1

1 Perceptionoftheselfandtheother:ThecaseofMacedon* ByPr.MiltiadesHatzopoulos,VIIInternationalSymposiononAncientMacedonia,2002. Source:http://macedoniaevidence.org/identity.html In my communication to the last Ancient Macedonia symposium on the character of the ancestral tongue of the Macedonians I cautioned that I did not pretend to solve the controverted question of the nationality of the ancient Macedonians, not only because language is, at best, only one of the several elements which contribute to the formation of group identity, but also and mainly because such a debate presupposed a previous responsetothequestionofthenatureofnationalityinancientGreece,providedofcourse thatthisquestioniswellformulatedandadmitsaneffectiveanswer.[1]Intheensuingyears ethnicstudies,astheyarenowcalled,[2]haveenjoyed,especiallyontheothersideofthe Atlantic,awildsuccesscomparableonlytothatofthatotherNewWorldinvention,gender studies.[3]AmongrecentpublicationsonthissubjectthecollectivevolumeAncientPerceptions ofGreekEthnicity(Cambridge,Mass.andLondon2001)editedbyIradMalkinstandsoutfor itsscholarlyquality.SeveraloftheincludedcontributionsandespeciallytheIntroduction and Greek Ambiguities: Between Ancient Hellas and Barbarian Epirus by Irad Malkin himselfandContestedEthnicities:PerceptionsofMacedoniawithinEvolvingDefinitionsof GreekEthnicitybyJonathanHall,goalongwaytowardssatisfyingtheconditionIhadlaid down, to wit that the nature of Greek nationality be previously explored. Although a certain conformism of most contributors in their unreserved adoption of the politically correctantiessentialistview,whichreducesgroupidentitiestomereinventionsconstructed onpurediscourse,needstobewatereddown,[4]theresultisimpressive,andJonathanHalls paperinparticularsetstheparameterswithinwhichthequestionoftheancientMacedonian identity,whichinterestsushere,canbeapproached. Hall challenges the view that Macedonia was marginal or peripheral in respect to a Greek centre or core, for the simple reason that such a Greek hard core never existed, since Greekness is constituted by the totality of multifocal, situationally bound, and self consciousnegotiationsofidentitynotonlybetweenpoleisandethnebutalsowithinthem, and because a view such as this assumes a transhistorically static definition of Greekness.[5] As he argues at greater length in his monograph,[6] in the fifth century, mainlyasaconsequenceofthePersianWars,thedefinitionofGreekidentityevolvedfroman aggregative noninclusive conception based on fictitious descent from the eponymous Hellenandexpressedinforgedgenealogies(whichmayleaveoutsidenotonlyMacedonians and Magnetes, but also other goups such as Arcadians or Aitolians) into an oppositional one, turned against outgroups, relegating thus (fictitious) community of blood to the same levelifnottoaninferiorone(videinfra)aslinguistic,religiousandculturalcriteria.(Inthis perspective there is not much sense in opposing a putative compact, homogeneous and immutableGreeknesstothecontestedidentitiesofgroupssuchastheAitolians,Locrians, Acarnanians, Thesprotians, Molossians, Chaones, Atintanes, Parauaioi, Orestai, Macedonians).[7] HallproceedstoapenetratinganalysisoftheshiftingdefinitionsofGreeknessinHerodotus, ThucydidesandIsocrates,ourmainsourcesfortheevolutionoftheconceptintheClassical period. Of Thucydides in particular he writes that, contrary to Herodotus, he did not view Greeksandbarbariansasmutuallyexclusivecategoriesbutasoppositepolesofasingle, linearcontinuum.Thus,theinhabitantsofnorthwesternGreecearebarbariannotinthe

FOR FAIR USE ONLY

2sensethattheircultures,customs,orbehaviorareindirect,diametricaloppositiontoGreek norms but rather in the sense that their seemingly more primitive way of life makes them Hellnesmanqus.[8] Finally, not only he but also I. Malkin in his introduction and Rosalind Thomas in her contribution Ethnicity, Genealogy, and Hellenism in Herodotus, which contains a section ontheMacedonians,stresstheimportanceofreligion,orratherofcults[9](commonshrines ofthegodsandsacrifices).[10] J.Hallinhisconclusionsconfirmsmydoubtsaboutthepossibilityofansweringthequestion concerningthenationalityoftheancientMacedonians.ToaskwhethertheMacedonians reallywereGreekornotinantiquity,hewrites,isultimatelyaredundantquestiongiven theshiftingsemanticsofGreeknessbetweenthesixthandfourthcenturiesB.C.Whatcannot bedenied,however,isthattheculturalcommodificationofHellenicidentitythatemergedin the fourth century might have remained a provincial artifact, confined to the Balkan peninsula,haditnotbeenfortheMacedonians.[11] This finely balanced verdict is all the more praiseworthy in that it does not hesitate explicitly[12] or implicitly to contradict[13] authoritative views current in the American academicestablishment,[14]oreventomodifyopinionspreviouslyexpressedbytheauthor himself.[15]Moreover,itwaspartlyattainedthroughsheerreasoningandintuition,ascrucial evidencewasnotaccessibletohim. Epigraphic data of capital linguistic interest which have become available only after the Center of Hellenic Studies Colloquium of 1997[16] and important recent monographs and articles which seem not to have been accessible in the United States,[17] if known, would haveprovidedadditionalargumentsandpreventedsomeminorinaccuracies.[18]Itisworth noting, however, that although Hall[19] fully shares Malkins view on the overriding importance of religion and in particular of common shrines and sacrifices,[20] he does not exploit the unique evidence of the theorodokoi catalogues,[21] which precisely list the Greek statesvisitedbythetheoroi,thesacredenvoys,ofthepanhellenicsanctuariesandinvitedto participate through official delegations in sacrifices and contests celebrated in those sanctuaries.[22] IthaslongbeenestablishedthatthetheoroiofthePanhellenicsanctuaries,didnotvisitmere urbancentres,whatevertheirimportance,butonlystates,betheyofthepolisoroftheethnos variety, for their mission consisted in announcing () the sacred truce and the oncomingconteststothestateauthorities.[23] Since only Hellenes participated in the Panhellenic sacrifices and contests,[24] it is obvious thatthetheoroivisitedonlycommunitieswhichconsideredthemselvesandwereconsidered bytheothersasGreek.Startingwithoneoftheoldestcatalogues,thatofEpidauros,dating from360,andcontinuingwiththoseofNemea,Argos,andDelphi,theMacedoniankingdom is never absent from their surviving North Aegean sections. At such an early date in the fourthcenturyasthatofthefirstoneitcannotbeclaimedthattheMacedonianpresencewas theresultofthekingdomspoliticalandmilitarymight.Norcanitbesaidthattheinvitation concernedonlytheGreekroyalfamily,for,aswehavealreadystressed,itwasaddressed nottoindividualsbuttostates.[25] OnemightobjectthepostPhilippiandateoftheNemea,ArgosandDelphilists.Itistrue thatnoneofthethreeisearlierthanthelastquarterofthefourthcentury,buteventhemost

FOR FAIR USE ONLY

3recent one, the late third century great list of the theorodokoi of Delphi, following a long established tradition, includes, with very few and obvious exceptions, only the coastal, cities of Asia.[26] Still for the sake of argument, we can start by consideringonlythelistofEpidauros,whichdatesbacktoaround360,yearsbeforeitcould bearguedthatMacedoniabyitsmeteoricrisehadimposeditselfontheterrorisedpersonnel ofthepanhellenicsanctuaries.[27] The Epidaurian list, in its surviving sections, on a first stele, starting from Megara moves throughAtticaandBoeotiatoThessaly,Macedonia,ChalkidikeandThrace.Onasecondstele are listed the theorodokoi of Corinth, Delphi, Ozolian Lokris, Aitolia, Akarnania, Sicily and southernItaly.OfparticularinterestaretheMacedonian(includingChalkidike)andEpirotic sections. In the first, after Thessalian Homolion, one reads the names of the theorodokoi of Pydna, Methone, Macedonia, Aineia, Dikaia, Poteidaia, Kalindoia, Olynthos, Apollonia, Arethousa, Arkilos, Amphipolis, Berga, Tragila, Stagira, Akanthos, Stolos, Aphytis, Skiona andMenda. Fortunately we possess a contemporary document describing the same region, the work of PseudoSkylax.[28]HedescribestheMacedoniansasanethnosafterthePeneios,mentionsthe ThermaicGulf,andlistsHerakleionasthefirstcityofMacedonia,thenDion,PydnaaGreek city,MethoneaGreekcity,theriverHaliakmon,Alorosacity,theriverLydias,Pellaacity anda palacein it anda waterway up the Lydias toit, the riverAxios, the river Echedoros, Therme a city, Aineia a Greek city, Cape Pallene, and after an enumeration of the cities of Chalkidike, Arethousa a Greek city, Lake Bolbe, Apollonia a Greek city, and many other citiesofMacedoniaintheinterior. As U. Kahrstedt was the first to understand, the distinction between Greek cities and Macedoniancitiesorsimplecitiesisnotethnologicalbutpolitical.Independentcitiesare qualified as Greek, while the cities remaining within the Macedonian kingdom have to contentthemselveswiththesimplequalificationofcities.[29] The list of the theorodokoi of Epidauros confirms the nature of this distinction, for in the section west of the head of the Thermaic Gulf it enumerates only three states: Pydna, MethoneandMacedonia.Thusthefirst,althoughacityoriginallyMacedonian,[30]iscalleda Greek city, just like the originally Eretrian colony of Methone, because at the time they were both independent from the kingdom and members of the Second Athenian League, while the equally Macedonian Herakleion, Dion, Aloros and Pella were simply styled as cities.TheEpidauriantheorodokoivisitedonlyMacedonia,thatistosaythecapitalofthe state, presumably Pella or Aigeai, not because this was the only Greek city of the kingdom andevenlessbecausetheyintendedtoinvitethekingonlytheinvitation,aswehaveseen, was extended to communities not to persons, but because there was the seat of the authoritiestowhomtheepangeliahadtobemade,asatthattime,beforethereformsofPhilip II, the several Macedonian cities did not possess sufficient political latitude to qualify as autonomouscitiesandtobeeligibletoparticipateassuchinpanhellenicfestivals.[31] Similarly the section Epirus lists the states of Pandosia, Kassopa, Thesprotoi, Poionos, Korkyra,Chaonia,Artichia,Molossoi,Ambrakia,Argos(ofAmphilochia).OfthesetheElean colony of Pandosia and the Corinthian colonies of Korkyra and Ambrakia represent the southernGreekelement,whileKassopa,theThesprotoi,theMolossoi,ChaoniaandArgosthe nativeEpiroteone.(NothingisknownofPoionosandArtichia).Theimportantpointisthat colonial cities, Epirote cities and Epirote ethne, republican and monarchical alike, are consideredequallyGreekandinvitedtothegreatpanhellenicsacrificesatEpidauros.

