Talk:Ancient Macedonian language/Archive 2

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Doric

kalan ameran, everyone :) — for the purposes of the Macedon article, do we have any example word that shows Doric as well as (Berenice-style) XMK-characteristics? alixa, aliza "alder" (PIE *ol-, *el-) could be one? BTW, I am getting the impression that there were several languages in Ancient Macedonia, but we don't have enough data to resolve them. There would have been Doric Greek, I suppose, and there was also XMK, and maybe others (or, to put it differently, "XMK" didn't exist, there were several unknown languages). To put it like this would amount to original research, since I've only just thought of that. But probably someone somewhere would have published a similar idea? no? dab (ᛏ) 08:58, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I will stoop so low as to answer a greeting in provincial accent: g'day, mate! :P Isn't "XMK" a Jaguar model? In the meantime I found another authentic Macedonian text, a fragment from the diary of a Ptolemaic princess:

The time: 1st Century BC
The place: the Royal Palace, Alexandria

Queen Veronica (in pain): "My stomag 'urts"
Princess Cleopatra (smiling): "That phig you ate, like, phive minutes ago? It was, like, poisoned, mother!"
Queen Veronica (anguished): "But, Cleo, you gave me dat big"
Princess Cleopatra (coldly): "It was poisoned, mother. I poisoned it!"
Queen Veronica (gasping): "Cleo, how could you do dis?!? I-am-your-moder!"
Princess Cleopatra (leering): "Yeah, but your name, like, lacks aspiration, and I aspire to be, like, QUEEN OF EGYPT. And to, like, marry that hunk, your husband and my brother Ptolemy! Now, DIE!"

(walks away in triumph as the Queen falls to the floor, blue and twitching)
____________________________

Big, phig = modern-day fig Chronographos 10:34, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Follow-up:

Upon her ascent on the throne, Cleopatra the (Nile) Valley girl duly assumed the title "Eumetor", and when she killed her brother and husband the Pharaoh to marry her (younger and yummier) nephew, she also assumed the title "Philadelphos" :)))))) Chronographos 11:31, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

ok, 'graphos :o) I know I started the joking, but this was actually meant as a serious idea... dab (ᛏ) 13:41, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

You see what happens when folks encourage me, I put on a show! Why, I could be a scriptwriter for Xena :-PPP To business: can you direct me to a reputable online source of Macedonian word lists and names? I must confess I'm not impressed by the article Glossary, it looks haphazard to me. Primary sources would be a-ok - whacko webpages would not Chronographos 15:25, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Quelle silence ...

C'mon, Albanau, excite us with your erudite eloquence, your elaborate elegance, your ebullient effervescence! Chronographos 10:38, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I'm busy at Elam right now — WP is "emergency driven", I suppose :) dab (ᛏ) 11:08, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Oh, man, I see a fatwah coming with your name on it. Imagine the headlines: "The Salman Rushdie of Wikipedia flees for his life", "The Ayatollahs threaten Switzerland with retaliation", "Something is rotten in William Tell's apple", etc, etc. All this of course is no excuse whatsoever for Albanau the Enlightener to remain silent on crucial issues of our times. BTW did you hear that Skanderberg is recalling 250,000 trucks for faulty windscreen wipers? Apparently they cause poor visibility in heavy rain and have been responsible for 347 autobahn deaths so far. And it's all Albanau's fault too! Chronographos 11:23, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

you are a funny man. Seriously, humour is sometimes all too scarce on Wikipedia. It's true, all you have to do is start vandalizing this article, and people will come jumping and give you attention. You may be blocked as a result, however :) dab (ᛏ) 11:37, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

"humour is sometimes all too scarce on Wikipedia"? Now this is an unwarranted, inappropriate, weaselly attack on Decius and I won't allow it! Chronographos 11:53, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

nah, this is actually in defence of Decius. Being used to grim panhellenic edit warriors with double axes, he couldn't know you were such a funnybone. dab (ᛏ) 14:22, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Double axes?!?!? I go for double entendre Chronographos 14:47, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Okay Chronographos, you are not a weasel. I apologize for that. I get into worse arguments with my brother, and I can't be too mad at someone with a sense of humor. If the Pella katadesmos represents the ancient Macedonian language, I'm wondering why the Macedonians were so often viewed as non-Hellenes. Decius 14:27, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Well, if you take off thinking that Alexander might have not identified himself as a Greek, but as a Macedonian instead, and then, after getting drunk, you conclude that he actually did the latter rather than the former, then I say that the old adage "in vino veritas" is strictly true about wine, not gin. You state what is "often viewed". In Galileo's case who was right? He or what most people "often viewed"? What most people often think or say does not define the truth by necessity. Well, maybe we should ask Alexander himself. Some quotes of his exist verbatim, you know. Do you recall what inscription he ordered written when he sent 12 Persian shields to be hanged on the west architrave of the Parthenon as trophies? Chronographos 14:47, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I don't know, or if I read it before I don't remember. Decius 14:48, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Let me refresh your memory then: "ΑΛΕΞΑΝΔΡΟΣ ΦΙΛΙΠΠΟΥ ΚΑΙ ΟΙ ΕΛΛΗΝΕΣ ΠΛΗΝ ΛΑΚΕΔΑΙΜΟΝΙΩΝ ΑΠΟ ΤΩΝ ΒΑΡΒΑΡΩΝ ΤΩΝ ΤΗΝ ΑΣΙΑΝ ΚΑΤΟΙΚΟΥΝΤΩΝ". What's your take of it? Chronographos 14:55, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I think it says something like Alexander son of Philip, a Hellene,... conquered Asia from the barbarous nations. Decius 15:02, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I give you an F for "fail". I was frankly hoping that, someone who states that Language A is a different one than Language B, should be able to read Language B (since there are no intact A texts). Here is the translation: "Alexander son of Philip and the Greeks, with the exception of the Spartans, from the barbarians who inhabit Asia". The Spartan jab has to do with the fact that the Spartans refused to join the expedition because "every expedition in which Spartans participate should always be headed by a Spartan". The Spartans were living in the past, and Alexander was pointing that out most, er, pointedly. That piece of sarcasm apart, what does the inscription tell you on the matter of Alexander's own perception of himself and his troops? Something more than gin, one should hope ... Chronographos 15:41, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Alexander the Great may well have identified as a Greek, since he got along more with his mother, who was a Greek, and there is also his father's Argive ancestry. Decius 15:22, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

what evidence is there that Epirotes were Greeks? What Argive ancestry? That's a very vague claim. The Argeads were way more specific: they claimed to be descendants of Hercules himself. Maybe they were just aggrandizing themselves. Surely they didn't have the certificates matching their DNA to Hercules' DNA, did they? Is this the kind of "evidence" you prefer? In other words: your opinion is that Alexander's Parthenon inscription is unreliable because he had ulterior motives, whereas the Argeads' claim that they were descendants of .... Hercules (!) is sound and could not possibly have had an ulterior motive. Yeah right ... Chronographos 16:17, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

See above. Alexander dictates the inscription on behalf of the victors: himself (as king) and his troops (the Greeks with the exception of the Spartans). What now? Had he no Macedonians with him, that he should honor their part in the war? Chronographos 15:41, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hmm, maybe because the inscription was written in Athens, he didn't want to take pride away from the Greeks by underlining the Macedonian part, and maybe identifying Greeks with Macedonians was part of the policy of the Hellenization. Who knows. Decius 15:51, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Maybe this, maybe that, maybe something else, maybe you've made your mind up and there ain't nobody gonna change it Chronographos 16:17, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I can't read ancient Greek off the top, but if I would've checked Perseus I could've done it. I got lazy and just looked in my Scott & Liddel's book, and didn't find enough info. I can read it now, what really tripped me up was the use of 'plen' and I confused katoikounton with kat-oikeo, 'to be governed over', and I thought of 'govern over'> conquer. Decius 15:53, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

LSJ - κατοικ-έω ,

     A. settle in, colonize, πόλιν Hdt.7.164 ; γῆν E.Med.10 ; τοῖς κατοικεῖν ἐθέλουσι τὰν πόλιν Decr.Byz. ap. D.18.91: generally, inhabit, τόπους S.Ph.40 ; τὴν Ἀσίαν SIG557.17 (Magn. Mae., iii B.C.), etc.:-- Pass., to be dwelt in or inhabited, opp. κατοικίζομαι (to be just founded), Arist.Pol.1266b2.

                 2. abs., settle, dwell, ζητοῦσα . . ποῦ κατοικοίης S.OC362 ; ἵνα χρὴ κατοικεῖν Ar.Av.153 ; ἐν δόμοις, ἐν ἄστεσι, E.Hel. 1651, Pl.Lg.666e, etc.; αὐτόθι Th.3.34 ; ἐν μοναρχίᾳ Isoc.1.36 ; ἐπὶ γῆς Apoc.3.10 ; esp. of non-citizens, Ἐφέσιοι καὶ οἱ -οῦντες SIG352.4 (Ephesus, iv B.C.). cf. 633.67 (Milet., ii B.C.):--pf. and plpf. Pass., to have been planted or settled, κατὰ κώμας Hdt.1.96 , cf.2.102; κ.νῆσον, τὴν μεσόγειαν, Id.4.8, Th.1.120.

           II. administer, govern, οἱ τὰς πόλεις -οῦντες Phld.Rh.2.225 S.:--more freq. in Pass., κατῴκηνται καλῶς, of Athens, S.OC1004; ὀρθῶς κ., of Sparta, Pl.Lg.683a.

           III. intr. of cities, lie, be siluated, ἐν τοῖς πεδίοις ib.677c, cf. 682c: also c. acc. loci, τὰς τὴν Ἀσίαν κατοικούσας which are situated in . . , Isoc. 5.123.

Chronographos 16:29, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

The fact that I'm a barbaros from the North :) who can't yet read ancient Greek without comprehensive dictionaries isn't relevant to the article or what it says. However, I am for the Greek dialect view being given more prominence, since enough scholars support it. Now, the Epirotes question: I can ask you the same thing about the Macedonians. Decius 16:33, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

My point exactly! There is similar dearth of existing hard evidence about the Epirotes and what they spoke. Yet you remain "unconvinced" about the Macedonians while accepting the Epirotes as Greeks. Maybe you just don't know enough about either of them, Decius .... Chronographos 16:45, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I'm looking for a quote about Epirotes that I read last night that is relevant here. B back. Decius 16:52, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

According to R. Malcolm Errington, in his A History of Macedonia (paraphrasing): "the fundamental Greek nationality of the Epirotes, Acarnanians, and Aetolians was never doubted", "unlike the Macedonians", whose Greekness was called into question. See chapter 1, pg. 4. I might quote it exactly later, but that's what he says. Decius 16:57, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I've been looking for more linguists who support the Macedonian-Greek dialect camp, but so far I have only collected more historians who believe that. R. Malcolm Errington himself in that 1986 book that I just mentioned views Macedonians as speakers of a Greek dialect. Errington was a Professor of Ancient History at the Philipps-Universität in Marsburg, West Germany (sic). Decius 17:22, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

So, if I understand correctly what you wrote, Errington says that he himself thinks that Macedonians spoke a Greek dialect, whereas their Greekness has been questioned by others? Is this the meaning of the Passive Voice ("never doubted", "called into question") Errington uses? Do I get it right? Chronographos 17:27, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

You got it right. Errington believes that Macedonian was a Greek dialect, but he discusses how their Greekness was called into question by the Greeks. He remarks how Macedonians, Epirotes, Acarnanians, and Aetolians all led the same "alien way of life" (verbatim): "This alien way of life was, however, common to the western Greeks in Epeiros, Acarnania, and Aitolia, as well as to the Macedonians, and their fundamental Greek nationality was never doubted." In the context of the paragraph & the text, he is remarking how the Macedonians were singled out as non-Greeks for some reason, while those others weren't, according to Errington. Decius 17:35, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

However, I've been reading Errington's book and he seems to be deceptive or selective, claiming for example in one place that the Greekness of the Macedonians was only questioned when the dispute with Athens developed, while in another place he discusses and admits how Herodotus recorded that the Macedonians were excluded from the Olympics until Alexander the I....so...Errington isn't the book I go by. Decius 17:42, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

The contradiction will be found as you turn from page 3 to 4, if somebody's curious, and I'll probably quote it later. I've noted that type of juggling of the facts before, which is why I trust linguists more than historians and classicists who are overflowing with pan-hellenism---not that that's bad, but it colors their interpretations. Decius 17:45, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Pg 3:This claim (Greek descent)was already made by Alexander I, who wished to participate as a runner in the Olympic Games, which apparently no Macedonian before him had done. But because participation was traditionally restricted to Greeks, Alexander had to prove his Greek ancestry, which he was able to do brilliantly with the tale of the Argive origins of his family. Errington doesn't proceed to question that Macedonians were excluded because Greeks viewed them as non-Hellenes. He seems to accept that fact, and he moves on. On page 4 however, he says this: Ancient allegations that the Macedonians were non-Greeks all had their origin in Athens at the time of the struggle with Philip II.---That's not only false, it is a contradiction. Decius 18:35, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

So, that is why I am suspicious of the real motives and of the scholarly integrity of individuals like Errington, Hammond, monsieur Masson, and others of their ilk. Decius 18:37, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Gosh, Decius, for a fellow who gets confused by "plen" (Greek kids learn plen at 1st Grade, when they are taught how to subtract: three oranges plen two oranges equals one orange), you're awful quick to be passing judgement on the Oxford Classical Dictionary, and the Grand Professorial Conspiracy which you, Decius Maximus, so bravely exposed . Medical students who do this at Rounds get "pimped". Some have been driven to suicide after being repeatedly pimped. The rest learn rather quickly. Nevertheless all you do is quote, quote, quote, and then opine, opine, opine on the quotations, quotations, quotations. Yet your scientific training in the relevant field appears to be zero. My insistence, rather, is quite simple: focus on the evidence. Evaluate what's there. Coins, inscriptions, even poor old Hesychius writing ten centuries after the "crime". Hesychius, Hesychius, wheretofore art thou, Hesychius? Chronographos 19:20, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC) (PS I don't know the specifics of your self-described alcohol-related issues, but please read this. Just trying to help)

You seem to have gotten frustrated. I wonder why. More evidence indeed is needed here, so feel free to bring it. In the meanwhile, I pride myself on not being able to translate that ancient Greek sentence off the top of my head, because I identify myself as a Roman (Greek descent doesn't contradict that identification). The Romans are the ones who laid down the greatest empire this world has ever seen. Decius 19:27, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

A Roman! Carry on, dear, carry on.

For the rest of our readers, from the dry drunk WP entry (my comments in italics): The behavior patterns of dry drunks are characterized by rigidity of thinking and going to extremes (weasel, prick) of characterization of people (monsieur Masson, and others of their ilk) and situations as e.g. (linguists) good and (historians) evil. Subtle distinctions (evidence) are difficult for the dry drunk to understand.

Now back to Decius: I should sincerely hope the above do not apply to you, but your Roman self-identification really puzzles me. For example, how do you realize this identification of yours in practical, every-day terms? Do you dress in togas? Is this strictly in the privacy of your own home? Do you keep Lares at your home? Do you often perform certain ceremonies in relation to the Lares? I just find this fascinating and I'd love to hear more .... Chronographos 19:47, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I'm actually looking for a good Roman toga. If you find a website selling one, let me know. Honestly. Decius 19:48, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

A toga prætexta, or will a plain one do? I do believe you honestly mean every word you say. This is why your disinclination to discuss your "I am a Roman" statement leaves me perplexed. Surely this is something you feel intensely proud about, something to share with others. I, for example, also "respect the Romans" because they indeed "are the ones who laid down the greatest empire this world has ever seen". But, since I do not reside there, I cannot call myself a Roman (this being the year 2005). Why do you? Chronographos 20:08, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

You guys must be stupid or something. You don't realize how I'm sitting back here laughing at all this. I'm here listening to Masta Killa on my stereo and looking through The Gun Digest Book of Assault Weapons, and googling for a toga just to see if any are for sale. You got something to add to the article, do it. I don't own Wikipedia or even care about it beyond the articles I watch. Decius 20:21, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Masta Killa! How exquisite! A certain Roman connoiseur of fine music would be proud of you. Let not my humble tastes annoy you Chronographos 20:41, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Chronographos, I'm not vindictive and I'm not holding the article in my tyrant-grip. I'm not some rigid jerk who thinks his say is law. No one is stopping you from editing the article, but like everybody else, your edits will be open to the fluidity of Wikipedia. Decius 20:46, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

My aim is not to edit articles according to my own beliefs. Indeed "beliefs" and Wikipedia sont deux mots qui vont tres mal ensemble. What I wish is to discuss the issues intelligently. To learn, perchance to teach. Which is why I have not touched the article since the Pella katadesmos. I enjoy convincing others and being convinced. Se vuol' ballare, Signior Contino ... Chronographos 21:09, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC) (it is the voyage that matters, not the destination)

I'm glad you are buddying up now, slowly :) Anyway, 'graphos, considering that we are strictly only allowed to adduce published opinions, and arrange them in a pleasantly flowing writeup, it doesn't really matter if Decius is able to read Ancient Greek. I have no knowledge of most languages I read publications about. People could boo me off Elamite language, because I don't speak a single word of that :) dab (ᛏ) 09:02, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hmm, maybe because the inscription was written in Athens, he didn't want to take pride away from the Greeks by underlining the Macedonian part, and maybe identifying Greeks with Macedonians was part of the policy of the Hellenization. Who knows.

There is a passage in the Histories of Kallisthenes (1.37.9) where he quotes a letter of Alexander III:

`Now you fear punishment and beg for your lives, so I will let you free, if not for any other reason so that you can see the difference between a Greek king and a barbarian tyrant, so do not expect to suffer any harm from me. A king does not kill messengers.'

I wonder what sort of 'maybes' you'll fabricate for this one Decius... The fact is that in all records that we have from Macedonian royalties and scholars, the Macedonian people naturally identify themselves as Greeks in every single account. There's not a single piece of evidence which can remotely imply that Macedonian people had a separate ethnic conciousness (that many people go on about). The fact that Alexander's close relations with his army was a major factor to his military success, proves that his own views reflected the ones of the entire Macedonian nation. Unless of course you suggest that Alexander was a Greek dictator over a non-Greek people, because the quotation on "from Alexander and the Greeks", refers to his Macedonian armies. Anyway, I don't support the view that the Greekness of the Macedonians was ever literally doubted. Your question regarding why some people like Demosthenes did call Macedonians barbarians (while nobody ever wasted his time on Aetolians and Epirotes) can be easily answered by considering the military power of Macedon under Philip II. Miskin 14:32, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

In the meanwhile, I pride myself on not being able to translate that ancient Greek sentence off the top of my head, because I identify myself as a Roman. The Romans are the ones who laid down the greatest empire this world has ever seen. I respect the Romans.

That's rather contradictory. It hasn't been two days since I randomly found myself in the basement of Gilbert Jeune by St-Michel, going through a book that was called "Façons de parler grec à Rome". The editor's presentation reads: "César selon Suétone serait mort dans les deux langues, s'adressant en latin à ses ennemis politiques, en grec à son fils". There was no Roman citizen who couldn't speak Greek. Of course the question that comes up is "what was ever a Roman" other than a title of power? The people who were originally "ethnic Romans" were assimilated into their own Empire. I suppose the Roman Empire was so great that got all Romans extinct... I think I'll stick with the empire of Alexander III. Besides, no Alexander, no Roman Empire. Miskin 14:32, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Chronographe den exo graphtei akoma ekei pou synphonisame, dose mou ligo chrono mexri na epanelthei to diadyktio sto spiti mou. Milao kata auton ton tropo gia na min mas katalaboune. Miskin 14:32, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

TLG

As I have said before, I have no problem with the article as it stands now, nor do I wish it changed at this point. The conversation so far has satisfied me that Decius' grasp of the subject is superficial and patchy, at best. What I have asked for repeatedly, is to be directed to online primary sources of the original material used in the Glossary. You guys have not been forthcoming. Why is this? If there is no online stuff, let me know so that I can start raiding the bookshops. BTW, since I am a 'Graf', shouldn't you address me as Durchlaut? :-P Chronographos 11:12, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

it should be simple tracing all those words using the TLG database. However, it would take me a couple of hours. Pay me, and I'll do it :) dab (ᛏ) 11:22, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Macedonian words in the Thesaurus Linguae Graecae?!? Conspiracy, conspiracy! Nevertheless I had obtained (I won't say how) "TLG CD-E+ PHI5&7+ Musaios + TLG Workstation", an archive about 800 MB big after unzipping. I am confused as to this: is CD-E sufficient or do I need A, B, C and D as well, so to speak? Chronographos 12:43, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

um, one CD should be sufficient. You will only find the words attested by Greek authors, of course, i.e. things like Theophrastus' maple, and of course Hesychius. Epigraphical stuff like coins will not be on there. dab (ᛏ) 12:52, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

That's ok, I have ways and means and connections, you know. I may get access to the work of Stefanos Koumanoudis the Younger, a leading epigraphologist, and the grandson of SK the Elder, another legend who worked with, among others, Doerpfeld, and a member of the Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres. When the younger SK went to Paris for his advanced studies, his professeur asked each student to rise and introduce themselves. When SK started "Je m' appelle Stéphane Koumanoudis ...", the professor waved him down: "Je vous connai, Monsieur". Such was the renown of his grandfather! Chronographos 13:13, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

why then do we not have a Stephanos Koumanoudis article? Get busy man! — We don't have Wilhelm Doerpfeld, for that matter. But note de:Wilhelm Dörpfeld. dab (ᛏ) 13:19, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Two articles, you mean. All in good time. I am now trying to locate the new poem by Sappho that was reconstructed from the Oxyrhynchus findings, as published in TLS yesterday. Then I need to work on my presentation to a medical convention next weekend :-PPP etc etc. Chronographos 13:29, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC) (And did I mention my Med School Reunion tomorrow?) :-)))

Thracian words are found in Perseus' Greek database (cf. Brynchos), so it doesn't imply their views on the language classification. Decius 13:25, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

he was joking! the names of Indian tribes, and words like aananaananalaaa, aioiaoiiiaaao, arithosaaaaa are found in the TLG. dab (ᛏ) 13:35, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I had to clear up the issue regardless if he was joking. Remember, Miskin also reads this page, and he might include that fact in his "arsenal". Decius 13:38, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hmm, maybe because the inscription was written in Athens, he didn't want to take pride away from the Greeks by underlining the Macedonian part, and maybe identifying Greeks with Macedonians was part of the policy of the Hellenization. Who knows.

There is a passage in the Histories of Kallisthenes (1.37.9) where he quotes a letter of Alexander III:

`Now you fear punishment and beg for your lives, so I will let you free, if not for any other reason so that you can see the difference between a Greek king and a barbarian tyrant, so do not expect to suffer any harm from me. A king does not kill messengers.'

I wonder what sort of 'maybes' you'll fabricate for this one Decius... The fact is that in all records that we have from Macedonian royalties and scholars, the Macedonian people naturally identify themselves as Greeks in every single account. There's not a single piece of evidence which can remotely imply that Macedonian people had a separate ethnic conciousness (that many people go on about). The fact that Alexander's close relations with his army was a major factor to his military success, proves that his own views reflected the ones of the entire Macedonian nation. Unless of course you suggest that Alexander was a Greek dictator over a non-Greek people, because the quotation on "from Alexander and the Greeks", refers to his Macedonian armies. Anyway, I don't support the view that the Greekness of the Macedonians was ever literally doubted. Your question regarding why some people like Demosthenes did call Macedonians barbarians (while nobody ever wasted his time on Aetolians and Epirotes) can be easily answered by considering the military power of Macedon under Philip II. Miskin 14:34, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

In the meanwhile, I pride myself on not being able to translate that ancient Greek sentence off the top of my head, because I identify myself as a Roman. The Romans are the ones who laid down the greatest empire this world has ever seen. I respect the Romans.

That's rather contradictory. It hasn't been two days since I randomly found myself in the basement of Gilbert Jeune by St-Michel, going through a book that was called "Façons de parler grec à Rome". The editor's presentation reads: "César selon Suétone serait mort dans les deux langues, s'adressant en latin à ses ennemis politiques, en grec à son fils". There was no Roman citizen who couldn't speak Greek. Of course the question that comes up is "what was ever a Roman" other than a title of power? The people who were originally "ethnic Romans" were assimilated into their own Empire. I suppose the Roman Empire was so great that got all Romans extinct... I think I'll stick with the empire of Alexander III. Besides, no Alexander, no Roman Empire. Miskin 14:34, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Chronographe den exo graphtei akoma ekei pou synphonisame, dose mou ligo chrono mexri na epanelthei to diadyktio sto spiti mou. Milao kata auton ton tropo gia na min mas katalaboune. Miskin 14:34, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I agree with you on some points. For instance, Greeks can call themselves Romans (if they want to) as much as any Italian can. It does not have to do with Rome, but with the empire. Decius 14:39, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Graecia capta ferum captorem cepit, et artis intulit agresti Latio Horace, Epistulae, 2.1.156 Chronographos 14:44, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Yeah well, for obvious reasons by "Roman Empire" and "Romans" I wasn't referring to the Byzantine hellenism. The Byzantine Empire was in fact the only original successor state to the real Roman Empire (TM), but the title "Rhomaioi" was only a symbolic (most foreigners indentified them as Greeks). The Greeks who indentified (or identify) themselves as 'Romans' never claimed an ethnic connection to ancient Rome. And I don't think that any educated Italian would ever consider the Roman civilization as a sole heritage of the Italian nation. Modern Italy is connected to the Roman Empire as much as any other Vulgar Latin-Speaking peninsula did prior to the French Revolution and the creation of modern nations. Besides there's no such thing as ancient Italians or ancient French. And of course French != Francs like Turkish != Turks. Miskin 15:11, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

and Akhaioi!= Elliniki, one is tempted to add. dab (ᛏ) 15:19, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

i-je-re-ja e-ne-ka ku-ru-so-jo i-je-ro-jo to you too! :P Chronographos 15:28, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Not until the 9th century BC dab. Miskin 15:24, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Pella katadesmos

The Pella katadesmos is pretty compelling proof of ancient Macedonian being a form of Greek. Good job, guys. As for whether the others considered the Macedonians barbarians, well... My mother is a vociferous Maniot from Kalamata who considers the Maniots the only true Greeks as "no Turk ever set foot in the Mani". Even the non-Maniot Messenians (like my father) are suspect, and she has absolutely no time for the Macedonians: "They're like the Yugoslavs, they eat too many peppers."--Theathenae 17:28, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I hope this nice amateur ethnologist lady is as good at her area of expertise (=dishwashing) Chronographos 17:47, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Masson knew about the Pella katadesmos (he writes of it), but even he said we should wait for further discoveries to be more sure. Decius 17:34, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

What Masson and others realize is that a Dorian Greek dialect may have been spoken in Macedonia alongside Macedonian. That is not unlikely. Decius 17:44, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

How sure can you be that Klingon was not spoken as well, Decius? Chronographos 17:47, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Wow. The Macos spoke Doric and Attic in addition to their own tongue. Such talent. No wonder they gobbled up Slavonic so readily.--Theathenae 18:00, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

No, I didn't imply bilingualism necessarily, I meant geographical co-incidence. Decius 18:02, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Okay, then the alternative is: the ancient Greeks "proper" were such astounding xenophobes and chauvinists, they considered Macedonians as non-Hellenes because they spoke an archaic Doric Greek dialect? Not a much better scenario. Decius 17:51, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Venom becomes Decius (yawnnnnn, what else is new ...) Chronographos 17:56, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC) (PS If you ever get overtly jaundiced, Decius, it might not be just alcoholic cirrhosis. Methinks you were born with bile in your veins, instead of blood)

That is probably closer to the mark than anything you've ever written, Decie. The Greeks have been at each other's throats as a national pastime since antiquity, and the biggest insult in the book is to question someone's Greekness.--Theathenae 18:00, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

In either case, I was right: Ancient Macedonian was a separate language from Greek (a language is a dialect with an army, etc.). Decius 18:05, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

No, it's your dry drunk brain that cannot grasp complex realities Chronographos 18:14, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I got something for you to grasp. Decius 18:17, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

For the time being, grasp a bottle. It won't be the first time ... and there's nothing wrong with "comfort foods" per se Chronographos 18:32, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

No. Doric is undisputedly Greek. XMK is not. I agree it's a compelling that XMK was marginal even in the 4th century, and maybe was never more than a mountain dialect. I.e. it may be argued that Ancient Macedonian is a misnomer, since typical Macedonians spoke Doric. Maybe. But that does not in the least suggest that XMK = Doric. Where is the Doric vocalism in XMK? Where is the XMK voicing in Doric? Also, it would be more compelling if the katadesmos was 5th century. Everybody agrees Greek became dominant from the 4th century. An interesting text. Not decisive to this question. dab (ᛏ) 18:07, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Attic Greek became dominant from the 4th century, yes, but the language of the katadesmos is certainly not Attic. It looks like Doric, but it isn't. It is precisely these differences from Doric that suggest it is in fact Macedonian. But still unmistakably Greek.--Theathenae 18:18, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I was joking. My comment was aimed at Theathenae and the Tosk/Arvanite debacle. Decius 18:08, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Decie, the débâcle you speak of concerns 18-year-old Kosovar Albanau's insistence that a "pure Arvanítis is a pure Albanian" and his latest pearl of wisdom, namely that "the Tosk and the Gheg" are "mostly mutually intelligible", despite all evidence to the contrary. See Talk:Albanian language#Gheg and Tosk, mostly mutually intelligible?--Theathenae 18:41, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, I wasn't implying who has the upper hand in the debacle, I think both you and Albanau are stretching the thing in opposite extreme directions. But I'm not getting involved further. Decius 18:48, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Would you two please keep off-topic disussions where they belong? Thank you ever so kindly Chronographos 18:53, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

The words identifed as belonging to XMK exhibit a consistent sound-change pattern (extremely unlikely to be a false positive---the sound-changes are actual), as already noted, both in the article text and previously on this talk page. The katadesmos from Pella doesn't show these changes. Did the changes happen after the katadesmos? I doubt that, but let's wait for further discoveries, as Masson said. Decius 18:58, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Okay, then the alternative is: the ancient Greeks "proper" were such astounding xenophobes and chauvinists, they considered Macedonians as non-Hellenes because they spoke an archaic Doric Greek dialect? Not a much better scenario.

Oh please, you sound as if you're quoting from Makedonija.com. How the hell has this false idea got stuck in your head? If Greeks didn't consider them Greek, then why did they let them in the Hellenic leagues? Even Demosthenes states that Macedonia had a place in the pan-hellenic events prior to Philip II. And as for the Olympic Games, I told you already that we have lists of Olympic winners from Macedon since the 5th c. BC. Miskin 29 June 2005 04:18 (UTC)

Also, it would be more compelling if the katadesmos was 5th century. Everybody agrees Greek became dominant from the 4th century.

Actually it was Koine Greek that became dominant from the 4th century in not only Macedonia, but also in the entire Greek and Hellenistic World. Ironically Koine Greek was practically "invented" by the the Macedonians. Attic was only spoken in the Royal court and was most likely never adopted by the Macedonian people and yet it was undoubtly understood (which enforces the theory of XMK belonging to Ancient Greek). There is no basis on Doric being an imported language. The Pella Katadesmos is an unidentified idiom of Doric (different than Laconian), Theban etc), which assures that it was a native speech of Macedon. Unfortunately for some, all evidence keeps leading to the conclusions of Masson. Miskin 29 June 2005 04:18 (UTC)

The words identifed as belonging to XMK exhibit a consistent sound-change pattern (extremely unlikely to be a false positive---the sound-changes are actual), as already noted, both in the article text and previously on this talk page. The katadesmos from Pella doesn't show these changes.

