Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license.
Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat.
We can research this topic together.
I know there are frequent inaccuracies here and the effect of centuries of propaganda is inevitable but depite that it is reasonably sound. I know there was no nation of ancient Greece. What there was was an ancient-Greek-speaking network of poleis streching all across the Mediterranean. It was vastly larger than modern Greece. So, it wasn't the same at all. Different species of animal. Not a nation. The nation of course is relatively recent. The U. of Copenhagen did a 10-year flag study of the polis, which need to be brought in. So, I'm saying the ideology here is somewhat behind the study. Needs to be brought up to date. Second, overbriefness has resulted in certain inaccuracies. This great plain of lower Macedonia the article begins with didn't exist. There was no plain there. It was the Thermaic Gulf plus wetlands. The states were all squeezed between it and the mountains. I'm working on this under ]. And finally, the article does not make clear that "Macedonian" meant different thing at different times. The original Macedonians were around Mt Olympus. So, there is more work here if anyone dares to risk it. Oh, one thing more. Beekes is a good linguist I am sure but he tends to be something of a wild man in some of his etymologies, as when he discovers the source of all the Etruscans in the Mediterranean hiding in a section of Anatolia about the size of a county. "The slim men" indeed. Why don't we name them after their hair-do? Highlanders is much more likely.] (])
I know there are frequent inaccuracies here and the effect of centuries of propaganda is inevitable but depite that it is reasonably sound. I know there was no nation of ancient Greece. What there was was an ancient-Greek-speaking network of poleis streching all across the Mediterranean. It was vastly larger than modern Greece. So, it wasn't the same at all. Different species of animal. Not a nation. The nation of course is relatively recent. The U. of Copenhagen did a 10-year flag study of the polis, which need to be brought in. So, I'm saying the ideology here is somewhat behind the study. Needs to be brought up to date. Second, overbriefness has resulted in certain inaccuracies. This great plain of lower Macedonia the article begins with didn't exist. There was no plain there. It was the Thermaic Gulf plus wetlands. The states were all squeezed between it and the mountains. I'm working on this under ]. And finally, the article does not make clear that "Macedonian" meant different thing at different times. The original Macedonians were around Mt Olympus. So, there is more work here if anyone dares to risk it. Oh, one thing more. Beekes is a good linguist I am sure but he tends to be something of a wild man in some of his etymologies, as when he discovers the source of all the Etruscans in the Mediterranean hiding in a section of Anatolia about the size of a county. "The slim men" indeed. Why don't we name them after their hair-do? Highlanders is much more likely.] (])
== No debate among modern historians ==
There is a section stating that there is ambiguity in historical texts regarding Macedonians being Greeks semi Greeks or 'barbarians'.It holds no scientific truth as the Macedonians themselves referred to non-Greeks as 'barbarians'.The sentence also lacks any stated source. Moreover there is currently no debate among the majority of modern historians regarding the ethnicity of Macedonians. Again in this sentence there is no source stated. In my opinion the following sentences:"Authors, ], and statesmen of the ancient world often expressed ambiguous if not conflicting ideas about the ] of the Macedonians as either ], semi-Greeks, or even ]. This has led to some debate among modern academics about the precise ethnic identity of the Macedonians, who nevertheless embraced many aspects" should be removed and replaced with a sentence starting with : " the Macedonians, who embraced many aspects of contemporaneous ] such as". ] (]) 20:57, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greece, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greece on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GreeceWikipedia:WikiProject GreeceTemplate:WikiProject GreeceGreek
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors interested in Misplaced Pages's articles on classics. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our project page. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our talk page.Classical Greece and RomeWikipedia:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeTemplate:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeClassical Greece and Rome
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ethnic groups, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to ethnic groups, nationalities, and other cultural identities on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ethnic groupsWikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groupsTemplate:WikiProject Ethnic groupsEthnic groups
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Former countries, a collaborative effort to improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of defunct states and territories (and their subdivisions). If you would like to participate, please join the project.Former countriesWikipedia:WikiProject Former countriesTemplate:WikiProject Former countriesformer country
The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to the Balkans or Eastern Europe, which has been designated as a contentious topic.