FOR FAIR USE ONLY

4 ThesamepictureemergesfromtheslightlylaterlistsofArgos[32]andNemea[33]andfrom thelatethirdcenturylistofDelphi,themaindifferencebeingthatafterPhilipIIsreformsthe several Macedonian cities take the place of the central Macedonian authorities,[34] while Epiruswaversbetweenasinglecentralisedandseveralcivicrepresentations. A piece of evidence which until very recently had gone unnoticed is the actual presence of MacedoniansandEpirotesinthepanhellenicsanctuaries,whichisfirstattestedintheArchaic period,butincreasesdramaticallyinthesecondhalfofthefourthcentury.AlexanderIwas neither the first nor the only Macedonian active at a panhellenic sanctuary in the fifth century. He had been preceded at Delphi by Macedonians from Pieria, and both his fifth century successors Perdikkas II and Archelaos participated in panhellenic festivals at Olympia,DelphiorArgos.[35] It is in this context that we can properly understand some other facts that have puzzled modern historians, such as the participation of Macedonian envoys in the panhellenic conferenceheldatSpartain371[36]ortheinclusionoftheMacedonianethnosandnotjust kingPhilipintheDelphicAmphictiony.[37]UndertheseconditionsDemosthenesoutrage at the presence of Philip II and his Macedonians at Delphi loses much of its candour and credibility.[38] As J. Hall rightly observes, the rhetorical contrast between Greeks and MacedoniansintheageofAlexander,bywhichsomeAmericanscholarssetmuchstore,has militarypoliticalratherthanethnicconnotations.[39]AcaseinpointisthelistofAlexander theGreatstrierarchsinArriansIndica,whichE.N.Borza,labouringtodemonstratetheun HelleniccharacteroftheancientMacedonians,adducedinteraliainanarticleinhonourofE. Badian.[40] ThemenappointedbyAlexandertocommandtheHydaspesRiver,hewrites,arenamed according to their ethnicity: these were the Macedonians altogether: as for the Greeks .... (houtoi men hoi sympantes Makedones, Hellenon de...). Arrian concludes by mentioning the appointmentofasinglePersian,thuspreservingthedistinctionamongMacedonians,Greeks, and others, as mentioned elsewhere (2.17.4 and 7.30.23). I regard the men...de usage as significant.[41] The list of the trierarchs is admittedly an interesting document and the ........ usage is indeedsignificant,providedtheyareaccuratelyreportedandcorrectlyanalysed.Inreality,to the of the Macedonians are opposed not one but two ( . ..... ....), followed by the single Persian ( ...). Thus Arrian, or rather his source, distinguishes (if we leave aside the odd Persian), between three groups: the Macedonians, the Greeks and the Cypriots. The next point which arises concerns the exact nature of this distinction. Borza has no doubt that it relates to the ethnicity of these men. He explains that he uses this term to describe a cultural identity that is near the meaning of nationality, but without the necessity of membership in a political organism... and proposes to use as criteria language, contemporaryperceptions,historicalperceptions,andculturalinstitutions.[42] AsIrecentlywroteinadifferentcontext,[43]thecaseoftheMacedoniansisboundtoremain paradoxical as long as it is viewed by itself. I then had in mind the parallel case of Epirus, which was geographically excluded from Greece and whose inhabitants from the time of Thucydides to that of Strabo were qualified as barbarians, even from the linguistic point of view, although they undoubtedly spoke a Greek dialect that we have no difficulty in understanding,enjoyedGreekinstitutionsandshared,aswehaveseen,thesameshrinesand

FOR FAIR USE ONLY

5sacrifices and participated in the same panhellenic events as the other Greeks.[44] In their case,thereasonfortheoccasionalandparadoxicaldenialoftheirHellenismisprobablytobe soughtintheabsencebeforetheHellenisticperiodofurbancentresdeservingthenameand statusofpoleis.[45]TheCypriotcase,however,isequallyinstructive. An overview of the evidence concerning Cyprus, which I reserve for fuller treatment elsewhere,[46] would lead us to the conclusion that, whatever the physical appearence of ancientCypriots,[47]itdidnotcastanydoubtsontheHellenicoriginofthekingdomsofthe island, on the Greek character of the local dialect or on the Hellenic nature of the gods veneratedtherewiththeonlyandobviousexceptionsofthePhoeniciancityofKitionand oftheautochthonousoneofAmathous. The Cypriot syllabic script was indeed an obstacle to written communication, but from the middleofthefourthcenturytheuseoftheGreekalphabetspreadsacrosstheisland.[48]For oralcommunicationtheCypriotdialectprobablysoundedexoticthenasnowtosomebut notall[49]GreekspeakersfromtheAegeanarea.ButthenmanyGreekswereawareofthe existence of other Greeks with uncouth tongues. Did Thucydides not write that the Eurytanians speak a most incomprehensible tongue[50] and has it not been said of the Eleans that they are speakers of a barbarous tongue[51]? Nonetheless, at least as far as practicalpoliciesareconcerned,theGreeknessofneitherofthemwasevercontested.Sacred prostitution assuredly shocked more than one Greek. But it was in no way a Cypriot monopoly.TheEpizephyrianLocrians,forinstance,reputedlyfollowedthesamepractice.[52] The Cypriot kingships, whatever their exact origin and nature, were for most citystate Greeks an anomaly. But monarchies had survived in Cyrenaica and the northern fringes of the Greek world or had reappeared in Sicily. Thus, no single criterion can satisfactorily explaintheexclusionoftheCypriotsfromtheGreekcommunityinthelistofAlexanderthe Greats trierarchs, but not from participation in panhellenic sacrifices and contests, as the theorodokoilistsattest.For,whatevertheconditionsinearlierperiods,itseemsthatbythelast quarter of the fourth century most Greeks and apparently all foreigners recognised the CypriotsasGreeks.[53] Theunsatisfactoryresultsofourinquiryobligeustoquestionthevalidityofthepremisseson which it was based, to wit that Alexanders trierarchs are named according to their ethnicity,asBorzathought.Anobviousanomalyshouldhavemadeussuspicious.Thelist of the Macedonian trierarchs comprises at least two persons whose impeccable Greek ethnicity[54]theAmericanhistorianwouldreadilyrecognise:NearchossonofAndrotimos and Laomedon son of Larichos hailing respectively from the Cretan city of Lato and the LesbiancityofMytilene.Borzamakesnomentionofthisdifficultyinhiscommentonthelist, but attempts to deal with the first case in a note referring to a different context, hesitating betweencastingdoubtsonthereliabilityofthelist[55]andonthatofNearchosorigin.[56]In fact, just as the presence of the forgotten category of the Cypriots contradicts the alleged binary opposition between Greeks on the one hand and Macedonians on the other, discrepanciessuchastheabovebeliethesupposedethniccharacterofthelistandcannot be explained, unless the latter reflects nationality, Staatsangehrigkeit, rather than ethnicity. Borza, who sets great store by the case of Eumenes handicap as an ethnic Greek, despite his long years in Macedonian service, could not convincingly argue that NearchosandLaomedonandthousandsofotherGreeksfrombeyondOlympusceasedtobe ethnicGreekswhateverthatmaymeanwhentheysettledinMacedonia.[57] The explanation of the presence of Nearchos and Laomedon in the Macedonian list is obvious:contrarytoEumenes,whentheymovedtoMacedonia,theydidnotsimplysettlein

FOR FAIR USE ONLY

6the country, but became citizens of Amphipolis and ipso facto also of the Macedonian Commonwealth. It is thus more than clear that the trierarchs are not named according to ethnicity. The classification is determined by political criteria. All citizens of Macedonian civic units are classified as Macedonians, whatever their origin. Who then are the Greeks? Medios son of OxythemisfromLarissa,EumenessonofHieronymosfromKardia,KritoboulossonofPlaton from Kos, Thoas son of Menodoros and Maiandros son Mandrogenes from Magnesia, AndronsonofKabelesfromTeos.Now,thehomecitiesofthesetrierarchsshareacommon feature:theywereallmembersoftheHellenicLeague(ofwhichMacedonitselfwasnopart), LarissaandKardiafromthetimeofPhilipII,[58]KosandMagnesiaandTeossince332.[59] On the other hand the kingdoms of Cyprus, which joined Alexander at the siege of Tyre, neveradheredtotheLeagueofficiallystyledastheHellenes. AcloserlookatotherpassagescollectedandadducedbyBorzaassupposedlyrevelatoryof theethnicthatistosay,accordingtohim(videsupra),oftheculturaldistinctionbetween GreeksandMacedoniansbetrayssimilardifficultiesanddiscrepancies.AsM.B.Sakellariou has aptly stressed, the contrast and occasionally the antagonism between Greeks and MacedoniansintheageofPhilipandAlexander,ofwhichtheAmericanhistorianmakesso much, was political and had to a certain extent social causes.[60] In fact the Macedonians satisfiedthecriteriaofGreeknessputforwardbytheAtheniansintheircelebratedanswerto the Spartan envoys, as it is reported by Herodotus.[61] Nevertheless, it is equally true that theirHellenicqualitywasrecurrentlydisputed,especiallywhenpoliticalanimositiescreated a suitable political environment. For the opposition was political and doubly so, between polisstatesandanethnosstate,aswellasbetweenregimeswhichideallyweredemocraticand areputedlytyrannicmonarchy.Thus,evenforproMacedonianswantingtodispellegitimate fearsthattheMacedoniankingsmightextendtheirmonarchicalregimetotheGreekcities,it wasimportanttodissociateasmuchaspossibletheTemenidkingdomfromtheworldofthe polisstates. This was the reason why Isokrates, eager to reassure his readers that a Macedonian hegemony was not dangerous for their liberties, insisted that, just as Philips ancestors,knowingthattheGreekscouldnotsuffermonarchicalregimes,ratherthanenslave their fellow citizens, preferred to leave Greece altogether and rule over a different ( )people,[62]soPhiliphimselfwouldnotdreamofimposinghisruleonthe Greeks, but would content himself with reigning over the Macedonians.[63] In this often cited passage the Athenian orator masterfully exploits the implicit correspondence between the geographical term and the ethnic , from which it derives, in ordertoenforceinthemindofhisreaderstheunHelleniccharacterof,thesubjects of the Macedonian kings, since for most writers of the Classical and Hellenistic periods[64] HellasdidnotextendgeographicallybeyondtheAmbracianGulfandtheriverPeneios.[65]It isnotexcludedthattheMacedoniankinghimselfsharedtheAthenianoratorsconcern,and that,heedinghisadvice,hepreferredtokeephiskingdomcompletelyapartfromtheHellenic League.[66] It should then not come as a surprise that the modern scholars who have best understood the Macedonian paradox are the nineteenth and early twentieth century Germans,whowereawareoftheparticularpositionofPrussiavisvistherestofGermany, initiallyoutsidethebordersoftheHolyRomanEmpireoftheGermanNationand,evenafter theabolitionofthelatter,anentitywhosecitizensweretobereckonedseparatelyfromthe other Germans.[67] Did not Jakob Salomon Bartholdy write insuch terms to his brotherin lawAbrahamMendelssohnon6February1817:Alsichhier(inNeapel)kam,fandichviele deutscheundpreussischeKnstlervonentschiedenenAnlagenundTalenten,andcanone not still in 1990 publish a book under the title Preussen und Deutschland gegenber dem Novemberaufstand18301831?DoesnotthereluctanceoftheSouthGermanstatestosubmitto