Sigh, maybe that's because such "sound-change patterns" could not be reflected in Classical Ancient Greek where the alphabet consisted of raw capital letters. The creation of minuscule letters and accents was introducted in Hellenistic Greek. Miskin

I thought about an unlikely explanation myself: the katadesmos writer may have decided to not indicate the sounds properly in the text, representing them rather by standard sounds (ph, th, etc.), the reason being to make Macedonian look like more standard Greek in writing. But I don't believe that. The evidence is conflicting, and the solution I see is that in ancient Macedon, speakers of Doric (Pella katadesmos) lived beside speakers of XMK (Berenike, danos, kombous, kebala, etc.). Decius 29 June 2005 04:45 (UTC)

Glossary

Agkalis is probably a mis-rendering of Ankalis (PIE *ank, 'to bend'). Agkalis is from Babaev's glossary, apparently. Cf. Attic ankulos, ankos, ankistron, etc., from PIE *ank (or *ang). Cf. also Latin angulus (angle, bend), Old English ancleow (ankle), Sanskrit anka (hook). Decius 19:38, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Decius, your utter ignorance, combined with your alcoholic stubborness, make a uniquely repulsive amalgam of δοκησισοφία. NONE of the words you mention do you even spell correctly. I will not correct you because I would like you to keep demonstrating your incompetence. Chronographos 01:56, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Really? The transliterations are as according to the American Heritage Dictionary, so send them a letter of complaint. If you want all the accents indicated, don't expect them from me unless I really need to indicate them. Decius 02:12, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Written alpha, gamma, kappa, but should be read as ank-. Decius 19:40, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

that's no problem at all. We're just transliterating, here, and alpha-gamma-kappa would of course be read as ank-. dab (ᛏ) 19:47, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

In one word, no. You are wrong too, Dab Chronographos 01:56, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Excuse me for "opining" again, but I will say that Macedonian and Attic were not very mutually intelligible, and I don't think the Pella katadesmos is Macedonian. There is an Egyptian papyrus that apparently records how a Greek general had to send a soldier who spoke Macedonian to address a Macedonian cavalry. Will find the papyrus in question. Decius 20:21, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Please do. And try to stay sober while at it Chronographos 01:56, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

After all is said and done, I'm confident that ancient Macedonian would qualify as a language: there would be enough differences to support that. A language belonging to a Greco-Macedonian group, as I said before (and as linguist Brian Joseph said, "most likely not a Greek dialect on a par with Doric, Attic, etc."). Decius 20:55, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Theathenae, be careful: Attic amalos is an alpha euphonicum added to the stem mal, meaning 'soft', from PIE *mel, 'soft', while the Macedonian word is claimed by some to be from PIE *amma, from which comes Latin amare (to love). Decius 21:00, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Why? Chronographos 01:56, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Also, until a reference is provided, I will remove kompos. The Attic cognate in fact is gomphios (=molar tooth). Decius 21:06, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

So, you are totaly unaware of "γόμφος", of which "γομφίος" is the diminutive. I am not surprised. What surprises me a little bit is that you continue to preach nonsense on stuff you know nothing about. Times change, Decius. Your unscientific mumbo-jumbo will not go unchallenged any more. Chronographos 01:56, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Huh? You must be the drunk guy today. Gomphos is listed right above gomphios in my book, and I've even mentioned the word gomphos on this very Talk Page before: see Talk:Ancient Macedonian language/archive1, section #7 near the top called "Greek cognates". And when I transliterate, I do not indicate accents (á,í,etc.), just to make people like you upset. Decius 02:06, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Actually, if Macedonian amale is also a euphonic alpha added to mal, then it can be a cognate. But the references I've seen so far (not many, admittedly, on this particular etymology) say it's not from PIE *mel. Maybe dab can weigh in on this also: what does Pokorny say? Decius 21:22, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

In my LS, there is argilla (or argila) listed as meaning, 'an underground chamber', occuring in a text (Ephorus ap. Strabo). Don't think it's Attic. Might even be a Macedonian word listed. Decius 21:53, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

A few other Macedonian words are explicitly tagged as such, like κράββατος and σάρισσα. ἄργιλλος means 'white clay', 'potter's earth'.--Theathenae 21:58, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

So, what does "άργιλος" mean? (rhetorical question) Chronographos 01:56, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I don't want to seem like "Mister-know-it-all" (because I do not know it all), but the only one that surprised me was Attic argos (idle), contracted from a-ergos (>alpha privativum + ergos 'work'). I knew about that word, but I didn't make the connection to Macedonian arkon. But I suppose it's a cognate. I knew about Attic amalos, but I admit I forgot to connect that to the Macedonian word. I think the given etymology for that Macedonian word (from PIE *am) caused me to overlook that. Decius 22:02, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

By now, you definitely look like "Mister-know-nothing" Chronographos 01:56, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

In that case, you would be something like "Mister-know-less-than-Mister-know-nothing", judging by your fantastic exposé of klinotrokhon. Decius 02:37, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Indeed. Arkon could well have been the name by which we knew argon had Macedonian won out over Attic for supremacy among the Greek dialects. What was your source for that amalē etymology?--Theathenae 22:12, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

The suggestion that the Macedonian word is from PIE *am I took (actually dab took it, but I also assume responsibility) from Babaev, but note that Babaev merely echoed someone else. The etymology for Attic amalos (a+ PIE *mel) is from Liddel-Scott's. They are contradictory, and I don't know who is right. Decius 22:16, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Well, when you have two identical words that mean exactly the same thing, why make your life more difficult than it need be?--Theathenae 22:21, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

What are Babaev's academic credentials? (this is the second time I pose the question, I hope it will not go unanswered again) Chronographos 01:56, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, I agree they are most likely cognates. I really can't wait till more linguistic references are available on the internet concerning the ancient Macedonian material. I'm tired of this "dark ages" we are in. Decius 22:24, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Judging from that glossary, XMK looks like an archaic form of Greek with a few loanwords from neighbouring Thraco-Illyrian languages. Either that or it preserved more IE vocabulary than the southern Greek dialects, which had heavy pre-Hellenic (non-IE) substratal influences. Macedonian will probably be proven beyond any reasonable doubt to be archaic Greek within our lifetimes, just like Linear B was.--Theathenae 22:44, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Actually Ventris was totally convinced that Linear B would read Etruscan. So Decius' alcohol-fumed improvisations may actually prove a total jinx to his poorly disguised agenda Chronographos 01:56, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I'm satisfied to view Macedonian as a semi-Greek language. That glossary to me shows enough differences to justify the term language. Decius 22:50, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Did you celebrate your satisfaction the usual way? (not that you need special reasons to drink) Chronographos 01:56, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I doubt anyone would question the Greekness of Macedonian were it not for the politics of the matter, both ancient and modern.--Theathenae 22:54, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

One reason why I never incorporated the Babaev glossary is because I wanted to verify more of his info. I was satisfied to leave it as an external link. But it's bettter that dab incorporated it, because now we can hammer it out and improve it, and ultimately we've discarded the Babaev glossary and created a new one. We still have to verify more etymologies and cognates and sources. Decius 00:07, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Chronographos, you came in here making various accusations and insults, none of which stick. Those transliterations may not be the best, but they are used in my American Heritage Dictionary, first edition. So even if they are wrong as you claim, it's not my problem. Decius 02:52, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I've checked, and they are also used by Perseus : so are you being overly-pedantic, or just being a jerk? Decius 03:07, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

As for Cyril Babaev, he is not a good source of info at all, and it is unfortunate that his glossary was the only Macedonian glossary on the web: [1]. Email him and tell him how you feel directly: cyril@babaev.com. Babaev is no "ally" of mine, and I would have preferred not dealing with his website at all. Decius 04:04, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Generally though, the stuff he claims is substantiated by other references (Pokorny, etc.), but everything on Babaev's site has to be double-checked. Decius 04:23, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

So, where did you suddenly disappear to, Doc? It's amusing how you hurl out insults like "incompetent" when you have revealed your incompetence earlier by such exquisite examples as your klinotrokhon exposé and your irregular-aspiration-is-proved-by-Philotelas argument... Decius 04:41, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I stand by my appraisal of Theophrastus' hearsay botanics. And I never ever wrote anything about any "Philotelas". You are imagining things, Decius. As usual. Chronographos 10:57, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

You're probably going to make up some lie after the fact and say that you suddenly left after making your latest edits, etc.,---but the fact is, my responses came down right in front of your face, and you couldn't respond. Decius 08:30, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Decius, your continual alcoholic stupor has probably deprived you of all sense of time, place and especially judgement. I came home very late last night from my Med School class reunion, sat down at the PC for half an hour, took care of the downloads, email etc that had transpired during my absence, answered all pertinent points in this discussion, and went straight to bed as the sun was about to rise. So, according to you, I should have stayed online, sleepless on a Sunday morning, and waited for your esteemed person to respond to me. The fact that I did not, and went to sleep at 5 AM, proves that I am wrong and a liar to boot??? You are severely unbalanced, Decius, and that's all there is to it. To sum things up: I will be on Wikipedia on MY spare time, as fits MY schedule, I will respond WHENEVER I please, and THERE AIN'T NOTHIN' YOU CAN DO ABOUT IT EITHER. On to the substantive points:

The links on Babaev's site don't work as of 12:42 Greek time, Sunday, June 26th 2005. As of 7 or 8 hours ago, the Lidell-Scott search facility at Perseus found no entries under ankulos, ankos, ankistron, because there aren't any. The words proper are άγκιστρον etc. Indeed I doubt that any Greek word exists with the complex -nk- in it. So you can take the American Heritage Dictionary and shove it where it best pleases you. As dab pointed out to you, ν turns to γ before κ. Always. Therefore there is no Attic word ankalis: the word is agkalis and it means "bent arm" and by extension whatever can be held in bent arms. Hence the modern Greek usage: agkale/agkalia, a hug or an armful. Which is exactly how manual laborers harvest wheat: they hug as many wheatstalks as they can, and then cut them with the sickle. So don't you "email AHD" me. When Perseus comes back online at 7:00 Eastern Time, you can check for yourself. Otherwise I'll be happy to scan and post the relevant page(s) from my Liddell-Scott (Greek 4-volume Edition, 1948). Now it is conceivable that you think AHD a higher authority on Classics that Liddell-Scott. Which ties perfectly with your stated preference to urinating out of windows over the study of Greek.

I asked you why are the two amalos words considered to stem from two different roots and you failed to explain. It seems that, whenever something does not suit your outlandish, unscientific theories, a mysterious Passive Voice comes out of the blue and vindicates them. Not to mention that the "Attic"" cognate in your Glossary has an H (δασεία) which should not be there. Was this in AHD too? A dictionary that can't even spell? This is pathetic, Decius. Under different circumstances, I'd urge you to do better than that, but it seems you are incapable of doing better. Chronographos 10:57, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

O Chronográphe, to be fair, the traditional Roman transliteration of the -γκ- cluster is -nk-, not -gk-, as that is how it was pronounced. Hence ankylosis in English, rather than agkylosis. Also, the hamalē with the δασεῖα was put there by yours truly as that's what L&S gives as the Attic form (ἁμαλός), immediately after the main entry ἀμᾰλός, which I presume is the general (non-Attic) Greek form.--Theathenae 11:21, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

You are obviously right about "Roman transliteration", but this is not about how a Greek word is transliterated for use in the Latin language: this is about how a Greek word is transliterated so that people without Greek fonts may visualize the Greek word. And the proper pronunciation is "ang". If ank were pronounced ank in Greek, there would be no need for the k to uniformly turn into g before n. Remember the cardinal rule of Ancient Greek "spelling": you don't read what is written, you write what you pronounce. There is a (Thessalian, I believe) inscription that reads "εμ πόλει" (in the city). It is not a "spelling error". As for the amalos entry, I'm sorry but my 1948 LS print edition only lists it with a ψιλή. Since Perseus is down for maintenance right now, I cannot check if an entry with δασεία currently exists as well.Chronographos 11:40, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Ἐν τάξει πατρίδα, but I disagree with using the Latin alphabet to "visualise" Greek as all modern browsers are perfectly capable of displaying Greek and even polytonic characters. (There is a special Wikipedia polytonic template, which I am using here; check the formatting by opening an edit page.) As for ἁμαλός, it is listed in my 1997 LS abridged edition, so its absence from your 1948 print edition is mysterious to say the least.--Theathenae 12:08, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Fair enough. I write in Polytonic with pen and paper, but as Microsoft has made polytonic writing with a keyboard a twisted legerdemain, I prefer monotonic. The issue here is AHD's transliterating, not mine or yours. If you don't like it anymore than I do, <Decius mode> SEND THEM AN EMAIL AND FRIGGIN' COMPLAIN ABOUT IT </Decius mode> :-PPP Chronographos 12:30, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

The nk vs. gk question is really a red herring. It matters for the alphabetical ordering, but that's about it. Indeed, I imported the list so it can be checked and improved. It was transliterated to begin with, but if you like to change it back to the Greek alphabet, that's fine with me. dab (ᛏ) 12:21, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Dab, can you please talk some sense into Decius? And can we please have some decent conversation here? Decius is really impossible to deal with: one moment he says that this young Russian diplomat is not trustworthy, and five minutes later he proclaims that, given a difference of opinion between LSJ and Babaev, the issue is unresolved. If the opinion of an "untrustworthy source" is given equal gravity to the opinion of the standard Greek Lexicon, there is no way arguments can be advanced to a satisfactory conclusion. Chronographos 12:30, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

But would we do that just for the Attic, or for the Macedonian too? Decius may not appreciate the Greek alphabet being used for XMK, and bring out his AK-47.--Theathenae 12:32, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Which brings up another grave concern of mine. I do not want to insinuate anything, but it will not be flattering to Wikipedia if someone had trouble with the law down the line. Clandestine arm dealers and possible Mafia connections is not exactly good PR Chronographos 12:39, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I don't get it. Of course XMK was written in the Greek alphabet as far as it was written at all, what else? Linear B? Babaev is really not an issue. I mean, he hacked together an online glossary, that's great, and for some time that was the only XMK resource on the internet. Why would we bash him because it is not up to academic standards? Nobody ever claimed it was. That was just our starting point. Now if everybody is really so confused by transliteration, let's just move back to the Greek alphabet, for the glossary. This is likely to cause more confusion, of course, since the Greeks (who seem to pass through here in droves) will just think beta is [v] and eta is [i] etc, but at least we'll be just giving the attested forms. Using one-to-one transliteration of the Greek alphabet, a gamma is just rendered as g, no matter if it corresponds to [g] or not. dab (ᛏ) 12:57, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

also, transliteration is useful from keeping apart the language from the script. Note that I wrote the entire Arabic grammar article without using a single arabic letter, and that's not because I don't know how to. It's just that as soon as you use anything non-ascii, American users will come to the talk pages complaining about the funny foreign squiqqles (I shit you not). dab (ᛏ) 13:01, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I agree on all counts. And I am glad you write sanely, concisely, argue one point at a time, do not apply double standards, and do not rant every ten minutes in the stream-of-consciousness Decius mode. But then again you don't drink all day long. Or do you? :-P Chronographos 13:08, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Ladies and gentlemen, see my Perseus link, which is up once again now. Each of those three words are transliterated by Perseus exactly as I transliterated them: ankulos, ankos, ankistron (and agkalis is transliterated as ankalis, and the Macedonian word is even mentioned in the Perseus text [2]). We are writing for English readers, and I never heard of "agkylosis" in English. Decius 18:39, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

As I said, it's a matter of transliteration and phonology. We fully understand Greek phonology, and therefore we know that agk is rendered /ank/. We can assume as much for XMK, of course, but with an unknown language, it is more safe to use a lossless transliteration. Greek transliteration of alpha-gamma-kappa is not lossless. it collapses with hypothetical alpha-nu-kappa. Only, we know that alpha-nu-kappa will not occur, or be equivalent to alpha-gamma-kappa. Can we say as much for XMK? If in doubt, trasliterate without loss of information. dab (ᛏ) 19:00, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

When I search LSJ online with the "ank" string, only the word anakrites (!) comes up. LSJ's transliteration (e.g. ankalis) is unacceptable unless either one of two conditions exist: (1) readers are alerted that γ before κ is always transliterated as n, or (2) the Greek script is exhibited alongside in the printed edition. In any other case, your comments about "losslessness" apply fully. And I cannot accept that LSJ have been so sloppy. Therefore one of the two conditions must be actually present in print, possibly both. The fact that the online version does not meet them means that people ignorant of Greek (e.g. Decius) are handicapped. 212.251.109.253 21:47, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Okay, exceptions can always be made. Decius 19:02, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Chronographos, your gloss on Macedonian ankalis is unlikely: more likely it did not refer to an armful of anything, but to the bent sickle (PIE *ank): it is a singular noun. In Attic, the singular noun referred to the (bent) arm. Decius 19:59, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I fully agree with LSJ's comments on agkalis. I never said that it meant "an armful". I explained how the term evolved afterwards. Ignorant people, like you, should show express gratitude at such tutoring.

I noted with interest your failure to respond to my comments on your, hopefully improbable but not impossible, gang connections and assault weapons. Furthermore, connections between ex-communist-country gangs operating in the West and Islamic terrorism are well established, as they provide a channel for the clandestine sale of weaponry. I sincerely hope, for your sake and safety, that your gang comments have been merely in jest, and there is nothing at your home that would interest the Immigration and Naturalization Service. Or the police. Or the DHS for that matter. Is there?

transliteration etc.

adē "clear sky" (Attic αἴθρη aíthrē), adraia "bright weather" (Hes. Attic αἰθρία aithría, PIE *aidh-)

something went wrong here. The point of mentioning "Hes." is that Hesychius said:

adē: aithra
adraia: aithrios

i.e. aithra is a translation, by Hesychius, we are not claiming adē is identical to aithra (although it is probably related). We then translate Hesychius' translations into English, aithra as "clear sky" and aithria as "bright weather". If you fiddle with the glossary, please make sure you understand what's already there in the first place. dab (ᛏ) 19:06, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Just so we all know, that was Theathenae's doing: 20:47 25 Jun. Decius 19:24, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I know I know. It's not a disaster either. It's just not clear why the "Hes." is there anymore. dab (ᛏ) 19:31, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

My apologies. I ripped αἴθρη from LS which is listed as an earlier Attic form, but you're quite right, it would've been αἴθρα by the time of Hesychius. I somehow figured that only the second word was his, as the Hes. tag was right at the end of the original entry. As for adraia, are you certain it is the exact translation of the masculine αἴθριος, rather than the feminine αἰθρία? The former is the adjective meaning clear, bright, fair or in the open air, whereas the latter is the feminine noun which actually means fine weather or open sky. May we see the original manuscript?--Theathenae 19:37, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

ok, even my original entry may have been wrong. I have to check Hesychius. All I know is that Pokorny links both words to aidh "to burn". dab (ᛏ) 20:06, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

The joys of Google. For those of you who can read modern Greek, there's a guy[3] who has traced sarissa back to σαίρω 'to show the teeth' (esp. in scorn or malice) or 'to sweep clean/away' and abagna ('rose') back to ἁβρός 'delicate, pretty, dainty, soft, luxurious'. I would add that the -agna in abagna reminds me of ἁγνός 'pure, chaste, unsullied'. I guess a rose is all of those things.--Theathenae 20:30, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Doric abós meant 'young, luxuriant' and LS says it may be connected to abros (delicate, graceful, etc.). Decius 20:53, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Well, this guy actually writes it αβός, but my Doric is rather sketchy so I opted for LS Attic. Damn Koine. In that case, abagna is almost certainly derived from ἀβός, possibly compounded with my suggestion ἁγνός.--Theathenae 21:05, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

As long as we're listing equivalent forms: Macedonian kombous<>Attic gomphious (masc. acc. pl.). Decius 20:37, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

this guy seems to have a few sources that we are missing so far. Especially kebala is interesting (another example of the Berenike-law). He also seems to have a better text of the Pellas katadesmos (?). In Greece, even philologistts feel compelled to rant against the "apologetes of Panslavism"? What is panslavism, and what has it got to do with XMK I wonder? dab (ᛏ) 20:54, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

He's not in Greece, he's in Melbourne, Australia. And even philologists can get emotional sometimes. :)--Theathenae 21:05, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Είναι βέβαια αλήθεια ότι από την αρχαία μακεδονική διάλεκτο διασώθηκε ελάχιστος μόνο αριθμός λέξεων, περί τις 350, από τις οποίες οι 200 είναι ανθρωπωνύμια, όπως Αμύντας, Αλκέτας, Αρχέλαος, Φιλώτας, Λάγος, Εύδαμος, Μαχάτας, Βερενίκη, Θεσσαλονίκη (όλα ελληνικά), και οι υπόλοιπες κοινά ονόματα, όπως ακρουνοί, κάραβος, κεβαλά, πεζέταιρος, νικάτωρ, αβρούτες, άβαγνα (στη συντριπτική τους πλειοψηφία ελληνικές λέξεις και αυτές), κι αυτό χάρις στη μανία του λεξικογράφου του 5ου αι. μ.Χ., Ησύχιου

I've mentioned kebala before: see Talk:Macedon. Decius 20:58, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, that slipped my mind. In fact, if we have Berenikē, but kebala what does that tell us about the Doricity of XMK? Shouldn't it be either Berenika or kebalē? dab (ᛏ) 20:59, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I saw the form kebale (don't know what value the 'e' had, it was transliterated) given on a website, but I can't vouch for it. Decius 21:03, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

:o) in fact, I begin to believe they were Dorians who had re-voiced their aspirates (and no, Ch'graphos didn't bribe me with alcohol). The name would have been Berenika, but was changed back to -e as a matter of fact when Attic became the dernier cri. This isn't compatible with the katadesmos, which is un-XMK in any case. This would mean that any word containing kh, ph or th must be foreign to XMK (i.e. chuck away all the names with Th, Ph etc., they're just Greek). We really need to find a case of intervocalic s! dab (ᛏ) 21:12, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

How about XMK just never got round to devoicing and (re)aspirating the PIE consonants that were devoiced and aspirated elsewhere, rather than being a form of Doric that had its aspirates revoiced? In other words, truly archaic Greek.--Theathenae 21:37, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

it wouldn't be Greek then, but "Graeco-Macedonian", i.e. the remaining Greek would have done a common innovation. That's also possible, of course. They would not be Dorians, in that case. We just don't know enough. dab (ᛏ) 21:45, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thaethenae, that is what I've been arguing here from the beginning. The sound-differences are archaic and were retained in Macedonian, a language belonging to a Greco-Macedonian group. It is not unlikely, and I don't know why some Greeks abhor the idea (irrational reaction). Decius 21:48, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Did they have to speak a Doric Greek dialect in order for one to connect to them? No. I can connect to them regardless of what language they spoke. I'm not a xenophobe. The words known from Macedonian suggest something beyond a Doric dialect. Decius 21:50, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I don't think it was Doric either. I was thinking more along the lines of North-Western Greek, which was related to but not quite the same as Doric Greek. "Both NW Greek and Doric are in some respects more archaic than the other Greek dialects." In other words, more IE, as the other Greek dialects arrived much earlier and absorbed significant pre-Hellenic substratal elements. I guess that begs the question, how do you define "Greek"? Perhaps the traditional definition is no longer valid. I'd say that Macedonian was definitely Hellenic in the Indo-European sense, and "Greek" would've probably remained pretty damn similar were it not for the non-IE influences.--Theathenae 22:02, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I'd like to see this article expanded Proto-Greek language. Decius 22:06, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Whoa, guys. Panayiotis from Melbourne gives ακρουνοί for our arounoi 'boundary stones'. Was this just a typo? Because if it is actually akrounoi, that would immediately invoke ἀγρός 'field', which is exactly what these stones would have been used to divide.--Theathenae 21:15, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I don't know what the original manuscript says nor did I add the current spelling to the article, but akrounoi to me recalls akro- (PIE *ak, summit), which could mean 'edge, boundary', often prefixed to other words (cf. Akro-lithos, 'ends made of stone'). Decius 21:20, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

You're right, Decie. I thought of that immediately after my last post, but was thrown off by XMK's wacky voicing patterns. ἄκρος 'at the end (or extremity)', from ἀκή 'point, edge'.--Theathenae 21:15, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

akrounoi it is. arounoi is my emendation of ahrounoi of Babaev's page, which is probably a typo (I didn't know what to make of ahrounoi, see above somewhere :\ ). dab (ᛏ) 21:26, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

On the subject of the glossary again, Perseus has a lot of these Macedonian words in its database: I've found ankalis, abagna, akrounoi (that spelling, and it is related to akros as I guessed), argipous (Mac.=aetos), arkon, baskioi, kombous, sarissa (of course, common), kanadoi, adis, danos (>Macedonian word mentioned by Plutarch according to Perseus), and no doubt others, but I'll check later. Decius 28 June 2005 06:53 (UTC)

Berenike dates back to the time of Alexander the Great (was a common name among the Ptolemies who succeeded him, etc.), so extremely doubtful that the Pella Katadesmos is Macedonian (lacking voiced aspirates, etc.), and it's no wonder that Borza and others reject it, I assume (one of Borza's latest works is from 1999, so he would have known of the katadesmos). Borza by the way is in fact a highly regarded authority in Macedonian studies, not just linguistics. His works are even referenced as authoritative by Errington who I mentioned before, among others. So Borza carries as much weight as Hammond in the field: Borza of course has also criticized Hammond and is directly opposed to him. I'm going to look for works by both authors and compare. It seems, judging by criticisms I've read, that Hammond has also made contradictory statements in the manner of Errington (no concerted conspiracy going on, it's apparently a tendency among many of these individuals). Decius 28 June 2005 06:44 (UTC)

Phila, again

moved to Talk:Pella katadesmos. dab (ᛏ) 28 June 2005 07:17 (UTC)

Frication

Chronographe, in relation to your ὑπὸ κατασκευὴν Pronunciation of Greek article, how much do you know about the history of the frication of β γ δ θ φ χ? Βερενίκη and Φερενίκη aren't all that different when the initial consonants are fricated; one is voiced, the other isn't. Likewise δανος and θάνατος, especially if PIE *dhenh.--Theathenae 28 June 2005 13:38 (UTC)

Well, your question is too vague. I know more than nothing and less than everything, obviously :-)) Is there something specific you'd like to ask? Βερενίκη and Φερενίκη "aren't all that different" because they are the same word. It is interesting that the likes of Decius focus on it alone, for some weird reason, and refuse to examine the evidence offered by all surviving Macedonian names. Indeed what the survival of Βερενίκη as a personal name until Roman times (to the exclusion of the Koine form Φερενίκη) suggests, is that Macedonians were justly proud of their particular pronunciation and names, and sought to conserve them. Which suggests that the Macedonian personal name list is probably the single most valuable resource we have. The "strange sounding" words by Hesychius do not impress me at all. He, writing 10 centuries too late, is far more likely to select "exotic" words rather than plain Greek ones. Imagine the linguistic history of Macedonian and plain Greek reversed: <scenario mode> plain Greek has all but disappeared whereas Macedonian is a living language to this day. A certain Thorybius (the opposite of Hesychius) writes a compilation of Greek glossai around 500 AD and includes "chrysos" (gold) in it. All the Decii of this world start screaming: "See, see, Greek was just Phoenician"! </scenario mode> But we'll discuss this more some other time. Chronographos 28 June 2005 14:14 (UTC)

What I meant was, is it indisputable that β was /b/ rather than /v/ or even /β/, that γ was /g/ rather than /ɣ/, that δ was /d/ rather than /ð/, etc.? Is W. Sidney Allen's Vox Graeca the absolute authority?--Theathenae 28 June 2005 14:45 (UTC)

I'll sidestep your question re Vox Graeca with the following: There is a 3rd century BC Beotian inscription that says "ΕΥΔΟΜΟΝ" instead of "ΕΒΔΟΜΟΝ". This means that ευ was already pronounced ev and β was pronoumced v at that time in that region, or the mistake would not have happened. There is an inscription from Elis (I think) saying "Άσμητος" instead of "Άδμητος". This means that δ was already pronounced "th" at that time in that region, and just like any German pronounces "that" as "zat", the scribe wrote σ (σ before μ is pronounced z). Spelling was diverging from pronunciation and the poor guy was at a loss. Aristophanes in the "Acharnians" has the Spartan envoy swear "μα τω σιώ" (by the Two Gods, i.e. Castor and Pollux, a standard Spartan invocation to the two Spartan royal princes who were deified). The form should be "μα τω θεώ" (Dual number). This means that the Spartans already pronounced θ the "modern" way, and Aristophanes had no way of writing it down as his θ was pronounced differently (aspirated T). So he wrote σ. Etc etc etc. Do not make me write the whole article right now, please. Just be patient. Chronographos 28 June 2005 15:00 (UTC)

Ἐν τάξει, ἐν τάξει! I now feel vindicated in simply refusing to pronounce γ /g/ and δ /d/ in my ancient Greek classes. The professor's Greek sounded to me like the product of a western European conspiracy on the supposed pronunciation of ancient Greek, along the lines of the nordicist myth that the ancient Greeks were all tall, blond and blue-eyed. ("If they looked like us, they must have sounded like us too.") Surely Greek phonetics can't have changed that much by Hellenistic times.--Theathenae 28 June 2005 15:37 (UTC)

Nevertheless Vox Graeca is correct about pronunciation, your professor notwithstanding. We, as Greeks, do not have to read Ancient Greek that way, although any scholar should try and fathom ancient pronunciation. Otherwise there is no way to comprehend, for example, Homeric metrics. So, reading for fun is one thing: I enjoy Plato in the original while reading it like katharevousa. Reading for scholarship is another: those Austrians have done a terrific job, look it up, and listen to the sound samples. Chronographos 28 June 2005 16:13 (UTC)

Interesting, but still sounds exceedingly Viennese. This becomes even more evident in the voice-only audio samples on the next page. He even pronounces ρ as a German voiced uvular fricative, while his prosody is replete with those rather annoying German glottal stops. Sounds more like Old Hochdeutsch than ancient Greek. Not authentic in the slightest.--Theathenae 28 June 2005 17:17 (UTC)

So? I LOVE Viennese! I love Viennese music, Viennese painting, Viennese cuisine and Viennese desserts. Of course he has his local accent. Doesn't everyone? Don't we? How else could it be? Can't you try to hear through the uvulars and the glottal stops and enjoy the music of the language? Thetis' lament for her son just broke my heart: "ώ μοι εγώ δειλή, ώ μοι δυσαριστοτόκεια" Chronographos 28 June 2005 18:01 (UTC)

I can't say it brought me to tears, no. Pass me some of that torte, though.--Theathenae 28 June 2005 18:07 (UTC)

Plain or with Schlagober, you voracious pig? :-PPP Chronographos 28 June 2005 18:11 (UTC)

With, of course. I have a healthy non-Erasmic appetite to whet.--Theathenae 28 June 2005 18:25 (UTC)

Me too! :-))) Chronographos 28 June 2005 18:27 (UTC)

And I'm no Pig either. I'm a Snake in Chinese astrology. The Pig is my mortal enemy. Compare the list of famous Snakes and Pigs, and you'll get my drift.--Theathenae 28 June 2005 18:37 (UTC)

Therefore you are vain and slothful! :-}}} Whereas I am intelligent, charming, persuasive, energetic, adaptive, funny, an appealing friend, generous, handsome and skillful (the remaining famous Rats do not apply to me) :-)))) Chronographos 28 June 2005 19:22 (UTC)

we have danos, abroutes, kebala and Berenike at least. That's at least a pattern. For all I care, we need not call the language "Macedonian" at all. We can call it "weird backward balkanese spoken by some mountain tribe hanging out in the remote areas of Macedon". Then we could say that "Macedonian" proper was 'of course' Doric Greek, and all Greeks would be happy. It's just an accident of terminology that not "weird backward balkanese" was chosen as a term for the language, but "Macedonian". We cannot just move the article to weird balkanese since that would be idiosyncratic terminology, but I really wish it was called that, so all the Greek patriots didn't imagine they had turf to defend here :) dab (ᛏ) 28 June 2005 14:33 (UTC)

No need to change anything in the article, relax, we are just discussing. And no, Macedonian was not just plain Doric, because there are strong Aeolian elements to be explained. There is no Greek patriot conspiracy against the truth. This is just your <Albanau mode> Switzerlandian (sic) dogmatic paranoia </Albanau mode>. :-))) Chronographos 28 June 2005 15:06 (UTC)

I see you admire Decium and Albanau as much as I do.--Theathenae 28 June 2005 15:23 (UTC)

Most fervently, especially Albanau. I even pointed out his ancient and glorious ancestry to him. Chronographos 28 June 2005 15:57 (UTC)

The ancient pronunciation of β, γ, δ as b, g and d survives until today when they are preceded by μ and ν (e.g. γαμβρός, άνδρας, δένδρον, άγγελος). We don't notice it because sometimes the spelling is changed. In fact all phonology of Modern Greek has its origins at ancient times, either Classic or Hellenistic, while most ancient phonology survives in idioms of the modern language. Miskin 29 June 2005 04:49 (UTC)

Briges

I just stubled upon a passage in Herodotus (7.73, I think) where he says that the Macedonians (in ca. 500 BC) claim that the Phruges, before they migrated to Anatolia (around 1200 BC), had called themselves Briges. This is quite interesting. I take this to mean that the Macedonian re-voicing could have taken place between 1200 and 500. This is no proof in any way, but I suppose that if the Macedonians had never de-voiced in the first place, they would just have called the Phryges Phryges, as a foreign ethnonym, like everybody else. Also note that the claim isn't just that "the Phryges are called Briges in Macedonia", but that the Macedonians actually claim that the Phrygians themselves changed their own name. The other possibility of course would be that the Macedonians were right, and there is really a Proto-Macedo-Phrygian, and the Phrygians de-voiced only when they were in Anatolia. This seems much less likely to me, but I have to review the Phrygian corpus first. The upshot is, if you follow me, that XMK was Greek(yes!), with a strange re-voicing of the aspirates. No proof, of course. Anyway, since we're not supposed to do original research, I'll just mention the Briges bit in the article for now. dab (ᛏ) 29 June 2005 07:14 (UTC)

Yeah, I know about that. Briges was also recorded as the name of a Thracian tribe. A third possibility is that the Macedonians later incorrectly identified Briges (=Thracians) with Phrygians.Decius 29 June 2005 07:19 (UTC)

no, I think it is quite established that the Phrygians did, in fact, emigrate from Thrace. Note however that we may be claiming that, if both Macedonian and Phrygian are "Greek", the Armenian language may also need to be considered Greek. I.e. if you want to argue the Macedonians are "Hellenes", linguistically, you'd need to admit that the Armenians are Hellenes too. After some very weird sound changes, of course. I do think the term "Graeco-Armenian" is better suited for the theory than "Hellenic", in any case :) dab (ᛏ) 29 June 2005 07:33 (UTC)

It's all a matter of degree and interpretation, ultimately, as all those languages are related to a greater or lesser extent. Macedonian was clearly closer to "Greek" than Armenian, even if Armenian is now the closest language to Greek. The "closest" doesn't necessarily mean all that "close", however. XMK is clearly recognisable to me as a Greek language; Armenian is not.--Theathenae 29 June 2005 09:45 (UTC)

sure, but if Armenian is descended from common Graeco-Phrygo-Armenian, historically, we'd have no choice but to classify Armenian as a really far out Modern Greek dialect. Just like we classify Hindi as Indo-Aryan, although it doesn't really preserve much of the grammar of Sanskrit. This is all uncertain, but "Graeco-Macedonian" is the superior terminology, because it is unambiguous. Calling Graeco-Macedonian "Hellenic" because people want the Macedonians to be Hellenes is just as bad as not calling Graeco-Armenian "Hellenic" because people don't want the Armenians to be Hellenes. We're just drawing trees, here. dab (ᛏ) 29 June 2005 10:05 (UTC)

I don't think it's been established, it may be a myth. And see also John Wilkes (Roman archaeologist), The Illyrians (1992), pg. 145: "Other coincidences of ethnic names supported notions of a connection between the Balkans and Asia Minor, the Mysians in the latter matching the Balkan Moesians and the Phrygians corresponding to the Briges". Besides the Briges in Thrace, there was also a tribe known as Briges near Epidamnus in Illyria. It's too hazardous to be convincing. Elaborate myths were often woven around these similar ethnonyms (see Dardani, Dardan). Decius 29 June 2005 07:40 (UTC)

ok, I just noticed that the famous Phrygian bekos "bread" shows "Macedonian" behaviour, i.e. it would be *phegos in Greek. Phrygian is really in a similarly tantalizing way similar to Greek as XMK... dab (ᛏ) 29 June 2005 08:06 (UTC)

Thracian also is known to have voiced rather than devoiced (forgot the examples, but they are agreed upon). Decius 29 June 2005 08:08 (UTC)

yes, I am saying that this supports the tradition that the Phrygians came from the Balkans. I note there is Attic (aorist) ephokha < *ebhéhgshe, root-cognate to bekos. dab (ᛏ) 29 June 2005 08:10 (UTC)

I'm skeptical about all these migration theories. Obviously migrations did happen in prehistorical times, but I wonder if they can be reconstructed now with any degree of accuracy. Witness all these conflicting theories about IE migration (Gimbutas vs. Renfrew etc). While we can be certain that some of these myths do contain an attavistic handdown of genuine collective memory, as opposed to pure mythical baloney, it's practically impossible to say which is which. Chronographos 29 June 2005 08:52 (UTC)

Herodotus is the father of history, man! we are not talking about chalcolithic kurgan migrations, we are talking about a tradition of a "mere" 700 years. Miskin here claims that the Hellenes were one ethnos since 2900 years, by comparison. This is slightly over the top, of course, but ethnic identities may well remain consistent over a millennium or so. dab (ᛏ) 29 June 2005 09:12 (UTC)

"Ethnos" is a relatively modern concept. I don't think it can be uniformly applied in retrospect. As for Herodotus, well, I am a staunch Thucydidean myself Chronographos 29 June 2005 10:09 (UTC)

I've also previously proclaimed my esteem for Thucydides on Talk:Macedon. And it's interesting that he consistently separated Macedonians from Hellenes when the issue came up (at least, on all instances I've seen from him). Decius 29 June 2005 10:14 (UTC)

Mayahi, mayahoo, mayaho, mayaHAHA! Chronographos 29 June 2005 10:56 (UTC)

Tell that to Thucydides... Decius 29 June 2005 11:04 (UTC)

Was at his birthplace Sunday, had coffee by the sea. Chronographos 29 June 2005 11:27 (UTC)

Phoenician inscription

This belongs on Talk:Phrygia, but since we're here: what can we say about this "Phoenician inscription of Edessa", [4]

Perdikas son of Argeo(s) leading his Makestes (Macedonians) when approached to Vedissa (Edessa) citadel, coming down from upper Illyria, offered sacrifice to uppermost (god) Savaz(i)os. Then when conquered entire Midas country, being outraged with foreign Greeks who were charged for intrigues, extincted them immediatelly while released indigenous Briges (Phrygians) to wander away, because both these people spoke different languages. Since then being elder sovereign of Brigea (Phrygia) enjoyed the profits of this most ancient city renaming it to Aegae while kept repelling fugitives to return with excemption of captives. Dredas son of Gordios chiseled this marble chronicle in Greek language to memory of sorrowful remembrance.

the website looks a tad kooky, is this inscription real? dab (ᛏ) 29 June 2005 08:14 (UTC)

That site was baffling me a few months ago, and it may be a hoax. I've seen a totally different translation of the same text on another site (forgot which)---a fake tablet? or just spurious translations of a real archaeological find? I don't know. Decius 29 June 2005 08:16 (UTC)

they try to sell you a print of the inscription, and their images are blurred on purpose. Not a very reliable authority, I'd say. They also seem to have some sort of agenda, although I didn't bother which. Note also this dead Greek site preserved in google cache: [5]. It also pretends to give the original text,

ΠΕΡΔΙΚΑΣ ΑΡΓΑΙΟ[Υ] ΚΑΡΑΝΙΟΝ ΙΔΙΟΙΣ ΜΑΚΕΣΤΑΙΣ ΚΑΘΥΠΕΡΘΕΝ ΙΛΛΥΡΑΙΑΣ ΑΓΧΙΜΟΛΟΣ ΕΠ ΑΚΡΑ :ΒΕΔ[Υ]Σ ΣΑΣΣΑΒΑΖΟ ΟΦΣΙΜΕΔΟΝΤΙ ΕΡΕΧΣΕΝ ΜΙΔΟΥ ΕΠΑΝ ΑΙΑΝ ΚΑΣΧΕΘΕ ΟΘΝΕΙΟΥΣ ΓΡΕΚΕΣΤΑΣ ΕΠΙ ΣΚΕΥΟΡΗΜΑΣΙ ΛΕΛΟΙΔΟΡΗΜΕΝΟΥΣ ΑΥΘ ΑΝΗΡΕ ΣΚΥΔΜΑΙΝΟΝ ΒΡΥΓΑΣ ΔΕ ΠΑΛΑΙΧΘΟΝΑΣ ΑΛΑΣΘΑΙ ΤΗΛΟΘ ΕΙΕ ΑΜΦ ΑΛΛΟΘΡΟΑΣ ΕΚ ΤΟΥ ΤΟ ΠΑΛΛΙΣΤΟΝ ΑΣΤΥ ΑΙΓΑΣ ΠΡΟΣΓΟΡΕΥΣΑΣ ΕΚΑΡΠΟ ΚΡΑΝΤΟΡ ΔΗ ΒΡΥΓΑΙΑΣ ΓΕΡΑΙΤΕΡΟΣ ΠΑΛΙΝΤΡΑΠΕΛΟΥΣ ΑΛΑΛΚΕ ΠΛΗΝ ΖΟΓΡΗΜΕΝΟΝ ΤΟ ΔΟΥΝ ΜΑΡΜΑΡΕΟΝ ΜΝΑΜΑΤΟΣ ΧΑΡΙΝ ΔΡΕΔΑΣ ΓΟΡΔΙΟΥ ΓΡΕΚΙΣΤΙ ΕΧΣΕΣΕΝ ΕΣ ΓΡΑΜΑΤΕΑ ΛΥΓΡΑ