Can someone double check the Ian Worthington quote "Not much is to be said about the Greekness of Macedonians: it is undeniable". I can't for the life of me find that quote in his book Philip II. I can find "There is enough evidence and reasoned theory to conclude that the Macedonians were Greek" on p.219, but not the former. 2A02:6B67:7917:0:C8F1:C995:AF34:FB67 (talk) 17:23, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
Really. They is no historical evidence of a country called Greece (Hellas or Ellada, whatever you want to call it) before 1821. There is also no historical evidence of such people called Greek before 1821. The koine language was simply called Koine and not Koine Greek as the so called Greeks of today call it. This page is just full of propaganda. You also fail to mention that your first Bavarian king Otto came to Athena where the majority of the people in Athens spoke Albanian (Arvanites ) 14.201.79.60 (talk) 05:07, 23 April 2023 (UTC)
I have to say Misplaced Pages is just full of propaganda articles like this one. An ethnic group that conquered Thrace, Epirus Archaia etc. ohhh they didn't conquer Greece because there was no such country. But you will respond with some crap like ancient city states of Ancient Greece. <— yet no Ancient Greece country existed lol. You don't make sense at all. 14.201.79.60 (talk) 05:09, 23 April 2023 (UTC)
@Srnec I do agree that the phrasing is strange, but I assume a lot of that how problematic this discourse is contemporarily anyway. Maybe some re-verifying is necessary, but I wouldn't be surprised at all if this language was used in the original source.
I know there are frequent inaccuracies here and the effect of centuries of propaganda is inevitable but depite that it is reasonably sound. I know there was no nation of ancient Greece. What there was was an ancient-Greek-speaking network of poleis streching all across the Mediterranean. It was vastly larger than modern Greece. So, it wasn't the same at all. Different species of animal. Not a nation. The nation of course is relatively recent. The U. of Copenhagen did a 10-year flag study of the polis, which need to be brought in. So, I'm saying the ideology here is somewhat behind the study. Needs to be brought up to date. Second, overbriefness has resulted in certain inaccuracies. This great plain of lower Macedonia the article begins with didn't exist. There was no plain there. It was the Thermaic Gulf plus wetlands. The states were all squeezed between it and the mountains. I'm working on this under Emathia. And finally, the article does not make clear that "Macedonian" meant different thing at different times. The original Macedonians were around Mt Olympus. So, there is more work here if anyone dares to risk it. Oh, one thing more. Beekes is a good linguist I am sure but he tends to be something of a wild man in some of his etymologies, as when he discovers the source of all the Etruscans in the Mediterranean hiding in a section of Anatolia about the size of a county. "The slim men" indeed. Why don't we name them after their hair-do? Highlanders is much more likely.Botteville (talk)
No debate among modern historians
There is a section stating that there is ambiguity in historical texts regarding Macedonians being Greeks semi Greeks or 'barbarians'.It holds no scientific truth as the Macedonians themselves referred to non-Greeks as 'barbarians'.The sentence also lacks any stated source. Moreover there is currently no debate among the majority of modern historians regarding the ethnicity of Macedonians. Again in this sentence there is no source stated. In my opinion the following sentences:"Authors, historians, and statesmen of the ancient world often expressed ambiguous if not conflicting ideas about the ethnic identity of the Macedonians as either Greeks, semi-Greeks, or even barbarians. This has led to some debate among modern academics about the precise ethnic identity of the Macedonians, who nevertheless embraced many aspects" should be removed and replaced with a sentence starting with : " the Macedonians, who embraced many aspects of contemporaneous Greek culture such as". Knoflook101 (talk) 20:57, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