FOR FAIR USE ONLY

7Prussia,andatthesametimethePrussiankingsdesiretomaintaindirectandexclusivehold onhisownkingdom,forwhichreasonWilliamIstyledhimselfDeutscherKaiser,Knigvon PreussenratherthanKaiserderDeutschenin1871,ringIsocraticechoes? Abbreviations Badian,Greeks=E.Badian,GreeksandMacedoniansinBerylBarSharrarE.N.Borza (ed.),MacedoniaandGreeceinLateClassicalandEarlyHellenisticTimes(WashingtonD.C.1982) 3351. Borza, Archelaos = E. N. Borza, The Philhellenism of Archelaos, Ancient Macedonia V (Thessalonike1993)23744(=Makedonika12433). Borza, Greeks = E. N. Borza, Greeks and Macedonians in the Age of Alexander: The Source Traditions, in R. W. Wallace E. M. Harris (eds.), Transitions to Empire. Essays in GrecoRomanHistory,360146B.C.inHonorofE.Badian(Norman,Okla.London1996)12239. Daskalakis,Hellenism=Ap.Daskalakis,TheHellenismoftheAncientMacedonians(Thessalonike 1965). Hall, Ethnicities = J. Hall, Contested Ethnicities: Perceptions of Macedonia within EvolvingGreekIdentity,inI.Malkin,(ed.),AncientPerceptionsofGreekEthnicity(Cambridge, Mass.London2001)15986. Hall,Language,=J.Hall,TheRoleofLanguageinGreekEthnicities,ProcCamPhilSoc41 (1995)83100. Hatzopoulos, Epigraphie = M. B. Hatzopoulos, Epigraphie et philologie: rcentes dcouvertespigraphiquesetglosesmacdoniennesdHesychius,CRAI1998,11891218. Hatzopoulos, Herodotos = M. B. Hatzopoulos, Herodotos (VIII 137138), the ManumissionsfromLeukopetra,andtheTopographyoftheMiddleHaliakmonValley,The WorldofHerodotus(forthcoming). Hatzopoulos, Macdonien = M. B. Hatzopoulos, Le macdonien: nouvelles donnes et thoriesnouvelles,AncientMacedoniaVI(Thessalonike1999)22539. Hatzopoulos, Institutions = M. B. Hatzopoulos, Macedonian Institutions under the Kings: A HistoricalandEpigraphicStudy(=22;Athens1996). Malkin, Ambiguities = I. Malkin, Greek Ambiguities: Between Ancient Hellas and BarbarianEpirus,inI.Malkin(ed.),AncientPerceptionsofGreekEthnicity(Cambridge,Mass. London2001)187212. Malkin, Introduction = I. Malkin, Introduction, in I. Malkin (ed.), Ancient Perceptions of GreekEthnicity(Cambridge,Mass.London2001)128. Mari,Olimpo=ManuelaMari,AldildellOlimpo:MacedoniegrandisantuaridellaGreciadellet arcaicaalprimoellenismo(34;Athens2002). Perlman, City = Paula Perlman, City and Sanctuary in Ancient Greece: The Theorodokia in the Peloponnese(Gttingen2000). Thomas, Ethnicity = Rosalind Thomas, Ethnicity, Genealogy, and Hellenism in Herodotus, in I. Malkin (ed.), Ancient Perceptions of Greek Ethnicity (Cambridge, Mass. London2001)21333. *Abbreviationsarelistedattheendofthispaper.ChristineSourvinouInwoodsimportant paperGreekPerceptionsofEthnicityandtheEthnicityoftheMacedonians,Identiteprassi nelMediterraneogreco(Milano2002),whichtheauthorhadthekindnesstosendme,cameto myknowledgetoolateforinclusioninthepresentdiscussion. [1].Hatzopoulos, Macdonien 225: La prsente communication ne prtend nullement rsoudre la question tant controverse de la nationalit des anciens Macdoniens. Un tel dbatprsupposeunerponselaquestionpralabledelanaturedelanationalitdansle monde grec, supposer quune telle question soit bien pose et quelle comporte

FOR FAIR USE ONLY

8effectivement une rponse. Quoi quil en soit, il est hors de doute que la langue nest au mieuxquundeslmentsquiconcourentausentimentdappartenancedungroupe.... [2]. Cf. F.W. Walbank, Hellenes and Achaeans: Greek Nationality Revisited, Further StudiesintheAncientGreekPolis(HistoriaEinzelschriften138;Stuttgart2000)18.F.W.Walbank, in1951,stillnamedhisrelevantarticle,withoutanyinvertedcommas,TheProblemofGreek Nationality, Phoenix 5 (1951) 4160 (= Selected Papers [Cambridge 1985] 119). Is it merely coincidental that the word ethnicity is untranslatable except as a calque in languages suchasFrenchorGreek? [3].Cf.therichbibliographyinJ.Hall,EthnicIdentityinGreekAntiquity,Cambridge1997;inI. Malkin,TheReturnsofOdysseus:ColonizationandEthnicity,Berkeley,Cal.1998;andattheend of each contribution in the collective volume I. Malkin (ed.), Ancient Perceptions of Greek Ethnicity,CambridgeMass.London2001.Amongthenumerousrecentworks,besidesthose already cited, I would also mention the following: Cinzia Bearzot, La Grecia di Pausania. Geografiaeculturanelladefinizionedelconcettodi,inMartaSordi(ed.),Geografiae storiografianelmondoclassico,Milan1988,90112;EdithHall,InventingtheBarbarian:GreekSelf DefinitionthroughTragedy,Oxford1989;CatherineMorgan,EthnicityandEarlyGreekStates: Historical and Material Perspectives, PCPhS 37 (1991)13163; E. N. Borza, Ethnicity and Cultural Policy at Alexanders Court, AncW 22 (1991) 2125 (= Makedonika, Claremont Cal. 1995,14958);MartaSordi(ed.),Autocoscienzaerappresentazionedeipopolinellantichit,Milan 1992;P.Cartledge,TheGreeks:APortraitofSelfandOthers,OxfordNewYork1993;Catherine Morgan, The Origins of Panhellenism, in Nanno Marinatos R. Hgg (eds.), Greek Sanctuaries, LondonNew York 1993, 1844; A. Giovannini, Greek Cities and Greek Commonwealth,inA.Bulloch,E.S.Gruen,A.A.Long,A.Stuart(eds.),ImagesandIdeology: SelfDefinitionintheHellenisticWorld,BerkeleyLosAngelesLondon1993,26586;J.Hall,The Role of Language in Greek Ethnicities, PCPhS 41 (1995) 83100; F. Cassola, Chi erano i Greci?, in S. Settis (ed.), I Greci: Storia, cultura, arte, societ, 2.1, Turin 1996, 523; D. Asheri, Identitgreche,identitgreca,inthesamework2.2,Turin1997,526. [4]. And attracts the ironic scepticism of the editor (p. 1): The tone of the current writings aboutethnicity,anyethnicity,reflectsaubiquitousantiessentialism.Thingshavenoessence, nocore.Ethnicity?Thereisnosuchthing,assuch,andthekeywordsfordiscussingitare nowinventionandconstruction.(Hemighthaveaddeddiscourse). [5].Hall,Ethnicities166. [6].Hall,Identity4051;cf.id.,Language9196. [7].As,forinstance,E.N.BorzasystematicallydoesfortheMacedonians.Cf.IntheShadowof Olympus:TheEmergenceofMacedon,Princeton,N.J.19922,9497;258;26872;27582;id.,Before Alexander:ConstructingEarlyMacedonia.PublicationsoftheAssociationsofAncientHistorians6, ClaremontCal.1999,3234. [8].Hall,Ethnicities16972. [9].Hall,Ethnicities179,n.92;Malkin,Introduction6;Thomas,Ethnicity215and219. [10].Cf.Herod.8.144.2:,, ... [11].Hall,Ethnicities172. [12].Hall,Ethnicities173,n.8. [13].Cf.Hall,Ethnicities171. [14]. Cf. E. Badian, Greeks and Macedonians, in Beryl BarSharrar E. N. Borza (eds.), MacedoniaandGreeceinLateClassicalandEarlyHellenisticTimes,WashingtonD.C.1982,3351; id., Herodotus on Alexander I of Macedon: A Study in some Subtle Silences, in S. Hornblower (ed.), Greek Historiography, Oxford 1994, 3551; E. N. Borza, In the Shadow of Olympus.TheEmergenceofMacedon,Princeton,N.J.19901;19922;id.,EthnicityandCultural Policy at Alexanders Court, AncW 22 (1991) 2125 (= Makedonika 14958); id., The Philhellenism of Archelaos, Ancient Macedonia V, Thessalonike 1993, 23744 (= Makedonika

FOR FAIR USE ONLY

912433);id.,GreeksandMacedoniansintheAgeofAlexander:TheSourceTraditions,inR. W.WallaceE.M.Harris(eds.),TransitionstoEmpire.EssaysinGrecoRomanHistory,360146 B.C.,inHonorofE.Badian,Norman,Okla.London1996,12239;id.,LaMacedoniadiFilippo eicoflitticonlepoleis,inS.Setis(ed.),IGreci.Storia,Cultura,Arte,Societ2.3,Turin1998, 2146; id., Macedonia Redux, in Frances B. Titchener R. F. Moorton Jr. (eds.), The Eye Expanded:LifeandtheArtsinGrecoRomanAntiquity,BerkeleyLosAngelesLondon1999,249 66, and particularly 263, n. 17; P. Green, Alexander to Actium: The Historical Evolution of the HellenisticAge,BerkeleyLosAngeles1990,35;SarahB.Pomeroy,S.M.Bursteinetal.,Ancient Greece:APolitical,Social,andCulturalHistory,NewYorkOxford1999,37375,etc. [15].Cf.Hall,Identity6365. [16]. See C. Brixhe, Un nouveau champ de la dialectologie grecque: le macdonien, .AttidelIIIColloquioInternazionalediDialettologiaGreca,A.I.O.N.19(1997) 4171; Sophia Moschonisioti, A. Ph. Christides, Theodora Glaraki, , in A. Ph. Christides D. Jordan (eds.), . ,Athens 1997,19398;E.Voutiras, :Marital Life and Magic in Fourth Century Pella, Amsterdam 1998; M. B. Hatzopoulos, Epigraphie et philologie: rcentes dcouvertes pigraphiques et gloses macdoniennes dHsychius; CRAI 1998, 11891218; id., Le Macdonien: nouvelles donnnes et thories nouvelles, Ancient Macedonia V, Thessalonike1999, 22539; id., Lhistoire par les noms in Macedonia,inGreekPersonalNames:TheirValueasEvidence,ProcBritAcad104(2ooo)99117; id., La position dialectal du macdonien la lumire des dcouvertes pigraphiques rcentes,DiealtegriechischenDialekte,ihrWesenundWerden(forthcoming);id.,Herodotos (VIII. 137138), the Manumissions from Leukopetra, and the Topography of the Middle HaliakmomValley,TheWordofHerodotus(forthcoming). [17]. This is the case of much of the fundamental archaeological and epigraphic scholarly productionpublishedinGreece,suchasthefourteenvolumesofT , 114 (19872000) series, the volumes of the series and the seventeen volumes of the series devoted to Macedonia,someofwhichhaveadirectbearingonthepresentsubject. [18]. For instance, the epigraphic discoveries mentioned in the previous notes have greatly reduced the importance of glosses and have rendered redundant much of the relevant discussion. In particular, dreptos (p. 162) is a ghost (see Anna Panayotou, , Ancient Macedonia IV, Thessalonike 1986, 417). Strabo 7.7.8 (p. 163) does not say that Macedonians, Epirotes and Illyrians shared some dialectal commonalities. In fact he says two different things: 1) that some extend the term Macedonia to the whole country (west of Upper Macedonia) as far as Corcyra, because the inhabitantsofthisarea(towittheEpirotesoppositeCorcyraandnottheIllyrians,wholived farthernorth,beyondtheCeraunianmountains),usesimilarhairstyles,dressanddialect(cf. R.Baladi,Strabon,Gographie.LivreVII,Paris1989,228,n.4adlocum;2)someoftheEpirotes inhabiting this area are bilingual (presumably they spoke Greek as well as Illyrian). EpigraphicevidenceaccumulatingovertheyearshasrenderedTarnslistofdivinitiesandits discussion (p. 164) irrelevant. Thaulos, Gyga, Zeirene, Xandos, Bedu, Arantides, Sauadai, Sabazius never occur in epigraphic documents; Totos, attested once in Roman times, is an imported Egyptian deity (cf. H. Seyrig, Tithos, Totos et le Sphinx panthe, Annales du Service des Antiquits dEgypte 35 (1935) 197202; Ch. Picard, La sphinge tricphale, dite panthe, dAmphipolis et la dmonologie gyptoalexandrine, CRAI 1957, 3546; id., La sphinge tricphale dite panth, dAmphipolis et la dmonologie gyptoalexandrine, Mon.Piot50(1958)4984;GazoriaisalocalepithetfromthenameoftheeasternMacedonian cityofGazoros(cf.M.B.Hatzopoulos,ArtmisAgrotra,GazoreitisetBloureitis:unedesse thrace en Macdoine, Festschrift Ivan Marazov [forthcoming]). Judging from dedicatory inscriptions, the most popular gods of the Macedonians were Zeus, Herakles, Asklepios,