It totally looks like a hoax. Grekestas? Bryges? (Hdt has Briges) dab (ᛏ) 29 June 2005 08:28 (UTC)

Probably a hoax, but it doesn't look like Dragostea Din Tei. Even if it's a hoax, it would be interesting to find out how it originated. Decius 29 June 2005 08:36 (UTC)

ok, it's a total hoax. They date it to the 9th century. If it was real, the academic world would be in an uproar! How convenient, a 9th century inscription telling us in plain words that the Macedonians spoke a language different from Greek. They didn't even try to make the text look archaic. Just forget it, the Dragostea was more inspired. I guess this is the "panslavicist" side of the argument :) dab (ᛏ) 29 June 2005 08:40 (UTC)

Or "pan-Albanian"---I saw the same translation given on an Albanian propaganda site that somehow used the text to prove that the Macedonians were an Illyrian tribe. Decius 29 June 2005 08:44 (UTC)

It's fishy and I smell a rat too. "Dredas" even spells gramatea wrong. And that λυγρά thingie: too corny! Not to mention grEkestas. That such an inscription would be only deciphered by an esteemed Lebanese scholar and find its way to a humble Geocities webpage. The injustice of it all ... Chronographos 29 June 2005 08:52 (UTC)

well, it's allegedly transcribed from the Phoenician alphabet, so you cannot really complain about the missing eta. But it is true that it's a really pathetic forgery. I mean, they don't even bother to make the image of the transcription legible. No expert would be fooled for more than ten seconds by this, but I am sure a lot of Albanian kids are dead convinced now that the Illyricity of Macedon is firmly established :) dab (ᛏ) 29 June 2005 09:04 (UTC)

not true, they claim they have an eta. man, this thing would revolutionize our knowledge of the genesis of the Greek alphabet, if only it were real! dab (ᛏ) 29 June 2005 09:06 (UTC)

I wonder if this is just an internet hoax, or a "big-time" hoax that made it into tabloid newspapers and t.v. shows. Decius 29 June 2005 09:09 (UTC)

As so often, I am struck by the lengths nationalist will go to create their own version of history.--Wiglaf 29 June 2005 09:10 (UTC)

Hmm, most likely the blame goes to a Macedonian Slav rather than an Albanian---but where does the Lebanese guy fit in? I find this an interesting hoax. Decius 29 June 2005 09:14 (UTC)

I wrote them an email, asking them to join us here :) dab (ᛏ) 29 June 2005 09:21 (UTC)

Do they have Internet in Lebanon? Or electricity around the clock for that matter? :-))) Chronographos 29 June 2005 10:09 (UTC)

I resent that! One of the loveliest women I known lives in Lebanon, and we stay in touch over the Net >:-(.--Wiglaf 29 June 2005 10:53 (UTC)

As we say in Greece, "pussy hair can tow ships" :-PPP Chronographos 29 June 2005 11:03 (UTC)

I hope you guys are not serious about this. This is one of the oldest hoaxes in the book and it's been on the internet for some time now. Its main page is the geocities site and then it could also be linked by a Bulgarian or Slavo-Macedonian universities (imagine the level). Yes, I know what you're thinking, like Wiglaf said some people are pretty desperate. The fact that you people linked this site here automatically degrades the level of the the article. Yes, yes I know how you were all discussing what an "interesting hoax" it is, but having to discuss over something like that could also pose a problem. I mean, for crying out loud, even if you've missed all technical obvious reasons to it, this text is to Ancient Greek what Swahili would be to Latin. The hoax-master was such an amateur that he even used the word "Greek". I mean besides the fact that the word "ΓΡΕΚΙΣΤΙ" has absolutely no meaning in Ancient Greek as "Graecus" is spelled with an 'AI', the term "Greek" was never' used as a collective term for the Greek-speaking peoples prior to the rise of Rome. The collective names were "Hellenes" or "Ionians" (used by Greeks and Asians respectively). The Graeci were originally a tribe of Thessaly whose colonisers came in contact with the Romans until their name became gradually a collective term. And as I said earlier, prior to the 9th century BC, there is no reference of collective term. I never meant that Greeks have been a nation (in its modern meaning) since 900BC dab, stop trying to present me as a extremist by manipulating my words. Miskin 29 June 2005 10:59 (UTC)

quite so, but note that the link is only from the talk page of this article, therefore it has no impact on our article's quality. Sorry, I didn't want to portray as an extremist. I do believe you are really moderate, especially recently. dab (ᛏ) 29 June 2005 11:13 (UTC)

copy-paste of "ethnos" above

what do you mean, modern concept? ethnos means nation, in the sense of tribe, from at least Herodotus (while in Homer, it apparently means "warband"). dab (ᛏ) 29 June 2005 10:15 (UTC)

"In the sense of" being the operative words. "In the sense of" the New Testament, ethnos is any population of non-Christians. The devil is in the details, my friend :-) Chronographos 29 June 2005 10:53 (UTC)

I obviously meant to say that "Miskin claims Greeks as an ethnos in the sense of bloody tribe just like in bloody Herodotus are aged 2900" :P dab (ᛏ) 29 June 2005 11:06 (UTC)

By this bloody definition, the bloody Hellenes considered themselves a bloody nation when they got their bloody ships together in bloody Aulis and sailed over the bloody (sorry, wine-dark!) sea to get to bloody Troy and bloody get that bloody whore back! There they fought for ten bloody years and a lot of bloody blood was, er, bled :-}} Chronographos 29 June 2005 11:20 (UTC)

A battle which is just as credible as the battle of Bråvalla, *rolleyes*.--Wiglaf 29 June 2005 11:37 (UTC)

By "ethnos" I would refer to a collective term that describes peoples of common cultural and linguistic elements. In that sense we can talk about the Keltic ethnos, the Germanic ethnos, the Thracian ethnos, the Hellenic ethnos, and even the modern Arabic ethnos etc. The modern notion of "nation" (which also translates into Greek as 'ethnos'), refers to the unity of a large group of people under a common state. In that respect, Greeks and Cypriots are two different nations of the Hellenic ethnos. Miskin 29 June 2005 11:34 (UTC)

Anti-nationalist hoax

The site mentioned above[6] is linked to by http://geocities.com/makedonia007/index.html, part of a webring[7] of one (or more) loony propagandist(s) identifying as ethnic Bulgarians living in "Greek-occupied Macedonia". (They all share a common contact email address: kaltsef@hotmail.com.) But the fact that most of the pages are entirely in Greek with no English or other translations leads me to believe that this is an elaborate hoax by Greek anarchists who are known for their catchy anti-nationalist slogans like "The Aegean belongs to the fish". If they really were aggrieved Bulgarian nationalists, they probably wouldn't use the spelling МАКЕДОНИЈА, or promote the "Macedonian" Orthodox Church. The sites' intent appears to be to piss off the Greeks rather than promote "Bulgarian human rights in Macedonia". One of the more colourful articles is entitled "The Greeks, descendants of savages from Ethiopia". I wouldn't take anything on these sites even remotely seriously.--Theathenae 29 June 2005 10:41 (UTC)

Skopjans calling Ethiopians "savages"? This must be the End of Times.

this is really funny then, anarchists from Thessaloniki taking the piss out of frowning nationalists, also from Thessaloniki? Or maybe serious Greek nationalists on a quest to make the Bulgarians look silly? the possibilities... If they are really anarchists with a taste for the absurd, I may live to regret I invited them to WP, though :\ dab (ᛏ) 29 June 2005 11:09 (UTC)

Bloody Thessalonikeans! They eat too much bougatsa and support all the wrong teams! :-P Chronographos 29 June 2005 11:31 (UTC)

Ancient Ethiopians were not savages, according to Greek mythology they were Gods' sacred race (of course propagandists didn't know that). Anyway the "ancient Greeks were immigrants from Egypt and Ethiopia while Macedonian Slavs are the oldest people in the region" hoax, is another amusing attempt from Bulgaro-Slavic nationalist to lay claims on Greek soil. I never really understood the point of that hoax. Is it just supposed to trace some "Macedonian genes" back into time and at the same time "insult" Greeks by inventing an African origin for them? Imagine that in those people's minds, a non-european (non-white) origin is something degrading. I hope Dab and Decius see with what kind of backwards inbreds do people like me have to deal with. Miskin 29 June 2005 11:34 (UTC)

They got it from Luigi Luca Cavalli-Sforza's genetic studies, which identified what he calls a "Subsaharan" gene in the Greek population. If true, this is a finding that makes me very proud. I am a big believer in balanced polymorphism. Not to mention that such a gene would be a great advantage in athletics. Chronographos 29 June 2005 11:42 (UTC)

Nah, they just faked the whole thing from scratch, they even added a fake historical background. I read it once and it was simply laughable, especially to people with basic knowledge on the subject. I'll try to find it again. Miskin 29 June 2005 12:11 (UTC)

guys, Wikipedia is not a discussion forum ok? it's ok to have some fun while working on an article, but you've completely gone off on a tangent now. dab (ᛏ) 1 July 2005 08:41 (UTC)

I totaly agree dab, and I'll stick to the topic as long as others do also. Chrono' constantly directed off-topic comments at me, and I had to respond off-topic in turn. But no more hopefully. The topic is interesting enough. Decius 1 July 2005 08:49 (UTC)

Speaking of the topic, I've seen hardly any comments relating to Hesychius, and it's been two days since dab posted the opus and I extracted the Macedonian glosses. Our article needs some major work, and we're sitting here worrying about gay marriage, which is going to happen sooner or later anyway.--Theathenae 1 July 2005 09:05 (UTC)

yeah, we'll address the Hes. wordlist yet. Need to sort out the interesting words, no point in listing them all. Will take some time. dab (ᛏ) 1 July 2005 16:01 (UTC)

I see that "someone" conveniently deleted all the talk in which Decius repeatedly called me a "faggot". Unless it was a "server glitch" again. Pity. I was not going to call on the admins about it anyways. Chronographos 4 July 2005 20:36 (UTC)

ok, so,

while you're all here, can we get a full list of Macedonian words from Hesychius or something? You know, for the article... dab (ᛏ) 29 June 2005 12:19 (UTC)

I don't have the Hesychius text. However, you previously stated that you have it, and would share it if someone requested it. Decius 29 June 2005 12:22 (UTC)

Yeah, dab!--Theathenae 29 June 2005 12:32 (UTC)

ok, I'm working on it. But I cannot finish this today. See wikisource:Hesychius of Alexandria. dab (ᛏ) 29 June 2005 13:00 (UTC)

There's no hurry dab, and I consider that a heroic jest just typing up what you've typed already. I'll see what I can decipher from the Greek text. Decius 29 June 2005 13:05 (UTC)

typing? You don't seriously suppose I'm typing out Hesychius for you? That would be a heroic jest indeed :) dab (ᛏ) 29 June 2005 13:07 (UTC)

You're right: a check of the history shows timespan impossible for typing. Decius 29 June 2005 13:45 (UTC)

Im formatting. I've actually got it now, and am trying to post it in two chunks. dab (ᛏ) 29 June 2005 13:46 (UTC)

hang on — I'm done: [8]. I had to create a separate page for each letter though, this Hesychius thing is longer than the bible! Now, no excuses for you to continue bickering about Slavs and Ethiopians and what not, go find those Macedonian words :) dab (ᛏ) 29 June 2005 14:28 (UTC)

The polytonic diacritics aren't coming up on my screen. Perhaps you could incorporate the polytonic template? I want to spend my time deciphering Macedonian, not small empty boxes.--Theathenae 29 June 2005 14:47 (UTC)

um, that's your browser's problem. They have no polytonic template on wikisource, it's just encoded UTF-8. You should try fiddling with your browser font/encoding options. The diacritics show up fine here (firefox / OS X) dab (ᛏ) 29 June 2005 14:53 (UTC)

Andriotes

In the book of Andriotes it is mentioned the name of another lexigographer of Macedonian, which I personally had never heard of. The name is ΑΜΕΡΙΑΣ, in English "Amerias" maybe? I haven't found anything on the internet. Miskin 29 June 2005 13:17 (UTC)

Actually I just found something: http://www.hri.org/docs/macque/text4.html I know that for some people this site can't be considered neutral, yet it's the only source on the internet that refers to this name. It says that Amerias was a Macedonian lexicographer on which Hesychius was based. Therefore the assumptions of the Macedonian dialect surviving until the 5th century AD becomes moot... Miskin 29 June 2005 13:29 (UTC)

That's fine if the Macedonian language became extinct earlier than the 5th century AD. The note in the website says that info is from The History of Greek Writing, Ant. Thavoris. Decius 29 June 2005 13:35 (UTC)

Are you suggesting that Amerias didn't exist because he's only seen so far in Greek sources? Miskin 29 June 2005 13:41 (UTC)

No, I didn't suggest that. I actually think that info is 80% credible. I was pointing out it's from an actual book (actually two books, Andriotes and Thavoris), not just a website. Decius 29 June 2005 13:45 (UTC)

Ἡσύχιος, γραμματικὸς Ἀλεξανδρεύς: A-Ω

http://wikisource.org/wiki/Hesychius_of_Alexandria

These are all the entries containing any reference to Macedonia or the Macedonians:

Α
<ἄβαγνα>• ῥόδα n Μακεδόνες <ἀβαρκνᾷ> κομᾷ † τὲ Μακεδόνες <ἀβαρύ>• ὀρίγανον Μακεδόνες <ἀλογεῖ>• σπεῖσον Μακεδόνες <ἀβλόη>• σπένδε Μακεδόνες <ἀβροῦτες>• ὀφρῦς p Μακεδόνες <ἄγημα>• τὸ προϊὸν τοῦ βασιλέως τάγμα ἐλεφάντων καὶ ἱππέων καὶ πεζῶν, οἱ δὲ τῶν ἀρίστων τῆς Μακεδονικῆς συντάξεως Σ <ἀγκαλίς>• ἄχθος. καὶ δρέπανον Μακεδόνες <ἄδδαι>• ῥυμοὶ, ὑπὸ Μακεδόνων <ἀδῆ>• οὐρανός. Μακεδόνες <ἄδισκον>• κυκεῶνα. Μακεδόνες <ἄδραια>• αἰθρία Μακεδόνες <Ἀέροπες>• ἔθνος, Τροιζῆνα κατοικοῦντες. καὶ ἐν Μακεδονίᾳ γένος <Ἄθως>• ὄρος b ἐν Μακεδονίᾳ (Ξ 229) <ἀκόντιον>• δοράτιον vgASn μικρὰ λόγχη AS ῥάχιν δὲ Μακεδόνες. καὶ στρατεύματος μέρος Ἀγριανῶν Αἰολεῖς. <ἀκρέα>• παῖς θήλεια. Μακεδόνες. <ἀκρουνοί>• ὅροι, ὑπὸ Μακεδόνων <ἄλιζα>• ἡ λεύκη τὸ δένδρον. Μακεδόνες <ἀλίη>• κάπρος. Μακεδόνες <Ἀνθεμουσία>• τάγμα τι παρὰ Μακεδόσιν ἐξ Ἀνθεμοῦντος, πόλεως Μακεδονίας <ἄξος>• ὕλη, παρὰ Μακεδόσιν <ἀορτής>• [ξιφιστής S,] ὑπὸ Μακεδόνων [ἄγγος] [ἄγγος δερμάτειον ἱματίων S <ἀράντισιν>• ἐρινύσι. Μακεδόνες <ἀργιόπους>• ἀετός. Μακεδόνες <Ἄρητος>• Ἡρακλῆς, παρὰ Μακεδόσιν <ἀρκόν>• σχολήν. Μακεδόνες <ἀρφύς>• ἱμάς. Μακεδόνες <ἄσπιλος>• χείμαῤῥος, ὑπὸ Μακεδόνων
Β
<βαβρήν>• ὑπόστασις ἐλαίου, κατὰ Μακεδόνας <βαδάς>· κίναιδος. ὡς Ἀμερίας <Βαθάλη>· κρήνη. Ἀμερίας †<βαθάρα>• πυκλιή, Μακεδόνες. πυρλός, Ἀθαμᾶνες <βαίβυκος>· πελεκᾶνος Φιλίτας (fr. 47 K.), Ἀμερίας δὲ βαυβυκᾶ- νας <βηματίζει>• τὸ τοῖς ποσὶ μετρεῖν. ἔστι δέ πως ἡ λέξις Μακεδονική †<βηνῶσα>• ἡ φωνὴ τῶν προβάτων <βίῤῥοξ>• δασύ. Μακεδόνες
Γ
[<Γάμψηλοι>• πόλις Μακεδονίας] <γάρκαν>• ῥάβδον. Μακεδόνες <γόλα>• ἔντερα. Μακεδόνες <γοτάν>• ὗν. Μακεδόνες <γυλλάς>• εἶδος ποτηρίου, παρὰ Μακεδόσιν <γῶπας>• κολοιούς. Μακεδόνες
Δ
<δαίτας>• μεριστάς Sn <Μακεδόνες> nw <δανῶν>• κακοποιῶν. κτείνων. Μακεδόνες <Δάῤῥων>• Μακεδονικὸς δαίμων, ᾧ ὑπὲρ τῶν νοσούντων εὔχονται <δάρυλλος>• ἡ δρῦς, ὑπὸ Μακεδόνων <δρεπανηφόρα ἅρματα>• τοὺς Μακεδόνας φασὶ πρώτους χρήσασθαι †<δρῆες>• στρουθοί (vgn) s Μακεδόνες <Δύστρος>• ὑπὸ Μακεδόνων μήν <δώραξ>• σπλήν hw ὑπὸ Μακεδόνων
Ε
[<Ἔορτος>• ἢ] <Ἐορδός>• Μακεδών, ἀπὸ ἔθνους <ἐπιδειπνίς>• Μακεδονικὸς κώθων, ἥδυσμα. †ἐθισμός
Ζ
<Ζειρηνίς>• Ἀφροδίτη ἐν Μακεδονίᾳ
Η
<Ἠμαθίη>• Μακεδονία (Ξ 226) <ἥμεναι, οἷά τε φύλλα μακεδνῆς αἰγείροιο>• οὕτως ἔφη, ἤτοι ἐπεὶ τὰ φύλλα τῆς αἰγείρου ἀλλήλοις ἀντέστραπται, οὕτω καὶ <αἱ> Ἀλκίνου θεράπαιναι προσεῖχον τοῖς ἔργοις πάνυ, ἀλλήλοις ἀντεστραμμέναι• ἢ ὥσπερ πυκνὰ τὰ τῆς αἰγείρου φύλλα, οὕτω κἀκεῖναι θλιβόμεναι ἐκρέκοντο (η 106)
Θ
<θούριδες>• νύμφαι. Μοῦσαι. Μακεδόνες
Ι
<ἰζέλα>• ἀγαθῇ τύχῃ. Μακεδόνες <ἴλαξ>• ἡ πρῖνος, ὡς Ῥωμαῖοι καὶ Μακεδόνες <ἰν δέᾳ>• μεσημβρίᾳ. Μακεδόνες <Ἰχναίην χώραν>• τὴν Μακεδονίαν (p), ἔνθα τὸ μαντεῖον ὁ Ἀπόλλων κατέσχε, καὶ τιμᾶται <Ἰχναίη Θέμις> (h. Apoll. 94)
Κ
<κἄγχαρμον>• τὸ τὴν λόγχην ἄνω ἔχον. [Μακεδόνες] <καλαῤῥυγαί>· τάφροι. Ἀμερίας<κάλιθος>· οἶνος. Ἀμερίας <καμαστίς>· μέτρον τι. Ἀμερίας <κάραβος>• ἔδεσμα, ὥς φασιν, ὠπτημένον ἐπ' ἀνθράκων. ὑπὸ δὲ Μακεδόνων ἡ πύλη. καὶ τὰ ἐν τοῖς ξηροῖς ξύλοις σκωλήκια. καὶ τὸ θαλάττιον ζῷον <καρπαία>• ὄρχησις Μακεδονική <κίκεῤῥοι>• ὦχροι. Μακεδόνες <Κισσοῦς>• ὄρος ἐν Μακεδονίᾳ. καὶ πόλις Θρᾴκης [<κομμάραι ἢ κομάραι>• καρίδες. Μακεδόνες] †<Κόραννος>• βασιλεὺς Μακεδονίας <κυνοῦπες>• ἄρκτος. Μακεδόνες
Λ
†<λακεδάμα>• ὕδωρ ἁλμυρὸν ἄλικι ἐπικεχυμένον, ὃ πίνουσιν οἱ τῶν Μακεδόνων ἀγροῖκοι <Λακεδαίμων>• ἡ Σπάρτη. καὶ ποτὲ μὲν [ἡ Πελοπόννησος] ἡ χώρα πᾶσα• ποτὲ δὲ πόλις ὁμώνυμος τῇ χώρᾳ (Β 581) <λείβηθρον>• ῥεῖθρον. [ὀχετόν S. κρουνόν, καὶ τόπος ἐν Μακε- δονίᾳ καὶ <κατὰ> τὸν Ἑλικῶνα <Λυγκαίη>• πόλις Μακεδονίας
Μ
<μακεδνὰ σκῦλα>• τὰ οὐράνια καὶ μεγάλα. ἢ ὅτι <τὰ> τρόπαια μετέωρα ἵσταται <μακεδνή>• μηκεδανή. μακρά. ὑψηλή (η 106) <μακεσίκρανος>• ἔποψ. διὰ τὸ ἔχειν ἐπὶ τῆς κεφαλῆς καθάπερ λόφον. καὶ κορυθαίολον αὐτὸν λέγουσι. πολυώνυμον δὲ [λέγε- ται] τὸ ζῷον• σίντην τε γὰρ αὐτὸν καὶ ἀλεκτρυόνα καὶ γέλα- σον λέγουσι <Μακετία>• ἡ Μακεδονία <μάκιστος>• ποῤῥώτατος. ὄφελος ἔχοντα <μακιστήρ>• βέλος. τάσσεται δὲ καὶ ἐπὶ τοῦ μεγάλου (Aesch. Pers. 698) †<μάκιστι>• λοιμός <Μάκκος>• ... βασιλεύς <ματτύης>• ἡ μὲν φωνὴ Μακεδονική, ὄρνις. καὶ τὰ ἐκ τοῦ ζωμοῦ αὐτοῦ λάχανα περιφερόμενα <Μυσίων Ὀλυμπίων>• ἐπεὶ πλείους εἰσὶν Ὄλυμποι Μακεδονίας καὶ Θετταλίας• ἔνιοι δὲ δεκατέσσαρας ἠρίθμησαν
Ν
<Νῦσα> καὶ <Νυσήϊον>• ὄρος, οὐ καθ' ἕνα τόπον. ἔστι γὰρ Ἀρα- βίας, Αἰθιοπίας, Αἰγύπτου, Βαβυλῶνος, Ἐρυθρᾶς, Θρᾴκης, Θετταλίας, Κιλικίας, Ἰνδικῆς, Λιβύης, Λυδίας, Μακεδονίας, Νάξου, περὶ τὸ Πάγγαιον, τόπος Συρίας
Ξ
<Ξανθικά>• ἑορτὴ Μακεδόνων, Ξανδικοῦ μηνὸς ἢ Ξανθικοῦ ἀγο- μένη. ἔστι δὲ καθάρσιον τῶν στρατευμάτων
Ο
<Ὀλύμπια δώματ' ἔχοντες>• οἱ τὸν Ὄλυμπον κατοικοῦντες θεοί, ὅ ἐστιν ὄρος ἐν Μακεδονίᾳ, καὶ οὐρανός (Α 18) <Ὄλυμπος>• οὐρανός, θεοῦ οἰκητήριον. καὶ ὄρος ἐν Μακεδονίᾳ r. Avg
Π
<παραός>• ἀετὸς ὑπὸ Μακεδόνων <Πελλαῖον>• [φαιόν. καὶ] Μακεδονικόν <περί[πε]τ[ε]ια> καὶ <περιῆτες>• περιῆτες μὲν οἱ φύλακες, περί[πε]- τ[ε]ια δὲ Μακεδονικὴ ἑορτή <πέχαρι>· ἔλαφος. Ἀμερίας <πίγγαν>· νεόσσιον. Ἀμερίας. γλαυκόν <Πιερία>• ὄρος. [ἢ λιπαρά] <Πιερίδες>• αἱ Μοῦσαι ἐν Μακεδονίᾳ <Πιέρι..>• ἡ ἀκρώρεια τοῦ ἐν Μακεδονίᾳ ὄρους <Πίπλ(ε)ιαι>• αἱ Μοῦσαι ἐν τῷ Μακεδονικῷ Ὀλύμπῳ, ἀπὸ κρήνης Πι- πλείας
Ρ
<ῥάματα>• βο[ς]τρύδια. σταφυλίς. Μακεδόνες [<ῥαμάς>• ὁ ὕψιστος θεός] <ῥοῦτο>• τοῦτο. Μακεδόνες
Σ
<σάρις[ς]α>• δόρυ μακρόν, εἶδος ἀκοντίου Ἑλληνικοῦ, σπάθη βαρβαρική. Μακεδόνες <σαυᾶδαι>• σαῦδοι. Ἀμερίας τοὺς σειλείνους οὕτω καλεῖσθαί φησιν ὑπὸ Μακεδόνων <σαυτορία>· σωτηρία. Ἀμερία(ς) <σκοῖδος>• ἀρχή τις παρὰ Μακεδόσι τεταγμένη ἐπὶ τῶν δικαστηρίων. <σμώγη>· ῥανίς. τὸ τυχόν. Ἀμερίας βο(ύ)γλωσσον <Στρεψαῖοι>• ἔθνος περὶ Μακεδονίαν <Σχερίη>· ἡ Σχερία. ἡ τῶν Φαιάκων χώρα, ἢ νῆσος Κέρκυρα τὸ πρό- τερον οὕτως ἐκαλεῖτο <σχερόν>· κῦμα ἕτοιμον. Ἀμερίας <σχερός>· ἀκτή, αἰγιαλός
Τ
<ταγόναγα>• Μακεδονική τις ἀρχή <τεθολωμένον>· μεμυρισμένον <τεθολώς>· ἀνάπλεως. Ἀμερίας <τεθο(ω)μένον>· ὠξυμμένον. καὶ <ἐθόωσα> ὤξυνα
Υ
(*)<ὑφαίνει>· ἐμπρῆσαι. ὑφᾶται. Ἀμερίας
Χ
<Χαλαστραίων συῶν>• [πόλις τῆς Μακεδονίας καὶ λίμνη ἔνθα τὸ Χαλαστραῖον νίτρον γεγένηται

Hesychius - Comments

Utterly fascinating. Excellent work, dab. Our sample glossary (and perhaps the entire article) is clearly in need of a major makeover. Seeing the words in the original Greek script puts them into serious perspective (not to mention their rightful place). And I was right all along about Macedonian ἄδραια = Attic αἰθρία, dab! :)--Theathenae 29 June 2005 15:36 (UTC)

I love αορτής! Homer could not have put it better. Even my mom knew what aor meant (hint: it's a popular "filler" word in Greek crosswords) Chronographos 29 June 2005 16:21 (UTC)

aor means "sword"? and aortes is some kind of scabbard or bag?

Why, yes. I thought the etymology of aorta was known to everyone. Aorter is the sword strap (used nowadays in Greek army terminology as a rifle strap), aortes is the swordsman. Chronographos 29 June 2005 17:04 (UTC)

what do you mean? athria is Hesychius' translation of XMK adraia. dab (ᛏ) 29 June 2005 15:51 (UTC)

Whoever wrote the original sample glossary had Hes. giving aithrios instead of aithría. And you berated me for following my Greek instincts and changing it [9] to what Hes. really wrote.--Theathenae 29 June 2005 16:01 (UTC)

Oh look[10] whodunnit! ;P--Theathenae 29 June 2005 16:05 (UTC)

Congrats for your hard work, dab! As for the vocabulary, it's all Greek to me! :-)) Chronographos 29 June 2005 16:11 (UTC) (Do you agree, Theathenae?)

Makedonía xakoustē, toû Alexándrou hē khōra! :PPP--Theathenae 29 June 2005 16:15 (UTC)

I see, good catch then. the glossary should in any case make clear which forms are Hes.'s, and which are 'ours'. 130.60.142.65 29 June 2005 16:06 (UTC)

I was mis-quoting Pokorny, I didn't take the form directly from Hes.,

r-Formans: gr. [aithēr] `die obere Luft' (maked. [adē]), [aithra] `der heitere Himmel' (maked. [adraia/]), [aithrios] `hell, heiter (vom Wetter)', wozu ablautend [itharos] `heiter', ai. vi:dhra/- (=vi-idh-ra//-) ds.

my bad :) 130.60.142.65 29 June 2005 16:11 (UTC)

Gee, more Greek. We all know what a ταγός was in Thessaly, so a ταγός that ήγεν .... Chronographos 29 June 2005 18:00 (UTC)

It's more a case of spot the barbarous words, if you can. OK guys, I think I've extracted any and all entries relating to Macedonia. I hope I haven't missed any. Hesychius would be most unforgiving.--Theathenae 29 June 2005 18:08 (UTC)

Excellent job, both of you. Now strike out the linguistically irrelevant stuff, like "Olympus, a mountain in Macedonia", or that Nysa mountain that exists in 15 places around the globe. Next thing to be done (I think) is classify the entries into 3 categories: obviously Greek, obviously IE but not obviously Greek, and totally inexplicable. Right? Furthermore, what should be taken into account is the "broken telephone" effect. For non-Greeks, "broken telephone" is a kids' game where a number of kids take turns whispering each other a word in the ear very fast. The last kid has to guess what the first kid said. This is what must have happened with poor Hesychius transmitting almost a thousand years after those words were actually used. Therefore many totally inexplicable words have to fall into this unusable category. As for Hesychius himself, I think he was a very QUIET person, if you get my drift. ;-))))))) Chronographos 29 June 2005 23:12 (UTC)

Νῦσα is modern Νάουσα, n'est-ce pas?--Theathenae 30 June 2005 11:04 (UTC)

Dunno! The etymology is straightforward (νύσσω, Διό-νυσος etc), but if it's modern Naousa, I don't know. I could lecture you about the Naousa grape, Xinomavro, though! :-)) Chronographos 30 June 2005 11:14 (UTC)

Well there is a Naousa on the island of Naxos too, as our trustworthy friend Hesychius dutifully informs us.--Theathenae 30 June 2005 11:35 (UTC)

I know of the Paros party town of Naousa, which is right across the strait from Naxos (have you tried γούνα (roasted sundried mackerel) there?), but I wonder what the etymology is. Ναίουσα would be a tempting choice - remember Achilles' prayer: Ζεύ άνα, Δωδωναίε, Πελασγικέ, τηλόθι ναίων ... ;-) Chronographos 30 June 2005 11:57 (UTC)

I'm off for Brazil vs. Argentina. Dab, the poem is in safe hands, I think I'll bring it back tonight, God willin' and the creek don't rise. It was read to me over the phone, it's beautiful Chronographos 29 June 2005 18:03 (UTC)

And that first goal by Aithriano, BOOMMMM, what a thunderbolt! Chronographos 30 June 2005 00:35 (UTC)

Pardon me for bringing out the cold water again, but nobody should get too excited over this glossary: linguists have already went through it inside & out, and they have come back with: an inconclusive verdict, and many (most, but you'll challenge that) linguists will prefer to not view Macedonian as another Greek dialect. I'm not stating my opinion, that's just the situation. Decius 2 July 2005 03:56 (UTC)

Macedonian tagonaga, cf. Attic tagos, 'commander'. Decius 2 July 2005 04:51 (UTC)

we're not trying to come up with a breakthrough discovery from this list. We just want to pick the most interesting words from it for the article's glossary. dab (ᛏ) 2 July 2005 08:35 (UTC)

Decius have you honestly went through all or even most linguistic studies on this glossary and discovered that the majority differentiates Macedonian from Greek? First of all it's evident that the words are NOT picked at random. Chances are that this glossary contains an amount of words which do stand out from the rest of Greek dialects. If you take into account all Classic sources in which Macedonians are said to speak Greek and feel Greek (Strattis, Kallisthenes, Livy), chances are that this glossary contains some of the most characteristic Macedonian words. None of the ancient Greek dialects contained the exact same vocabulary. Ancient Greek is by definition the mixture of Proto-Greek with the Pre-Hellenic languages such as Pelasgian and many others. In that respect, every Greek dialect has vocabulary and linguistic particularities which are inherited from the local pre-Hellenic peoples. Besides we already know that Upper Macedonia was inhabited by Thraco-Illyrian tribes who were independent from the Macedonian Kingdom, and were therefore NOT ethnic Macedonian. So it's only reasonable that the Macedonian dialect would have linguistic particularities different to the rest of Greece. Miskin 2 July 2005 15:24 (UTC)

all experts we quote are of course completely Hesychius-aware. This is the main stock of our knowledge of the language (plus some scattered references, plus some coin inscriptions). This article has essentially been about this glossary all along. Do not be tempted into original research. We shall pick the most useful words to illustrate the various positions. We are not looking for a "solution". dab (ᛏ) 2 July 2005 17:17 (UTC)

I disagree: it is not all we have. It is a random collection of words, totally out of context, and written almost a thousand years (with all the consequent and unavoidable misrenderings) after they were purportedly used. A collection of names from primary sources (i.e. excavation findings), the names of gods worshipped in Macedonia, the names of the months of the Macedonian calendar (which have survived) are far more useful. Chronographos 4 July 2005 19:55 (UTC)

Miskin, you might be totally right, but let's go by what the experts say. They still disagree strongly on the classification of ancient Macedonian as of 2005---who is leading the race in terms of numbers of linguists? That will determine the article's emphasis. The separate language guys seem to be ahead, from what's been collected so far---no, I haven't seen most of the references, but if the dialect-school was ahead, we would have found out by now. Decius 2 July 2005 21:57 (UTC)

We do not know how Hesychius chose the Macedonian words he included. He also included some Thracian words in his glossary (>brynchos, a guitar among the Thracians), so one can't assume that he only chose different/interesting words while ignoring words that were identical to Greek. Decius 3 July 2005 00:22 (UTC)

We don't even know whether it's the same glossary since we only have fragments of his work. Why are the words in the "Sample glossary" written only in the Latin and not the Greek alphabet as in the original source? Isn't this almost a kind of propaganda that aims to mislead the reader into leaning towards the unsupported "different language" view? The authentic glossary is in Greek, and that was NOT because there was no other alphabet to use... Miskin 3 July 2005 04:24 (UTC)

I don't have any problem with the Macedonian words being written in the Greek alphabet, but I don't use it because I have to type in the code for each special character. Decius 3 July 2005 08:13 (UTC)

The eagle entry is argiopous, not argipous. While "swift-footed" would be a totally lame description for an eagle, "white-footed" would be a perfectly acceptable, and perfectly Greek, word for the Booted Eagle. Chronographos 4 July 2005 20:30 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm aware of that white-footed meaning. The swift-footed, along with the white-footed suggestion, was added by Theathenae. The confusion arises from the fact that both meanings are derived from the same PIE root: *arg, from which words meaning 'white, shiny, swift', et cetera, are derived. Decius 4 July 2005 23:59 (UTC)

So what is "Macedonian-non-Greek" about it? Chronographos 5 July 2005 00:43 (UTC)

Most of the Macedonian glosses in Hesychius are demonstrably Greek. As for the suggestions "added by Theathenae", you will find them in your LSJ.--Theathenae 5 July 2005 00:52 (UTC)

Have you found out what βραβρήν means? I have, but will keep it as a test for you ;-) Hint: it was in the seminal Leventis TV speech where he was wishing cancer upon the "traitors of Geros' bones" !! :-))) Chronographos 5 July 2005 01:02 (UTC)

Βραβρή or βαβρή? As for the seminal Leventis, I'm too young to remember. :P--Theathenae 5 July 2005 01:10 (UTC)

Βαβρήν, sorry. Leventis said it around the 1993 elections, I think, but the video/audio file has since achieved legendary status online :-)))) Chronographos 5 July 2005 01:18 (UTC)

Put me out of my misery. I was still too young to vote then.--Theathenae 5 July 2005 01:22 (UTC)

"μούργα"! Τώρα τουμπεκί! ;-) Chronographos 5 July 2005 02:02 (UTC)

I wonder why Hesychius uses the periphrastic ὑπόστασις ἐλαίου rather than ἀμόργη, which my trusty Babz lists as the etymon.--Theathenae 5 July 2005 09:01 (UTC)

Maybe he was a second-rate philologist, like Borza? Chronographos 5 July 2005 09:09 (UTC)

Pokorny online

http://khayyami.free.fr/paarsii/vaazheh/refs/

This should help.--Theathenae 29 June 2005 23:26 (UTC)

Indeed, a most valuable resource, although I wonder how much has changed oner the 70 years since it was written. For example, the Linear B decipherment in the 50's proved some of the standard etymologies wrong and caused new ones to be formulated. Anyhow, I won't be able to write much because I am off to a convention tomorrow, to be back Sunday night - and I haven't written my Powerpoint presentation yet :-)) Take care of the μουνίδιον for me, won't you? ;-) Chronographos 30 June 2005 09:37 (UTC)

if was published in 1959, 46 years ago. Most of the information is reliable, decipherment of Linear B did not turn Greek philology on its head, it only meant a few suggestions were confirmed, and a few others were out of the picture. dab (ᛏ) 30 June 2005 10:11 (UTC)

I thought it came out in the 30's. 1959 is much better. As for Linear B, I didn't say anything different that what you said :-) Chronographos 30 June 2005 11:04 (UTC)

FFS

I've been concentrating on some serious articles lately and apparently there's been a revolt right under my nose. Decius out of all the things that you've said and done, your edits on the article Macedonians is by far the worst. I can't believe you actually allowed those animals have their ways with the article and write all this bullshit on Greek history. I'm going to edit every single section on the article on first chance I get, and you'd better not try to revert them unless you have got me blocked. Miskin 3 July 2005 04:58 (UTC)

What are you talking about? I don't watch that article, and the edits I did (all on the 17th of April 2005) to it were in the section that describes the early inhabitants of the region "Antiquity and the Roman Empire" (Pelasgians, Thracians, Macedonians, Paionians, Illyrians, etc.); three edits in another section ("Slavs, the Byzantine empire, Bulgaria") were corrections of text that was discussing Aromanians and Albanians. Decius 3 July 2005 05:03 (UTC)

If you're ticked off because I didn't erase the slanting of history that was probably in the article on 17th April, it's because I didn't read the entire article and also my radar doesn't detect certain kinds of propaganda when it comes to current Balkan politics and propaganda surrounding Greece, RepOfM, Bulgaria, and so on, which you should be more familiar with. Decius 3 July 2005 05:27 (UTC)

Right. The article is a mess, I really have no words for it. I don't really know who wrote what, I just saw your name being repeated on the history list and assumed you had been active. I've probably misunderstood. I'll go find who's responsible for this travesty. Miskin 3 July 2005 05:31 (UTC)

Dammit. I didn't realise it when this article got created. Anyway I just checked out the edits and you have nothing to do with it, so I'm sorry. It's that parasite VMRO. I seriously can't believe that there's people like him and Albanau free to edit all over the place, freedom of speech is such a disease. This article has to either be removed or cleaned up, I don't see a single reason for its existence apart from VMRO having a private space to dump his crap. Miskin 3 July 2005 05:42 (UTC)

VMORO is known to keep a close watch on these Bulgaria-related articles, so you & he will get into a Wiki-war over that article. He's an ethnic Bulgarian living in RepOfM I think. His agenda is very Pro-Bulgarian (obviously). He voted for Macedonian Slavs being called Macedonian Slavs, so he's not pro-FYROM. Decius 3 July 2005 05:57 (UTC)

Well that's where the problem lies, this is not a Bulgaria-related article. Honestly, Bulgarians have been bitter against Greeks ever since the days of Basil II. They lost the Balkan and the World Wars, and they still don't get the bloody picture. Anyway, you're probably right this will be a wiki-war, it's a shame because I had been working on some interesting stuff which will inevitably be interrupted. What I don't understand is how did the other wiki-people allow this article to stay there. They're either completely ignorant or just don't give a toss. Anyway this officially becomes my priority right now. Miskin 3 July 2005 06:13 (UTC)

Now that more people are supporting merging/redirecting/breaking apart or renaming that article, people will see that it's a better solution, and VMORO probably would go along with a rethinking or renaming of the article. Decius 3 July 2005 10:09 (UTC)

What do you guys think of my "ancient Macedonians" section in Macedonians? I tried to make it as neutral as possible by providing authentic and unbiased arguments. In the beginning I only wanted to edit the previous disgraceful version of the section, but on the way it came out quite smoothly. If we manage to get rid of the Macedonians article, we could stick that section in Macedon. If you approve it of course. Miskin 4 July 2005 05:02 (UTC)

The hegemony argument doesn't indicate that the Macedonians were not viewed as foreigners. You used this hegemony argument before, and I don't see how it makes sense. Other than that, the text is not extremely biased, but people will of course challenge its inclusion in Macedonians, make edits to it, etc. I think it is too slanted to one side to include it in Macedon. I'm not criticizing the style, just the viewpoint and some of the arguments. What is acceptable in a book by Errington or Hammond is not necessarily acceptable in an open encyclopedia. Hammond clearly expresses his personal views, for instance, which are challenged by other scholars of equal standing, so in Wikipedia one shouldn't just sponsor Hammond, Errington, etc. unless they were unchallenged by other credible scholars. Decius 4 July 2005 05:14 (UTC)

I didn't base it on Errington and Hammond, I wrote it from scratch. Those were actually pretty much my personal conclusions, based directly on ancient sources that I've either read or just come across with. Nevermind Macedon then, but for the standards of Macedonians it's probably even too neutral. I still don't think it's one-sided because I'm commenting on every single argument, including the bashing of Demosthenes and the common refereces on "Greeks and Macedonians". You know that there are tons of quotations that imply the exact opposite. I don't think I've ever brought up in here the quotation of Aeschines. It proves that Macedon took place in the pan-hellenics before Philip II. Miskin 4 July 2005 05:30 (UTC)

I might've read of it. I remember reading of Greeks from Macedonia who participated in early Olympics, but Greeks from Macedonia doesn't necessarily mean Macedonians from Macedonia---or are you talking about another quote (which I either don't know of, or forgot). I just checked, and the quote I'm talking about is from Pausanias (5.8.11), so you probably mean another one.Decius 4 July 2005 05:35 (UTC)

It's not about the Olympics this one. "For at a congress of the Lacedaemonian allies and the other Greeks, 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 other Greeks in voting to help Athens to recover possession of Amphipolis." Miskin 4 July 2005 06:04 (UTC)

We discussed that in Macedon before some months back (in April, see [11]), and the only thing that can prove is that the Macedonian Royals were generally accepted as Greeks. I don't know of a scholar who would read more into that fact in itself. Decius 4 July 2005 06:08 (UTC)

And of course you realise that this interpretation is as POV as the hegemony one. Miskin 4 July 2005 14:34 (UTC)

what's pov about it? the statement "the royals were accepted as Hellenes" is agnostic about whether the general populace would have been considered Hellenes. Having considered Phrygian (eberet!) and Armenian, I am back to assuming a Paleo-Balkans group, including Graeco-Macedonian, possibly Graeco-Illyrian or even Graeco-Armenian, with Macedonian not a member of the Graeco- part, but just a member of the group in general. There will not be a proof either way, ever, so you may as well live with the agnostic state of affairs. dab (ᛏ) 4 July 2005 18:11 (UTC)

The POV is the fact that we can't know for certain whether Amyntas had a seat because he was a Macedonian Royal (therefore of Greek descent) or just because he was simply Macedonian (therefore a Greek). In fact there's nothing to support the first theory. Imagine that the Athenian citizenship was inherited by blood (both parents had to be Athenians), and that Demosthenes was mocked for his barbarian mother; I really don't think the Greeks of the 5th c. BC would take fall so easily for the "my great-great-great-great grandmother had a cat named Hercules"-type of excuse in order to let all Macedonian royals to take part in the pan-hellenics. And think that this is prior to Phillip II's bullying, so they did have the guts to him home packing. Miskin 4 July 2005 21:15 (UTC)

A POV-neutral statement would be that "at least the ruling house were accepted as Hellenes". The statement "the royals were accepted as Hellenes" implies that the rest were not. As for Amyntas' seat, would a Greek ruling over a manifestly non-Greek population ever be given a seat? I really doubt it. Chronographos 4 July 2005 21:26 (UTC)

alert

Can someone offer me support against the retards who think they run List of extinct languages and Extinct language? They're trying to categorise Ancient Greek as a stand-alone language that is considered extinct. I already have enough problems with the propagandists in "Demographic history of Macedonia" or whatever, and I don't have the time to be explaining what Attic is. Miskin 4 July 2005 21:32 (UTC)

Independent Palaeo-Balkan language, based on Goda?

"The ancient Macedonian lexical stock reveals some words that do not have cognates in Greek, but do have in other Indo-European languages. E. g. Macedonian goda "intestines", from Proto-Indo-European language *gudom (Sanskrit guda-)."

In fact, Hesychius lists γόλα (not γόδα), which would be cognate to Attic κόλον (pl. κόλα), would it not? Του γόλου τα 9μερα τα ξέρετε;--Theathenae 4 July 2005 23:16 (UTC)

LSJ lists goda. Now why would a single word be sufficient to create a whole new linguistic item rather than be simply considered a loanword, is beyond me. Do you have any idea where the bedu Glossary entry comes from? LSJ lists it as Phrygian, not Macedonian Chronographos 4 July 2005 23:59 (UTC)

Whichever one is correct, that's what we should list. The goda spelling was taken by dab from the references, as they should be taken. Gola may or may not be correct. If it is, it once again suggests Greco-Macedonian, considered along with the other words. The PIE root of that Greek word is unknown as far as I know, though another apparently unrelated Greek 'kolon' word (with an omega rather than omicron) is considered to be from PIE *skel, 'crooked, to bend' (which seems to make sense for an intestine also, but the linguistic references don't trace it to *skel) . Decius 4 July 2005 23:40 (UTC)

And dab also posted the Hesychius text where γόλα appears for 'intestines' instead of γόδα. Which do we trust? By the way, LS derives κόλον from κόλος 'docked, curtailed, stunted', while κῶλον = a limb, member of a body.--Theathenae 5 July 2005 00:22 (UTC)

The former gives English colon, large intestine, and the latter gives English colon and semicolon, the punctuation marks. Chronographos 5 July 2005 00:35 (UTC)

The former also produces κόλουρος. Chronographos 5 July 2005 00:40 (UTC)

The gotan etymology also troubles me. If correctly transmitted to Hesychius over a thousand years (unlikely), it would make Macedonian the only IE language that derives pig from PIE for ox rather than PIE *sus, wouldn't it? Chronographos 5 July 2005 00:31 (UTC)

To answer your question, I don't think linguists would be so stupid to base any theory on one etymology which may be based on a scribal error. Decius 4 July 2005 23:51 (UTC)

Decius, why (and by whom) was your repeatedly calling me a faggot deleted? As I have said, I have no plans to report you, so you needn't be afraid of your own words, racist as they may be. Chronographos 5 July 2005 00:04 (UTC)

I deleted sections that were seriously off-topic, i.e., many of your comments and my responses to them. Can we agree to them being deleted? Decius 5 July 2005 00:06 (UTC)

No, I want your calling me a "faggot" to remain on record. Don't you stand by your words? Chronographos 5 July 2005 00:13 (UTC)

It's on record. It can be accessed in the History files. Decius 5 July 2005 01:25 (UTC)

Gosh, you must be really scared! 4 days ago dab suggested to you that you archive the part and link to it. First it takes you 4 days NOT to do what dab told you could be easily done, then you try to coax my agreement for the burial of your racist namecalling, and now that my agreement is not granted, you sanction your own censoring of this talk page after conferring with ... yourself! If I were to take it as a manifest apology and repentance, I would be inclined to show clemency and magnanimity and let you bury your racist "past". But I think that it's just fear. In which case I expressly ask you for the integrity of this talk page to be restored by yourself, the prepetrator of this censorship Chronographos 5 July 2005 01:41 (UTC)

I made no actual racist comments. Whatever I said was said in jest to offset your comments. The deleted text was very off-topic and obnoxious, and that's not what Wikipedia's for. And I do apologize once again, though you never apologize for your comments.Decius 5 July 2005 01:48 (UTC)

Apology accepted, for the second time, although your motives for it seem far from a benign desire for civility (I suspect you were just admin-afraid). Just remember the California law: three strikes and you are out. I don't see what I need to apologize for: my statements were based on fact and had all the appropriate references to back them up. Chronographos 5 July 2005 01:55 (UTC)

Sure you do, Chronographos, sure you do. As for racist comments, let me remind you about "exposing the Slav" that you were ranting about earlier. Decius 5 July 2005 08:38 (UTC)

Not that he needs me to defend him, but Chronographos did not express any overt racist sentiments towards Slavs; he merely described the Rumanians as Latinised Slavs. You, on the other hand, used the pejorative term "faggot". The two are not comparable.--Theathenae 5 July 2005 08:58 (UTC)

Decius thinks they are. And that's very enlightening as to what kind of person he is. Chronographos 5 July 2005 09:17 (UTC)

Where Decius lives, Gahd Hates Fags.--Theathenae 5 July 2005 01:31 (UTC)

Then again, we're talking about the land where Arnie can be governor and Ronnie president.--Theathenae 5 July 2005 01:52 (UTC)

No, where Decius lives (>Los Angeles) fags walk the streets in broad daylight and have annual gay parades in Silver Lake. I don't do any physical harm to anyone for being gay. Decius 5 July 2005 01:34 (UTC)

Does this also go for your gangsta colleagues? Chronographos 5 July 2005 01:45 (UTC)

Hallelujah, praise Benny.--Theathenae 5 July 2005 01:40 (UTC)

Off to bed now: let the record show, Decius, that you have so far failed to argue on the various topics I brought up in this and the preceding threads: gotan, bedu, aorths, argiopous etc. Chronographos 5 July 2005 02:00 (UTC)

Excuse me, but I was busy going through some films. Bedu appears (I'm not sure) to be a word that was in Macedonian and Phrygian as well, though I make no claims that it was native to Macedonian or Phrygian and not borrowed by one or both. It may even be words such as this that caused Pokorny to link Macedonian to Phrygian, on which I have no comment now besides that they surely were related to a degree. Decius 5 July 2005 03:30 (UTC)

Appears WHERE? Evidence, please! Chronographos 5 July 2005 08:44 (UTC)

Of course Macedonian and Phrygian "were related to a degree". So were all IE languages, to a degree. Your arguments (of sorts) remind me of the guy who heard the distant sound of thunder and remarked most wisely "it's raining somewhere". Chronographos 5 July 2005 08:44 (UTC)

I made that vague statement on purpose. It would only be speculation to say Macedonian was closer to Phrygian than Greek, or closer to Greek than Phrygian, so I'd rather be vague. Decius 5 July 2005 08:56 (UTC)

Evasive once again, Decius. Where the heck is bedu referred to as a Macedonian word in a primary source? Vague statements are yours to make (like you ever make any non-vague ones), but for a word to be in the Glossary, evidence is needed. Where was the word found? Chronographos 5 July 2005 09:25 (UTC)

The etymology of gotan (which is from linguists) may or may not be correct, and even if the etymology is correct the word may have been borrowed. Argiopous is a very Greek word indeed, no disagreement on that one. Though I expect that there were very Greek in words in Phrygian also. But I'm not claiming that it was or wasn't borrowed, and I don't know of argiopous meaning 'eagle' in any known Greek dialect. Decius 5 July 2005 03:30 (UTC)

Do you know of "αορτής" meaning swordsman in any known Greek dialect? Chronographos 5 July 2005 08:44 (UTC)

I know---the linguists know, regardless of how they classify ancient Macedonian---that many Macedonian words are quite Greek in etymology (argiopous, aortes). The arguments used against such words is that they could have been borrowed from Greek. You got a problem with that, send a letter to Borza or something. I refuse to state right now whether I believe they were borrowed or native, and the article is not about what I believe, the last time I checked. Decius 5 July 2005 06:11 (UTC)

Leave Borza and the article alone for the time being and argue like a scientist (I know you are not one, but you can at least try). If Macedonian was basically a non-Greek IE language, why did the Macedonians also borrow practically all their names from the Greeks as well? Chronographos 5 July 2005 08:44 (UTC)

The fact that you "don't know of argiopous meaning 'eagle' in any known Greek dialect" should be rather compelling evidence that it is in fact a native Macedonian word rather than a loanword, should it not?--Theathenae 5 July 2005 08:51 (UTC)

A native Macedonian word of purely Greek morphology? Ppppppppppppperish the tttttttthought ..... Chronographos 5 July 2005 08:54 (UTC)

Okay, if you guys really want to know Decius' mighty opinion, it's that many of those words with Greek etymologies are native to Macedonian, which was probably close enough to Greek that some might want to tag "dialect" on it, but I will still call it a language. To you guys, ancient Mycenean is a dialect relative to Demotikí, so ... Decius 5 July 2005 09:00 (UTC)

"Mighty" only in the presence of your "entourage". Still, call it what you will. I note the substance of your opinion, namely that "Macedonian ... was probably close enough to Greek that some might want to tag "dialect" on it". Chronographos 5 July 2005 09:13 (UTC)

Yes, and I've had that opinion pretty much from the beginning. The term dialect is abused anyway and imprecise, so I would rather use language. Of course, my opinion may be disproven by further discoveries---either even closer to Greek so that it is firmly a dialect, or far enough that Greco-Macedonian becomes untenable. Decius 5 July 2005 09:21 (UTC)

Fair enough! Finally I got to to at least behave like a scientist. Maybe, in time, you might begin to think like one. Chronographos 5 July 2005 09:25 (UTC)

Actually, the main article lists a single proponent of the Graeco-Macedonian theory, compared to three scholars for the Greek dialect option. None is proffered for the Independent Palaeo-Balkan school of thought. And yet we are somehow to believe that the Greek dialect theory is "less accepted" or marginal today, when the most recent pronouncements appear to favour it (Masson, Mallory & Adams). Rather incongruous, really.--Theathenae 5 July 2005 09:27 (UTC)

For the time being, that's fine by me. After all, in science truth is not determined by voting. For example a single publication in Nature carries more weight than all the combined work of all Romanian scientists put together Chronographos 5 July 2005 09:35 (UTC)

I'm going to start gathering names for Greco-Macedonian. For Independent Paleo-Balkan language, there is notably Eugene Borza, who currently may be the main proponent of that theory. Decius 5 July 2005 09:32 (UTC)

You have no balls, Chronographos. Any coward can hide behind a User Name and make those kind of comments. Decius 5 July 2005 09:38 (UTC)

People without "balls" hide behind "entourages". If you take exception to my comment, fight it with evidence. Chronographos 5 July 2005 09:44 (UTC)

What I was referring to there was camaraderie, not safety in numbers. There is nothing to fear from Wikipedia meet-ups except boredom and "wishing you weren't there, sitting next to these fucking nerds who I don't relate to". Decius 5 July 2005 09:46 (UTC)

Whatever. You derive mental pleasure by going buddy-buddy with gangsters (that's your prerogative), and I duly note it (that's my prerogative). Chronographos 5 July 2005 09:51 (UTC)

Back on topic, I will try to find a primary source for bedu being a Macedonian word, but no guarantee I'll find it. Dab listed it in the article, remember, not me, so why not ask him about it as well. Decius 5 July 2005 09:57 (UTC)

No problem, as soon as he shows up I will. There is no rush. I trust in Dab's good faith, which is mostly why I have taken care not to touch the article since my original contribution to it on June 18th Chronographos 5 July 2005 10:06 (UTC)

I don't know where bedu is from, and I don't have the TLG here right now. Anyway, the hypothesis is not based on a single word, but roughly a dozen, consistently showing voiced stops for PIE voiced aspirates, just like in Phrygian, and also in Armenian (although Armenian is just too weird to help us much). dab (ᛏ) 5 July 2005 12:30 (UTC)

My LSJ (print edition, 1948) lists bedu as water in Ορφικά (which, as we all know, should make it a Thracian word, not a Macedonian one) and it is apparently also quoted by Clemens (Κλήμης) of Alexandria. Is there a reference to bedu as a Macedonian word? Chronographos 5 July 2005 12:56 (UTC)

So far, I've found an early Christian writing by Clement of Alexandria, The Stromata, where one Neanthus of Cyzicus is quoted as saying that Macedonian priests invoked a divine power or quality named Bedu [12] (Chapter VIII). The Phrygian and Orphic usage are also noted in this early work. Decius 5 July 2005 13:16 (UTC)

It's possible it was a foreign borrowing, of course. No one can say for sure though. Decius 5 July 2005 13:29 (UTC)

Aha, so maybe Bedu is a Mac. theonym; the best we can do is:

bedu "air", a Macedonian god, according to Clement of Alexandria, The Stromata, quoting one Neanthus of Cyzicus (compare Phrygian bedu "water", from PIE *wed-)

dab (ᛏ) 5 July 2005 13:53 (UTC)

What appears to have happened rather is that among the Macedonian priests (presumably, Orphics), as among some non-Macedonian Orphics (cf. Philydeus), Bedu (water) was mystically interpreted as 'life-giving air' ("which they interpret to mean the air"). Bedu may even have been introduced into Macedon along with the Orphic cult. It is definitely related to the Thracian and Phrygian forms, from PIE *wed/*wod. The only question to me: is it a mere foreign borrowing, that came along with the Orphic cult? And the answer to that is: no one can as yet say.Decius 5 July 2005 14:00 (UTC)

ok, so let's remove it from this article, and discuss it on Phrygian language, which is still sadly desloate of wordlists (note to the Greeks, hey, if you wanted to insist that Phrygian is "Greek" you'd have a much better case, since the language is at least known to a small extent). dab (ᛏ) 5 July 2005 14:21 (UTC)

Excellent! Maybe bedu is a "Mac. theonym", a transplant from the Thracian Orphic cult which had spread to all of Greece very early on. Sounds like the "Latin" god Mithras to me. In the meantime, how come the article finds no words to say about the actual gods worshipped in Macedonia, as attested by excavations and inscriptions? Chronographos 5 July 2005 14:25 (UTC)

As for your Phrygian jab, dab, I should think that such Straw man arguments were beneath you :-) Chronographos 5 July 2005 14:25 (UTC)

hardly a strawman. If you can get wide recognition of Phrygian as "Hellenic", Macedonian may just be included in the package. As for a list of gods, that would go on Macedon. We're trying to hammer out XMK on this article. dab (ᛏ) 5 July 2005 14:37 (UTC)

I can't believe I'm reading this. Phrygian is an IE language, but it's not Greek. Why are you suggesting that I make such an outlandish claim? If your first argument was a strawman, this is strawman squared. I also wonder why you fail to see that theonyms are very relevant linguistically. There is a cultural and religious aspect to worship, which belongs in Macedon, and a linguistic one, which belongs here. After all, if Orphic bedu (as mentioned by Clemens, who heard it from Neanthes, who heard it from someone else, and so on ad nauseam) was mentioned here and was not removed until challenged on pragmatic grounds, why omit Zeus? N' est ce pas? Chronographos 5 July 2005 15:21 (UTC)

I'm okay with moving Bedu to Phrygian language, since the Macedonian usage very likely was introduced from Thraco-Phrygian. Decius 5 July 2005 14:29 (UTC)

I got some other PIE *wed related data in connection with ancient Macedon that I'll discuss later---have to find those references again. This data is not specifically related to the bedu form we just discussed, which may be a loan. Decius 5 July 2005 15:18 (UTC)

BTW the "digamma switches to occlusive" that occurs in bedu is a transformation that also occurs in Aeolian, as manisfested in the new Sappho poem (βροδόπαχυν, original Fροδο-, Attic ροδόπηχυν, "with pink forearms"). Chronographos 5 July 2005 16:37 (UTC)

Is this the only attested case? Since Aeolians generally lived among Mysians, Lydians, Carians, and Phrygians, I'm wondering if that Aeolian feature might have come from Phrygian-Lydian influence (as in Phrygian bedu). Decius 6 July 2005 00:33 (UTC)

"Aeolians generally lived among Mysians, Lydians, Carians, and Phrygians"? This may have been true about Asia Minor colonies, but here we are talking about a poet from the island of Lesbos. Ain't no Mysians, Lydians, Carians and Phrygians over there. So just you be patient. I plan to write extensively on the Ancient Greek dialects over the next month. You will learn a lot, provided the matter interests you. Chronographos 6 July 2005 10:01 (UTC)

Yeah, I know they didn't all live in Asia Minor. Yet, Carians, Lydians, etc., also lived on some of those islands. I think Herodotus even wrote that the Carians supposedly originated from the Cyclades or something. But I'm not claiming anything regarding non-Greek influence, I was just wondering. Decius 6 July 2005 10:07 (UTC)

Polytonic Glossary

Terrific work, Theathenae, bravo! Instead of φασκίδες you may want to put φασκιόω (Attic: bind with bandages, Modern Greek: bind with bandages, swaddle) and/or φασκιά (Attic: bandage, Modern Greek: swaddling cloth). Chronographos 5 July 2005 21:11 (UTC)

Yes, excellent. But Attic argillos (=white clay) is from PIE *arg, 'white, shiny'. Has any reference linked it to Macedonian argella (=bathing cabin)? They do not seem to be from the same PIE root. Decius 6 July 2005 00:01 (UTC)

The supposed argillos connection is wrong, even though it is suggested in LSJ that argilla is "perhaps from" argillos. Note to the reader: the etymologies in LSJ are more outdated and more likely to be wrong than Pokorny or more recent references. Pokorny traces the words we are concerned with to PIE *areg, 'to lock' [13]; while Attic argillos is from PIE *arg, 'white'. Decius 6 July 2005 02:20 (UTC)

I have my doubts about Pokorny's etymology. ἄργιλλα appears to have been used in Greek to mean both 'underground dwelling' (in Magna Graecia) and in the sense of ἄργιλλος 'white clay'.[14] We're talking about actual uses here, not etymologies. The use of the identical argilla in Latin (next door to Magna Graecia) for 'white clay' also suggests a link.--Theathenae 6 July 2005 10:49 (UTC)

I guess if you can find a post-Pokorny reference that supports the argillos link to the Macedonian word, we can list that alternative etymology. Decius 6 July 2005 10:53 (UTC)

I've just added the Magna Graecia reference. It would be intriguing to find out how it made its way into the Greek of southern Italy; the Cimmerians weren't exactly next door.--Theathenae 6 July 2005 11:04 (UTC)

Karabos is tangled up with probable homonyms that might have different etymologies, though I think they all have the same etymology [15], [16]. I'll let someone else put them in polytonic. I think I've solved the mystery of most of these different meanings, and most of them might have the same etymology. Yet separating them seems to add to the clarity in the glossary. Decius 6 July 2005 03:52 (UTC)

Can we include the place I go swimming? Chronographos 6 July 2005 10:05 (UTC)

I don't swim that well, but L.A. beaches are not that bad either (Venice, etc.). Decius 6 July 2005 10:08 (UTC)

Been there, done that: they are atrocious for swimming. The waves are too big and consequently the water is literally a suspension of sand. Those beaches I've been to (Laguna Del Mar, Redondo, Huntingdon, Venice, and Santa Barbara up north) are really beautiful to look at, but not to swim in. Chronographos 6 July 2005 10:15 (UTC)

You're right they're better for surfing, but I don't surf. By the way, I'm still not gay, so don't get any ideas. Let's just discuss things in gentlemanly fashion (as we were doing now). Though I don't have much to discuss now, I mean for later on and in general. Decius 6 July 2005 10:17 (UTC)

Who cares about your sexuality, whatever it may be? Why do you have to bring it up again and again and again? Chronographos 6 July 2005 14:22 (UTC)

How do I type in Greek fonts without having to type in the number code for each special character? That's why I never use Greek fonts. Decius 6 July 2005 10:57 (UTC)

If you're running Windows XP, all you have to do is add Greek (select Polytonic keyboard) to your languages list in Regional & Language Options (Control Panel).--Theathenae 6 July 2005 11:04 (UTC)

Alright, thanks. I really had no idea. I'll add 'em on soon. Decius 6 July 2005 11:08 (UTC)

Katadesmos edit

Dab, I disagree with your edit "between the 4th and 2nd centuries BC". Not with what you actually mean by it, but with the impression it gives. The point is, archaeologists are usually able to date such findings within a 50 year accuracy, often better. You edit gives the impression that there is a single dating with a +/- 100-year margin of error, whereas there actually are two competing datings with much smaller margins of error - we just don't know which one is correct. Maybe what we should do is omit the dating issue from this article altogether, and let readers go to the Pella katadesmos article itself for the appropriately referenced dating data. What do you think? Chronographos 6 July 2005 14:39 (UTC)

ok, I didn't realize that, just revert me. And do give details of how people arrived at the competing dates, please. dab (ᛏ) 6 July 2005 14:52 (UTC)

ah, wait, how do you know this? The katedesmos article says 3rd century (this is from the website linked to). ALso, the text is written on lead. This cannot be dated at all, dating must be from context, or from epigraphical evidence. I seriously doubt this can be done within a 50 years margin. dab (ᛏ) 6 July 2005 14:59 (UTC)

I don't know how to revert! :-))) All the dating data I have is in the references I've posted. Not many details, but that's all I've found so far. The Duke University pdf link says "Mid IVa or earlier, by spelling and lettering" or something. The Bryn Mawr guy says 2nd century. Chronographos 6 July 2005 15:07 (UTC)

so, we should say, after all, "it has been dated on palaeographical grounds to between the 4th and 2nd centuries". dab (ᛏ) 6 July 2005 15:19 (UTC)

We know the 4th century dating, right or wrong, was done by paleographical criteria. We don't know how the 2nd century dating, right or wrong, was arrived at. And it's the "between" thing that bothers me most. It's not a between issue, it's an either/or issue. Isn't it sufficient that the dating be only discussed at Pella katadesmos? Chronographos 6 July 2005 15:27 (UTC)

yes, details go on the main article. But how do you know it's an "either or", if you don't know how the 2nd c. date was arrived at? Surely it's a "from 4th to 2nd" likelyhood-continuum, with no reason to exclude the 3ed century. dab (ᛏ) 6 July 2005 16:19 (UTC)

I don't, and neither does anyone else for sure. For all we know, both datings may be wrong and the tab may be 1st century. My point is to present both datings as are, without introducing value judgements of our own (i.e. there is dating A and dating B, so the truth must be somewhere in between A and B) Chronographos 6 July 2005 16:32 (UTC)

I am also skeptical about the 2nd century BCE dating (or the 3rd century BCE for that matter). ~~I'll throw in another resource from the Australian Society of Classical Studies Conference XXVI (Feb. 2005) hosted at the Department of Classics of the University of Otago (New Zealand) here:~~ (Edit: Sorry, just saw that it was already mentioned in the article.)

Abstracts page 31

Programme page 58

The abstract also mentions another 3 very brief Doric(ish) 4th century BCE inscriptions. Who's up for the task to contact Dr James O'Neil – University of Sydney and kindly ask for a copy of his paper and presentation ? :-P Ninio 7 July 2005 05:41 (UTC)

If he says later inscriptions from Macedon avoid voicing of consonants contrasted to earlier ones, that obviously means earlier ones should show voicing of consonants---that would be interesting. Decius 7 July 2005 05:56 (UTC)

I think, he is talking about the inscriptions from Macedon written later in the Koine and the contrast refers both to the Doric forms used in neighboring areas (maybe Aeolic, Locrian, Aetolian, Phocidian) or the “Macedonian'” glosses (maybe those attested in Hesychius) that somewhat show voicing of consonants. The abstract (intriguing as it is) gives us little in that respect. But the dating is clear. On a side note, how did you come up with the 2nd century BCE? Ninio 7 July 2005 06:48 (UTC)

I took that from one of Dab's comments on Talk:Pella katadesmos, where he says that the Bryn Mawr site dates it to the 2nd century BC. Decius 7 July 2005 07:02 (UTC)

Dab probably made a mistake in the talk page. Prof. Edmonds in Brynmawr.edu (as far as I can see) talks about 3rd century BCE. Even dab wonders about the 2nd century bit in his last edit (cur) (last) 13:04, 6 July 2005 Dbachmann (not 3rd?) Ninio 7 July 2005 08:27 (UTC)

I wouldn't say the date is "clear" yet, seeing as how 1) sources disagree on the date; 2) lead cannot be dated precisely, and most likely the Pella tablet was dated by epigraphical methods, which are always questionable more or less. If it was dated according to archaeological stratigraphy or something, that would be more convincing maybe. Decius 7 July 2005 07:07 (UTC)

Stratigraphy? On something that was supposed to have been buried deep? For all we know if that woman was desperate to get Dionysophon, she would have dug 2 meters deep into ... Neolithic strata Chronographos 7 July 2005 08:38 (UTC)

Was it buried or thrown down a well? If it was thrown down a well, stratigraphy would come in handy possibly (curse tablets in ancient Greece were sometimes thrown down wells according to references I've read). Decius 7 July 2005 08:41 (UTC)

I never said the dating of artifacts is clear or absolute in general. The date is crystal clear in the source mentioned (James L. O'Neil). The only source so far that "dates" it in the 3rd century BCE is brynmawr.edu and that looks like a mistake judging from the evidence. The whole reference (translation text) looks like a direct quotation from Voutyras, Emmanuel: Dionusofontos gãmoi. Marital Life and Magic in Fourth Century Pella (Amsterdam 1998) pp 15-16 as shown here [17]. The drawing used also seems to be Voutyras' drawing No. 5 (somewhere in pages 8-34), with photographs provided at the end of the book. Voutyras and every other source we have so far dates it on 4th century BCE.