FOR FAIR USE ONLY

10Dionysos and a feminine deity variously appearing as Demeter, the Mother of the Gods, Artemis,Pasikrata,Ennodiaetc.CatherineTrmpysexcellentmonograph,Untersuchungenzu denaltgriechischenMonatsnamenundMonatsfolgen(Heidelberg1997)26265,hasmadeobsolete previous discussions of the Macedonian calendar. For the months Peritios, Dystros and Hyperberetaios in particular, cf. Hatzopoulos, Macdonien 23739; id., Epigraphie 12021204.KlodonesandMimallones(p.176,n.54)havenothingtodowithThrace;seeM.B. Hatzopoulos,CultesetritesdepassageenMacdoine(19;Athens1994)7385. On the political system of the Molossi (p. 166), cf. the divergent view of J. K. Davies, A Wholly NonAristotelian Universe: The Molossians as Ethnos, State, and Monarchy, in R. BrockSt. Hodkinson (eds), Alternatives to Athens: Varieties of Political Organization and CommunityinAncientGreece,Oxford2000,258:...sofarfrombeingunGreek,assupercilious southernersthought,theirworldshowsclearsignsofsimilaritytothatofthecommunitiesof southern Aegean and protourban Greece in the archaic period. Concerning the Aiolian ancestryoftheMacedoniansinHellanicusversion,asopposedtotheDorianoneoftheroyal dynasty (p. 169), it is not impossible that this Lesbian historians invention may have stemmed from the contrast between the Upper Macedonian origin of the Argeads and the northThessalianoneoftheLowerMacedoniancommoners;cf.Hatzopoulos,Herodotos. [19].Hall,Ethnicities72,n.92. [20].Malkin,Introduction56. [21]. See now Paula Perlman, City and Sanctuary in Ancient Greece. The Theodorokia in the Peloponnese, Gttingen 2000. For the Delphic catalogues, awaiting for the new edition by J. Ouhlen,LesTharodoquesdeDelphes(doctoraldissertation,UniversitdeParisX,1992),seeA. Plassart,InscriptionsdeDelphes.Lalistedestharodoques,BCH45(1921)185.Itsdatein thelatethirdcentury,firstproposedbyG.Daux,Listedelphiquedetharodoques;REG 62(1949)1227,hasbeenconfirmedbyaseriesofnewdiscoveries;cf.Ph.Gauthier,Nouvelles inscriptions de Sardes II, Geneva 1989, 14950; M. B. Hatzopoulos, Un prtre dAmphipolis dans la grande liste des tharodoques de Delphes, BCH 115 (1991) 34547; D. Knoepfler, LetempledeMtrondeSardesetsesinscriptions;MuseumHelveticum50(1993)2643. [22]. Cf. Hatzopoulos, Institutions 47276. This has been admirably done now by Manuela Mari in her monograph Al di l dellOlimpo: Macedoni e grandi santuari della Grecia dallet arcaicaalprimoellenismo(34;Athens2002). [23].SeeinparticularL.Robert,VillesdeCarieetdIoniedanslalistedestharodoquesde Delphes,BCH70(1946)510(=OMSI331);id.,DocumentsdAsieMineure,Paris1987,29295; cf. BullEpigr 1980, 297; cf. Perlman, City 3233; ead., . PanhellenicEpangeliaandPoliticalStatus,inM.H.Hansen,SourcesfortheAncientGreekCity State,Copenhagen1995,11347). [24].Thiswidelyattestedfact(cf.Herod.5.22.12)hasrecentlybeencommenteduponbyR. Parker,CleomenesontheAcropolis,Oxford1998,1011. [25]. See now also Christiane SourvinouInwood, Greek Perceptions of Ethnicity and the Ethnicity of the Macedonians, Identintit e prassi storica nel Mediterraneo greco, Milano 2002, 19092. [26].L.Robert,VillesdeCarieetdIoniedanslalistedestharodoquesdeDelphes,BCH 70(1946)51516(=OMS33637). [27].IGV1,9495;cf.Perlman,City17779;Ep.Cat.E.1. [28].PseudoSkylax66. [29].U.Kahrstedt,StdteinMakedonien,Hermes81(1953)91111. [30]. The relevant information in the literary sources (Thuc. 1.137.1 and Diod. 11.12.3) has been confirmed by recent epigraphic and other archaeological discoveries. Cf. M. Bessios, , .3,1989,Thessalonike1992,15563;J.B.CubernaD.Jordan,CurseTabletsfrom Pydna,(forthcoming).

FOR FAIR USE ONLY

11[31].Cf.Hatzopoulos,InstitutionsI473. [32]. From Argos we have a fragmentary list (P. Charneux, Liste argienne de Tharodoques, BCH 90 [1966] 15688; Perlman, City 100104, Ep. Cat. A. 1) dating from c. 334325/4 and preserving the names of the theorodokoi from northwestern Greece, the Peloponnese, and western Asia Minor and the Aegean islands, and a fragmentary list preserving the amounts of contributions from Thessalyand Macedonia, probably related to theexpensesofthesacredenvoys,anddatingfromtheendofthefourthcentury(IGIV617; cf.Perlman,City12729). [33]. S. G. Miller, The Theorodokoi of the Nemean Games, Hesperia 57 (1988) 14763; Perlman,City23639,Ep.Cat.N.1.Thefragmentarycatalogueprobablydatesfromc.321317 (Hatzopoulos, Institutions 474, n. 7) and preserves the names of the theorodokoi of Cyprus, Akarnania,theIonianIslands,Macedonia,theHellespont,Kyme,EretriaandChios. [34].Cf.Hatzopoulos,InstitutionsI47286. [35].SeethenewmonographbyManuelaMari,(Olimpo2966).Imaginativescenariosabout ArchelaosandtheotherMacedoniankingsexclusionfromthepanhellenicshrinesandthe creation of counterOlympics at Dion (cf. Badian Greeks 35; Borza, Archelaos 129) not onlyareexplicitlycontradictedbytheuniqueavailableliterarysource(Solinus9.16),butare also implicitly refuted by epigraphic evidence such as the Epidauros list and the inscribed tripodfromthegreattombofVergina(M.Andronikos,Vergina:TheRoyalTombs,Athens1984, 16566;seenowMari,Olimpo3536).FromEpirustoo,inthefirsthalfofthesixthcentury,the Molossian Alkon had been present at the Olympic Games along with other young Greek nobles(Herod.6.127.4;cf.Cabanes,LesIllyriens24;Malkin,Ambiguities201. [36].Aesch.2.32;cf.Badian,Greeks37withn.28;N.G.L.Hammond,LiteraryEvidence forMacedonianSpeech,Historia43(1994)13435(=CollectedStudiesIV8081). [37].P.Marchetti,AproposdescomptesdeDelphessouslesarchontatsdeThon(324/3)et deLaphis(327/6),BCH101(1977)14,n.37;N.G.L.Hammond,SomePassagesinArrian Concerning Alexander, CQ 30 (1980) 46263; id., Were Makedones Enrolled in the Amphictyonic Council in 346?, Electronic Antiquity I/3 (1993). See now F. Lefvre, LAmphictioniepylodelphique:histoireetinstitutions,Paris1998,94101;Mari,Olimpo71,n.4. [38].Dem.,19.327. [39].Hall,Ethnicities173,n.8. [40]. Cf. though Badian, Greeks 3940 and 49, n. 50, who is much more cautious in his discussionofthatparticularpassage. [41].Borza,Greeks125. [42].Borza,Greeks136,n.2. [43].M.B.Hatzopoulos,PrefazioneinMari,Olimpo910. [44].M.B.Hatzopoulos,TheBoundariesofHellenisminEpirusduringAntiquity,inM.B. Sakellariou(ed.),Epirus,Athens1997,14042. [45].Hatzopoulos,InstitutionsI473,n.4. [46]. M. B. Hatzopoulos, Epirus, Macedonia, Cyprus and Other Controverted Cases of Greek Identity (; forthcoming); cf. P. J. Stylianou, The Age of the Kingdoms. A PoliticalHistoryofCyprusintheArchaicandClassicalPeriods(; Nicosia1989)492[117]510[136]. [47].Cf.G.Hill,HistoryofCyprus,vol.I,Cambridge1949,9394. [48].Cf.O.Masson,Lesinscriptionschypriotessyllabiques,Paris19832,4647. [49].Forinstance,nottotheArcadians. [50].Thuc.3.94.5. [51].Hesych.s.v.. [52].Ath.,Deipn.12.516a. [53].Cf.Perlman,City11516.

FOR FAIR USE ONLY

12[54]. The word ethnicity, as already mentioned, is practically untranslatable in languages such as Greek, German or French, except as a calque from Engish. Its success in the latter language,andinparticularinAmericanEnglish,isprobablyduetotheshiftinmeaningof thetermnationinacountrywithoutalongnationaltradition,which,insteadofthepeople, cametobeusedforthestate,causingtheneedforthecreationofanewterm.ForaGreek theexistenceofanorforaGermantheexistenceofanationisclearlyindependant fromthatofastateapparatus. [55].Nearchosismentionedamongthenotables,butArrian(ratherthanNearchoshimself, Ind.18.4)classifieshimamongtheMacedonians(Borza,Greeks13738,n.14). [56]. While probably of Cretan origin... (Borza, Greeks 138, n. 14, my italics). It is not a questionofprobabilitybutofcertaintybasedonbothliteraryandepigraphicalevidence(cf. H.Berve,DasAlexanderreichaufprosopographischerGrundlageIII,Munich1926,269,no544). [57].Cf.Badian,Greeks3940and49,n.4850. [58].N.G.L.HammondG.T.Griffith,AHistoryofMacedonia,vol.II,Oxford1979,381. [59].E.Badian,AlexanderandtheGreeksofAsia,AncientSocietiesandInstitutions.Studies PresentedtoVictorEhrenberg,Oxford1966,3796. [60]M.B.Sakellariou,TheInhabitants,inM.B.Sakellariou(ed.),Macedonia,Athens1983, 52;cf.Hall,Ethnicities173,n.8. [61].Herod.144.2. [62].Giventheobviousopportunismofthepassage,itisvaintodelveintotheexactmeaning of the term, which in Greek has meanings as varied as the word , from which it is composed.Inanycase,itisnoteworthythatitcanbeusedtodenotenotnecessarilyanother race or nation, but just another Greek population (cf. Thuc. 1.141, aptly adduced by Daskalakis,Hellenism274,n.56.). [63]. Isocr., Phil 107108: , , ... , , . Cf.Daskalakis,Hellenism24956. [64].Cf.Ephor.FGrHist70frg143;PseudoSkylax33;65;66;Dion.Calliph.24and3136. [65].NearlyacenturyandahalflateraMacedonianKing,inasarcasticrepartee(Pol.18.5.7 9: ; , , ;) exploited the same ambiguity in order to stress the absurdity of the proposed exclusion of Macedonia from Greece. Cf. le commentaire de P. Cabanes, Cit et ethnos dans la Grce ancienne,MlangesP.LvqueII,Paris1989,75:Suivrecettevoiequiconduitlexclusion de la Grce dune trs grande rgion de la Grce septentrionale, cest aussi carter de lhellnismeaussibienlOlympecherauxdieuxdupanthondesHellnesquelesanctuaire de Dodone, dj visit au temps de lIliade, et le pays des morts arros par lArchron et le Cocyte runis proximit du Nekromanteion dEphyre de Thesprotie, o Ulysse vient la rencontredudevinTiresias,selonlercitdelOdysse. [66].Whichprovedtobeamistake,foritenabledantiMacedonianpoliticianstoconstruea HellenicidentityfromwhichMacedoniawasexcluded. [67]. See in particular, F. Geyer, Makedonien bis zur Thronbesteigung Philipps II, Munich and Berlin 1930, 32: Nicht anders steht es mit dem Hinweis darauf, dass die Makedonen sich namentlich in der Zeit Alexanders des Grossen und der Diadochen als ein Volk fr sich gefhlthtten:DiesesGefhlwarlediglicheinAusflussnationalenStolzesaufdieunerhrten Leistungen, die ihnen die stliche Welt zu Fssen gelegt hatte, eine Wirkung des stolzen

FOR FAIR USE ONLY

13Bewussteins,auchdenGriechenmilitrischundpolitischunendlichberlegenzusein.Ganz hnlich haben sich die Preussen zur Zeit Friedrichs des Grossen allen anderen Deutschen gegenber als ein besonderes Volk gefhlt, haben sich mit Stolz als Preussen und nicht als Deutschenbekannt. Source:http://macedoniaevidence.org/identity.html

FOR FAIR USE ONLY

14

2 THENATIONALITYOFTHEMACEDONIANS byMichalisSakellarioy,Macedonia:4000YearsofGreekHistoryandCivilization,pages4463, 1983,EkdotikeAthinon Therehasbeenmuchdiscussioninthenineteenthandtwentiethcenturiesofthenationality of the Macedonians. The views expressed are basically three: the first recognizes the Macedonians as Greeks; the second denies that they were Greeks; and the third adopts an intermediate position. The same views have been propounded with reference to a more specific subject: the Macedonian tongue. This depends upon the more general question, however. The first view has met with the support or the acceptance of the majority of historiansandphilologists.44Thosewhodifferfromthemandareopposedtotheideathatthe Macedonians and their tongue were Greek in origin are not agreed as to who the Macedonians were or what language they spoke. Some are of the opinion that the Macedonians were Illyrians and Macedonian an Illyrian dialect;45 others regard them as Thracians;46othersseethemasadistinctpeople,withaseparatelanguage,47andlastlyothers havedeclinedtoexpressanydefiniteopinion.48Thethirdviewalsohasitsvariations.Some, for example,have asserted that the Macedonians separated from the Greeksat a very early point in time,49 while others suggest that the Macedonians were a product of intercourse betweenGreeksandnonGreeks.50Referenceshouldalsobemadeatthispointtothosewho feel that the available evidence does not permit the drawing of conclusions as to the nationalityoftheMacedoniansorthenatureoftheirspeech.51 Thesedifferencesofopinionaredue(1)tosomeextenttothenatureoftheevidenceand(2)to nonacademicreasons.Thetruthis: 1) The information handed down from antiquity concerning the nationality of the Macedonians is contradictory, and very few examples of their language remain; 2) the conclusionsreachedhavefrequentlybeeninfluencedbytheviewsofvariousmodernpowers (andnotonlyBalkanstates)onMacedonia. Theargumentsusedbyallsideshaveremainedwithinthepagesofmonographsorarticlesin academicjournals.Outsidethiscontext,thevariousviewshavebeenpresentedonlyinavery brief and dogmatic fashion (frequently in a single phrase). In the belief that the readers to whomthisvolumeisaddressedwillwishtoacquirearounded,comprehensivepictureofthe issuesinvolvedinthequestionofthenationalityoftheMacedonians,Ishallattempttosetthe evidence before them as briefly as is consistent with completeness, to enable them to check theconclusionsIdrawfromit. 1.ANCIENTTRADITIONS,TESTIMONIAANDOPINIONS Many passages in ancient authors record echoes of the traditions, testimonia and opinions regarding the nationality of the Macedonians, or, more narrowly, of the Macedonian royal family.Weshallfirstexaminewhatthesepassageshavetosay.Aftercompletingthisreview, we shall proceed to an assessment of their content and arrive at definitive conclusions derivedfromthiskindofevidence. a)ConcerningtheMacedonianpeople

FOR FAIR USE ONLY

15It is convenient to refer separately to the passages (1) that support the idea that the MacedonianswereGreeks;(2)thatareopposedtothisidea;and(3)thatcanbeusedtoargue eithercase,orthatareinconclusive.Weshallalso(4)dealwiththehypothesesputforward bymodernhistoriansontheviewheldbyPhilipandAlexanderastothenationalityoftheir subjects. 1)Referencehasbeenmadeabove(seepage46)toanancienttradition,accordingtowhich the Dorians were descended from a section of the Makednoi or Makedones. This tradition camedowntoHerodotoseitherthroughinformationhehimselfgatheredinsomeDoriccity,52 or through a very ancient epic poem, the Aigimios.53 The surviving fragments of this poem, togetherwithothersources,revealmorepreciselythattheDorianswereformedbytheunion ofsomeMacedonianswithothertribes.TheDorianswerepureGreeks.Variousattemptsto derive one section of them from Illyrian origins have been unsuccessful. In any case, these attempts were concernedwith the Doric tribe the Hylleis, whichwas certainly not identical with the Makednoi.54 The fact that the Dorians were Greek naturally presupposes that the tribes of which they were composed were also Greek, and these include the Makednoi or Makedones,atadateearlierthanthefourteenthcentury(seepage46). A Persian inscription dating from 513 B.C. records the European peoples who were at that datesubjecttotheGreatKing.OneoftheseisdescribedasYaunaTakabaraIonianswhose headdress is like a shield. The Persians, like the other eastern peoples of antiquity, are knowntohaveappliedthetermIonianstoalltheGreeks;ontheotherhandtheheaddress resembling a shield has been rightly recognized as that depictedon Macedonian coins. The peoplecalledbythePersiansGreekswhoseheaddressislikeashieldarethereforeidentified with the Macedonians. The identification is supported by the fact that, in another Persian inscription, of 479 or 478, also listing the peoples of Europe subject to the Great King, this name is missing; at this date, it is known that the Macedonians were fighting the Persians. ThisPersiannamefortheMacedoniansistheearliestpieceofdirectevidenceavailablesofar forthenationalityoftheMacedonians. 55 In a fragment of Hellanikos (fifth century B.C.), Makedon, the mythical founder of the Macedonians, appearsas the son of Aiolos.56 Thisgenealogical relationshipreflects theidea thattheMacedonianswereasectionoftheAiolians,asubdivisionoftheGreekrace. After the battle of Issos, Alexander the Great sent a letter to Darius that began as follows: YourancestorscametoMacedoniaandtherestofGreeceanddidusmuchharmthoughwe haddonethemnopriorinjury;IhavebeenappointedcommanderinchiefoftheGreeksand invaded Asia in the desire to take vengeance on Persia for your aggressions.57 From this extractitemergesclearlythatAlexanderregardedMacedoniaasaGreekcountry,identified the sufferings of Macedonia at the hands of the Persians with the destruction they had wroughtinsouthernGreece,andrepresentedhimselfastheavengerofallthesewrongs. The formulation Macedonia and the rest of Greece also occurs in the treaty of alliance betweenPhilipVofMacedoniaandHannibal.58InthesametextthephrasetheMacedonians andtherestoftheGreeksoccurstwice.Theambassadorofthissameking,inhisaddressto the Aitolians in 200 B.C., ranged the Macedonians with the Greeks and not with the foreigners()andbarbarians().59 OtherpassagesdemonstratethatnonMacedonianGreeksalsothoughtoftheMacedoniansas their kindred, and of Macedonia as a Greek country. In 217 B.C. Agelaos of Naupaktos, speaking to a gathering at which Philip V and representatives of his allies were present,

FOR FAIR USE ONLY

16prayed that internecine wars between the Greeks would cease.60 In 211 B.C., Lykiskos, representativeoftheAkarnanians,describedtheMacedoniansaskinsfolkoftheAchaeans.61 Macedonia is accounted part of Greece by various authors.62 As late as the second century A.D.,theEphesiansreferredinadecreetotheMacedoniansandtheotherGreekpeoples.63

2) The general sense of a passage in Thucydides gives the impression that the historian consideredtheMacedoniansbarbarians.64TheMacedoniansarealsodistinguishedfromthe Greeks and classified with the barbarians in the Peri Politeias, an anonymous work written about the end of the fifth or the beginning of the fourth century B.C.65 Various ancient geographers and historians of the classical and postclassical periods, such as Ephoros, PseudoSkylax, Dionysios son of Kalliphon and Dionysios Periegetes, put the northern borders of Greece at the line from the Ambrakian Gulf to the Peneios.66 Isokrates places Macedonia outside the boundaries of Greece and describes the Macedonians as (anunrelatedrace).67MedeiosofLarisa,whoaccompaniedAlexanderon hiscampaigninAsia,callstheThessaliansthemostnortherlyoftheGreeks.68

3)IncontrastwiththegenealogyofthemythicalfounderoftheMacedonianstobefoundin Hellanikos (see above), there are three other genealogies of Makedon in which he is not included in the stemma of Hellen. About 700 B.C., Hesiod refers to Makedon as the son of ZeusandThyia.69PseudoSkymnoscallshim,thatis,bornfromtheearth.70Pseudo Apollodoros and Aelian reflect a tradition according to which Makedon was the son of Lykaon.71 However, the lack of any genealogical connection between Makedon and Hellen does not imply that the Macedonians were not Greeks. These three genealogies were not concernedwiththequestionofthenationalityoftheMacedonians,aswasthatpreservedby Hellanikos, but had different sources and different concerns. This also happens with many other genealogies of the mythical founders of Greek tribes. I shall refer here to only two examples:inthesamefragmentofHesiod,ZeusandThyiaaresaidtobetheparentsnotonly ofMakedon,butalsoofMagnes,theeponymousherooftheGreektribetheMagnetes.Arkas, founder of another Greek tribe, is usually said to be the offspring of Zeus and the nymph Kallisto. Although the three genealogies of Makedon referred to above do not indicate that the Macedonians were distinct from the Greeks, we cannot deduce from this negative conclusionitsoppositethattheysupporttheviewthattheMacedonianswereGreeks.The fragment of Hesiod, on the other hand, does reflect a knowledge of Magnetes, who were Greeks.ItalsoportraysthemotherofMakedonasthesisterofHellen. WhenAlexanderI,kingoftheMacedonians,wantedtocompeteatOlympia(possiblyin496 B.C.),71hisprospectiveopponentsattemptedtoexcludehimbyarguingthatonlyGreeks,and notbarbarians,couldtakepartintheOlympicgames.AlexanderprovedthathewasaGreek andwasthereforeallowedtocompete.72Wemaysafelyconcludefromthisepisodethatthe GreekswhoattendedtheOlympicgameshadnoreason,atthebeginningofthefifthcentury B.C., to know the nationality of the Macedonians. It is also certain that when Alexander I submittedtotheHellanodikaiproofsofhisown,butnotofhissubjectsGreekdescent,heleft the question open. But this was not the question that had been posed. Thus it cannot be argued that Alexander I considered the Macedonians to be Greeks; but neither can the reverse.Thesesameconsiderationsholdgoodinanumberofothercases:when,forexample, AlexanderI,speakingonlyofhimself,saysforIamaGreekbyrace73orwhenotherkings,or theMacedonianroyalfamilyingeneral,aredescribedasGreek.74Onefurtherpointshouldbe added: the application ofthe term philhellene to Alexander I does not implythat the king was not a Greek. Jason of Pherai was also so called,75 and a number of other passages demonstratethat thisepithet was alsoapplied to Greeks inantiquity, in which cases it was equivalenttopatriotic.76