The accuracy of the dating can only be judged if we know the method or methods used, the reproduction of these methods by other scholars or labs and the scrutiny of the results. I have no problem in mentioning the 3rd century BCE even though that I think that it's an honest mistake by Prof. Edmonds. I find a bit odd though, that you are trying to build an argument on a typo (one-liner comment by dab). Ninio 7 July 2005 08:27 (UTC)

Ninio, welcome and thanks for your input and links. The Voutyras external link shows something I found extremely interesting: Philip II says that Macedonians call "την σκάφην, σκάφην", which is a saying still used by Modern Greeks Chronographos 7 July 2005 08:44 (UTC)

Ninio, Decius will build an argument out of anything. He has already argued that, if undoubted data support a Northwestern Greek dialect, then Macedonians must have been bilingual and spoken it along with XMK (the XMK he has formulated in his mind, of course). Actually he is a pioneer in Epistemology: Occam's Razor will eventually be replaced by Decius' Lawnmower Chronographos 7 July 2005 08:56 (UTC)

Bilingual? I explained that I meant geographical co-incidence previously (see above on this talk page). Decius 7 July 2005 08:59 (UTC)

So, two populations sharing the same land? Chronographos 7 July 2005 09:03 (UTC)

That's happened before, especially in the Balkans. Decius 7 July 2005 09:04 (UTC)

I see. Willing to mow the neighbors' lawn as well, whether they want it or not. Chronographos 7 July 2005 09:13 (UTC)

Well, there you go. "Complex realities", as you said yourself earlier. Anyway, since you guys are convinced it's a dialect, I might as well represent the other side here and balance the article---even if later I become convinced it was a dialect. Decius 7 July 2005 09:18 (UTC)

I think the article is reasonably balanced as is, and hopefully will become better balanced with time. Feel free to represent anything, as long as the data support it. In the meantime, allow me to be of the opinion that you are imagining things so that they fit your preconceived notions. Chronographos 7 July 2005 09:32 (UTC)

Fine. But one can say the same thing of you, Miskin, etc. Decius 7 July 2005 09:35 (UTC)

Firstly, I am not Miskin and Miskin is not me. Secondly, I like evidence, not wacky theorizing. Blame it on the scientist in me. Chronographos 7 July 2005 09:43 (UTC)

Excuse me, but authorities in the field would take offense to your "wacky theorizing" comment, so hold your horses. If everybody accepted Macedonian as a Greek dialect, it would be included as a Greek dialect in the standard references. Bring me a solid one that does so matter-of-factly. Decius 7 July 2005 09:50 (UTC)

I was referring to your wacky theorizing, Mr. Strawman Chronographos 7 July 2005 09:55 (UTC)

What "strawman" argument have I made here? Also, what wacky theory have I made relating to what language the ancient Macedonians spoke? The arguments and theories have already been made. Decius 7 July 2005 09:57 (UTC)

That I call authorities in the field "wacky theorizers". Your wacky theory is that this "previously unknown dialect" (your words) may have been spoken along with your version of XMK. The "authorities in the field" have prudently tried to reconcile the Pella Katadesmos with the previously known data. You have gone your own Decius' lawnmower way. Like I've said before, it's your prerogative to speak your mind, and mine to call την σκάφην, σκάφην. Chronographos 7 July 2005 10:15 (UTC)

Yes, I stand by that possibility for the time being at least. That Doric-like Greek dialect may have been spoken alongside XMK in ancient Macedon. Decius 7 July 2005 10:21 (UTC)

If your stance is the result of healthy skepticism and open-mindedness, I applaud it. One does not have to agree with one in order to see where they're coming from. After all, in the Galileo vs. everyone else dispute, it was Galileo who was right, not everyone else. Chronographos 7 July 2005 10:35 (UTC)

It's not based on anti-hellenism I can tell you that much. I formed my opinion from general reading over the years, and it was enforced by the fact that I find the idea of a new unknown language that was very close to Greek yet not Greek very interesting, rather than yet another Greek dialect. I guess I have visions of an archaic semi-Greek language that may have had many points in common with Thracian or Illyrian or Phrygian (a "vision" based on the XMK words, not wine or gin). Decius 7 July 2005 10:43 (UTC)

If anyone accused you of "anti-hellenism", it wasn't me. I should think that the elucidation of what XMK actually was is a very exciting issue, regardless of whether it was "yet another Greek dialect" or not. In general, I consider the whole IE affair, linguistic and otherwise, a fascinating story. Witness all the Renfrew/Gimbutas etc theories. I am a firm believer in Wittgenstein's aphorism: "The limits of my world are the limits of my language". Therefore, and since the vast bulk of human knowledge has been accrued by IE-language speakers, anything that will shed light on this age-old affair is something that fascinates me Chronographos 7 July 2005 10:54 (UTC)

I can't reconcile the Pella tablet with even the few XMK properties mentioned in this article, properties based on Macedonian words and glosses. Decius 7 July 2005 10:30 (UTC)

I'm not building any argument on Dab's typo. Forget about the "2nd century BC". What I'm underlining is that the sources may not agree on the date (4th or 3rd or even another BC date maybe). And also, we don't know how they dated it. Decius 7 July 2005 08:33 (UTC)

I don't know where the 2nd c. date came from, I thought Decius had introduced it. So maybe it was my typo, I was trying to refer to the brynmawr date, 3rd century, sorry. As for two populations sharing the same territory, hey, I'm Swiss, that idea comes naturally to me, in some parts in Switzerland, every valley has a different language, almost. So yes, my idea of 6th c. BC Macedonia is that Doric speaking and XMK speaking populations were present, and probably Phrygian and similar, as well. What we get through Hesychius is a very grainy image of a complex linguistic situation. Personally, I am happy with the 4th century date, I merely noted that it was dated 3rd on brynmawr, I do not know with what merits. I maintain that this difference is insignificant for our purposes here. dab (ᛏ) 7 July 2005 09:25 (UTC)

Actually there is fresh evidence that XMK speakers were watchmakers, Phrygian ones specialized in chocolate and Dorians were bankers. However, all three sent young men to serve in the Guard of the High Priest at Delphi :-P Chronographos 7 July 2005 09:32 (UTC)

Phrygian

picking up a thread from above, why are you so adamant that "Phrygian is not Greek", Chronographos? I mean, I was suggesting that Graeco-Phrygian could be referred to as a "Hellenic" subgroup of IE, just like Graeco-Macedonian has been. If you can change nomenclature for Graeco-Macedonian, why not for Graeco-Phrygian (which are, in all likelyhood, the same group anyway, Graeco-Phrygo-Macedonian). I don't really care if the group is called "Hellenic", it's just that we cannot make up terminology here, we have to go along with established terminology as it stands. If you really press me to define Greek, I'd say, de-voicing of aspirates, loss of prevocalic s, and a few features of vocabulary and morphology, like the gunaik- stem. This definition already excludes "Phrygo-Maceonian", but there can be a larger group, probably best called Balkanic, but for all I care also Hellenic, or maybe better, Sedlenic. dab (ᛏ) 7 July 2005 12:29 (UTC)

I do not know enough about Phrygian, and for the time being I will not be bothered. Maybe some other time. What do you mean by "loss of prevocalic s"? Are there XMK examples of retained prevocalic s? Chronographos 7 July 2005 14:22 (UTC)

Thanks Chrono, I'll accept hyperberetaios as another mark towards the Greco-Macedonian school. Intervocalic 's' then was probably lost in Macedonian (unless some scholar has a good counter-argument). Decius 7 July 2005 15:05 (UTC)

In defense of Dab (not that he needs defense here), I've seen some Phrygian sentences, and the closeness to Greek is unquestionable, more than just between Greek and other IE languages. But I do not advise anyone to call Phrygian "Greek", though they can if they want to I guess. It's pretty likely that Greek and Phrygian come from a common proto-language that branched off from PIE. Macedonian would also be part of that, whether it was a language or dialect. Decius 7 July 2005 12:48 (UTC)

it all boils down on where you put Proto-Greek, which will always remain unattesed anyway. Common practice is to include de-voicing, and that would make XMK descended from pre-Proto-Greek by definition, unless you assume XMK re-voicing, an assumption I haven't seen published anywhere yet. We can agree that Greek, Phrygian and Macedonian are very close, within IE, and Armenian is probably descended from the group, too. dab (ᛏ) 7 July 2005 12:59 (UTC)

No ancient author that I know of ever wrote that the Macedonian tongue was close to Phrygian, but that doesn't prove anything. Decius 7 July 2005 13:04 (UTC)

no, that's precisely the big question. Produce a good example of lost s in XMK (and XMK-ish voiced stops), and people will be prepared to call it Greek-ish, if not Greek. Produce a good example with s present, and people will agree that it cannot be Greek. dab (ᛏ) 7 July 2005 14:36 (UTC)

Are you not familiar with the Macedonian month of Υπερβερεταίος (complete with lost s and a voiced stop)? Chronographos 7 July 2005 14:44 (UTC)

I am not! what is the etymology of -beretaios? It may be an example, although the hyper- prefix may have become productive later, it is, after all, productive in English, and that doesn't mean Germanic lost prevocalic s. But it can certainly be cited as evidence. dab (ᛏ) 8 July 2005 08:02 (UTC)

Now you are! :-) The Attic form would be Hyperpheretaios, the month of "him who over-brings", so to speak. I believe there was a Zeus Hyperberetos, but I'm not sure. Since Greek months were more often than not named after religious festivals that took place in that month, it would fit perfectly. I guess it was a month of harvests (grapes, olives). Please take a look at this and tell me what you think in general. Chronographos 8 July 2005 08:24 (UTC)

If Hyperberetos is a Cretan month, I have my doubts that the etymology is really "he who over-brings". Do you have some reference where the word is discussed? It does not appear to be in Frisk. dab (ᛏ) 8 July 2005 08:46 (UTC)

At this point, all I have is the list of months and the LSJ link. Don't you agree that it derives from *bharami/phero? And who's Frisk? Chronographos 8 July 2005 08:59 (UTC)

Hjalmar Frisk. dab (ᛏ) 8 July 2005 10:04 (UTC)

A treasure! Thanks! What do you think of the Macedonian Calendar in general (not Hyperberetaios in particular)? Chronographos 8 July 2005 10:10 (UTC)

interesting, well, some names do sound Doro-XMK-ish I suppose, but I cannot guess the etymology of most. dab (ᛏ) 8 July 2005 10:50 (UTC)

Really? Aren't the LSJ links any help? 8 out of the 12 are rather plain to me. Chronographos 8 July 2005 11:10 (UTC)

Where do the Selloi (high priests of Dodona in Epirus) - to whom the name of the Hellenes has been etymologically linked - fit into all this, if prevocalic s was lost in all forms of Greek?--Theathenae 8 July 2005 12:19 (UTC)

Δέδυκεν α σελάνα και Πλεϊάδες... :-P . I think there is one instance where Homer refers to swine as sys instead of hys. Chronographos 8 July 2005 12:28 (UTC)

And don't mention those Σελλοί ανιπτόποδες χαμαιεύναι again because my nose won't take it! :-P Chronographos 8 July 2005 12:30 (UTC)

Hehe.. couldn't they just use some foot deodorant? So dab's hypothesis of prevocalic s = non-Greek is not conclusive.--Theathenae 8 July 2005 12:35 (UTC)

Well, since the prayer in question does begin with: "Ζευ άνα Δωδωναίε, Πελασγικέ", maybe we should ask the only surviving Wiki-Pelasgian, Albanau! :-} Chronographos 8 July 2005 15:12 (UTC)

Don't even go there. I just had to revert an edit of his in which "Albanian province of Ottoman Empire were Janina, Monastir, Kosova and Shkodra vilayet".--Theathenae 8 July 2005 15:48 (UTC)

The rascal failed to mention Struga?!?!?!? Chronographos 8 July 2005 15:51 (UTC)

Yup! And Mougga too, just like here.--Theathenae 8 July 2005 15:59 (UTC)

good questions, good questions. Selene has puzzled philologists for 200 years now and is the famous exception. I don't know the verdict on Selloi. Either another spurious exception, or a loan, or popular etymology. We cannot unroll 200 years of Greek philology on this talk page, people. dab (ᛏ) 8 July 2005 12:49 (UTC)

I'm sure this has crossed your minds, but maybe Selene is a loan from Macedonian, assuming that Macedonian had intervocalic 's'. Decius 8 July 2005 12:55 (UTC)

Somebody might also want to check the etymology of the Attic word selas, 'bright flame, blaze, light'. Might be another case. Decius 8 July 2005 12:59 (UTC)

I think I remember seeing the claim that Selloi is from Illyrian (Epirus). And also Dodona has been proposed to be from Illyrian (I think in Pokorny?). Decius 8 July 2005 13:05 (UTC)

Σῦς has a separate entry in LSJ. And Dodona falls very much on the Greek side of Epirus, unless the claim is that Epirus as a whole was Illyrian.--Theathenae 8 July 2005 13:31 (UTC)

And whilst discussing Βόρειον Σέλας, lets' not forget the Isthmian prize, celery Chronographos 8 July 2005 14:18 (UTC)

since you are digging into the s stuff, how about you update Proto-Greek with these details as you go along? dab (ᛏ) 8 July 2005 13:48 (UTC)

I've started with a little game. Feel free to play to your hearts' content! :-) Chronographos 8 July 2005 15:03 (UTC)

I'd leave that to the experts. If Chronographos is right and Hyperberetaios was also a Cretan month, what does that say about the existence of voicing in non-Macedonian varieties? Is the devoicing of aspirates such an absolute quality of all varieties of Greek, or just the ones we happen to be most familiar with?--Theathenae 8 July 2005 14:00 (UTC)

selinon has "no acceptable etymology" [18] for Selene, Frisk gives some references [19], Kretschmer KZ 31, 422f., Prellwitz s. v., Solmsen Unt. 209 A. 2; s. noch Schwyzer 322; Persson Beitr. 2, 579 A. 2; Benveniste Origines 28; Specht Ursprung 212; Pisani Rend. Acc. Lincei Scr. VI: 7, 75 und Jb. f. kleinas. Forsch. 3, 150. dab (ᛏ) 8 July 2005 14:28 (UTC)

Oh, NO, it's in German! :-PP The only words I understand are "pudenda muliebria" ;-} Chronographos 8 July 2005 15:07 (UTC)

I am sure you do, Chronographos, I am sure you do. dab (ᛏ)

Whence this masterly inactivity?

Latest comment: 18 years ago24 comments4 people in discussion

Speaking of Hyperberetaios, Selloi, Selene, Doric, Macedonian and prevocalic s, is anyone aware that two of the townships that made up Ancient Sparta were Pellana and Sellasia? Chronographos 22:12, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

Really? I was almost certain that Pella at least derived from the Albanian pelë.--Theathenae 22:22, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

Όμοιος ομοίω αεί πελάζει! :-Ρ Chronographos 22:30, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

Decius does not in anyway sponsor Albanau's idea, but I preferred to reserve judgment, and tell him about a cognate for the Albanian word. I don't know about you guys, but I'm also interested in other articles: Ligurian language, Sicania, etc. Decius 22:24, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

Maybe Decius read a dictionary that failed to differentiate between πώλος and πόλος Chronographos 22:45, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

No Chrono, I just didn't indicate the omega. That ancient Greek word is given as a cognate to the Albanian word in Bardyll Demiraj's standard reference, etc. I do not connect it to Pella, but since I can't disprove a connection, I would rather not tell Albanau: "You are wrong". He wouldn't listen anyway. Decius 22:50, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

Who is Demiraj? Is he someone worth considering? Because he is willing to disregard an ω-ε transformation. By the same token selene is a cognate for solenoid. What does Pokorny say on the matter? Chronographos 23:00, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

I don't know what Pokorny says on the matter. Demiraj is saying the Albanian word and the ancient Greek word derive from the same root, not that the Albanian word is from ancient Greek. Of course, he could be wrong, but it doesn't seem very improbable. Here is Demiraj's text: [20] (if you see pw-loj, read that as pôlos). I linked the exact page. The root is on page 801 in Pokorny. Decius 23:05, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

Improbable is nothing. In a probabilistic world, the moon could also be a tube. Then Alice slid down it, fell on Humpty Dumpty and broke him, and all the king's πώλοι and all the king's men could not put him together again. Ain't that a cryin' shame ... Chronographos 23:30, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

________________________________________

Pokorny: Root / lemma: pel-2a, pelǝ- : plā-

Meaning: to cause to move, drive German meaning: `stoßend or schlagend in Bewegung setzen, treiben'

Material: Lat. pellō (probably from *pel-nō), -ere, pepuli, *pultus (vorausgesetzt from pultāre `bump, poke'), pulsus (after perculsus : percellō) `stoßend or schlagend in Bewegung place, forttreiben', pulsus, -ūs `blow, knock', umbr. ař-peltu `appellitō, admovētō', lat. ōpilio (*ou̯i-pili̯ō) `Schafhirt' (`Schaftreiber'), Palēs `Hirtengöttin'; appellō, -āre `address, speak to';

air. ad-ella (*pel-nā-t) `besucht' (= lat. appellat), di-ella `weicht ab'; das Futur. to agid `treibt' : eblaid (*pi-plāseti) and die brit. Konjunktive with el- (above S. 307); air. laë `day' (*plāi̯om), originally *` turn '; about aksl. popelъ `ash' see under pel-2b;

probably auf einem d-present *pel-d-ō based on: ahd. anafalz m., ags. anfilte n. `Ambos', ags. felt, m., ahd. filz m. `Filz' (*`gestampfte Wollmasse'), ahd. falzan `anfügen, anlegen', nhd. falzen `zusammenlegen';

`sich nähern'; trans. `näherbringen, heranbringen' (πέλασε χθονί `warf to bottom'), πελάτης `Nachbar, Taglöhner'; πίλναμαι `nähere mich', πλησιόν, dor. πλᾱτίον `nahe, by', ion. ἄ-πλητος, dor. ἄ-πλᾱτος `dem man nicht nahen kann, entsetzlich', πλᾶτις `Gattin' (Ar. Ach. 132), ἔμπλην `ganz nahe', πλήν, dor. πλά̄ν preposition `besides'.

References: WP. II 57 f., WH. II 276 f.; See also: hieher probably also pel-3 `meal, flour'. Page(s): 801-802

_____________________________________

No horsie there ... Chronographos 23:30, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

Well, Demiraj could be wrong---or he might be right. *Pel-, 'to push, drive', might be the root for both. Pokorny didn't do all the work in the field. The problem is, Albanian has strange sound-changes (gh>d), so even acherdos (*gher--> a-cher-) might be cognate to Albanian dardhë (*gher-->dardh), as Pokorny and Demiraj say. Decius 23:38, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

Wouldn't know about pears. Pokorny's entry is full of Doric though. Chronographos 23:50, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

One way to double-check Demiraj's theory is to see whether any other references derive pôlos from *pel-, 'to drive'. I don't see what the big deal is: if the derivation was phonologically impossible, Demiraj would have noticed. It is not semantically improbable (the change in meaning is not a big deal, it's noted in many cases). He's not saying pelë is from pôlos. Decius 00:14, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

I'm not interested in horses that much. The Pokorny entry gives enough material for Apella, the Spartan Assembly, the Doric and Macedonian month of Apellaios, the towns of Pella and Pellana and quite possibly the Macedonian battle corps of πελτασταί.

Yeah, I've seen that connection proposed (Pella to Apella, etc). It seems likely. More likely than Albanau's idea anyway. However, Macedonian peltastai is from PIE *pel-, 'skin, hide'---hide-covered shields. Decius 00:49, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

It has been proposed (German pelz: fur), but I wonder how definitive it is. Peltastai also carried javelins and Pokorny does say "*pultus (vorausgesetzt from pultāre `bump, poke')". Anyways that's a minor point. Chronographos 09:22, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

Actually Chronographos, you are wrong: the root is *pel-, 'skin, hide'. Peltastai, masc. nom. plural; Peltastes, singular, 'one who carries a light shield', from peltê (Dor. pelta), 'a small light shield of leather without a rim'. You do not, as a rule, strike with your shield. However, light shields were usually covered with hide (*pel-). In ancient Greek, we even find the word erusipelas, 'inflammed skin' (erusi=red; -pelas=skin). So, -pelas meaning 'skin' existed in Greek (see also Latin pellis, 'skin'). The root of peltastai is PIE *pel, 'skin, hide'. Decius 17:57, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

Really? Read above: "I wonder ...". And, please, don't lecture a Greek physician on erysipelas. I was treating it before you ever knew it even existed. Chronographos 19:22, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, but if linguists agree that peltastai is from PIE *pel-, 'hide', they have a good reason for it. And a little search would have shown why they prefer *pel-, 'skin, hide', rather than other options. You apparently like bashing linguists such as Pokorny and Demiraj before you even fully research their points, which is not the way to do it. Decius 19:32, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

Are you drunk again? I am not saying what you think I'm saying. Do try to read more carefully. Chronographos 20:13, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

hey Chronographos, you seem to misunderstand something here. The point is that the Greeks lost PIE prevocalic s. They reintroduced s from other sources, so of course there are Greek words beginning in s-. The only couterexamples I am aware of are selene and Homeric sus, and they have to be explained as loans somehow. PIE s was dead and gone by 1300 BC, so it is rather unlikely that Homer would have had remnants. Selene I suppose can be explained as a "Balkanese" loan or something; I'm not sure about sus, that may indeed be a spurious leftover. dab (ᛏ) 08:54, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

I fully understand the issue, and your interpretation of it. My point was not the genesis of Greek from PIE; rather the Doric/Macedonian cognates. Chronographos 09:22, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

I trust you understand the issue. you just have a tendency for erecting strawmen :) So are you sayng that by indirect evidence we can assume that XMK preserved prevocalic s? And the Spartans had taken a few XMK words with them? Is there any evidence that Selene was a Dorian goddess in particular? You do realize that this assumption implies that XMK was a non-Greek language that was in loan-contact with the early Dorians? dab (ᛏ) 11:00, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

That is not necessarily the case. Although Sellasia, Selloi, Selene and the Homeric Sys remain puzzles, I was more concerned with Pella-Apella and the month Apellaios, as well as Hyperberetaios. I would welcome your ideas as how best to incorporate evidence from the Macedonian Calendar into this article Chronographos 11:11, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

I don't think anyone has made the claim that XMK systematically preserved prevocalic s. Chronographos cited Hyberberetaios as an example which would indicate the contrary. The survival of a few s- words in "Greek" means that even if a few Macedonian glosses with prevocalic s were found, such a finding would not be conclusive.--Theathenae 12:30, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

Things that make you go "Hmmmmmmm....."

Latest comment: 18 years ago12 comments3 people in discussion

Browsing through Pokorny, I stumbled upon the elusive Pydna etymology ....
__________________________
Root / lemma: *bhudh-m(e)n? Meaning: bottom German meaning: `Boden' Note: single-linguistic in part to *bhudh-mo-, partly to *bhudh-no-, besides with already idg. metathesis *bhundho- > *bhundo- ? Material: Old Indian budhná-ḥ `ground, bottom'; av. bū̆nō ds. (*bhundhno-), out of it borrows arm. bun ds., during arm. an-dund-k` `abyss' from *bhundh- seems assimilated. From proto iran. *bundhas derives tscherem. pundaš `bottom, ground '.

Gr. πυθμήν (*φυθ-) m. `bottom, sole, base of a vessel', πύνδαξ m. ds. (for φύνδαξ after πυθμήν Schwyzer Gr. Gr. I 71, 333).
Maked. PN Πύδνα (*bhudhnā), dissimil. Κύδνα?
Lat. fundus, -ī m. ` ground; the bottom or base of anything; a farm, estate' (*bhundhos), profundus `deep' = mir. bond, bonn m. `sole, foundation, groundwork, basis, pad, prop

maybe alb. (*fundus), fund `bottom, end', fundos `sink (to the bottom)'

Ahd. bodam, nhd. Boden, as. bodom, ags. *boðm > mengl. bothem m. besides ags. botm m. > engl.bottom and ags. bodan `bottom, ground',

Maybe alb. (bod-) botë ` bottom, ground, earth, world' an. botn `bottom', ags. byðme ` bilge, floor, bottom ' besides bytme, bytne ds., aisl. bytna ` to come to the bottom ', with unclear dental change; it seems to lie a basic proto germ. *buÞma- , probably is to be explained analogically; compare Petersson Heterokl. 18, Sievers-Brunner 167, Kluge11 under siedeln. About nhd. Bühne, originally ` wooden floor (made from floorboards) ', angebl. from germ. *bunī, idg. *budhniā, s. Kluge11 under Bühne. References: WP. II 190, WH. I 564 f., 867, Porzig WuS. 15, 112 ff. (against it Kretschmer Gl. 22, 116); compare also Vendryes MSL. 18, 305 ff. Page(s): 174
__________________________
... and it duly rang a few bells: it seems to me that, besides πύνδαξ, *bhudh-m(e)n has yet another Greek cognate, βένθος, which would be the exact equivalent of Latin fundus. So, is it that there are 2 Greek words showing loss of aspiration in both places of *bhudh-m(e)n ? Chronographos 15:55, 15 July 2005 (UTC)¨

Id's almozd doo koot do pe drue, innid?--Theathenae 17:23, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

I'd wait for dab's opinion; he's a linguist and I'm not. Chronographos 18:12, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

My AHD says benthos is from PIE *gwadh-, 'to sink', in which case it wouldn't be an example of that type of sound-change (it would be a common PIE *gw --> Greek 'b' change). A Greek 'b' often derives from PIE *gw-. Decius 18:35, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

True, see βούς (ox). Pokorny says that bathos derives from *gwadh-, which makes perfect sense, and that "βένθος `depth' secondary after πένθος : πάθος;", as obviously a *gwadh- derivation does not account for the -n-. I wonder how valid this "roundabout" etymology is. The *bhudh-m(e)n one looks much more straightforward, as the "metathesis *bhundho- " is accounted for . What do you make of πύνδαξ ? Chronographos 19:24, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

Hmmm... I agree that βένθος=fundus is pretty convincing. Also, note that the Macedonian toponym is Πύδνα, not Βύδνα, indicating that it underwent the same sound change as πυθμήν.--Theathenae 19:37, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

Indeed, things that make you go "Hmmmmmmm....." Chronographos 19:41, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

PIE *bh- changing to 'p' seems to be ocassionally attested in Greek, but PIE *bh- to 'b' is considered to be pretty much impossible for Greek. That's why linguists do not derive benthos from *bhudh-. Circular reasoning? May be, but these linguists have devoted many years to studying these sound-changes, while we haven't. Decius 19:43, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

So, apparently what you are saying is that Πύδνα underwent a "Greek-type" sound change in the first consonant and a "Macedonian-type" sound change in the second consonant? Chronographos 00:19, 16 July 2005 (UTC) (It does seem to be The Arsenio Hall Show after all)

"I'm" not saying anything regarding Pydna. Pokorny is the one who came up with the etymology, while at the same time Pokorny did not consider ancient Macedonian a Greek dialect. So you can pin it on Pokorny. I have not tackled the issue regarding Pydna or its etymology, or what it may or may not imply. Realize that in terms of Wikipedia, we can only use the research that is already out there. Decius 00:28, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

No need to get defensive, all I was asking for was a "Hmmmmm ...." Chronographos 00:44, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

It seems to me that what O'Neil is suggesting in his abstract is that Macedonians might have actually been pronouncing β as -bh- and when widely confronted with Attic spelling that clashed with their own pronunciation, they proceeded to drop their own spelling altogether. Chronographos 19:56, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

PERSIANS NAMING OF THE GREEKS & THE VARIOUS GREEKS TRIBES

Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

There are several types of Yauna in the Achaemenid Royal Inscriptions:

(1) Yaunβ in general: the same as the Greeks known as "Ionians", i.e., those living in Asia Minor. They can already be found in the Behistun Inscription, when the Persian rule had not yet reached Europe. This identification is 100% certain.

(2) Yaunβ takabarβ, the 'Greeks with shield-shaped hats'. First mentioned in DNa ( http://www.livius.org/aa-ac/achaemenians/DNa.html ), where they are distinguished from the "normal" Yaunβ: an almost certain reference to the Macedonian sunhats.

(3 and 4) "The Yaunβ, near and across the sea": another division, for the first time found in DSe ( http://www.livius.org/aa-ac/achaemenians/DSe.html ) and in a slightly different form in the Daiva Inscription by Xerxes (XPh: http://www.livius.org/aa-ac/achaemenians/XPh.html ). The obvious reading is "the Asian Yauna and the European Yauna", i.e., -again- Asian Greeks and Macedonians.

On the other hand, Persian inscriptions are fairly stereotypical, and the fact that there is a small difference between the precise wording of DSe and XPh suggests that there is a difference. Perhaps, there is a difference between the "Yauna across the sea" and the sunhat-Yaunβ. If this is correct, the Yauna across the sea must be either Cypriot Greeks (but why didn't Darius, who seems to have subdued Cyprus, mention them?) or the Thessalians, Boeotians, and Athenians - nations that Xerxes could claim to have conquered.

(5) There is a seal from the age of Xerxes ( http://www.livius.org/a/1/greece/yauna_seal.jpg ) in which the great king defeats someone looking like a Yauna. It is unique, because a second man appears to have a hand in the killing, and this man looks like a Yauna. Is this the Macedonian king Alexander who helps killing a Thessalian/Boeotian/Athenian??

Such instances are extremely rare since only a handful of original Persian texts have survived.There are of references by Darius I in the Behistun Inscription to Sardis (OP Sparda), Ionia (OP Yauna) and Cappadocia (OP Katpatuka). There are also a couple of statements concerning the Greeks and their tribes in the Babylonian tablets.

Thank you, Megistias, but this does not belong here: this is a primarily linguistics article. It belongs in "Macedon" where you posted it as well - although it has already been discussed there to some extent. Chronographos 11:37, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

Macedons Language was Greek

Latest comment: 18 years ago7 comments3 people in discussion

Ancient Macedonian language was a Greek dialect. No doubt about that. So stop claiming the opposite.
Right now I don't have enough free time to expand this article, but I del all the false or irrelevant material.

Decius, why don't u give us facts instead of typing false statements in this article?

About half of the article (if not more) was written User:Dbachmann. It has also been contributed to by User:Chronographos, User:Theathenae, and User:Miskin. Nothing in the article is my own idea. There is no propaganda in the article, especially no propaganda from me. The scientific community is still debating whether ancient Macedonian was a Greek dialect. Decius 18:18, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

We know that ancient Macedonians speak a Greek dialect because of Hesychius, Hesiod and other ppl of that period. So there is no doubt about that.

Yeah right... They are debating if Macedons were Greeks or not or even if the modern Greeks are descendest of ancient Greeks. :-P Give me a break, would u. If u belive that it isn't a Greek dialect, show me ur facts. Otherwise stop changing the article.

If u left the article with that faulse material, then this article says the opposite of the rest articles that contain the ancient Macedonian language. Like the Macedon article, the Hesychius article etc. So u can't have this no sense written in this article.

Άκου να σου πω, νέοπα. Εμείς εδώ μέσα έχουμε φτύσει αίμα. Δεν θα έρθεις εσύ να τα κάνεις λαμπόγυαλο επειδή έτσι σου κάβλωσε. Θα είσαι ήρεμος, θα συζητάς, θα υπογράφεις ό,τι γράφεις με 4 περισπωμένες, θα δημιουργήσεις user page στ' όνομά σου, και γενικά θα είσαι φρόνιμος και υπάκουος μέχρι να μάθεις τα κατατόπια. Αλλιώς θα βγεις στον τάκο. Έγινα σαφής? Chronographos 18:28, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

No.
1. This is english Wikipedia.
2. If u can not support ur articles, then u shouldn't post them in the first place.
3. As I mentioned this article claim the opposite thing as the rest article (for example Macedon, Hesychius articles).

So just prove ur theory and I believe u. Right now this article claims bull****. Also it contains irrelevant material.

hello Manos, warm welcomes, please join the choir. May I suggest you consider waiting with imparting your wisdom on us until you are more confident with the spelling of English pronouns though? dab (ᛏ) 18:35, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

Και ποιός έγραψε τα άρθρα Macedon kai Hesychius νομίζεις? Η μάνα σου? Εμείς τα γράψαμε, και μας βγήκανε τα μάτια να τα δακτυλογραφήσουμε. Φάε τώρα ένα blockάκι να ηρεμήσεις. Chronographos 18:38, 29 July 2005 (UTC) (Dab, this guy broke the 3RR. Could you please do the deed and give him, and us, 24 hours peace?)

Damn. I wasting my time with u. I'm busy right now. I guess that there is no point to contribute in the "encyclopedia".
But before I leave, I'll give u a free lesason.
{
Due to the fragmentary attestation widely diverging interpretations are possible. The suggested historical interpretations of Macedonian include (Mallory and Adams (1997), p. 361):
a Greek dialect mixed with Illyrian languages.
a Greek dialect mixed with Illyrian and the Thracian language.
a Greek dialect with a non-Indo-European substratal influence
an Illyrian dialect mixed with Greek
an independent Indo-European language close to Greek, Thracian and Phrygian languages.
The discussion is closely related to the reconstruction of the Proto-Greek language.
}

How did u conclude in this?
Let me guess. U assumed that the foreign origin words in the GREEK lexicon of Hesychius means that the Macedonian language was a non-Greek language.
Damn... I like ur conclusions. :-P
GREEK Lexicon... foreign language... lol yeah right. Maybe the word "bibliotheka" is Greek word, too. :-P
Or do u think that English language is Greek, too? :-P Stop waisting my time. Give me facts proving ur claims... not facts proving the exact opposite.

You must be watching too much Liakopoulos on TV. As a matter of fact we Greeks came from Sirius in spaceships. Chronographos 18:52, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

I don't know... maybe the authors of Britannica were wathing too much Liakopoulos. Btw who is Liakopoulos? :-P [[21]]

Your dad. Chronographos 18:56, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

If it wasn't Greek... then what was it? English? Macedonian? Slavic??? :-P

Sirian Chronographos 19:00, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

lol... if u can not support ur articles... u can not have it. Give me facts and I'll believe u.
The lexicon was Greek. So the Macedonian language was a Greek dialect. ;) End of story. :-P
You can not prove the opposite. So u can not claim that ur thesis is right.

If u can not support ur thesis, u shouldn't try to stop me changing this article. I prove my thesis. It was a Greek lexicon. So obviously the Macedonian language was Greek, too. Don't be stubborn and accept the truth.

I change the article again. If u prove that I'm wrong, I'll rv the article. If u don't, u shouldn't rv the article. If u rv the article without facts, u will prove that this web site isn't an encyclopedia, but it's just a forum.

OK. I'm out of here. I wont act childish like u. U can not prove ur thesis or to prove that my thesis is wrong, but u insist writing the things u like. I'm off. Have a nice day.

Thesis for change

Latest comment: 18 years ago14 comments2 people in discussion

If u don't prove in 48 hours that I'm wrong and your thesis is correct, then the article will be changed.

Hmmm, sir, excuse me, may I humbly ask for 49 hours, please, sir, please? Chronographos 14:24, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

So here is my thesis about ancient Macedonian language:

(1) The lexicon of Hesychius is a Greek lexicon:

(2) The article mentions the following:

{ Due to the fragmentary attestation widely diverging interpretations are possible. The suggested historical interpretations of Macedonian include (Mallory and Adams (1997), p. 361):

a Greek dialect mixed with Illyrian languages.
a Greek dialect mixed with Illyrian and the Thracian language.
a Greek dialect with a non-Indo-European substratal influence
an Illyrian dialect mixed with Greek
an independent Indo-European language close to Greek, Thracian and Phrygian languages.
The discussion is closely related to the reconstruction of the Proto-Greek language.
}

How did u came in that conclusion? I guess that because the origin of a few words were non-Greek, u assumed that the words were non-Greek, too. So the language was non Greek.

In that way, "bibliotheka" is a Greek word, because its origin is Greek and the English language is Greek language too, because "bibliotheka" as u know is an English word. But if u open a Greek lexicon u won't find that word. On the other hand, u will find it in an English lexicon. So obviously u can't claim that the ancient Macedonian language was non-Greek. The lexicon was Greek. So the Macedonian is a Greek dialect.

Also u can't claim that the language was mixed with foreign languages. The number of the survived Macedonian words from the Greek lexicon of Hesychius is too small (around 700 words) and the most of them have Greek origin. So we can not made such conclusions about the language.

(3) The Hesychius of Alexandria article states that "Hesychius of Alexandria, a grammarian of Alexandria, (probably flourished 5th century CE) compiled the richest lexicon of unusual and obscure Greek words that has survived".

So according to u although that the words were Greek, the Macedonian language was non-Greek. But how is that possible? Is there any other x language that is constructed by non-x words?

(Conclusion) It was a Greek lexicon, which means that the ancient Macedonian language was a Greek dialect. So we should change the article. If you can't prove me wrong within 48 hours (till 14:08, 1 August 2005) then I will change the article.

MANOS 14:08, 30 July 2005

The conclusion is wrong: Hesychius collected Thracian words in his glossary also. So first you have to prove that the Thracians were Hellenes. Decius 14:16, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

Some of the Thracian words Hesychius collected in his Lexicon are brynchon, bruton, kalamindar, skarke, torelle, zibythides, and some others. He also has words from other peoples, such as sukalobon, from the Mysians. Decius 14:38, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

U have to prove that the lexicon had Tracian words. When I say Thracian, I mean Thracian. Not Greek words with Thracian origin. They were Greek words with Thracian origin in Hesychius lexicon. No doubt about that.
Take a look in google search: [32]

Also keep in mind that the lexicon was written in Greek and was in alphabetical order.
So I doubt if ever exist a lexicon that has more than 1 language and it is in alphabetical order, too. ;)
Doesn't make sense, does it?
MANOS 14:50, 30 July 2005

You're wrong again. Those words are accepted as Thracian by most scholars. For example, Hesychius writes that kalamindar was a word that the Edonians used for the plane tree. The Edonians were a Thracian tribe. We don't have to prove anything here: scholarly references are cited for all theories, including the Greek dialect theory. Any admin who supports you is incompetent. Decius 14:56, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

[33]
I'll appreciate if u can prove ur thesis, with facts. How the heck are u planing to convince me that u are right if u don't show me any reall facts? ;)
MANOS 15:03, 30 July 2005

Hmmmm, ask for 49 and a half hours? Chronographos 15:06, 30 July 2005 (UTC) (BTW you Googled "kalamindar" with Latin characters. Not that it would have changed something. Do you expect Google to list all the words in every book?)

"scholarly references are cited for all theories, including the Greek dialect theory"
Probably these scholarly references didn't care about Hesiod or Hellanicus. ;)
MANOS 15:09, 30 July 2005

Kalamindar (from Hesychius) is mentioned as word among the Edonians in this site I'll link, quoting a linguist and Thracologist: [34]. Decius 15:12, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

1. U didn't explain me why the above web sites are saying that the Hesychius lexicon was Greek.
2. U didn't explain me why do u think that the Macedonian language might was:
a Greek dialect mixed with Illyrian languages.
a Greek dialect mixed with Illyrian and the Thracian language.
a Greek dialect with a non-Indo-European substratal influence
an Illyrian dialect mixed with Greek
an independent Indo-European language close to Greek, Thracian and Phrygian languages.
3. U didn't explain me why in the Hesychius of Alexandria article says that the Hesychius lexicon is the "richest lexicon of unusual and obscure Greek words that has survived". Why doesn't say Macedonian words? Thracian words? or multi-language lexicon or something?