FOR FAIR USE ONLY

17 The distinction is made in a passage of Isokrates between Greeks, Macedonians and barbarians.77 Those who believe that the Macedonians were not Greeks concentrate on the distinction between Greeks and Macedonians rather than that between Macedonians and barbarians. From the context, it emerges clearly that the basis used by the author to distinguish between the Greeks and the Macedonians was the difference in their political relationshiptoPhilip. 4)ThosewhobelievethattheMacedonianswerenotGreekhaveusedtheargumentthatthe term Makedones is never employed in negotiations, treaties and other political actions in whichtheMacedonianstatewasinvolved,aswastheGreekcustom(cf.theuseofAthenaioi, Lakedaimonioi,Korinthioi)butthatitwasalwaysrepresentedbyitsking.EvenPhilipdidnot admit his subjects to the Delphic Amphiktyony in 346 B.C. nor to the confederation Of the Greeksin338/337B.C.Thisargument,however,doesnottakeaccountofthefactthatthose ancient Greek states that were ruled by monarchs entered into agreements and negotiated alliances through the agency and in the name of their rulers. It was thus perfectly normal practice for Philip, but not the Macedonians, to become a member of the Delphic Amphiktyony.AsfortheconfederationoftheGreeks,evenPhiliphimselfdidnotbecomea member,butratherassumedthetitlesandresponsibilitiesofitsleaderandofcommander inchiefofitsmilitaryforces. ThesamescholarsarguethatAlexandertheGreatdidnotbelievethattheMacedonianswere Greeks,supportingtheircasebyreferencetothefactthatwhenhesentspoilstoAthens,he accompaniedthemwiththeinscriptionAlexanderandtheGreekswiththeexceptionofthe Lacedaemonians.... and that in many passages of Arrian he addresses his soldiers as Macedonians and Greeks. In both cases, however, the term Greeks is used to indicate the soldiersoftheconfederationoftheGreeksof338/337,whichwasrenewedafterthedeathof PhilipandwhichbestoweduponAlexanderthesamepowersandofficesithadgiventohis father.Thus,intheinscription,Alexanderuseshisownnametoincludehissubjectsandthe term Greeks to cover the soldiers of the allied cities. In his speeches, Macedonians and Greeks is addressed to the two component parts of his army with each of which he had a different relationship: to the Macedonians he was king, to the Greeks commanderinchief. Inanyevent,AlexanderslettertoDarius,referredtoabove(seepage49)leavesnodoubtthat AlexanderconsideredhisMacedonianstobeGreeks. 5) Lastly, on the following grounds, it has been maintained that Macedonians no more felt like Greeks than Greeks recognized them as compatriots: a) many thou sands of Greek mercenaries served the Persians during Alexanders campaigns; b) others who eventually enlisted in Alexanders army revolted after his death, and seventeen thousand were butcheredbyMacedonians;c)assoonasthenewsofAlexandersdeathreachedGreece,the maincitiestriedtothrowofftheMacedonianyoke. These arguments are unconvincing. Let us consider how many Greek states should be discounted as Greek because they encountered Greek mercenaries on the field of battle; or becausetheyrevoltedagainstGreekdomination;orbecausetheyshedthebloodofthosewho hadrevolted.IntheparticularconnectionoftheGreeksofthecitystatesandAlexander,and indeedwithPhilip,itshouldnotbeignoredthattheseweredetermined,toalargeextent,by fear of the popular classes, that the domination of the Macedonians would reinforce the oligarchic parties and limit the autonomy of the city states. Because the mercenaries came from the poorer classes they probably harboured deeper resentment of the Macedonians. Finally,itshouldbenotedthattherevoltoftheGreekmercenariesin323B.C.wasmotivated

FOR FAIR USE ONLY

18byadesiretoreturnhomeafterlongyearsofabsence,firstintheserviceoftheGreatKing andthenofAlexander. b)Concerningtheroyalfamily 1)FromthetimethatAlexanderIassertedatOlympiathathewasGreek,andthetradition thattheMacedoniandynastywasdescendedfromtheTemenidsofArgosbecamegenerally known,itwascommonlyacceptedbytheGreeksthattheMacedonianroyalfamilywaspart oftheGreekrace(seeabove). 2)Therewereexceptions,however:inafragmentofthespeechforthepeopleofLarisaby theoratorThrasymachusofChalkedon(secondhalfofthefifthcentury),Archelaos,kingof the Macedonians, is described as a barbarian, 79 and similar descriptions of Philip were for mulatedbyDemosthenes80andevenbyAischinesatthebeginningofhispoliticalcareer.81 Evaluationofthecategoricalevidence Thusfarwehavesetouttheevidencetobederivedfromancienttraditions,testimoniaand opinions concerning the nationality of the Macedonians or, more specifically, of the Macedonian royal family, distinguishing between that which expresses a definite view, whether for or against the idea that they were Greeks, and that which is inconclusive or inconsistent(seepage49).Weshallnowattempttoevaluatetheformer,withaviewtoseeing whichofitiscredibleandwhichisnot. 1) Traditions. Amongst the categorical evidence, we have met one ancient tradition that connects the Macedonians with the Dorians and another which traces the royal family to ArgosinthePeloponnese.Theformercontainsakerneloftruththatisasynopsisofevents earlierthanthemiddleofthethirteenthcentury.Fromthisitcanbededucedindirectly,but with certainty, that the Macedonians, like the Dorians, were Greeks (see page 49). The opinions of historians are divided on the second tradition: some accept that it reflects a historicalmemory,whileothersbelievethatitarosefromthecircumstancethattheTemenids whoruledinMacedoniahadthesamenameastheroyalhouseoftheArgives,andexplain this fact in terms of the presence of a Macedonian element amongst the Dorians. The first viewfoundersonthephenomenontobeobservedinearlysocietieswherebytheroyalfamily emerged from within the ranks of the tribe. The second view, on the contrary, is consistent withthethesisthattheDorianswereinpartdescendedfromMacedonians.TheTemenidsof Macedonia will have been part of that branch of the original tribe that did not move southwards, while the Temenids of Argos will have been descended from a branch that migratedfromthePindostocentralGreecewhere,withothergroups,ithelpedtoformthe Dorianpeople. 2)TheofficialMacedonianview.InofficialdocumentsofAlexandertheGreatandPhilipV, Macedonia is described as a Greek country; in the first of them, moreover, Alexander representshimselfastheavengeroftheevilswroughtbythePersiansbothinMacedoniaand in the rest of Greece; and an ambassador of Philip V classifies the Macedonians with the Greeks in contradistinction with foreigners () and barbarians () (see page49).TheMacedoniankings,therefore,althoughtheybelievedthattheyhadadifferent ancestryfromtheirsubjects,didnotconsiderthemselvestoberulingoutsideGreece,orover apeopleforeigntotheGreeks.

FOR FAIR USE ONLY

193)ExternalTestimonia.Therestoftheevidencecitedaboveconsistsoftestimoniaaboutthe Macedoniansderivingfromexternalobservers.Bytheirverynature,thesearelessvaluableas evidence than a genuine tradition recalling that a branch of the Macedonians had made its contribution to the formation of the Greek tribe of the Dorians, or the official Macedonian view. Let us examine them in their own right, however, as though we did not have more reliableevidenceatourdisposal. Theexternaltestimoniafallintotwoconflictinggroups.APersianinscriptionof513B.C.,the representation of Makedon as son of Aiolos in a fragment of Hellanikos, the speeches of Agelaos and Lykiskos, and a number of passages in other authors and a decree of the Ephesians afford evidence in support of the thesis that the Macedonians were Greeks (see page 49). In contrast, Thucydides, the unknown author of the Peri Politeias, Isokrates, Medeios, Ephoros,PseudoSkylax, Dionysios son of Kalliphonand Dionysios Periegetes,all depicttheMacedoniansasnonGreeks,orMacedoniaasanonGreekcountry(seepage49). The passages in the orators that portray Archelaos and Philip II as barbarians point in the same direction (see page 52). In which of the two groups should we place our trust? The Persianinscriptionisanearlyanddirectpieceofevidence.Theearliestoftheauthorsofthe firstgroupisthesolewriterwhoknewtheMacedoniansatfirsthand:heresidedatthecourt ofAmyntasI,sometimebeforethemiddleofthefifthcenturyB.C. 82Hehimself,asanativeof Mytilene,spokeAiolic,andrecognizedintheMacedonianlanguageadialectresemblinghis own: it was for this reason that he made Makedon son of Aiolos. On the other hand, it is interestingthatoneoftheauthorsinthesecondgroup,Ephoros,referstothePamphyliansas barbarians83thoughtheywereinfactGreeks.ThisdemonstratesthatsomeGreekscameclose tobeingthoughtbarbariansbytheirfellowGreeks.Thebackwardinstitutionsandcoarseness oftheMacedonianswillhavebeenamongthereasonswhytheyseemedtootherGreekstobe barbarians.TherhetoricalapostrophesofThrasymachosandDemosthenesshould,afortiori, beconsideredunreliable:theformerwasattemptingtoarousethepeopleofLarisa,thelatter theAthenians,toresisttheMacedoniankings,andtheydescribedthemasbarbariansinspite of the fact that they had officially and widely been recognized as Greeks.84 The rhetorical accusations that they were barbarians made not against the Macedonians but against their kings,referinanycasetocourtscandals,ortotheincontinenceandviolenceoftherulers(cf. PlatoonArchelaosandTheopompos85andotherauthorsonPhilip.). 4) Conclusion. The hypothesis that the Macedonians were Greeks is supported by all the reliableevidence:theancienttraditionthattheDoriansweredescendedfromasectionofthe Macedonians; the view the Macedonian kings held about themselves; and the testimony of Hellanikos, who lived at the Macedonian court. All the testimonia that contradict this view are external and derive either from observers who might have been mistaken, or from enemiesoftheMacedonians. 2.THEMACEDONIANTONGUE The earliest Macedonian written documents contain only names. When more extensive Macedoniantextsbegintoappear,theyareexpressedintheAtticdialect.Thisfactfurnishes oneoftheargumentsusedbythosewhodenythattheMacedonianswereGreeksandclaim that the Macedonians were a people who spoke a different tongue and who became Hellenized.ThosewhosupporttheviewthattheMacedonianswereGreekscounterthattheir kings introduced the Attic dialect into the court and the administration because the local dialect was undeveloped; Attic thus became widespread amongst the Macedonians as a means of expressing themselves in writing. Both these explanations are hypotheses that requireproof.Andtheproofofeitherdependsonotherfactorsthatwillbeexaminedbelow.

FOR FAIR USE ONLY

20 DespitethelackofMacedoniantextswritteninthelocallanguage,thenatureofMacedonian may be discerned from certain testimonia; from about one hundred surviving Macedonian words;andfromseveralhundredMacedoniannames. 1)Testimonia.Therearethreeancientpiecesofindirectevidenceofaconclusivenature:a)In ascenefromtheAtticcomedyMacedonians,bythefifthcenturywriterStrattis,anAthenian asks ; (sledfish, what do you mean?), and a Macedonian replies (whayeAtticscaahammerfush,mafreen).86In ordertoappreciatethevalueoftheMacedoniansreplyfortheproblemunderdiscussion,we must not forget that, as is clear from many passages in Aristophanes, the Attic comedians madetheirnonGreeksspeakbrokenGreekwithanadmixtureofbarbarianwords(someof them imaginary), while Lacedaemonians, Megarians, Boiotians and other Greeks spoke in theirowndialects(albeitwithanumberofinaccuracies).TheMacedoniansreplyisingood Greek with dialect (, ) and archaizing () elements, b) Alexander the Great, having selected thirty thousand Persian youths, gave an order that they were to learnGreeklettersandbetrainedintheuseofMacedonianweapons.87 Fromthisitmaybe deducedthattheMacedoniansoldiersspokeGreek:itwouldbepointlesstoteachtheyoung PersianswhoweretofightalongsidetheMacedoniansalanguagethattheMacedoniansdid notunderstand,c)AnambassadorfromMacedonia,speakingtotheAitoliansin200B.C.says oftheMacedonians,theAitolians,andtheAkarnaniansthattheyspokethesamelanguage.88

The expressions ,89 ,90 ,91 ,92 ,93 patrio sermone, sermonis patrii,94 ,95 have been taken by opponents of the thesis that the Macedonians were Greeks as indicating that their language differed from Greek; the supporters of the thesis declare that these formulations indicate a Greek dialect (cf. , , , , , , , , etc.) The expressionsareinfactsusceptibleofeitherinterpretation,96andcannotthereforebeusedto formpartoftheargumentationwithwhicheitherissupported.Theirsensewillbecomeclear afterMacedonianhasbeenshowntobeGreek,ornot,fromotherdata.

2)Words.Today,overahundredMacedonianwordsandafewhundredMacedoniannames are known from a variety of sources. Although the names presuppose words, they will be examinedseparatelyforanumberofmethodologicalreasons. A total of one hundred and twelve words, with ninetynine different stems, are attested directly.Ofthese,sixtyfivewords,orsixtythreestems,havebeenpreservedinlexica,while fortyseven words, with thirtysix stems, survive in various ancient texts, none of which is Macedonian.97 AllthewordsinthesecondgroupareGreek.Theopponentsoftheviewthat theMacedonianswereGreeksrefusetotakethemintoconsideration,arguingthattheywere allwordsborrowedbytheMacedoniansfromGreekatthetimetheybegantousetheAttic dialectastheofficiallanguagewhichtheyascribetothereignofPhilipII.However:a)the word and the form are not Attic in origin, and are attributed to the MacedonianshalfacenturybeforetheaccessionofPhilip(seeabove);b)themajorityofthese words are military and, as has already been observed, it would be illogical to suppose that PhilipwouldimposeaforeignmilitaryterminologyontheMacedonians;moreover,twelveof thesesamewordsarenotattestedascommontoalldialectsandfourteenmore,whilebeing commonwords,haveadifferentmeaninginMacedonian.98IndealingwiththeMacedonian material in the lexica, the opponents of the view that the Macedonians were Greeks have madeusetovaryingextentsofthefollowingmethod:theyselectfromamongstthesewords

FOR FAIR USE ONLY

21the ones that cannot be shown to have a Greek derivation; they do not always inquire whether the form of some of these has changed as a result of copying errors; they suggest derivations for these words from IndoEuropean roots without always demonstrating adequately that their derivations are wellgrounded; using this kind of etymology as their point of departure they draw up rules for the conversion of IndoEuropean vowels or consonantstoMacedonian;finally,sincethesamerulescanbedetectedinwordsthatarenot attested as Macedonian in the sources, they declare that these words, notwithstanding, shouldbeconsideredMacedonian. The latest, and most complete, monograph on the nationality of the Macedonians, devotes hundredsofpagestothestudyofMacedonianwords,andcontainssomeperceptivecritical observations and original views. It concludes that fiftytwo of the sixtyfive words in the lexicaareGreek,whiletheremainingthirteenincludenotonlygenuinelynonGreekwords butalsoambiguousforms,copyistserrorsandwordsusedbychildren.100

Let us assume, however, that all the Macedonian words handed down by the lexica are demonstrably nonGreek (which is not claimed even by the most extreme opponents of the theorythattheMacedonianswereGreeks).Eveninthiseventuality,itwouldnotnecessarily follow that the Macedonians did not speak Greek. The reason is that these words are not a representative sample of the Macedonian tongue. This would require that they had been preserved at random and from a variety of sources. Quite the reverse is true: they have all beencataloguedinlexicawhosepurposeistheinterpretationofrarewordsonly.Itfollows that the Alexandrian scholars who were the first to compose lexica of this sort (the forerunnersofthesurvivinglexicainwhichthewordsinquestionarepreserved)foundonly afewdozenMacedonianwordsthatrequiredinterpretation.However,thereisnolanguage ordialectthatdoesnothaveanumberofwordsofforeignorigin. 3)Names. InadditiontotheMacedonianethnicname,wetodayknowtheethnicnamesof someoftheMacedoniantribes,scoresofplacenamesinMacedoniaanddozensofnamesof gods and heroes, the names of six festivals and twelve months, and hundreds of personal names,coveringthousandsofmenandwomen. TheethnicnamesoftheElimiotai,LynkestaiandOrestaiderivefromplacenames.Thefirsthas anundoubtedlyGreektermination.Somescholarsbelievethattheofthesecondandthird areanaffixthatisfoundinIllyriannames.InthenameoftheOrestaiatleast,thebelongsto the root () and the to the termination (), which is Greek. Furthermore, both the OrestaiandtheLynkestaiwereundoubtedlyGreeks(seepage59). Alexander I, other Macedonian kings, Philip II, Alexander the Great and his successors all gave Greek names to the cities they founded; Alexander the Great and some of his officers wentfurtherandtranslatedsomeofthelocalnamesintoGreek.Thoseopposedtotheview thattheMacedonianswereGreeksarenotpreparedtotakethisevidenceintoconsideration, justifying their stance with the argument that it all postdates the introduction of Attic into the court and the state administration. There is no proof of this argument, however, other than the claim that the Macedonians did not speak Greek, and it is this claim that the argument is designed to support. The introduction of this argument into the chain of reasoningdesignedtodemonstratetheaboveviewthusleadstoaviciouscircle.Inorderto avoidtheaccusationthatweareusingthesesametoponymsasproofthattheMacedonians were Greek, while the evidence for and against this view is still being discussed, we shall restrict ourselves to toponyms in areas where the expansion of the Macedonians antedates Philip, and to those names attested before his reign. Some of these names were Greek and

FOR FAIR USE ONLY

22somenonGreek.ThelatterdonotprovethattheMacedonianswerenotGreeks,fortheareas inquestionwereinhabitedformanymillennia(fromthebeginningofhumanhabitationuntil c.2300/2200,andfrom1900untiltheeighth,seventh,sixthandeventhefifthcenturiesB.C.) bynonGreekpeoples.Wealsoknowthatplacenamessurviveevenafterthedisappearance oftheethnicgroupsfromwhichtheyderive.Further,ifthenonGreektoponymsofwestern andcentralMacedoniaareattributedtotheMacedonians,thishastwoconsequences.Firstly, wehavetoconcedethatthePelasgians,thePaiones,theBottiaioi,theEordoi,theAlmopes, the Phrygians, the Thracians and other races left no mark on the toponyms of Macedonia, which is improbable. Secondly, the following problem arises: if we exclude the possibility that the Macedonians were responsible for the Greek toponyms in western and central MacedoniabeforePhilip,towhichGreeksaretheytobeattributed?Itispossiblethatonlythe namesHaliakmonandPieriaareearlierthantheMacedonianexpansion.Therearemanymore toponymsthatareconnectedbyoursourceswiththeMacedonianexpansion,orthatcannot be dated to the period when the ProtoGreeks occupied Macedonia, for in this case they wouldexhibitamorearchaicformwhichwouldhavebeenfossilizedorcorruptedthrough theinterventionofanonGreeklanguage. Of seventytwo names and epithets of gods and heroes, fiftysix are panhellenic or Greek from a linguistic point of view, at least one is Greek with nonGreek phonetics, eleven are foreign (nine of these came from areas where nonMacedonian populations survived), and twoderivefromforeigntoponyms,withaGreektermination;therestaredoubtful(seepage 60).TheproportionofnonGreeknamesofgodsisverysmall,especiallyinviewofthefact that they are attested at very late periods, when the entire Greek world was feeling the influenceofforeignreligions. AllthenamesoffestivalsareGreek(seepage60).AllthenamesofthemonthshaveGreek terminations,andonlytwoofthemhaverootsthatarepossiblynonGreek(seepage60). Nocomprehensivecollectionofthepersonalnameshasyetbeenmade.Thefewcollections that have been made for prosopographical purposes have not inspired any exhaustive linguisticstudiesorstatisticalevaluations.Areviewofthenamesbornebymembersofthe royalfamilyoftheTemenids,ofthedynastiesofupperMacedonia,andotherMacedonians, 101 beforetheruleofPhilip,revealsonlyverysmallpercentagesforeachofthethreegroups.The recentdiscoveryoflargenumbersofgravestelaiatVerginahasincreasedourknowledgeof Macedonian personal names by adding dozens of examples. With one or two exceptions, theseareGreek,andanumberofthemdatefrombeforetheaccessionofPhilip.Theyareall namesofmembersofthemiddleclasses. ThosewhodenythattheMacedonianswereGreeksassertthattheytooktheGreeknamesfor gods,heroes,festivals,monthsandpeoplefromtheGreeks.Inthefirstplace,however,there isnootherexampleofapeopleneighbouringontheGreekswhosenameswere95%Greek beforethemiddleofthefourthcentury;manycenturieslaterthanthis,alargepercentageof Paionians, Thracians, Mysians, Lydians, Karians and Lycians had local names, even though theyhadbeguntofeelGreekculturalinfluencesmuchearlier.Furthermore,anumberofthe Greeksounding names given by the Macedonians to gods, heroes, festivals, months and personsdonotoccuroutsideMacedoniaorareasinwhichMacedonianshadsettled. ThemajorityofMacedoniannamesinallcategoriesareeithernounsassuch,oradjectives,or their derivatives, or a variety of compounds; they also include a number of verbstems, prepositionsandaffixes.Asaresult,thenameshelpustoformapictureofthevocabulary, phonetics and rules of derivation and synthesis of the Macedonian tongue which is

FOR FAIR USE ONLY

23quantitativelyricherandqualitativelysuperiortothatderivedfromthehundredorsoroots of words that have been handed down directly. Consequently, in attempting to trace the featuresofMacedonian,itisnecessarytogobeyondthewordsandmakeuseofallthedata tobegleanedfromtheMacedoniannames. Synthesis a)ThenatureoftheMacedoniantongue Fromtheaboveevidencetestimonia,wordsandnamesitisclearthatMacedonianwas notaseparatelanguagebutaGreekdialect. b)TherelationshipofMacedoniantootherGreekdialects ThefactthattherearenotextswritteninMacedonianpreventsusfromformingasgoodan ideaofthisdialectanditsrelationshiptootherGreekdialectsaswecanforthoseinwhich evenafewwrittendocumentssurvive.Nonetheless,thematerialatourdisposalenablesusto makeanumberofobservationsthatdemonstratearelationshipbetweenMacedonianandthe West Greek dialect (to which Doric and northwest Greek belong), and the Aiolic and Thessaliandialects.102