Explain me these first... and then try to prove ur thesis. MANOS 15:17, 30 July 2005

Manos, I don't know if you are fourteen years old, but that section you're quoting, describing the various theories, was quoted or paraphrased by Dbachmann from a linguistic reference, as indicated (Mallory and Adams, 1997, pg. 361). It is not one thesis, nor is it an original thesis of a Wiki contributor. Decius 15:21, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

Decius, I think u can't understand smth. In order to prove ur thesis u MUST explain these first:

1. Why the 10 web sites I mentioned are saying that Hesychius lexicon was Greek
2. As u said... linguistic. The only way to come to this conclutions is if u take the Greek lexicon of Hesychius and search for non-Greek origin words. Then u prove that it came from non-Greek origin and u are claiming that ancient Macedonian wasn't Greek dialect. The problem is as I told u, that u can't prove from the word origin, that the whole language, even the word itself, that it is non-Greek. Imposimble. Then as I told u, anyone can prove that English is a Greek language.
3. U have to explain why the Hesychius of Alexandria article says that the lexicon is the "richest lexicon of unusual and obscure Greek words that has survived".
4. Why the lexicon was in alphabetical order?
5. Why Hesiod and Hellanicus said that Macedonians are from Aeolian branch? Keep in mind that Hesiod said that around the year of the creaton of the Macedonian nation.

I'll suggest u not to try to insult me in order to prove ur thesis. If u explain me the above, then u can start explaining me why Macedonian language might be non-Greek.

U have a lot of work to do. ;)

MANOS 15:37, 30 July 2005

I'm not asking you or any reader to believe or even consider that ancient Macedonian was not a Greek dialect. What I do expect is for people to realize that scholars are still disputing the issue, and the article seeks to be agnostic, and to summarize the debate. If you think there are specific problems with the article or if you feel it is too slanted to one side or another, then discuss your objections more specifically. Decius 15:42, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

Decius, u can not get it, do u?

1. U can not prove that a word is not Greek, because it's origin it's not-Greek as u did in the discussion page. 2. ALL the evidence are proving that Macedons were Greeks. Not a single one evident is supporting the opposite. So don't waste my time with non-sense.

I like this one from the Macedon's article: "because I have current linguistic references that support a separate extinct Macedonian language. "
lol Yeah right. And I'm Santa. :-P As I told u Ancient Macedonian language and Macedons were Greek. If u disagree prove the opposite. Don't tell me that we don't know for sure. We do.

Hesiod said they were Greek.
Hellanicus said they were Greek.
Both said they were speaking Greek (Aeolian)
Macedons said they were Greeks
The rest Greeks said they were Greek
They were participating in Olympic Games
Persians said they were Greeks
Not a single evidence proving the opposite

So, if they were Greeks then their language was Greek, too.

MANOS 15:56, 30 July 2005

I did/do have those references, some of which are mentioned in the article (read the article). That quote doesn't say I have references that prove it was separate. Decius 16:02, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

"realize that scholars are still disputing the issue"
Yeah, I don't disagree. Do u know that in Albania they are saying that the Greek ancient cities there are Albanian? Do u know that a scholar said that Homer was Turk? Do u know that many scholars are saying that Alexander was Illyrian? Do u know that a whole SLAVIC nation believes that are descendants of Macedons? Do u know that a few scholars are claiming that humans that aren't coming from earth? I don't see this disputes in the related articles. I wonder why?
MANOS 16:07, 30 July 2005

You're comparing fringe pseudo-scholars to an actual debate among current specialists. Decius 16:09, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

"quote doesn't say I have references that prove it was separate." U meant that u have references that supporting the possibilitie of a non Greek dialect. But did u read the word that u use? "linguistic" I already told u, that u can not prove with a linguistic way that the language is non Greek. On the other hand we know that the ancient Greeks are saying that the language was Aeolian. Also from the Greek lexicon of Hesychius we found out that it's true that the Macedonian language was Aeolian. All the Greek words were showing that their language was Aeolian. ;) So u have zero proofs. Nothing. U can not even claim the opposite. Because if u do, then u are either a propagandist or a person with lack of history in the specific subject.

I wont say it again. U CAN NOT PROVE LINGUISTICLY THAT THE MACEDONIAN LANGUAGE WASN'T GREEK. It's imposimble. Use ur logic.
MANOS 16:16, 30 July 2005

You're right about one thing: as of 16:19 July 30 2005, no one can prove that Macedonian was not a Greek dialect. The article is still giving a legitimate summary of the controversy. Decius 16:20, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

"an actual debate among current specialists"
specialist? Do u kidding me? I already told u. U can not prove it linguisticly.
"bibliotheca": Greek + Greek <> Greek
What ur linguistic are claiming? non-Greek + non-Greek = non-Greek
These ppl aren't specialist. They should burn their diploma. Even a kid can understand that a foreign origin word, doesn't mean that the word is foreign, too. ;)
MANOS 16:22, 30 July 2005

Yeah, we've discussed this issue before. Linguists have also considered that many of the non-Greek words may have been borrowed. Other linguists consider them authentic Macedonian words (Julius Pokorny, Eugene Borza, Antoine Meillet, etc.). Decius 16:27, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

Keep in mind that u have to prove that: "I'm wrong and your thesis is correct".
U didn't prove anything. Plz give us the historical evidence proving that Macedonians were not Greeks. As I told u above all the evidence are saying the same thing. That they were Greeks. No doubt at all.
MANOS 16:30, 30 July 2005

All the evidence? No doubt at all? Okay. Thank you for revealing this to the world. Decius 16:34, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

Yes. Modern linguists can't prove a thing. For this reason I never mention them in order to support my thesis. ;)
I think that it's better to talk about Macedons. It's much easier for me to prove that the ancient Macedonian language was a Greek dialect using ancient evidence. I would like to hear ur thesis about Hesiod and Hellanicus. Do u think they lie? Do u think they mixed up things? If u can not support the opposite, u would never be able to support that the Ancient Macedonian language might not be Greek. ;)
MANOS 16:35, 30 July 2005

If u believe that they are evidence, plz tell us about them. MANOS 16:38, 30 July 2005

Hesiod said they were Greeks.
Hellanicus said they were Greeks.
Both said they were speaking Greek (Aeolian)
Macedons said they were Greeks
The rest Greeks said they were Greeks
They were participating in Olympic Games
Persians said they were Greeks
Not a single evidence proving the opposite
Where is my mistake(s)? MANOS 16:41, 30 July 2005

I'm busy. I'm planning on organizing the Illyrian tribes in this article today:Illyria. In the meanwhile, I hope no "admins" out there continue to support any vandalism to this article, because I will see to it that those admins are stripped of their adminship. Decius 16:59, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

U have 45 hours. I think u have plenty of time. ;) MANOS 17:05, 30 July 2005

"any vandalism to this article"
U didn't prove that I'm wrong. So it's obvious that u are the vandal over here. Also keep in mind that in the whole discussion and in the article, u based ur thesis in linguistics. As I told u that is a wrong way and u can not prove anything. On the other hand I based my thesis to ancient evidence. ;) MANOS 17:10, 30 July 2005

"because I will see to it that those admins are stripped of their adminship." Instead of ancient evidence and proofs, u only show threats. Come on. I'm sure ur propagandist mentor had teach u better than that. ;) MANOS 17:14, 30 July 2005

"MANOS"

Latest comment: 18 years ago9 comments3 people in discussion

at this stage, this is just trolling and vandalism. I will not even enter the debate unless he drops the leet speech and the ranting. I do imagine he is fourteen, or maybe thirteen years old. And apparently cheerfully uninhibited by manners or methodology. We are saying that it was possibly Greek and that people aren't sure, so I really don't know what he wants. The '48 hours ultimatum' is unwiki to boot. During his brief appearance, he managed to accumulate enough misbehaviour for an arbcom filing, that's quite an acheivement. I do propose that until user agrees to behave and cite his sources (lol), his edits count as pure vandalism and should be rolled back on sight.

WP is not an education facility for difficult teenagers, so let him take his ego elsewhere. dab (ᛏ) 07:51, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

I don't have time for childish games. If u really believe that ur sources are right, then according to ur sources what is the explanation of the following facts? Plz explain me the following and how ur sources came to the conclusion that Macedons might not be Greeks. If u can not explain it, don't say that my changes are vandalism.

Hesiod said they were Greeks (Aeolian).
Hellanicus said they were Greeks (Aeolian).
Macedons said they were Greeks
The rest Greeks said they were Greeks
They were participating in Olympic Games
Persians said they were Greeks
Not a single evidence proving the opposite

PS: Don't ask for my sources about the above. The above are already written in the Macedon article. ;)
MANOS

Read the article instead of vandalizing it, the answers are there. I do not believe "my sources" are "right", I believe they are notable. There's a difference. Nor am I here to preach teh truth!!1!. I am here to document a discourse. There is also a difference, although I do not expect you to follow, and since I am not paid to educate you, I will not press the point. Of course you took the above statements from the Macedon article, I would not have expected you to know these things. Here, however, the topic is not Macedon, but the Macedonian language. Can't tell the difference? Read language, linguistics, historical linguistics, Age of Reason, predicate logic etc. dab (ᛏ) 09:25, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

Are u playing the stupid or are u stupid? This article is based on linguistics. U can not prove anything with linguistics. I already prove that above. So I try to support my thesis with the Macedon article where there are evidence for the language of the Macedon.
They even say they were speaking Greek. Hellanicus and Hesiod confirmed it. So how the heck is possible to say that they might not speak Greek. Obviously u can't. How many times I told u to explain the articles? Ur thesis? Many. What did u do? U told me to stop talking. So I guess that u are either a propagandist or a man that doesn't want to know the truth. I wonder why?
MANOS

No personal attacks, or you will be blocked for disruption. This is the only warning you get.--Wiglaf 09:44, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

Come on dab. Tell us what ur sources think about the Macedons. Come on. We both know that ur theories doesn't make sense. For God's shake u post theories that can only "explain" a minor part of historical evidence. Why do u think that I really believe that Macedons were Greek? Because that thesis can explain all the evidence. Urs can not. So obviously ur thesis is incomplete. Wrong. Impossible to be the truth.
If u really believed that I'm just a kid, u would already post at least one evidence supporting the opposite. But u didn't. No one did. Even Decius. He said many times in the talk pages that has many historical evidence proving the opposite. Where are the evidence? I really want to see them. Come on dub. Just 1 evidence. Come on. U can copy paste.
MANOS

for pity's sake Chronographe, can you talk some sense into this compatriot of yours? Manos, there is an article. read it. This talkpage is for discussing the article, not for idle chatter. For the third and final time, if you (English pronoun, 2nd person) don't stop your AOLese spelling (yes, the "net language", not even leet, according to that article), I will not even begin to enter a debate with you. This is not usenet. dab (ᛏ) 10:15, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

Wish I could, dab, but I think it is hopeless. I do not intend to respond to his rants anymore, and you have my full blessings to deal with him as harshly as WP rules allow. I also concur that his "contributions" be moved somewhere out out of sight, the sooner the better. Chronographos 14:52, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

I was being theatralic; I do not think there is a problem, we had Antifinnugor, Zivibundias and who else, that's not even a hiccup by Wikipedia standards, I'd say :) dab (ᛏ) 16:08, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

LOL Wiglaf, u said that "If you want to ask someone who is neutral, knowledgeable and who can consult sources in this matter, you should ask Dab".
Yeah, right. Come on Wiglaf. Convince him to post a historical evidence supporting the opposite of my thesis.
I'm waiting dab. U shouldn't start this chat. I said I was off, but u wanted to continue. OK then... talk. U will continue the chat as u wish.
MANOS

Wiglaf, why don't u ask Dab, why Macedons were the only non-Greeks in the Olympic games?
Why don't u ask him why Macedons were the only non-Greeks in the Council of Delphi?
But how is that possible? Only Greek were allowed! I really want to know.
MANOS

Manos, I urge your to read this discussion, from bottom and down. You should also be aware that you're committing something that I strongly disprove of, you shift Burden of proof in order to claim Negative proof with the purpose of having an Ignoratio elenchi.--Wiglaf 10:50, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

yeah, on top of doing it on the entirely wrong talkpage, and without bringing up anything that hasn't been long in the articles. Why, he even quotes our own Macedon article to show how ignorant we are. What a clown, you really get all sorts on WP :o) dab (ᛏ)

to enable us to continue reasonable discussion, Manos' ejaculations should be moved to Talk:Ancient Macedonian language/MANOS. dab (ᛏ) 11:01, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

I guess u can't.
Why don't u post the scholar opinion that Macedons were Chinese? Let me tell u. Because it can not "explain" any historical evidence.
Why do u post the scholar opinion that Macedons were non Greek? Because it can "explain" a minor number of historical evidence. Can explain the above post of mine? NO. So it's a wrong theory, too.
Why I support the scholar opinion that Macedons were Greeks? Guess what. Because it can explain ALL ANCIENT EVIDENCE.

Could u plz tell me then, why do u still insist claiming that the Macedons language might not be Greek?
Can u explain why Macedons said that they were speaking Greek? Why Hesiod said that? Why Hellanicus said that? Why they all insist that they were Greeks?
If u can not explain it, u prove that ur theory is wrong.

U can not claiming that this web site is an encyclopedia when u don't post the truth. When u post whatever u want.
So stop be stubborn and post the truth.
Is there any Admin out there that can explain me why the heck u have an article that can not "explain" all the historical evidence and u don't post ONLY the scholars opinion that can explain ALL the historical evidence?

Plz tell me,
MANOS]

Wiglaf, don't say bull**** (I comment ur post, not urself. The same thing that dab did to me and u said is not a personal attack). If u believe that their theory is true then support it. Explain the facts.
Just explain what ;lead them in their conclusion, that Macedons might not be Greek. I don't ask too much.
I think I have the right to know where did u based that that the specific scholars opinion that is written in the article are correct and the rest are wrong.
Why nowhere mentioned that Macedons speak Slavic? That is a scholar opinion, too.
They didn't even post 1... 1 single proof that could prove that my thesis is wrong. I did. I didn't post just 1. I post many. What else do u want?
MANOS]

I guess u can't.
Why don't u post the scholar opinion that Macedons were Chinese? Let me tell u. Because it can not "explain" any historical evidence.
Why do u post the scholar opinion that Macedons were non Greek? Because it can "explain" a minor number of historical evidence. Can explain the above post of mine? NO. So it's a wrong theory, too.
Why I support the scholar opinion that Macedons were Greeks? Guess what. Because it can explain ALL ANCIENT EVIDENCE.

Could u plz tell me then, why do u still insist claiming that the Macedons language might not be Greek?
Can u explain why Macedons said that they were speaking Greek? Why Hesiod said that? Why Hellanicus said that? Why they all insist that they were Greeks?
If u can not explain it, u prove that ur theory is wrong.

U can not claiming that this web site is an encyclopedia when u don't post the truth. When u post whatever u want.
So stop be stubborn and post the truth.
Is there any Admin out there that can explain me why the heck u have an article that can not "explain" all the historical evidence and u don't post ONLY the scholars opinion that can explain ALL the historical evidence?

Plz tell me,
MANOS

Wiglaf, don't say bull**** (I comment ur post, not urself. The same thing that dab did to me and u said is not a personal attack). If u believe that their theory is true then support it. Explain the facts.
Just explain what ;lead them in their conclusion, that Macedons might not be Greek. I don't ask too much.
I think I have the right to know where did u based that that the specific scholars opinion that is written in the article are correct and the rest are wrong.
Why nowhere mentioned that Macedons speak Slavic? That is a scholar opinion, too.
They didn't even post 1... 1 single proof that could prove that my thesis is wrong. I did. I didn't post just 1. I post many. What else do u want?
MANOS

Macedon article: "Macedon (or Macedonia from Greek Μακεδονία) in Classical Antiquity was the ancient
Greek
state of Macedonia"
Ancient Macedonian language article:

a Greek dialect mixed with Illyrian languages.
a Greek dialect mixed with Illyrian and the Thracian language.
a Greek dialect with a non-Indo-European substratal influence
an Illyrian dialect mixed with Greek
an independent Indo-European language close to Greek, Thracian and Phrygian languages.

Greek state, but it's possible to talk a non-Greek dialect.

Yeah... it make sense. :-P
MANOS

Come on Dab. Just one evidence proving me worng. Just one. MANOS

Where are u Decius? I want the evidence that u were talking about. Paste them here. Come on. MANOS

"Dbachmann (→"MANOS" - click to see why we think you are a n00b)"
"don't stop your AOLese spelling (yes, the "net language", not even leet, according to that article),"

The only reason that I'll answer u is because u called me noob.
The net-language as I called it, Wikipedia calls it Internet slang.

"Internet slang consists of slang that users of the Internet have developed and utilized. Many of its terms originated with the purpose of saving keystrokes, (for example, "u" for "you", "r" for "are", "4" for "for", etc.) "

Keep in mind that I didn't use difficult words. ;)
I would suggest u to read the article. U will have difficulties to communicate in the net, if u can't write and read the internet slang. ;)
MANOS

I've been communicating on the internet for 13 years now; that doesn't mean I have to sound like a 1337 h4XX0r ;) sigh, 'the crude truncations of the lower classes' [35] dab (ᛏ) 16:10, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

Voiced stop in Spartan Doric?

Latest comment: 18 years ago19 comments4 people in discussion

βερνώμεθα sounds suspiciously like it's from PIE *bher-, and suspiciously like φερνή (dowry), and it's Spartan Doric. :-))) Chronographos 10:40, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

Tomorrow, I will introduce you all to Eumenes of Cardia, before everyone here runs to the bank with this "ancient Macedonian was a Doric dialect" scenario. ---Alex 17:12, 21 August 2005 (UTC)

No, you won't. We all know who Ευμένης ο Καρδιανός was. We were taught about him in high school. Chronographos 21:13, 21 August 2005 (UTC)

Forget about what you learned in high school and read this:

"...intending to make their appearance have the most fearful impact upon the cavalry, they advanced in close order; and the troops behind them, those who were cavalry, began to fire javelins where the opportunity offered in order to throw back the cavalry charge by means of the continuity of their barrage. When Eumenes saw the close locked formation of the Macedonian phalanx at its minimum extension and the men themselves heartened to venture every hazard, he sent Xennias once more, a man whose speech was Macedonian, bidding him declare that he would not fight them frontally but follow them with his cavalry and units of light troops and bar them from provisions. [36]"

---from PSI XII 1284: a papyrus fragment discovered at Oxyrhynchus early in the 20th century. This suggests something more different than a Greek dialect, but of course others will see "nothing strange at all" in that quote, nor in the quote from Plutarch where Alexander switches from Greek to Macedonian to address his troops ("switching from Attic to Doric", sure he was). ---Alex 21:50, 21 August 2005 (UTC)

You don't seriously consider the passage(s) you quoted as news, do you?!? They have been debated ad nauseam by linguists and historians, and they actually prove nothing. As you may (or, most probably, may not) know, Alexander's army was a hodgepodge of Greeks, but some corps were exclusively Macedonian: the sarissa-carrying phalanx was one, the Hetairoi was another. There would be many reasons why the officer dispatched to deliver a crucial command in the heat and din of battle would be one of them. Such occurences were not rare. A notorious Athenian strategem involved some complicated nightly manoeuvres against the Spartans at close quarters: except the Athenians had somehow secured some Dorian allies whom they had shout erroneous commands in Doric. The Spartans were confused by the familiar voices in the darkness and fell right into the Athenians' hands. Herodotus details how the 12 Ionic cities of Asia Minor spoke 4 different Ionic dialects between themselves. Chronographos 22:40, 21 August 2005 (UTC) (BTW nobody said Macedonian was Doric. It was most probably Northwestern. Surely you know the difference .... - Sarcasm Alert! Sarcasm Alert!)

Yeah, yeah, I know Northwestern Greek is different from Doric, etc etc., I know no conclusive evidence exists either way, etc. etc., I know your counterarguments, especially when one considers the other evidences, are not convincing, etc. etc., but that is the state of the evidence as it is now, inconclusive. ---Alex 22:51, 21 August 2005 (UTC)

There is more evidences (sic) on the way, except that Dab is not around for too long these days and I never get the chance to discuss it with him. Chronographos 23:37, 21 August 2005 (UTC)

Go bite one, while you're at it. If the Pella katadesmos is Macedonian, then I see no notable reason for Plutarch to have mentioned a switch from one close dialect to another. No dramatic effect. Boring. ---Alex 23:48, 21 August 2005 (UTC)

That's a bad argument Decius. Besides the fact that Plutarch doesn't say "switched from Greek to Macedonia" but he says "spoke in Macedonic(?)" (ανεβόα μακεδονιστί), it's pretty naive to deny the importance of perfect intelligibility in certain situation. And what do you mean when you say that Attic was close to Doric? The difference between two dialects of the same language and two idioms of the same dialect, is that the intelligibility of the dialects comes with a significant factor of difficulty. I traslated μακεδονιστί into "Macedonic" instead of "Macedonian", because its termination -ιστί is oftenly used to describe many Greek dialects (δωριστί, αττικιστί ιωνιστί), so it might actually imply the contrary of what you're trying to prove. Miskin 00:37, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

Decius that's really old news, and not particularly different from Plutarch's (who by the way never mentions "he switched from Greek to Macedonian"). It could mean a different language but it could also mean a different dialect, so this reference alone doesn't serve as anything. What you have to have in mind is that Greeks would snobbishly almost never refer to a non-Greek speech by anything other than "barbaric", let alone by its individual name as you're suggesting. Even high-classed barbarians like the Romans against low-classed Greeks like Pyrrhus of Epirus didn't qualify as an exception to this stereotype (as Plutarch's homonymous work informs us). Miskin 23:44, 21 August 2005 (UTC)

Decius, being unfamiliar with the Greek language, should be forgiven for his comments. One has to read the original texts, inscriptions and literary works alike, in order to understand the sheer cruelty of mockery involved, not to mention the divergence of the various pronuncations. Here is a text from Thessaly:

"Θιός. Τύχαν Αγαθάν. Συνθείκα Βασαίδουν τεις έντεσσι τουν πετταρούν γενίουν και τας ταγάς κοιναντείνουν τεν πάντα χρόνεν και αυτείς και τάι γενιάι τάι ες τύτουν γινυμέναι, μα μα έστου ποδέξαστα ποτ ταν ισοτιμίαν μαδέμινα ..."

Being the haughty Athenian that I admittedly am, I just roared with laughter reading this gem! It sounds like modern-day Lar'saioi! Can you imagine some poor Thessalian hick from the sticks speaking like this in Athens? They would put a bucket of hay in front of his face to eat out of! Chronographos 00:20, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

Okay, your point is well-taken. "We must wait for further discoveries", etc. ---Alex 00:23, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

Furthermore, the "-ίζειν" infinitives were a well known reference to dialectical speech: "αττικίζειν", "βοιωτίζειν", "αιολίζειν", the famous "το λακωνίζειν εστί φιλοσοφείν" (Laconizing equals philosophising), "μακεδονίζειν", etc. "Μηδίζειν" on the other hand, did not mean "to speak Persian" - it meant entering in an alliance with the Great King: i.e. high treason Chronographos 00:37, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

I was watching Antenna news last night and couldn't for the life of me make heads or tails of what some of the Cypriot relatives of the plane crash victims were saying. Those simply speaking standard Greek with a Cypriot accent are fairly easy to understand, but those speaking pure Cypriot dialect are almost unintelligible to the uninitiated. If asked to describe their tongue, I would most definitely distinguish it from my speech by calling it Cypriot. But no one is suggesting it isn't Greek.--Theathenae 04:24, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

Ατε μαυροσιυλλοΐρευκε ζαοπεζεβενγκόσπορε, παμπακοβίλλη, που να ιδείς τον Χάρον τιτσίρον με τα μποξερούθκια να παίζει μούτσιον, άτε φύε νταμές γιατί έννα πιάσω την ταπουροκολλούαν τζιαί έννα έρτω που το σπίτι σου τζιαί έννα παίξω σου τες πομιλόρες, γ* τον σιίστον σου! (ΜΕΤΑΦΡΑΣΗ: Άντε μαυροσκυλογύρευε (γύρνα σαν το μαύρο σκυλί), γιέ του ζαβού (παλαβού) απατεώνα, μαλακοκαύλη, που να δεις το Χάρο γυμνό με τα σώβρακα να "αυτοικανοποιείται" (τι εικών!), άντε φύγε από 'δω γιατί θα αγοράσω την εντούρο (!) και θα έρθω στο σπίτι σου να σου πετάξω ντομάτες, γ* το αρωμουνίδιόν σου) :-ΡΡΡ Chronographos 11:17, 22 August 2005 (UTC) (BTW the speech of the Dodecanese, especially Rhodes, sounds halfway between Cypriot and standard "Helladic"/Athenian. Cypriots and Dodecanesians are the only Greeks who pronounce double consonants as such)

Τα μποξερούθκια του παμπακοβίλλη! :D--Theathenae 13:45, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

Tα οποία επίσης ονομάζουν "αρτσιομάντρι" (αρχιδο-μαντρί)! Chronographos 14:06, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

And to think Cypriot is only considered an idiom of standard Modern Greek and not a separate dialect like Tsakonian. Miskin 12:09, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

What often makes such local dialects difficult to understand is not so much the difference in pronunciation per se, but the non-standard "music" of the spoken phrase. A typical example is the speech of the Ionian Islands, where pronunciation is rather straightforward, but the different intonation of phrases and the inclusion of Venetian-derived words can render such speech tough to catch for an untrained "mainland" ear. It is unfortunate that such regional differences are being wiped out by television-induced uniformity. Indeed, when speaking a non-native language such as English or French, phrasing intonation is far more important for comprehension than proper phonemic pronunciation. Witness the way Dalida spoke and sang in French in her native, Italianate way. Chronographos 13:14, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

october 2005

Latest comment: 18 years ago48 comments8 people in discussion

WHAT HISTORY SAYS

It is a fact that before the time of Alexander "philhellene", the Macedonians were not viewed as Greek, no ancient authors have wrote as such until Herodotus, who in any case made reference only to the royal lineage of Macedonia and not the general population. It is important to note that all other ancient Greek historians followed Herodotus' lead in regards to the argive descent of the Macedonain kngs, no other sources of the time corroborate these version of events. The closest following was Thucydides, who almost 25 years younger, would almost certainly have had access to Herodotus' Histories. Thereafter, ancient authors begin to consider Macedonia within the sphere of Greece, however the native population of the lands and even their kings were, even until Roman times, considered semi-barbaric. There is the suggestion that the ancient Macedonian language was a mere dialect of Greek, however considering the lack of authentic words(and access to them) and contrary historical evidence, this theory is not very plausable. Historians make several remarks that indicate distinction between ancient Macedonian and the Greek language. For example, Thucydides, book 4, 109; "Brasidas, after the capture of Amphipolis, marched with his allies against the place called Acte. This is the jutting out headland, with the Kig of Persia's canal on the landward side, and with the high mountain of Athos at the end facing the Aegean sea. The cities in Acte are Sane, a colony of Andros, which is just by the canal on the sea facing towards Euboea, and also Thyssus, Cleone, Acrothoi, Olophyxus, and Dium - all these latter towns being inhabited by mixed foreign races, speaking both Greek and their own dialects. There is a small Chalcidian element, but the majority are Pelasgian, of the Tyrrhenian race that once lived in Lemnos and Athens, together with Bisaltians, Crestonians and Edonians." Penguin Classics

"Brasidas after the capture of Amphipolis marched with his allies against Acte, a promontory running out from the king's dike with an inward curve, and ending in Athos, a lofty mountain looking towards the Aegean sea. In it are various towns, Sane, an Andrian colony, close to the canal, and facing the sea in the direction of Euboea; the others being Thyssus, Cleone, Acrothoi, Olophyxus, and Dium, inhabited by mixed barbarian races speaking the two languages. There is also a small Chalcidian element; but the greater number are Tyrrheno-Pelasgians once settled in Lemnos and Athens, and Bisaltians, Crestonians, and Edonians." [37]

The texts above are in regards to near coastal areas and Hellenic colonies in Macedonia. Notice how it states that there are two languages spoken in the region, the barbaric language with its own dialects and the Greek. This is only in reference to the regions inhabited by both natives and Greek, the second language of Greek being imported along with the founding of new colonies. Further north the inhabitants would have been more ignorant of the Greek language. A clear distinction is thus made with this fragment, where a native language with its own dialects is assumed to exist alongside Greek. Evidence like this should not be ignored. Of the native inhabitants of Macedonia, Strabo writes; "Thracians, Illyrians, and Epirotæ are settled even at present on the sides of Greece. Formerly the territory they possessed was more extensive, although even now the barbarians possess a large part of the country, which, without dispute, is Greece. Macedonia is occupied by Thracians, as well as some parts of Thessaly; the country above Acarnania and Ætolia, by Thesproti, Cassopæi, Amphilochi, Molotti, and Athamanes, Epirotic tribes." VII, 7, 1. Making it absolutely clear that even during Stabo's lifetime, the Thracian living space extended further south than Macedonia. Of these barbaric tribes so often mentioned by the Greeks many would indeed have been linguistically related, as is demonstrated with the above text in regards to the natives of Macedonia and the Thracians. This text is also very revealing for it places the Epirote in the Thraco-Illyric category identified as barbarians. Thus the next quote supplements the "related barbarians" theory by demonstrating a linguistic and cultural connection between the Macedonians and the Epirote, Strabo; "They gave the name of Upper Macedonia to the country about Lyncestis, Pelagonia, Orestias, and Elimia. Later writers called it Macedonia the Free, and some extend the name of Macedonia to all the country as far as Corcyra, at the same time assigning as their reasons, the mode of cutting their hair, their language, the use of the chlamys, and similar things in which they resemble the Macedonians; some of them, however, speak two languages. On the dissolution of the Macedonian empire, they fell under the power of the Romans." VII, 7, 8.

Macedonia is of course, a part of Greece according to Strabo, however what Macedonia is he refering to? And in that same 'matter of fact' manner, he just as easily states that the Macedonians themselves are barbaric Thracians who are also linguistically relate to the barbaric Epirote. Curtius Rufus is even more exlicit in his detailed trial of Philotas, once again making it clear that the native language of Macedonia was not mutually comprehensible with Greek; "Philotas had ridiculed his countrymen, calling them Phrygians and Paphlagonians, this from a man who Macedonian born, is not ashamed to use an interpreter to listen to men who spoke his own language." Philotas speaks; "One charge made against me is that I disdain to communicate in my native language, that I have no respect for Macedonian customs. That native language of ours has long been rendered obselete through our dealings with other nations, and conquerers and conquered alike must learn a foreign tongue." This Curtius text is only as confusing as certain neo-Hellenes try to make it, reading objectively it demonstrates a definite existence of a native language other than Greek in Macedonia. The neo-Hellenic claim of Philotas learning Persian and forgetting his native Greek(as opposed to Macedonian) is an absurd claim, for how can the base-language of the future 'Koine' be "rendered obselete"?

Even Isocrates, in regards to the apparent argive descent of Phillip II, states; "For they endeavored to win this honor by engendering factions, disorder, and bloodshed in their own cities; he, on the other hand, held entirely aloof from Hellenic territory, and set his heart upon occupying the throne of Macedon. For he knew full well that the Hellenes were not accustomed to submit to the rule of one man, while the other races were incapable of ordering their lives without the control of some such power." 107.

Macedonia, entirely aloof from Hellenic territory and their inhabitants who are of a non-kindred race to the Greeks. If Wikipedia is to live up to its claim of neutrality, then evidence of the type above must be considered in the equation. All statements I have made contain a source, they should be given due respect for they are precise and credible. The natives of Macedonia were a people related to the Thraco-Illyrians, cultural similarities with their Greek neighbours is a formality given the geographic location of the region. Hesiod states that Deukalion had two daughters who bore two children each with Zeus. Pandora bore Graecus and Latin, Thyia bore Magnes and Makedon. Mythology is not ethnology, for if it was the Italians are blood-brothers to the Greeks. It must be asked, if Graecus is not upset that his brother Latin speaks a language different to him, why does it bother him if his cousin Makedon speaks different also?

"Aetolians, Acarnanians, Macedonians, men of the same speech" Livy, 31, 29. I showed above of the usage of more than one language in the Balkans, the native and the more popular(due to trade and admin) Greek, as today we have people here from various native & linguistic backgrounds however we are united by our dialogue in the English language so thus it is fair to say, in comparison to the quote from Livy, "we have Macedonians, Greeks, Romanians, Germans, men of the same speech". If the internet had existed back then, we would all be writing in Greek instead of English due to it's wide spread use, however surely that would not make us all Greek, as it does not make us all English now.

"When you see the Greeks walking about amongst the Macedonians, do they not look to you like demi-gods amongst so many wild beasts? --- Alexander III, Plutarch, Alexander, 51."

Well Alexander, my Macedonian king, I don't know if they look like demi-gods compared to us Macedonians, but they certainly behave as such, even till today.Soldier of Macedon 03:01, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

Go to Herodotus check book 5, and also read works of Strabo and Isocrates regarding Macedon. +MATIA ☎ 09:27, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

Matia, I am well aware of the texts of Herodotus, Strabo and Isocrates, I do not recall any one of them stating the Macedonians are a Greek tribe. We both have our views on the matter, however the ancient quotes I cited above make it quite clear that the native population of Macedonia was akin to the Thraco-Illyric tribes, in language and culture. Strabo's work is called "geography", not "ethnography", what he considered Greece was, as he stated "anciently, a settlement of barbarians" who still "posses a large part of the country", VII, 7, 1. Strabo's Greece does not have a mono-ethnic element, besides that, there is much evidence that cannot and should not be ignored. As an on-line Encyclopedia, Wikipedia is viewed by many therefore people should have knowledge of all the facts, not just the one's that suit the individuals agenda. The particular issue at hand here is the ancient Macedonian language, and it is clear judging by the words of the ancients above that the native Macedonian language was not Greek. Soldier of Macedon 10:02, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

Soldier of Macedon, you are entering a battle ground here on Wikipedia, but you username suggests that you are prepared for it :). Note that this issue is not only about facts, it is also about people's national feelings, and even if you are 100% right (which I personally believe), people are going to question your stance. You are very welcome to edit here, but pay attention to the principle of NPOV.--Wiglaf 10:21, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

You claim that ancient Macedonian language was not Greek but you don't prove it by misinterpreting Isocrates which you claim to be aware of. And since you are "well aware of" Strabo you know that he was a historian and geographer - even if only Geographica are saved today. +MATIA ☎ 10:33, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

Matia, I think this discussion would become much more pleasant if you tried to be more polite.--Wiglaf 11:16, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

I think you're the one being impolite here, Wiglaf.--Theathenae 11:25, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

If so I apologize. I'll stay out of this dispute from now on, and stop any misguided attempts to moderate this discussion.--Wiglaf 11:29, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

Wiglaf I've made some comment on Alexander the Great in the past about Isocrates but I refrained from entering these info in the article, along with Demosthenes, to make it NPOV. But I have read Isocrates and using only one quote from him, while ignoring many others regarding Macedon is misinterpretation of the facts. Besides that I don't understand where I was rude. +MATIA ☎ 11:42, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

And a correction: I've mentioned book 5 of Herodotus, but one could read his whole History, there are various refferences on Macedon. I still can't understand where I was impolite, I don't see WP as a battleground but I do find the word Soldier in the username provoking.+MATIA ☎ 11:51, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

http://www.maknews.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=398 http://www.maknews.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=477 Pozdrav Te1mak (comment by User:Te1mak at 12:01, 3 October 2005 (UTC))

Matia, it is always difficult to interprete old texts, and I only reacted against you bolding misinterprete. I have discussed the content of old chronicles too many times with users to believe that there is only one correct interpretation. As for the use of the word battle ground, it was not directed at you. I hope you have seen the edit history of this article :).--Wiglaf 12:18, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

If only you'd exhibited a concomitant degree of indignation vis-à-vis User:Soldier of Macedon's much more serious transgressions...--Theathenae 12:26, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

I did not perceive the name soldier as offensive. Note also that I asked Soldier of Macedon to respect the principle of NPOV.--Wiglaf 12:27, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

PS, in order to sort things out about the username, I have asked other admins to comment on the name.--Wiglaf 12:37, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

His militant username and tone, along with his use of bold text throughout, should have alerted you to his true intentions. A brand new user going by the username of User:Te1mak (a sockpuppet?) has just posted links to an internet forum where a Soldier of Macedon makes wild claims about a supposed connection between ancient Macedonian and the unrelated modern Slavic language spoken in what is now the FYROM. The vexed question of whether or not ancient Macedonian was a Greek language is an entirely separate issue, and is discussed at length in Ancient Macedonian language. What is certain, however, is that a link between it and the Slavic languages, other than their common membership of the huge and diverse Indo-European family of languages, has most definitely not been acknowledged by any serious scholar. Of course, this hasn't stopped Slav nationalists propagating their zany theories nonetheless.--Theathenae 12:47, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

I was not familiar with this information (the Slavic connection). However, I hope that you all can discuss this issue and try to be polite to each other.--Wiglaf 12:52, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

All will be fine as long as he keeps his baseless theories to the talk page and refrains from vandalising the article. :)--Theathenae 12:54, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

What did I just ask you :)? Please, just try not to call other people's edits vandalism and their theories baseless. The discussion will be much easier that way.--Wiglaf 12:56, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

I stand by my comment above.--Theathenae 13:04, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

OK, but note that I will observe the discussions, if there will be any, for possible personal attacks from either side. Since you want to do the discussion the rough way.--Wiglaf 13:11, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

Although there may be more than one interpretations on some ancient sources - I'm sure Wiglaf agrees that if we isolate one phrase and we do not see the whole source (for example everything by Herodotus on ancient Macedonia) our resulting interpretations may disagree with the original source. +MATIA ☎ 13:08, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

Sure, the context is extremely important for any interpretation (however, I have also seen people twist even the context to fit their arguments).--Wiglaf 13:11, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

That's exactly what I meant when I used the word misinterpetation. +MATIA ☎ 13:27, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

Firstly I would like to thank Wiglaf for welcoming me here, and thank the rest who have made it clear where we stand. If I have broken any rules it has not been intentional. My name is symbolic and sentimental, I have not came here to cause trouble, it is not meant to have a military connotation, I am a new-age Soldier of Macedon thus I battle with my knowledge and my witts, in a respectful manner I have came here to stress my points of view. Prior statements in forums are not relevant here and it is a lame attempt at defaming an individual, nor is this a forum but a place of knowledge thus I provide a source for all my comments, I should be judged on the texts I bring here to Wikipedia and not for other matters in which have been taken out of context. So far I have heard a whole storyline of accusations and unkind words from the Greeks here, but not one of them have been specific in what actually is wrong or misinterpreted in the texts and sources I provided? Or is it that my opinion seems to bother them more, and the fact that what I write seems to make the most sense. I have not made any wild accusations about anything on Wikipedia, I am treading carefully and trying to go by the rules and providing credible sources, but my opinion under no circumstances will be silenced if I believe it to be true. Everybody has their thoughts and theories, I will only bring forth those of which I believe are solid and can be verified, my opinion is in accordance with the texts, other beliefs are my own and the simple fact is that a clear modern relation to the ancient Macedonian language has not, as yet, been determined. I didn't know somebody would find bolded text offensive, I was simply trying to add emphasis on that particular section of the paragraph. Wiglaf it would be much appreciated if I was to be allowed to continue using my name, let me be judged by my actions and deeds, and not for my name which represents much in terms of my determination and passion for Macedonia and its history, for I too have national feelings. Soldier of Macedon 13:48, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

I asked other admins about your name, and it is no problem.--Wiglaf 14:12, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

My previous comments were exactly upon your usage of the sources. +MATIA ☎ 13:59, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

MATIA: my objections

In this subsection I'll clarify my previous objections. +MATIA ☎ 17:35, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

ancient macedonian language

Thank you Wiglaf, I respect your fairness. Matia, I have not taken a phrase out of the context of the paragpraph, I will ask again for you to be more specific before hurling accusations as such. With all the words written by Greeks here since my opening post, not one of them addressed what exactly is wrong with my texts and sources, and how is my opinion innacurate. I say enough of the bickering and lets get down to some scholarly discussion, a civil debate, if you want to prove me wrong then dispute my evidence with some of your own. I could care less if I am disliked by the majority so far, this is a discussion page on the ancient Macedonian language and our aim here is to discuss and attempt to determine certain facts in regards to it. Soldier of Macedon 14:36, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

Throughout this debate, I've stuck to my guns and maintained that the ancient Macedonians did not speak a Greek dialect. I see no reason to drop my guns, though I do see a reason to raise my gun and aim it at some people in this room. Soldier of Macedon has located some important quotes that I knew of but hadn't located, such as the Curtius Rufus passages. But let's all be careful on how we incorporate ancient passages into these articles. The importance of the passages from Strattis (used as evidence for the Greek-dialect argument), for example, have been blown out of proportion by various Wikipedians. I haven't seen scholars giving much weight to Strattis the Athenian Comic. Such exaggerated use of ancient passages borders on original research and can even become original research; for encyclopedia purposes, it would be much better to know what the published scholars have written about a given passage. ---Alex 17:22, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

epigrams and more info

If I remember correctly Philip II was the one who adopted Koine Greek, instead of his native XMK. Some scholars associate Ancient Macedonian Language with Aeolic Greek, as well as with Doric Greek.

One interesting study, are the two books of Ioannis Touratsogloy (Ιωάννης Τουρατσόγλου) "Epigrams in Macedonia" (επιγραφές στη Μακεδονία). They include linguistic analysis based on various ancient macedonian epigrams. +MATIA ☎ 17:31, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

Phillip the II adopted the Attic dialect which had not yet developed into the Koine of the Hellenistic era. Macedon was in a cultural rise with the expansion of the kingdom thus for administrative purposes the foremost Greek dialect was adopted, due to its wide-spread use in Hellenic colonies in the mediterrainean continents and its growing influence. With the increasing links between Macedon and Greece such as colonies and trade, and also the "philhellenic" tendencies of the Macedonian kings first initiated by Alexander "philhellene", it should not be that odd, considering Thracians also adopted Greek words, characters & figures for coin inscriptions. The question on the contrary is why, if ancient Macedonian was a Greek dialect, did Phillip II adopt another dialect of the same language? Assuming ancient Macedonian was not a Greek language, it was obviously not wide-spread although related amongst neighbouring kin tribes that were barbaric, it would not be a suitable language of administration for the empire Phillip was planning for. Why, if ancient Macedonians are Greek did they only adopt a Greek dialect in the era of Phillip II for there is no record of any other Greek dialect or language being used for administration in Macedonia prior? The first Macedonian king to come into close relations with influential Greek figures was Alexander "philhellene" and it is where we can date the earliest time Greek was used for anything in Macedonia, which was just coins at that time, the pella katadesmos suggests that there were Hellenes living in Macedonia which is something that I do not dispute for that time period. However there are Thracian inscriptions in the region close to the Rhodope that are from the Vth century bc, and historic proof that Thracians and related tribes lived in Macedonia longer than any Hellenes. Soldier of Macedon 14:17, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

ancient macedonian and slavic macedonian

As Wiglaf stated this issue is not only about facts, but also people's national feelings. I am a Macedonian and I believe that my language along with other Slavic language of the Balkans and to a lesser degree north of the Danube are related to the Thraco-Illyric languages, to what extent is in dispute tis the reason why I do not state it as a fact but rather a personal belief. It is very convenient for some to use the term "slavic" in a negative way for the word itself only spread out when christianity began to take hold of the Balkans and was not recorded in ancient times. However it would be naive to suggest there is no linguistic connection between the words I will provide below, we are here to freely discuss our views on the ancient Macedonian language and its aspects, thus if it is to be truly objective my opinion should be stated also. I believe that two language families were present in the Balkans, Greek with its own dialects and nations, and the Pelasgi who later became known as Thracians, Paeonians, Macedonians e.t.c. That is why I have provided comparisons of words from various "barbaric" tribes of the Balkans, and a comparison in other languages also. My sources are from the Wikipedia, Indo-European glossaries, if specifics are required for a particular word, feel free to ask.

1. VODI = modern Macedonian, (water(s)), VEDY = Macedonian, VEDU = Phrygian, NERO = Greek, AQUA = Latin.

2. ZEMJA = modern Macedonian, (ground, earth, land), ZEMELO = Phrygian, SEMELA = Thracian, HOMA, GJI = Greek, BOTE, FUND = Albanian.

3. EZERA = modern Macedonian, (lakes), OSERIATES = Illyrian, LIMNI = Greek, LIQEN = Albanian, LACUS = Latin.

4. KAL = modern Macedonian, (mud), CHALAS = Thracian, LASPI = Greek, LIMUS = Latin, BALTE = Albianian.

5. ZLATO = modern Macedonian, (gold), SALTAS = Thracian, HRISOS = Greek, AURUM, CHRYSOS = Latin, ARTE = Albanian.

6. DZVER = modern Macedonian, (beast, animal), ZVERI = Thraciam, ZOA = Greek, FERA, BESTIA = Latin, KAFSHE = Albanian.

7. BRAT = modern Macedonian, (brother), BRA = Illyrian, ADELFOS = Greek, FRATER = Latin, VELLA = Albanian.

8. JASIKA = modern Macedonian, (alder), ALIXA = Macedonian, KILTHRA = Greek

9. GOIDA = modern Macedonian, (livestock, pigs), GOTAN = Macedonian, HUN, HURUNI = Greek.

10. ZELEN(A) = modern Macedonian, (green, greenery), ZILMAS = Thracian, PRASINOS = Greek, GJELBER = Albanian, CAERULEUS = Latin.

The comparisons above do not seem to me like wild claims, on the contrary rather and there are more words which have a connection. I know there are other words as such that resemble Greek, my intention here is to determine the proximity of Slavonic and modern Macedonian in particular , not to claim direct descent. Soldier of Macedon 07:17, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

The comparisons above are nothing new. You may be (or may not be) familiar with the Indo-European language family, with the concept of common root-words, and with the concept of cognates. There are many cognates between Thracian and Slavic; a few cognates between ancient Macedonian and Slavic. There are many more cognates between ancient Macedonian and ancient Greek. A few cognates (as between ancient Macedonian and Slavic) do not indicate anything other than we are dealing with two Indo-European languages.

I can go in detail through your list, give the PIE roots, and cite other cognates, including ancient Greek ones you missed. Got anything else? ---Alex 17:32, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

You only list three cognates between ancient Macedonian and modern Macedonian: Bedu/Vodi; Alixa/Jasika; Gotan/Goida. The modern Macedonian forms are from the Proto-Slavic language, though they are cognate to the ancient Macedonian forms. Most of the other ones you list are Thracian, and here we have a big problem: even if ancient Macedonian and Thracian were part of the same Indo-European language-branch, Thracian was overall a Satem language, while ancient Macedonian was very Centum. So there is no good chance of seeing something like zelena (PIE *ghel-), zemja (PIE *(dh)ghem-), zlato (PIE *ghel-), or ezera (PIE *eghero-) in ancient Macedonian. For example, PIE *eghero- ("lake") in ancient Macedonian would have given rise to something like Akeron, and in ancient Greek we find Acheron. These are Ancient Macedonian sound-rules. I will go in detail through your list later, if the people are not convinced. ---Alex 17:59, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

It would be better to give only cognates when comparing the words. Example:

PIE *wed-, "water". Ancient Greek 'udôr (not modern Greek nero); Latin udus (not "aqua"); ancient Macedonian bedu (though this may well be a loan from a Thraco-Phrygian Orphic cult, see above); Phrygian bedu; Slavic Macedonian vodi (from common Slavonic).

PIE *bhrater-, "brother". Attic Greek phrater (a member of a phratra, e.g., a member of a brotherhood, a clan made up of kin; Doric Greek patra); Latin frater; English brother; Slavic Macedonian brat (from common Slavonic).

PIE *dhghem-, "earth". Ancient Greek chamai, Latin humus, Thracian Semele, Phrygian Zemelo, Slavic Macedonian zemja (from common Slavonic, etc.). The ancient Greek stem cham- meant "earth". PIE gh became ch (chi) in ancient Greek. In ancient Macedonian, it would probably have become a k sound. In the Satemized languages (Phrygian, Thracian, Proto-Slavic, etc.), it became a sibilant sound: z or s.

Even if ancient Macedonian was on the same Indo-European branch as Thracian (which I doubt, but I've considered that), the Centum-Satem isogloss cuts through them and separates them. More likely, ancient Macedonian was grouped with Greek, not Thracian, but you all can feel free to argue the opposite. ---Alex 22:07, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

Decius, I appreciate your approach towards my opinions. Considering the fact that not many authentic words of ancient Macedonian survive, how is it possible to determine wether it was satem or centum language judging by a handful of words? I am familiar with the indo-euro root words and languages, probably not as much as you, although the words I cited have a common proto-indo-euro origin they are nevertheless much closer to the modern Macedonian language than any of the other comparison languages, this must be of significance. I respect your opinion on the language groupings but I would still classify ancient Macedonian as a Thraco-Illyric language. Also there may be as yet more cognates between ancient Greek and ancient Macedonian however many of the words are from Hesychius, thus in a period where Latin and Greek would have influence on the native language. The only way is to review all of the ancient Macedonian words, currently the glossary on Wikipedia does not have all the words. Also Decius, this satem and centum distinction is also not clear-cut sometimes, for as it states on the Wikipedia page Illyrian is centum while Thracian is satem, yet many scholars group these together not only culturally but linguistically as well. By the way Decius, you stated that ancient Macedonian was very centum thus no chance of words such as "ezera, oseriates", however this word is Illyrian and so thus accordingly centum, why would it exist in Illyrian and not Macedonian? Alot of assumptions are made even by scholars, however when we have clear word matches as such they must be considered. I will post some more words later, at least you have an opinion and it is scholarly, unlike some others who embraced my presence here. Soldier of Macedon 04:41, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

There are often words in a given language that don't follow the expected Centum-Satem rule. There are a few Centum words known in Baltic and Slavic if I'm not mistaken, and there are some Satem words in ancient Greek (I think). Albanian has some Centum words, though it's classed as Satem. Phrygian is a bit of a mix of Centum and Satem. Illyrian is undetermined, but more scholars seem to think it was Centum. I haven't seen any legitimate scholars propose that ancient Macedonian was Satem. The examples consistently show Centum sounds. Your argument would have more to it if you found Satem examples in ancient Macedonian. I stand by my words: there is no good chance of seeing those Satem examples (mentioned above) in ancient Macedonian. I would say that ancient Macedonian was even "more Centum" than ancient Greek, though maybe Dbachmann might disagree with such a phrase as "more Centum", whatever that means. But when a Greek word has ch, and we see a Macedonian word with k in its place, I think you guys know what I'm talking about:

Ancient Macedonian kalithos, "wine" (<PIE *ghel-)

Ancient Greek chalis "pure wine" (<PIE *ghel-)

Thracian zelas, "wine" (<PIE ghel-)

Speaking of wine, I'll be back later. -----Alex 06:13, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

In the ancient Greek dialects there may have been differences to the extent of making it a little troubling for two not of the same to comprehend each other, however nevertheless they were still mutually understood. My belief of a broad language with many dialects in the Balkans other than ancient Greek stems from the historical evidence I initially posted, where a clear ethno-cultural and linguistic relation is made in regards to Macedonians, Thracians, Epirote and Illyrian. Thus I place them in the same group, influence over time is another matter, it could very well be that words such as "kalithos' is a loanword which was altered in time in accordance with the local language, the ancient writers place the native language of Macedonia with Thraco-Illyric & Epirote. Most is speculation on our part in regards to a modern connection due to the lack of authentic words. However if we consider ancient Macedonian to be in the same "Pelasgic" family as Thracian, Phrygian, Illyrian, Paeonian and other sub-tribes in the Balkans, and we compare the survivng words with the Balto-Slavic language family there would be much in terms of similarities and links, possibly more than in other family. You asked for more words, whats your take on these two Paeonian words and possible etymology in modern Macedonian;

BYLAZORA = BELA ZORA (white dawn)

DYSORUM = DISI (breath), stemming from DUKH or DUSA(soul), mentioned by Herodotus 'dysorum' is the name of a mountain, etymology linked via fresh mountain air, fresh breathing.

I think Balto-Slavic, Slavonic in particular deserves much more respect in regards to the ancient words of the Balkans. Soldier of Macedon 08:45, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

I do not know of any specialist in ancient Balkanic toponymy who accepts such an etymology for Bylazora or Dysoron (Lat. Dysorum). On the other hand, I read a recent work on Balkanic toponymy by a linguist (some guy named Paliga, I have the link) , and he did not mention any proposed etymology for Bylazora. Myself, I cannot accept such Slavic etymologies for those two examples unless a good case is made for them, beyond just outward appearance, which is very often deceiving.

Regarding the Proto-Slavic language, it, along with the Baltic languages, preserved many Indo-European roots, so many cognates will be found between Balto-Slavic and other Indo-European branches, including ancient Balkanic Indo-European branches. And as noted above, many cognates have been found (though some are speculative; most are established) between Balto-Slavic and Thracian, and because Thracian was a Satem language, the cognates often have similar forms.

However, again this can be deceiving. There are a few close cognates between Phrygian and Balto-Slavic (ex: Phrygian belte, "swamp"; Early Proto-Slavic *balta, "marsh" <PIE *bhel-, "to gleam"), but as we know from Phrygian inscriptions (including many complete sentences), Phrygian was definitely not close to Baltic or Slavic, but is somewhat close to Ancient Greek. I will probably quote some Phrygian sentences to demonstrate this to everybody.

Balto-Slavic is respected in the fields of ancient Balkanic linguistics, so no need to worry about that. It has supplied a number of cognates with Thracian (as pointed out several times above), but it has not supplied many notable cognates with Ancient Macedonian. For example, Proto-Slavic *zab (or *zob, not sure here) meaning "tooth", is cognate to Ancient Macedonian *kombos, "molar tooth" (attested in plural form kombous in Hesychius, according to Perseus Online). They are both from PIE *gembh-, "tooth", but the Slavic form is not a notable cognate. Ancient Greek gomphios, gomphos (also from PIE *gembh-) is much closer, and Tocharian A kam ("tooth") and Tocharian B keme ("tooth") are also closer than the Slavic, as well as showing the unvoicing of the velar stop (PIE *g ---> k). Slavic shows the expected satem-reflex (g--z), and a denasalization, unless I'm mistaken (from *zamb or *zomb to *zab, *zob).

As for whether kombous is actually Macedonian, well ... If Hesychius says it is, then I would say that kombous is almost certainly a Macedonian word, as it shows the unvoicing of the velar stop encountered in other Macedonian examples (kanadoi, klinotrochon, arkon, etc.). Alexander 007 05:25, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

ARGIVE DESCENT

The claim of apparent "argive" descent from Alexander "philhellene" has I am sure been published to death by the Greek here, who claim that Alexander thus must be Greek for Argos is in Hellas proper. This being the case, does that mean that the Spartans are not Greek, for Herodotus also states "The chiefs of the Dorians are really genuine Egyptians. -- book 6, 53". Another interesting paragraph of Herodotus is the following; "Men of Argos, king Xerxes speaks thus to you. We Persians deem that the Perses from whom we descend is the child of Perseus the son of Danae, and of Andromeda the daughter of Cepheus. Here by it would seem that we come of your stock and lineage. So then it neither benefits us to make war upon those of whom we spring, nor can it be right for you to fight on behalf of others, against us. -- Book 7, 150". If we follow the rule applied by Greeks in regards to Macedonians it would mean the Persians must be Greek also, Xerxes makes clear not only royal lineage but the whole Persian race is of Argive descent, we know for a fact the Persians were not Greek either. Many ancients believed in mutual ancestry and relations regardless of race, this should not be the basis of determining their nationality. Soldier of Macedon 14:45, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

Soldier of Macedon Herodotus in this chapter or fragment mention the Digression on the Spartan royal families. So mention diffrents argyments (Egyptians, Assyrians e.t.c.). This is the analysis of this:

Digression on the Spartan version of how they came to have two kings, and how one line came to have first place; other Greeks do not follow this (52). Hdt prefers the Greek version, which makes the Dorians Egyptians and traces their family back only as far as Perseus (53). A Persian version makes Perseus an Assyrian (54). The prerogatives of the Spartan kings in declaring war and leading the army (55-56). A survey of the civic and religious functions of the kings: extra food and wine, appointing proxenoi and Pythioi (official oracle getters); his judicial role limited to heiresses and public roads, and adoption; his extra vote (?) in the gerousia (57). How the Spartans mourn a king who has died, including a ten day no-business holiday (58). Any debts to a king expire on his death; this is the same in Persia (59). Inherited jobs in Sparta: herald, flutist, and cook (60). Origin of the feud between Demaratus and Cleomenes: how the bride of Ariston (an earlier king) became the loveliest woman in Sparta through the intervention of the goddess Helen. She had been married to his friend, but he tricked him into giving her up. She bore Demaratus; at first, Ariston suspected that the boy was not his, but later he changed his mind (61-63). Demaratus became king on Ariston's death. Cleomenes got Leutychides, who was of the Heraclid line, to challenge Demaratus' birthright by promising him the kingship. Leutychides hated Demaratus for stealing his wife-to-be by 'capture' (cf Plut Lyc 15). Formal impeachment procedures are begun, and Sparta appeals to the oracle at Delphi; but Cleomenes fixes the oracle, and Demaratus is deposed (64-66). The deposed Demaratus questions his mother about his birth; she claims to have been raped by a local hero in the guise of Ariston, and also points out that he (Demaratus) was born prematurely (67-69). How Demaratus fled from Sparta to Asia and was royally treated by Darius (70). Leutychides became king; his son died young, but his grandson Archidamos was to succeed him (71). Later, Leutychides was convicted of bribery (while attacking Thessaly in the 470s) and banished (72). So Leutychides and Cleomenes in 491 BC went to Aigina, seized 10 leading citizens, and delivered them to the Athenians as punishment for Aigina's having given earth and water to Darius' heralds (73). Supporters of Demaratus then accused Cleomenes, who was banished; he went to Arcadia and tried to ally the Arcadians against Sparta; in fear, the Spartans took him back, but he then went crazy and committed suicide. This was divine punishment, but there is dispute over which impiety Cleomenes was being punished for (74-5). The Argives say that he had violated Argive suppliants during a Spartan invasion of Argos, the story of which is told at length (76-83). First, Cleomenes was prevented from crossing the Erasinus by bad omens and had to sail around to Tiryns (76). Relying on a riddling oracle, the Argive strategy was to follow the commands of the the Spartan crier themselves (77). Cleomenes used this to trick them into being busy eating while he attacked; many took refuge in a sacred grove (78). Cleomenes tricked some of these into coming out, then butchered them. He then burnt the grove (79-80). He whipped a priest who forebade him from sacrificing at Hera's shrine in Argos (81). He returned to Sparta and was accused of having been bribed, but successfully defended himself with a story of a bad omen at Hera's temple (82). How the native slaves then took over Argos, but were finally put down again in 468 BC (83). But the Spartans claim that Cleomenes went crazy from the strong wine which the Scythians taught him to drink, when they came to Sparta proposing a joint attack on Persia (84). With Cleomenes dead, the Aiginetans come to Sparta to demand justice; Leutychides is handed over to them, and they decide to take him to Athens and demand the release of the Aiginetans held there (85). Finding the Athenians reluctant, Leutychides tell the story of the Spartan Glaucus to illustrate that the breakers of oaths are punished by the gods (86). Still Athens refuses, so the Aiginetans ambush a religious procession en route to Sunium by ship and take prisoners (87). Nicodromus, an Aiginetan malcontent, agrees to help Athens get revenge (88). By agreement, Nicodromus seizes the acropolis of Aigina; but the Athenians arrive a day late, since they have to borrow 20 extra warships from the Corinthians. Nicodromus escapes with his men and is settled at Sunium (89-90). One of Nicodromus' partisans, about to be executed together with 700 of his fellows, takes refuge at Demeter's temple and is forcibly removed; a curse on the Aiginetan oligarchs culminates in their expulsion in 431 BC (91). War between Athens and Aigina; Argos refuses to aid Aigina this time, because Cleomenes had used Aiginetan ships for a raid in the Argolid; but 1000 Argive volunteers do help. Hdt seems unclear about who won. (92-93).

In the book 7-150,151(Reactions of the Greeks to Xerxes Invasion) Herodotus describe an another version of the Argive rôle: some say Argos had a prior mutual non-aggression pact with Xerxes on the basis of shared ancestry through Perseus & Andromeda. Evidence for this on the authority of Callias the Athenian.

Just as historic Herodotus describe all the versions of that era. Last as of the Dorians specially the Macedonias the first written record of the Greek legend about the Macedonian Argaeads we may regard Aeschylus' lines in the play "The Suppliants," where the poet introduces Pelasgus, king of Argos, common ancestor of the Doric branch of Greeks, boasting that his race rules as far as the pure waters of the Strymon .On the basis of the age-long legend handed down by the Greeks from prehistorical times, Aeschylus indirectly proclaims the descent of the Macedonians from the Doric branch and directly tells us about their origin from the Argive Heracleids, as those who ruled "the land of the Perrhaibians," "beyond Pindus," "near the Paeonians," "in the Dodona mountains" and "all the territory through which the pure Strymon flows."( Aesch. Suppl. 250 ff. )

Best Regards [38]Akritas

Well, well, if it isn't my old friend Akritas, the fact is common lineage can be traced by many nations, if it is irrelevant that the Persian race claims descent from Argos, then why would it be any more relevant in regards to the apparent argive descent of the Macedonian kings, after all we are talking of a whole race compared to a royal lineage? And for that Aeshylus fragment, it states Pelasgus, king of Argos, of the Pelasgic race. It does not indirectly or directly say anything about Dorian descent, Argive Heracleads or Macedonia itself, check http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0016;query=card%3D%2326;layout=;loc=207. The lands which are mentioned are Thracian lands by descent, all the region of which the pure Strymon flows is Thracian living space. Thus a Pelasgic king was still ruler of ancient Pelasgia(now called hellas), Pelasgi lived at Strymon and Pindus, Hellenes further south, there is nothing homogenous about the kingdom at hand. Your claim to the Argead dynasty is weak, I don't remember Herodotus mentioning king Pelasgus of Macedonian Argead Heracleids. By the way, that river "Strymon" has terminology in modern Macedonian, which is "Stryi" and/or "Strymi" meaning "to flow, to circulate", from where we get the modern Macedonian word for electricity which is "Stryja". Soldier of Macedon 01:39, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

In the Macedon article it writes a statement from Nicholas Hammond, where it mentions the "greek" tribal name of orestai which means "mountain men". It is highly likely that this word is connected to the Phrygian oru and modern Macedonian word gore, which mean "up, high, mountain, ie. montenegro, Crna Gora", and is thus in accordance with Hammonds definition. What puzzles me is Hammond's confidence in passing the word over as Greek, without explaining why. The modern Greek words for "up, high" are ipsi and apano, thus leading to the assumption that the word orestai is pre-Hellenic and very much Pelasgic, thus naturally fitting for a Macedonian tribal name. A question for the administrators, can we, in the name of fair play, get a couple of modern Macedonian cognates for the ancient Macedonian sample glossary? As it stands presently not one is present and it seems as though there is an effort to intentionally avoid them, however this is not objective nor in the spirit of Wikipedia for there are genuine cognates that deserve a mention. Soldier of Macedon 07:16, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Soldier of Macedon, old buddy with the polite language

Hammond in his book mention the orestai as a Greek-speaking political non-Greek depended from the Eperotical tribe of Mollosians. And as source Hammond mentioned the Ecataios the Milissean. (Macedonian State, chapter III) Also Strabo in the book 7, VII, 8 mention the Orestai as other tribe, non-Greek of course Now Orestai name came from the greek word Oresi=Mountain, a word that use from the Greeks and in the present without the -si. In the ancient Greek grammar when we want the characterized the people that live in a specific region we add the –ai. The region called Orestis, Orestias=Mountain region. So in the question of Soldier of Macedon to the administrators please add and my opinion concerning the etymological term of Orestai.Akritas 14:21, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

According to Herodotus, three brothers descended from the Heracleid Temenos, who founded the Heracleid dynasty of Argos, namely Gauanes, Aeropus and Perdiccas, left Argos and went to Illyria, whence they reached Upper Macedonia and were employed as shepherds by the king of the small city of Lebaea. This monarch, warned by divine portents of the future glory destined for the youngest brother Perdiccas - the bread baked for him by the queen swelled to double its size - sent them away, giving them in mockery the sun which came through the chimney hole as their wages. Young Perdiccas circumscribed the space occupied by the sun with a knife and with symbolic gestures put it three times in his pockets, clearly meaning that he was taking possession of the region. The king, realizing rather late what the youth had implied, sent horsemen after the fugitives to slay them. But the three brothers succeeded in crossing a river, which immediately after miraculously flooded, so that it became impassable to the horsemen. In this fashion the Temenids of Argos were saved and settled near the so-called "Gardens of Midas" beside Mount Bermion, where Perdiccas, the youngest, became founder of the Macedonian kingdom's dynasty, with Aegae for its capital(Herod. Hist. VIII, 137-139). Now if we go in the region that renamed after the invasion of Dorians Macedonia(before called Emathia, according Strabo) Herodotus(Herod. Hist. I, 56). said: the Makednoi (Macedonians) who crossed Doris and moved to Peloponnesos were later called Dorians. Since the term Dorians is much more well known than the term Makednoi we shall also use it to identify the latter people in the discussion to follow. The Dorians who formed the Macedonian state came in contact with the local Pelasgic population whose size was much smaller than the one residing at the sea shores and the islands of Southern Greece. It is for this reason that German Historian K. Belloch considered the Macedonians the purest Greeks of any other part of Greece (Gr. Geschichte, I, 1a, p92). The Dorians(Makednoi) of Macedonia were larger in number than those who moved southwards. This is because those who moved southwards were reduced in number either due to attrition or to settlements in the areas they visited along their movement to Southern Greece. Such a place of permanent residence for some Makednoi(Dorians) was Doris. When these Dorians (known until then as Makednoi only) moved to Peloponnesos they became known there as Dorians (that is, the people [coming] from Doris).. Of course there are some people claim that Makedmoi is not Macedonians we have to think what era Herodotus had written his work and what was the initial name of that Dorian tribe. Akritas 14:22, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

I guess some things never change, your misinterpretation in particular. Ok, so according to you the word Oresi means "mountain" in Greek, can you provide a source for that claim? Is there any other context in which the word could have been used, for example to mean "up, high" as well as "mountain" like it does in modern Macedonian? Or should I treat this explanation of yours the same way I treated your third-rate effort in the explanation of Athena? By the way, I was asking for modern Macedonian cognates to the words present in the glossary and Hesychius, not to introduce orestai into it, but then again you are Akritas, the person who possibly tried to dirty up my name by providing a link here to the Maknews forum perhaps... But it's ok for you see all in all my posts are comrehensive, backed-up and make sense, whereas you spent 90% of your effort there disputing the particular letter of a particular word, so please let slip if I do not take you seriously, which I cannot after your perfomance there. Speaking of which I will not get into the same Herodotus argument with you, I have been through this over and over again, if you are not able to understand sentences it is your problem. Just read this; For in the days of king Deucalion it inhabited the land of Phthia, then the country called Histiaean, under Ossa and Olympus, in the time of Dorus son of Hellen; driven from this Histiaean country by the Cadmeans, it settled about Pindus in the territory called Macedonian; from there again it migrated to Dryopia, and at last came from Dryopia into the Peloponnese, where it took the name of Dorian. http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0126&layout=&loc=1.56.0 If you cannot understand that the Dorian settlement was brief before they again migrated, that is your problem, nowhere in the above statement does it mention the Macedonians are of Doric or Hellenic origin, the fact that people like you continue to persist in something that does not exist is why I will very seldom respond to your posts. So keep chasing that tail, tis obvious you are still playing the same game.Soldier of Macedon 02:16, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

Soldier you repeat again the same thinks when someone tell you the etymological meaning of the word in Ancient or modern Greek . Oresi or Orese (όρεση) is a common ancient term that you find in the plenty of ancient Greek texts. The same goes and for the Orestai tribe. http://ancienthistory.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?zi=1/XJ&sdn=ancienthistory&zu=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.perseus.tufts.edu%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmorphindex%3Flang%3DGreek%26corpus%3D2.0%26display%3DLatin%2Btransliteration

in the above link you will find a lot of usings words of the term mountain in Ancient Greek Lexicon and of course the Orestias, or the single form of the oresi=mountains , OROS=MOUNTAIN. .Akritas 14:23, 11 October 2005 (UTC) Now who is right for the Herodotus text leave the reading people to judge. Original in the Ancient Greek lanquage LVI. toutoisi elthousi toisi epesi ho Kroisos pollon ti malista pantôn hêsthê, elpizôn hêmionon oudama ant' andros basileusein Mêdôn, oud' ôn autos oude hoi ex autou pausesthai kote tês archês. meta de tauta ephrontize historeôn tous an Hellênôn dunatôtatous eontas prosktêsaito philous, [2] historeôn de heuriske Lakedaimonious kai Athênaious proechontas tous men tou Dôrikou geneos tous de tou Iônikou. tauta gar ên ta prokekrimena, eonta to archaion to men Pelasgikon to de Hellênikon ethnos. kai to men oudamêi kô exechôrêse, to de poluplanêton karta. [3] epi men gar Deukaliônos basileos oikee gên tên Phthiôtin, epi de Dôrou tou Hellênos tên hupo tên Ossan te kai ton Olumpon chôrên, kaleomenên de Histiaiôtin: ek de tês Histiaiôtidos hôs exanestê hupo Kadmeiôn*, oikee en Pindôi* Makednon kaleomenon: entheuten de autis es tên Druopida* metebê kai ek tês Druopidos houtô es Peloponnêson elthon Dôrikon eklêthê.

Translations from the Loeb Libraries 56. By these lines when they came to him Croesus was pleased more than by all the rest, for he supposed that a mule would never be ruler of the Medes instead of a man, and accordingly that he himself and his heirs would never cease from their rule. Then after this he gave thought to inquire which people of the Hellenes he should esteem the most powerful and gain over to himself as friends. And inquiring he found that the Lacedemonians and the Athenians had the pre-eminence, the first of the Dorian and the others of the Ionian race. For these were the most eminent races in ancient time, the second being a Pelasgian and the first a Hellenic race: and the one never migrated from its place in any direction, while the other was very exceedingly given to wanderings; for in the reign of Deucalion this race dwelt in Pthiotis, and in the time of Doros the son of Hellen in the land lying below Ossa and Olympos, which is called Histiaiotis; and when it was driven from Histiaiotis by the sons of Cadmos, it dwelt in Pindos and was called Makednian; and thence it moved afterwards to Dryopis, and from Dryopis it came finally to Peloponnesus, and began to be called Dorian .Akritas 14:23, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

Please limit discussion to linguistics

Latest comment: 18 years ago5 comments3 people in discussion

The above are off-topic, the "Soldier"'s folksy hearsay stuff especially so. Chronographos 09:09, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

You are right, this is off the topic, funny how you direct your comment to me and not your co-national. I've also seen some of your off the topic posts, real intelligent, you seem to enjoy hurling insults from your high horse, must be hard to act like you know all but really know jack. Wikipedia is a neutral place, in this topic there are many who argue on behalf of the Greek cause, I represent the view of the modern Macedonians which obviously doesn't sit well with a "philoslav" like you. You should clear your mind of this ignorance, it will be easier for you when you finally realize the Macedonians were not and are not Greek. Practice what you preach.... Soldier of Macedon 13:53, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

Your grasp of history (and linguistics) is rather rudimentary, which makes your esteemed opinion rather immaterial. Chronographos 15:33, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

On the contrary, your "grasp" according to the things i've seen posted by you consist of nothing more than worthless chat and nonsense rather than any valid scholarly thesis. The fact that you hold yourself up on a pedestal yet you've no answers to dispute my "grasp" of history shows just how much of a "grasp" you have yourself. To quote another on Wikipedia in the same response he gave you, "i've got something for you to grasp". By the way, didn't you state to stick to the topic or is this bickering all you are here for? Practice what you preach.Soldier of Macedon 16:54, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

All talk and no play makes Jack a dull boy. You still haven't answered Herodotus' accounts on the Dorian origin of Macedonians, nor the constant Macedonian claims that take pride on being Greek, nor any of the hundreds of ancient quotes that have been discussed in here again and again. Whether Macedonians or not were Greek is a different story. What we know for sure is that the Macedonian royal family was most certainly Greek, participated in the Olympics and took pride for it. The Macedonian people spoke a "Hellenic" language and fought for a King that called himself and his people Greek (rare for a pride barbarian nation). Furthermore we know that Macedonians were completely assimilated into the Greek population some 8000 before your Slavic ancestors set foot in the Balkans. Take a look where Pella is in a map: in the heart of Northern Greece. Macedonians today ARE Greek, and Macedon is Northern Greece. The fact that some Bulgarian nation identifies itself as Macedonian (because a Serbo-Croat dictator chose to do so) is a different story. Every sane person knows that FYROM is urelated to the ancient Macedon region and people, but its ex-commie regime has brainwashed the public. For that and the other obvious reasons, any person of basic historical knowledge knows that your Slavic-Macedonian linguistic connection is a bunch of sad nationalist monkey-crap. It's also the reason I haven't even bothered to reply to your ludicrous edits during all this time. I can always find some time to waste, but all things have its limits. Miskin 09:29, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

Words of interest..........

Latest comment: 18 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

The sample glossary for ancient Macedonian consists of a few words which are not present in the Hesychius words list that Dab provided some time back. The words which I cannot find a source for are amale, argella, baskioi, kanadoi and kombous. Also for "intestines" it is written above as gola rather than goda making it unclear which is correct, If anybody can help out here it would be appreciated. Soldier of Macedon 14:35, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

Soldier please can you define english meaning, chronology and the type of the script of the ancient Macedonian glossary that you use?Akritas 17:21, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

Other Cognates

Latest comment: 18 years ago18 comments3 people in discussion

Soldier, if you want to go back through your notes and present on this talk page what you believe are the best cognates between Slavic and Ancient Macedonian, that would help. After presenting them, they will be reviewed. Those that are notable cognates (see below) may well be listed.

When dealing with these cognates, it's not a matter of NPOV so much as making sure a given cognate is actually a cognate (here, authoritative references are a must), and if it is a cognate, whether it is close enough or unique enough to merit being listed (this will be determined by making a comparison of known cognates). Anyway, listing cognates that are very different from the Macedonian complements will only serve to undermine any theory of Slavic being close to ancient Macedonian.

I don't know of many notable cognates between common Slavic and Ancient Macedonian. As the Phrygian example proves (discussed above), a few cognates can be very deceiving. A body of very close cognates (as between Macedonian and Greek), however, suggests something more. Alexander 007 05:50, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

Finally, I'm asking any contributor here not to stray too much off-topic. The whole section above about "Argive descent" is irrelevant on this talk page, and it would be great if someone copy-pasted it to Talk:Macedon. Alexander 007 05:54, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

Nope. I haven't changed my position from the beginning (Greco-Macedonian hypothesis), nor has any evidence besides the questionable Pella katadesmos surfaced against it. Your participation here is as it is on most talk pages---bla bla bla. This ancient language interests me, and I will be here whether some one likes it or not. Alexander 007 09:43, 3 November 2005 (UTC) (oh wait, I think Macedonians (ethnic group) has something to do with your rancor... but that was an unavoidable occurance, darling, because of Wikipedia's policy)

Wasn't civilization built on blah, blah, blah? Your variety of usernames makes you hard to recognise... You speak of being faithful on your "position" as if we talking about football clubs. So, are you actually willing to even consider the Slavic language connection to Ancient Macedonian? You have definitely changed your position on that one. Miskin 09:59, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

Miskin, I am not considering any connection between Slavic and Ancient Macedonian besides them both being part of the Indo-European language family. But I'm trying to discuss this in a scientific, logical manner, so that Soldier and other people who share his ideas may even come to reject their previous theories. If I come here like some big chauvinist anti-Slavic jerk and say "Soldier, your theory is idiotic and there is not a shred of evidence for it", I will not be acheiving the desired effect, which is to reach people's reason (and by the way, Soldier, I do not think your ideas are idiotic, they are simply unfounded). You have your methods Miskin, and I have mine. Alexander 007 10:04, 3 November 2005 (UTC) (and this is not just about Soldier, it's about 1 million or so people who may share his views)

Well after having witnessed hoaxes such as the "Phrygian inscription" and the "genetics reseaserch" (and the list goes on), I consider my methods well justified. The hoaxes will never stop and I don't have the energy nor the time to deal with every single one of them (which doesn't mean that I haven't repeatedly done it in the past). I choose to regard various of those hoaxes directly as idiotic, if for any good reason, because the opposite would encourage them to come up with something new. I trust that my general knowledge permits me to be 100% certain on whether an certain opinion is based on neutral scientific facts or idiotic nationalist myths. Miskin 10:29, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, I've seen how outrageous their stuff can get, and there is always a time to be no-bullshit about it. But Soldier when he first came here wanted to open a scholarly discussion. I decided to counter his idea in a scientific manner. He was trying to show that ancient Macedonian was closer to Slavic than to Greek, and I am picking apart this scenario (and as I said before, his scenario is unfounded: the evidence is to the contrary). But he was not saying (though he may believe this) that Ancient Macedonian was a Slavic language, which would have been idiotic (or maybe he did say that and I missed it). Of course, linguistics does not need me to counter such an idea which is not considered by any bonafide linguists anyway, but nobody was countering him on this Talk Page in an adequate manner. Alexander 007 10:44, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

Or perhaps we should check Ancient_Macedonian_language#External_links and update the wiki. One thing that might be missing (I've read it from Bambiniotis) is that many hellenic words (mostly military terms) were loans from Macedonian language and that happend during the hellenistic period (aka after Alexander III of Macedon). +MATIA ☎ 11:26, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

As a matter of fact, this should be discussed in the article itself. Ancient Macedonian (language or dialect) became extinct, but we haven't discussed (aside from some examples noted in the glossary) how words were passed on into koine Greek, then eventually Modern Greek. This is a legitimate topic to cover in the article. Alexander 007 11:43, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

Well in order to conclude, as Soldier states in his section "ancient macedonian and slavic macedonian", he basically supports that Slavic has existed in the Balkans since antiquity, either as a child or parent branch of Thraco-Illyrian. With all non-Slavomacedonian historians as my witnesses I regard this opinion directly as idiotic. And as himself he puts it, his claims are not based on facts but on nationalist beliefs (=myths): this issue is not only about facts, but also people's national feelings. I am a Macedonian and I believe that my language along with other Slavic language of the Balkans and to a lesser degree north of the Danube are related to the Thraco-Illyric languages, to what extent is in dispute tis the reason why I do not state it as a fact but rather a personal belief. Well in that respect I think I have the right to discard something that a self-conscious nationalist considers a "personal belief". I'm already aware of some Slavomacedonian books that claim direct connection between Slavic Macedonian (Bulgarian) and ancient Macedonian (Hellenic). I'm sure they all think they're being scholarly as well, but that does not oblige me to regard them as such. What those people intentionally ignore, is that their language artificially broke off Bulgarian after Tito's reforms at the end of WW2. The fact that it's not called Bulgarian today is for purely social reasons, not linguistic ones. All of the words he pasted as "Macedonian" can be found unchanged in other Slavic languages spoken in Northern Europe (e.g. Russian:VODI=Water). This fact alone suffices to nullify his claims. And for crying out loud, if there really was some remote connection between Slavs and the known ancient word, would we really be expecting the Macedonian Slav scholars to discover it? Slavic intellectuality has an unbroken history of some 1000 years while Russian literature has dominated the international scene in the modern era, would the rest of the Slavs expect a 15-year old country with an artificial language and nationality to make new discoveries on the origins of the Slavic language?? That in my book is regarded as extremism not worthy of any attention. Miskin 11:44, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

After my last post on October 4th or October 5th, and after I read his response, I was considering ignoring him altogether. It wasn't until today, about a month later, that I decided to continue and counter his ideas a bit more. Sometimes silence can be interpreted as not having a response, and I want people who read this talk page (including Slavic Macedonians) to see such ideas refuted with linguistic facts, rather than personal attacks. Alexander 007 11:57, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

There were and there are some linguists who propose that ancient Macedonian may be affiliated with Thracian (though Illyrian is preferred more). Now, I have not seen any strong evidence of this. But the reasoning that Soldier apparently had was "Thracian has many cognates with Balto-Slavic; if ancient Macedonian was affiliated with Thracian, then perhaps ancient Macedonian was closer to the Slavic branch than to Greek"---I see this is as something worth addressing in a scientific manner. Though even if Macedonian was grouped with Thracian (despite one being centum and the other satem, which is a big problem for the theory), it still doesn't make much of a case, because some recent linguists propose that Thracian itself may have been grouped with Greek or Phrygian (and Phrygian is generally grouped adjacent to Greek). Alexander 007 12:13, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

Back in January of 2005, I came across a paper on the internet by an Italian linguist, Mario Alinei. Amazingly enough, Alinei put forth in this paper (published in 2003) the "hypothesis" that Thracian was a type of conservative Proto-Slavic language (see section 7.5.5 of his paper); Alinei also proposes that the Slavic invasion never happened, but that Slavs are native to various parts of Europe, including the Balkans (yes, he actually in 2003 wrote this). Alinei has no convincing evidence nor are his ideas catching hold, but... you see, there is actually a linguist out there who is only a few degrees away from Soldier. Again, I do see something worth confronting. Though I should point out Alinei from what I've seen does not include ancient Macedonian in his scheme. Alexander 007 12:32, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

You see Miskin, I have my undisclosed motives for what I do on many occasions. Hence, the 007 after my name. But unfortunately, you drove me to explain myself a little more than I needed to. It's alright though, because Alinei despite his Emeritus status is still in the fringe, and I have not seen him include ancient Macedonian in his hypothesis. Alexander 007 12:54, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

I hardly see it as "few degrees away" from a person who comes under the username "Soldier of Macedon". What we really have to consider is why haven't any other Slavic scholars emphasised such a possible connection, which as you said it yourself it might be a simple affiliation of IE languages. I'm sure that with some great deal of fantasy someone could find linguistic connections between Latin and Sanskrit. If Soldier's opinions were nothing but an innocent observation on the origins of the "Slavic language", then he wouldn't be labelling as "Macedonian" an group of words that can be found unchanged even in Russian. Even if the Slavo-Thraco-Illyrian connection did have a scientific basis, it still wouldn't back up any of Soldier's nationalist myths (connection between ancient Macedonians and Bulgarian Macedonians). The theory that "the Slavic invasion never happened" is not literal, and it's title is misleading. The Slav invasion did happen, and it's recorded in detail by Byzantine and other medieval historians, it's not based on an abstract reference like the Dorian invasion in Histories. The Southern Slavic linguistic group does undoubtly stem from that recorded Slavic invasion, which is independent to the fact that some Balto-Slavic populations might have had left traces in Thraco-Illyrian. If we take this phrase literally, it would be equally logical to state that the Bretons' migration in France never happened, because Celtic people had pre-existed in Gaul. In a caricature, Columbus never really went to America because the Vikings had most likely been there some centuries before him. I hope you can see where I'm coming from. Miskin 13:15, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

On the other hand I'm not sure whether proto-Slavic refers literally to the first Slavs or just the people who just preceeded the Slavs in the Balkans. What I want to point out is that whether or not the Thraco-Illyrian group has a connection to the ancestor of Slavic, it's completely irrelevant to the vocabulary that Soldier provided us with. Unless of course someone supports that the Russian and Polish languages adopted or inherited linguistic elements from the Thraco-Illyrian peoples and their neighbours. This is why Soldier's claims are out of context and no worthy of attention. For example the Indo-Aryan invasion did happen and groups of IE-speaking peoples did dominate great part of Asian populations, but if a nazi ever used this facts to prove the existence of a superior race (connected to a nation X), I wouldn't be willing to discuss. Miskin 13:23, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

Yes, I agree on many points, but if you read page 37 of Alinei's text, you will see that he states that Thracians=Slavs. I can quote him exactly if you want, but you can just read it. He also challenges a number of the pillars of the Slavic invasion scenarios. Again, I am not supporting anything that Soldier wrote (or that Alinei writes---I reject most of Alinei's theories), but there were elements of Soldier's text that I wanted to address, because they surface often, especially on the internet.

And yeah, I may have been overly-dramatic when I said "a few degrees away", but Alinei identifies Thracians with Slavs. The next step, of course, is to identify Macedonians with Thracians...Alexander 007 13:32, 3 November 2005 (UTC) (and I can just imagine how User:Macedonian will react when he finds Alinei's paper, though it is in the fringe)

To the USURPERS of history (aka "Macedonian"(sic)-Slavs) I think that history will judge you poorly. All I can say is that the Hebrews were right in their proverbs and I call to mind one such proverb that I think befits usurpurs of history (people of darkness). "Let us swallow them up alive as the grave, and whole, as those that go down into the pit" Proverbs (Mishle Shelomoh). : FYI. == Here are some external sources for the proofs that the ancient Macedonians were considered Greek, naturally. I suggest you learn HISTORY and not conform to pseudo-science (remember that Genetics paper in the journal published by some Spanish and Macedonian (sic) - slavonic nationals claiming the Macedonians as a separate ancient entity?). Well regarding such pseudo-science, the paper was published in an impact factor journal of just under 1.5 (meaning it's impact is akin to wiping one's bottom after relieving themselves). In addition, the paper is extremely flawed, considering it's implication is to say that Macedonian-slavs are different from Greeks... point taken, ofcourse they are... but purporting (by Slav nationals) that therefore the genes of the modern Macedonian(sic)-slavs means that they are the descendants of the ancient Macedonians. Where were those ancient genes obtained (Oh I know... they weren't as the researches DID NOT have access to ancient DNA from the ancient Macedonians so comparing Slavic Genes to Greek Genes is ofcourse going to be different). Ergo sum totali crappus!!! Hence, read these in ancient Hebrew... if you can and then see what the ancient Hebrews thought. Books: Daniel (chap.8, 1-22 chap.2 para.39 4-13, 26-28, 31, 38 chap. 7, 2-7) Isiaiah chap. 19, 20 chap. 19,23 Joel chap.3 v.6, Jeremy, Habacoum chap.2, v.5 and the books of the Maccabees (1st book chap. 1, v.1 & 10 chap. 6 v.2, II 8, 20 III 8). Shalom l'olam, Sanser ha-Maqdon ha-Yewani ve-Melekh Yewanim. Hovevei Le'Ziyyon!!!!!!!

The Hebrews were right about many things actually. No point in bringing up references from the Bible, the version of the Macedonian Orthodox Church has slightly "mistranslated" the above chapters (<- no joke). Even if he looks it up, he won't be able to find it. I wouldn't be surprised if he told us that the Macedonian Slavs are God's chosen people. Miskin 03:00, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

On Linguistics

Latest comment: 18 years ago7 comments3 people in discussion

May I also add in reference to Gora in Slavic.. it is related to Oros in Greek - it should be of no surprise that languages have common root words but in Ancient Macedonian the word was Orestai for the mountain people, not Goresti. The point to make is that Linguistics is hypothetical and very fallible... in deed at best one can draw any etymological relations beteween any indo-european language and say that they are related. Let us not forget that many Byzantine Greek words entered into Slavic and the language is inundated with Greek terms albeit changed to suit the etymology of Slavic (a lack of literacy records prior to the advent of Cyrillic) means that it is impossible to extrapolate what the pre-Slavic words were prior to that stage (yes yes it's all hypothetical people). At least with ancient Macedonian, the words that do survive were the peculiar words as such (local idioms being influenced by Pelasgian or Thracian or the Phrygian languages - mind you these are anatolian languages and as such share a very very close kinship to Greek). The remaining Macedonian language does survive, it is imbued in Koine Greek (after all Alexander commissioned the Koine Dialektos or Common Mode of Speech - he wouldn't commission something that is not COMMON to ALL the tribes of the Hellenic Kingdom he set out to create now would he and that includes Macedonian). Shalom l'olam ve-shalom l'Yewanim, Sanser ha'Maqdon ha'Yewani ve-Melekh Yewanim.

Shalom (and Salaam to the Arabs who read this). Slavic gora is not cognate to ancient Greek oros, or to Orestai. According to my references, oros and Orestai have not been traced to a PIE root. Slavic gora on the other hand goes back to PIE *gwer-, "mountain". PIE *gw- as a rule is represented by a b in ancient Greek, and a number of linguists think ancient Greek Boreas may derive from the same root as Slavic gora [39]. A curious thing is, that as Macedonian gotan may show (if it is from PIE *gwou-), PIE *gw- may have been at times represented by [g] in Macedonian. So Greek Boreas could conceivably have been Goreas in Macedonian, but this is a wild possibility, and it is irrelevant as far as the Slavic words are concerned, because it would just be a phonological coincidence. Alexander 007 02:34, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

To clarify a few things, Miskin wrote "And as himself he puts it, his claims are not based on facts but on nationalist beliefs (=myths): this issue is not only about facts, but also people's national feelings. I am a Macedonian and I believe that my language along with other Slavic language of the Balkans and to a lesser degree north of the Danube are related to the Thraco-Illyric languages, to what extent is in dispute tis the reason why I do not state it as a fact but rather a personal belief", that is in line with what Wiglaf was trying to imply in his response to my first post, Wiglaf wrote "Soldier of Macedon, you are entering a battle ground here on Wikipedia, but you username suggests that you are prepared for it :). Note that this issue is not only about facts, it is also about people's national feelings, and even if you are 100% right (which I personally believe), people are going to question your stance. You are very welcome to edit here, but pay attention to the principle of NPOV". Also Miskin you wrote "What those people intentionally ignore, is that their language artificially broke off Bulgarian after Tito's reforms at the end of WW2", thanks for clarifying your idiocy, at least now I know, for anybody who actually believes that is hiding from the truth, so keep telling yourself we are artificial if it makes you feel better, while you are at it you might want to take a look at what was written about Greece and its peoples/languages/religions at the time of independence, or wait a minute, you may be one of those Greeks that actually believes you are a direct descendant of Pericles. "And for crying out loud, if there really was some remote connection between Slavs and the known ancient word, would we really be expecting the Macedonian Slav scholars to discover it? Slavic intellectuality has an unbroken history of some 1000 years while Russian literature has dominated the international scene in the modern era, would the rest of the Slavs expect a 15-year old country with an artificial language and nationality to make new discoveries on the origins of the Slavic language?? That in my book is regarded as extremism not worthy of any attention" Miskin you have nothing to offer, and your insults are rather pathetic but expected from an idiot like you. Do you not see how your childish ignorance blinds you? So even if ethnic Macedonians did discover an authentic link between Slavic and ancient Macedonian, you would not take is as the truth? Of course not, because there is much that you avoid and will continue to do so. Historic opinions do change with the uncovering of evidences, and if you honestly believe that this is all straightforward and it can be nothing other than Greek, Greek, Greek, then you are sadly mistaken, or just plain sad. How long did they think the world was flat before they realised it wasn't? The truth will come out you leech, rest assured the Macedonian nation lives. As for the person who changes his name everyday, Alex or Decius or whatever, the one who deep down probably believes that Romanians are ancient Macedonians, you should have maintained your respect towards me as I did towards you. It amazes me how people such as yourself and that Miska have so much to say about the Slavonic peoples yet neither of you are Slavs. All these cognates yet they are all somehow discredited by you "scolars" or "professors", you were both talking about the bla, bla, bla factor, you two specialise in it. As for the Slavic scholars yet to claim descendency from the ancient Balkan tribes, they already exist, and as time goes by there will be much more, this theory will gain ground because geography and linguistics support it, two important aspects neither of you have a clue about. From my last post till this one, all I saw in between was just ranting, no decent discussion, just the same old waste, i've read posts from both of you here, I didn't expect much from you Miskin for you are after all a racist Greek, Decius, well birds of a feather... Soldier of Macedon 07:49, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

Romanians are not involved in this, and I don't drag them into this. Ancient Macedonians were mostly Hellenized, not Romanized. Romanians arrived to the Macedonian area around 500--900 AD. I'm not a racist. Nor do I have any big problem about your people calling themselves Macedonians, though I had my qualms about it. I credit myself in part, by the way, with having Macedonian Slavs moved to Macedonians (ethnic group), and I have links that show I greatly influenced this, since an administrator moved the page within 10 minutes of my "ultimatum". I just cannot seriously consider the idea of ancient Macedonian being close to Slavic in any notable degree. It's about linguistics, not genetics. Genetically, I'm probably as much a Slav as you are. As for names, I cannot change my name, though I can pull nice fantasy Latin names out of Latin dictionaries, then get tired of them. Alexander 007 03:04, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

Let it be noted Soldier wrote "all these cognates", but he has not cared to reorganize a list of them, so actual cognates can be evaluated according to linguistic references. Alexander 007 03:21, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

Soldier of Skopje says: Also Miskin you wrote "What those people intentionally ignore, is that their language artificially broke off Bulgarian after Tito's reforms at the end of WW2", thanks for clarifying your idiocy, at least now I know, for anybody who actually believes that is hiding from the truth Yeah I was wrong to say "intentionally". In your case, your ignorance is completely unintentional, you probably believe in every thing you say. Instead of trying to question the validity of the myths you're being fed with, you choose to simply believe that Greeks, Bulgarians and Serbians are "bad, bad, bad" and hate the Slavomacedonian nation as much as anything. Well, that's the easy way. Like I said earlier, your regime has even changed the Skopjan Bible in order to hide the truth, or what was considered dangerous to the propaganda you are fed with. Miskin 02:49, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Soldier of Skopje continues: while you are at it you might want to take a look at what was written about Greece and its peoples/languages/religions at the time of independence, or wait a minute, you may be one of those Greeks that actually believes you are a direct descendant of Pericles. The name you're looking for is Jakob Fallmerayer. There were others before you, who would have really liked to quote this man, but they were smart enough to realise how ridiculous it would make them sound, so they finally chose to create their own anti-Hellenic propaganda, which of course made then look even more ridiculous at the end. Apparently you're couple of levels below them, and the only reason you didn't quote him was because you were too ignorant to even know his name. Friendly advice: If you want to quote German nationalists, you might as well cut to the chase and get yourself a copy of Mein Kampf. What should concern you is how come nobody has never said anything about the so called "Slav Macedonian" nation earlier than the 20th century?? Maybe because people do not tend to talk about things that don't exist? Oh, but what do I know right? I'm only a stupid Greek... Oh and as for the relation between me and Pericles... I never really claimed to be anything to him, you see I'm not stupid enough to try to define my ethnic identity with imaginary genetics and similar banana-theories. Yet if there's one thing I know for certain, it's that I mathematically have more chances to be the direct ancestor of Odysseus, Pericles, Alexander and Aristotle put together, rather than you being remotely related to any of the Macedonians' Indian slaves. However, I do know a girl who hails from the Comnenus if that really interests you. Miskin 02:49, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

It amazes me how people such as yourself and that Miska have so much to say about the Slavonic peoples yet neither of you are Slavs. Hey, wake up and smell the roses: You are under an Hellenic name of Greek etymology (MAKEDON), you practically use a Greek alphabet (Cyrillic) and religion (Orthodoxy), and yet all you can do is hate and insult the Greeks. Why? Because you were told to. You see I'm not even mad at you, because I know it's not your fault, I just see you as a victim of a political situation. Miskin 02:49, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Next time

Latest comment: 18 years ago21 comments3 people in discussion

Next time a person comes by arguing for a theory of ancient Macedonian being closer to Slavic than Greek, it would be appreciated if such a person has linguistic references to back him up, as well as some more knowledge of the field. Vojnik was not even aware that Phrygian is an attested language, since he incorrectly included it as a language he expected to be close to Slavic. It is not. Alexander 007 05:13, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

Let it be noted Alex/Decius wrote "and after I read his response, I was considering ignoring him altogether", how very noble of you to reconsider, I am honoured. As for my knowledge, I am a Macedonian, a Balkan Slav with a very resourceful background when it comes to MY language. You made the move to "ethnic Macedonians", I commend you for that, but there was no reasn for you to initiate a slander towards me just because your pal Miskin couldn't get that stick out of his a....All of a sudden every Greek is a historian, only god knows what they'd be saying today had not the British "philhellenes" drawn up a nation for them. Also for the word "ore", as a person who has an interest in linguistics you should know that pronounciation varies according to the speaker, wether from a dialect or a different language altogether. Thus "ore" could also have been pronounced as "hore", thus leading to "gore", the "h" commonly replaced by a "g" or "k" or "ch". There is absolutely no doubt whatsoever that Slavonic "gore" stems from ancient "ore", many here spend more time discrediting a Slavonic link than proving your own.

Here is a list of Slavonic cognates for ancient Macedonian, some Greek cognates are mentioned but not all, just making it clear that they are not deliberatly excluded but used only where I see it as necessary. I am not denying a Hellenic influence in ancient Macedonian, but it is only an influence not an origin. And it is not only these word matches that we rely on, geography tells much of the story too, but that is for another time. Acording to "scholars" neither Illyrian nor ancient Macedonian can be safely concluded as "satem" or "centum" due to the lack of words, so much of the "assumptions" written here by people are just that, assumptions, so let us assume a different position. "Know your enemy and know yourself"-- Sun-tzu's The Art of War, you cannot assume we are wrong when you do not know us. Now you tell me if any are worthy of the list or not, I can see at least five that stand out in deserving a mention.

Ancient Macedonian

Ade, Adraia = upper air, open sky Arija = air

Agkalis = weight, sickle, arm Raka = arm Present in Greek in as "Agkalis" meaning "arm".

Akrounoi = boundary (stones) Krajina = borderland, boundary The word "Akro" meaning "edge, end" is present also in Greek, the modern Macedonian version is "Kraj". The word is worth mentioning for the suffix of "unoi" is similar to "ina" so thus a likely cognate. Another Slavonic alternative would be "Ukraine", which means the same thing.

Aliza, Alixa = alder Jasika = alder Elka = pine tree

Garkan = branch, stick Granka = branch

Gotan = pig(s) Goida = livestock, cattle, pigs

Danon = killer Davi = kill, supress This word is also present in Illyrian as "Daunus", Phrygian as "Davos" and in Greek as "Thanatos". Stemming from indo-european "Dhaw", from where also derives the English "Death".

Darron = gift, well thought out present Dar = gift, present This word is also present in Greek as "Doros".

Darullos = wood Drvo = wood, timber The Thracian word for "spear" is "Taru" which is also linked. Present in Greek as "Ksileia" or/and "Dokari", and ancient Greek as "Drus".

Dorax = spleen Dosada = spleen Also present in Bulgarian as "Dalak".

Izela = good luck Vesela = in good spirit, celebrant The word for "good, kind" in Phrygian is "Vaso" and in Illyrian "Ves", thus the reasoning for a likely etymological link.

Lakedama = salt-water with garlic Luk = garlic

Makisti = pestilence, annoyance, trouble Maki = torment, annoyance, troubles

Skoidos = appointed head of the judicial courts Sudo = the court, the case Sudija = the judge

Amale = gentle Malo = small, tiny Milo = dear, peaceful Present in modern Greek as "Hamale" or "Hapale".

Bere = to gather, bring Bere = gather, carry Also present in Greek as "Phere" and Phrygian as "Ber".

Grabion = sort of oak wood Dab = oak wood Also linked is the word "Kreveti" meaning "bed, couch" which is similar in Greek.

Hetairoi = comrade, fellow soldier Cheta = military company, group, squad Although not commonly used, the word "Chetar" could be used to refer to a single member of the "Cheta", however more common would be a "Komita" or "Vojnik". Present in modern Greek as "Heteroia" meaning "Company".

Kanadoi = jaws Kandzhi = claws In Greek "Gnathos" means jawbone.

Oresti = macedonian tribe, mountain dwellers Gore = up, mountain Present in Greek as "oros", in Phrygian as "Oru".

Pez = walk Pesh = walk, on foot

Prodromoi = scouter, pathfinder Pred = (in) front, ahead Drym = road, path, highway

Pudna = southern macedonian place-name, border region Budna = on alert, guard, watchful

Sarissa = lance, macedonian pike Zarinka, Zarica = to thrust or pierce into

Vedu = air Vozdu = air, breath

Soldier of Macedon 07:49, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

I see a number of cognates, but also many that are not cognates (as per linguistic references, not my opinion), and some that should be checked out. I'll go through the list completely eventually, starting now. Alexander 007 07:56, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

so, which five do "stand out" then? Can we have the reference claiming they are cognates, not just the list? Did it ever occur to you that non-Slavic words get loaned into Slavic? Did it ever occur to you that Slavic is Indo-European, and some cognates may still sound similar in Greek and in Slavic? "prodromos" is pure Greek, and you claim it for Slavic because of drym? That's really funny, because then you're just renaming "Indo-European" to "Slavic". The European Union, then, is really the "Slavic Union", isn't it? And Greeks are really "Greek Slavs"? We had people on history, claiming it was a Slavic word, because in "Macedonian", it is called historija. Since this is the sort of linguistic expertise we have to put up with on Wikipedia, you'll understand that we cannot chat with every person who dumps his opinion of "cognate" on the talkpage. Just the academic references, please. dab (ᛏ) 09:07, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

I took a long detour trying to find whether ancient Greek oros (mountain) is attested with an initial digamma, which would totally do away with any connection to gore (I indeed found this digamma form listed in my abbreviated Liddel and Scott's, p. 153; it is not shown with an asterisk so I will assume it is attested). Contemplating gotan I remembered some Romanian words, as well as a Bulgarian word. In Romanian, godin means 'little pig', as does godac and godânac (<Bg. godinak). Interesting "cognate", ancient Macedonian gotan and Romanian godin, but unlike Vojnik I will not jump to a conclusion. It's late in my time-zone, I'll probably continue tomorrow. By the way, drum ("road, path") is also found in Romanian, and its etymology is from Late Latin, in turn from Greek dromos. Alexander 007 09:37, 12 November 2005 (UTC) (I will do this systematically, don't worry, but this is on short notice)

are you sure about the woros? According to Pokorny, oros is from ornumi "rise, move" (*h₃er). Cognates would include rishi, arse, Irmin, Rhine, as well as Slavic reka "river". These are IE cognates, and the word isn't any less Greek because of them (meanings of "mountain, peak" are known from Greek, Germanic, Celtic and Indo-Aryan, not, as far as I can see, for Slavic, so the word is even pronouncedly un-Slavic). The comparison with gore is out of thin air and completely unfounded. Slavic gore is rather cognate to Greek deiros "hill", and maybe boreas. Just ask for sources, Alexander, you are wasting your time. It is pointless to discuss these things with people with no knowledge of the isoglosses separating Greek from Slavic, they will lump together all sorts of things just because they sound similar. dab (ᛏ) 10:09, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, my Scott & Liddel is a reproduction of a work from 1889. Pokorny seems more reliable. Just as well. Vojnik, you are good-intentioned and I apologize for the mean-spirited (indeed, evil; but not racist;) things I said, but linguistics is a science, and we have to go by the books. Nevertheless, I will go through your list eventually. Alexander 007 10:18, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

regarding drym, it's possibly a Greek loan in Slavic, I don't know. Nevertheless, drem was an IE root, and is attested in Slavic. Greek edramon "ran" etc. is possibly directly cognate to Slovenian drmati "shake" and other words; there was a semantic shift from running to shaking, compare English titter (< *di-dra-mi). Again, if there are Slavic words on drm-, that doesn't prove a closer relation, since they are inherited from IE anyway. If you want to prove Slavic elements in Paleo-Balkans languages, you'd need to concentrate on peculiarly Slavic, non-Greek sound-laws (some are listed on Balto-Slavic, e.g. ruki) -- good luck. dab (ᛏ) 12:14, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

I took that etymology of drum from here :[40]. This linguist is quoting established sources apparently. It's a basic vocab word in Ro., and unless I'm mistaken it's not found in East Slavic or West Slavic (?), possibly just in South Slavic, which reinforces the Vulgar Latin<Greek etymology. Alexander 007 12:29, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

sure, I believe you, and think it is very likely, especially since the meaning of the root changed to "shake" in Slavic. dab (ᛏ) 15:41, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

No problem Alex, apology accepted, as for the words, in your own time, I just wanted to post the words so people such as yourself and others can evaluate them and then let me know your opinion. You know what the ancient words mean, for the modern Macedonian words just attain a Macedonian-English dictionary, they will all be there. A scholars opinion on these words I do not have for scholars today are much like you Dab, they assume without investigating, none of them have even contemplated in giving Slavonic a chance, as if some tribe unknown till the 6th centruy just suddenly appeared occupying almost half of Europe, forgive me if I don't buy that story as you may. Yes I do know that some words may be Greek-loan words or have a common indo-euro origin, I am not claiming them all as Slavonic I was just giving the Slavonic/ancient equivalents. "Prodromos" may be a Greek/Latin word but it exists in Slavonic also via a variant, I was trying to demonstrate a relation but you immediately identified me with another who had posted words such as historija or what not. If you view my posts as the "dumping" of information then that is your prerogative, I call that state ignorance. Here are the five I believe stand out above the rest; Alixa, Garkan, Gotan, Makisti, Skoidos.Soldier of Macedon 06:15, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Gotan and goida may well be actual cognates, and it probably has the best chance of being listed once verified; but if listed, it will be listed alongside any close cognates found for that word (also, if listed, I would want to list it both in its contemporary and reconstructed Proto-Slavic form, since we are concerned with older forms). Garkan and granka is interesting, but has yet to be verified. Arija, which you listed earlier besides some ancient Macedonian words, is a lesson for you: it appears to be a loanword from Italian aria, which is from Latin āēra<āēr<ancient Greek aēr, "air". This ancient Greek word according to my reference probably derives from PIE *we-, "to blow". It is not only an Italian loan, but its etymology traces it back to a different root from the ancient Macedonian words, which go back to PIE *aidh-. Arija is found in numerous Slavic languages (such as Bosnian), and the Italian word has entered Romanian as arie and English as aria. I will at the end recap all of this into a list, paralleling yours. Alexander 007 02:15, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

I do not rule out the possibility that some ancient Macedonian words could have passed into early Macedonian, but that is a totally different thing from saying that ancient Macedonian was similar to Slavic. But again, one would need a bonafide linguistic source for any modern word claimed to be derived from ancient Macedonian. Alexander 007 02:31, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Getting back to granka, I realized that this word also exists in Romanian as creangă, "branch"; according to DEX Online, it is a loan from Bulgarian granka. Pokorny notes that it is found in Russian, and the fact that it's found in Russian, Romanian and Bulgarian and probably many other languages makes an ancient Macedonian origin not worth considering. Pokorny gives the root as PIE *gher-, "to stick out". It may be a cognate to the ancient Macedonian word, but I wouldn't get too excited about it, as cognates with similar forms and meanings are a well-known phenomenon. I wouldn't be opposed to listing common Slavic granka in the glossary next to ancient Macedonian garkan (I have it in my notes that it is an ancient Macedonian gloss) once the etymology of anc. Mac. garkan is checked. Alexander 007 05:13, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

I was looking in Pokorny under PIE *gwou-, and I didn't find goida (though I'm not saying it's not from that root, it probably is), but I did find ancient Greek boton, "a beast", found mostly in plural, meaning "grazing animals". Since gotan is also considered to probably be from *gwou-, I'm listing boton in the glossary as a cognate, going by references (I can't read German that well, so maybe somebody wants to double-check). By the way, what's Theathenae's source for abagna perhaps being a combination of abos and agnos? Just checking. Alexander 007 05:44, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Alex, for the word "granka", you say it is not worth mentioning due to so much languages using this word, but which languages are they? So far you have provided Bulgarian and Russian, both of which are Slavonic like modern Macedonian, and in Romanian via Bulgarian. Thus meaning it is essentially a Slav word, and is in accordance with my belief of a Slavonic link, unless it is found in other langauges. I see your point for "arija", I was aware that it is common, what about "makisti" and "skoidos"?

The fact that the word is probably common Slavic means I don't expect it to have entered Macedonian from ancient Macedonian, that's what I meant there. But as I stated below that I would agree to list it as a common Slavic (when I said found in other languages, I meant other Slavic languages, and possibly also Hungarian as a loan from Slavic; but it is a Slavic word) cognate, but only once we find what the references have to say about garkan. Makisti is from PIE *mak-, but I don't know about maki. The modern equivalent that you listed for skoidos doesn't look likely to me due to linguistic reasons, but I haven't checked it yet. Alexander 007 06:26, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

I can't find an etymology for skoidos (which was also an epithet for Dionysus), but a possibility that occured is PIE *skei-, "to separate, discern", but that's just a guess and what's needed are references. Makisti has many Greek cognates, and after considering the ancient Greek cognates (Doric makistos, Attic mekistos; makister, "long and tedious") the root looks pretty certain: PIE *mak-, "long, thin". The meaning change appears to have been "long", "tedious', "torturous". There should be a reference that verifies this, another etymology would surprise me. Alexander 007 06:56, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Maki I assume is equivalent to Serbian muka ("torment") (cf. M. zab, S. zub correspondance), which I assume is from Old Slavonic monka (from which comes Romanian muncǎ, "work"). If that's right, and the modern Macedonian maki derives from an older monka, then it's safe for me to assume no connection to ancient Macedonian makisti, which is cognate to Doric makistos. When dealing with Slavic words, one has to check their older forms in Slavonic before connecting them to even older forms.

I don't have a reference for this yet, but it's based on what I know of Slavic sound-changes. See Macedonian zab ("tooth", equivalent to Serbian zub) from Old Slavonic zonbu (zonb--zob--zab; compare to monk--mok--mak). Call it a guess. Alexander 007 09:33, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Found a reference [http://encyclopedia.jrank.org/PRE_PYR/PRIMARY.html . It is as I said. Alexander 007 12:44, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your help Alex, I'll check this out.Soldier of Macedon 00:36, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

You're welcome Soldier. The quest here is the quest for truth. May the truth be victorious. Alexander 007 00:39, 14 November 2005 (UTC)