1) Macedonian and West Greek: a) in place of b) nominative singular of certain compoundsininsteadofc)anumberofwords(tothosealreadyrecorded103shouldbe addedtheword,theexistenceofwhichinMacedonianwasrecentlydemonstratedby the name , read on one of the stelai from Vergina (fig.31); this name will have meantHewhoisofthewoodoftheoakcf.theMacedonianname:Hewhois ofthewoodofthepine). 2)Macedonian and Aeolic: 104 a) vv from (consequently, also from etc); this phoneticruleisattestedinMacedonianbythetoponym(Doric:; IonicAttic: ); b) nominative plural of the second person of the personal pronoun (Ionic Attic:;Doric:);fortheMacedonianexample,seepage55. 3)MacedonianandThessalian:insteadofattestedinbothMacedonianandThessalian. 4)MacedonianandArcadian:conversionoftoiv 5) Macedonian, Thessalian and A rcadian: conversion of into under certain conditions; Macedonian (in ) from which is attested in Thessalian ( in the other Greek dialects) Macedonian =3dian , Thessalian , for . c)NonGreekfeaturesofMacedonian AnumberoffeaturesmaybeobservedinthesurvivingMacedonianlinguisticmaterialthat arenotGreek.AllthosewhohaveassertedthatMacedonianwasadistinctlanguageandnot a dialect of Greek have represented these features as having universal application. In fact, theyhavereliedonselectedevidence,whichtheyhaveputforwardasbeingtheonlygenuine examplesofMacedonian.Thisevidenceconsistsof:a)thoseoftheMacedonianwordsinthe ancient lexica (see page 56) which cannot be assigned a Greek derivation; b) the very few Macedoniannamesforgods,heroes,festivals,months,placesandpeople,thatarenotGreek, at least phonetically; c) words known from ancient lexica or other sources which are not statedtobeMacedonianbutwhichhavefeatureseitheridenticalwithorsimilartothoseof

FOR FAIR USE ONLY

24thefirsttwogroups.Theevidenceisselectedonthebasesofthefollowingarguments:allthe examplesthatarestatedtobeMacedonianbuthaveGreekcharacteristicsarenotgenuinely Macedonian, but will have passed into the Macedonian language as loanwords; all the examples that are not stated to be Macedonian but display the same characteristics as Macedonian are concealed examples of the Macedonian language. These arguments, however,fallintothelogicaltrapoftakingasassumedthatwhichhastobeproven,namely, thatMacedonianwasaseparatelanguagewhichwasgraduallyinfluencedtoaconsiderable degreebyGreek;andthattheexamplesinthethirdgroupareMacedonian. The following characteristics have been suggested as features distinguishing Macedonian fromGreek,thoughmostoftheminfactsuggestanaffinitywithThracianandIllyrian:1)the retention of the IndoEuropean s before an initial vowel (in Greek, the s became h, the daseia);2)theconversionoftheIndoEuropeanvoicedaspiratesbh,dh,ghintovoicedstops, b (), d (), g () (in Greek these became (, , ), the dissimilation of the first aspirate in caseswheretwoofthesesoundsoccurinsuccessivesyllables;4)theconversionofb(),g(), d()into(),k(),t();5)theconversionofthevowelgroupintoa;6)theconversionof thevowelgroupau()intoa;7)thedroppingoffinalr(p);8)theformationoffemininesin ;9)theformationofethnicnamesbytheaffix.Letusexaminemattersmoreclosely. 1) Only three Macedonian words have before a vowel in their first syllable: , / and /. However: a) none of these has been convincingly derived from an IndoEuropean root; b) the third is also attested in the Greek dialect of Cyprus from as early as the third century, and the second corresponds to the gods name , which spread through southern Greece at an early date; c) Greek has many examplesoftheretentionofIndoEuropeans beforeavowelinthefirstsyllable,occurring inwordsborrowedbyGreekfromthelanguagesspokenbypopulationssubjectedtoGreek tribes.Thus:eithertheMacedonianexamplesdonotprovetheexistenceofthephenomenon in question or, if they prove it, they do not constitute criteria for distinguishing the Macedonian tongue from Greek; in the latter eventuality, they will have derived from PelasgiansorThracianswhoweresubjugatedbytheMacedonians.ThefactthatMacedonian hasexamplesinwhichinitialsisconvertedintoanaspirationcannotbeignored,however. This phenomenon cannot be interpreted in terms of Greek influence, for it occurs in the names and amongst others; these are not only unknown outsideMacedonia,butexhibitintheplaceof.Itisillogicaltocitethesenamesamongst the examples in which appears in place of the Greek and simultaneously to ignore the fact that they represent examples of the change of the initial s into h in accordance with a Greekphoneticlaw. 2) The second phenomenon is attested in Plutarch, 105 Eustathios of Thessalonike,106 and a numberoflemmatainByzantinelexica.OneofthepassagesinPlutarchgivestheimpression that the phenomenon was widespread in Macedonia. Examples are the names , , , , , (for: , , , , , ), (=.), * (=), (=), and words such as (=), (), (=), (=).Ontheotherhand,itistobenotedthatthename,andMacedonian names in general in which the first component is , are written more frequently with from the beginning of the written tradition; also, that and not occurs in: , , , , , and ; and not in: , , ,, , and ; and not in , and . Those who oppose the view that elements of Macedonian were Greek argue, of course, that the versions with , , , represent Macedonian names

FOR FAIR USE ONLY

25transmitted in Greek texts, and also names and words borrowed by the Macedonians from the Greeks. If the evidence of the Greek texts is excluded, on the grounds that it is untrustworthy, then exception cannot be made for those passages which attest to , , in placeof,,.Iftheselatterarenotexcluded,anditisthusconcededthattheGreekauthors rendered the Macedonian pronunciation correctly by writing etc., then it is illegitimate to assert that the versions with , , are errors. Furthermore, the spelling isnotattestedsolelyinnonMacedoniantexts;italsooccursoncoinsofPhilipII, and on Macedonian arrows, and tiles of the same period. It would be curious if the coins issuedbytheMacedonianstatedidnotaccuratelyreflectthenationalpronunciation.Letus concede, however, that Philip insisted that his name be written with , since he had established the Attic dialect as the official language of the state: this explanation might accountforthephoneticformoftheroyalnameonthecoinage,butnotalsoonarrowsand tiles.ThehypothesisthatMacedoniannamesandwordshaving,,inplaceof,,are borrowed from Greek has properly been countered with the hypothesis that this is unacceptable in the case of words like , which is otherwise unknown; , whichhadfallenintodisuseintherestofGreece;,whichwasusedintheisolated regionofArcadia;,whichinMacedoniawasnotusedtomeanCharonbutlion.Two conclusions emerge: 1) the pronunciation of the ancient bh, gh, dh as , , , was not universal throughout Macedonia, but occurred alongside the pronunciation , , ; 2) the pronunciation , , appears in some words which could not have been borrowed by the MacedoniansfromaGreekpeople.Inthelightoftheseconclusions,wemustlookforsome otherexplanationoftheappearanceof,,inMacedonia.Thisdemandcanbesatisfiedby thefollowingobservations:1)thesamephenomenonalsooccurssporadicallyinwordsand namestransmittedinindisputablyGreeksources;2)thesewordsandnamesarethoughtto be loanwords borrowed by the Greeks from other IndoEuropean peoples that they first conqueredandthenabsorbed;3)theMacedonianstooconqueredthePelasgians(seepage47) and after them the Thracians (see page 47) and Illyrians who, like the Pelasgians, had con verted IndoEuropean bh, gh, dh into , , . Since, on the one hand, the appearance in Macedonian of , , deriving from IndoEuropean bh, gh, dh cannot be attributed to ex ternal influences and since, on the other, the conversion of the same sounds to , , , occurred in Macedonian under conditions similar to those that account for it in an in disputably Greek linguistic area, we are obliged to give the same interpretation to the Macedoniandata. 3and4)ThesetwophenomenaalsooccurinwordsandnamesfoundintheGreekworldin general, where they are regarded as vestiges of Pelasgian, or of preGreek languages generally,thathavebeenpreservedinGreek.TheiroccurrenceinMacedoniancantherefore alsobeattributedtopreMacedoniansubstrata(bothPelasgianandThracian). 5) That the group au was converted to a is a conjecture based on a very small number of namesandwords.Sincetherearealsoreliableindicationsthatthegroupwasalsopreserved, we may reasonably assume that this is another case in which we have to deal with two differentkindsofdevelopment; 107thatoneofthese(thepreservationofthegroup)doesnot distinguish Macedonian from Greek; and that the other (the conversion of the group to a), sinceitwassporadic,isnotanancienthallmarkofMacedonianbutisduetotheinfluenceof populationsconqueredbytheMacedonians.108

6)ThehypothesisthatthegroupaubecameainMacedonianisbasedentirelyonadubious derivation.Bycontrast,thepreservationofthegroupauinthistongueiswellattested.109

7)Thedroppingoffinalrissimilarlysupportedbyunlikelyetymologies.110

FOR FAIR USE ONLY

26

8) The formation of feminines in is attested in Macedonian by: , and.Theviewthattheintheseexamplescorrespondstoizza inIllyrianremainsundecided.Ontheotherhand,theGreekandcannot be ignored. Admittedly, the of the Macedonian examples cannot be in terpreted phonetically in the same way as the in the two Greek words (from ja and ja);butitisnotimpossiblethat,andwereformed by analogy with and , in accordance with a phenomenon familiar in linguistics.111Furthermore,themostlikelyderivationofrelatesittoacommonnoun indicatingatypeofoaktree,whichisattestedinGreek.112

9)ThenamesofthenationsofupperMacedonia,and,theethnicsfound in various parts of Macedonia derivedfrom the names of cities, such as * (from ), / (from ), (from ), (from ), (from *), / (from ), and personal names likehavebeenthoughttobeIllyrian,sinceanaffixdoesinfactappearinethnic names in Illyria and in regions inhabited by Illyrian tribes. However: a) the names *, , have stems in ( , ) and a termination (), like the familiar Greek words and names , , , , , etc. They do not, therefore, belong to the category of names that have an affix .113 Moreover, the and the were Greek tribes, and Argos, whose inhabitants were called *, was a city of the second of thesetwotribes.Thederivedtheirnamefromtheverb.b)Thetoponyms andwereGreek.Inthese,andalltheothersthatwerealsoGreek,themay bestbeattributedtotheinfluenceoftheGreek.Fortheothers,wehavetoassumea doubleinfluencebothfromtheGreekandfromtheIllyriannames. 3.RELIGIOUSANDETHNOLOGICALEVIDENCE FromthepointofviewofthequestionofthenationalityoftheMacedonians,thesurviving religious and ethnological evidence may be divided into Greek, nonGreek, doubtful and irrelevant; the Greek evidence may in turn be subdivided into (a) that found throughout Greece,(b)thatwhichisattestedinvariouspartsofGreece,and(c)localMacedonian.This subdivision is rendered necessary by the fact that opinion is divided as to the value as evidenceofthefirstgroup,andalsoofsomeoftheitemsinthesecond.Somescholarsagree thatthisevidencedemonstratesthattheMacedonianswereGreeks,whileothersclaimthatit doesnotprovethis,sincetherelevantinformationdatesmainlyfromtheperiodofAlexander andhissuccessorsandonlyrarelyfromthetimeofPhilipandearlier.Ifthisargumentholds good,however,thenafortiori,wemustrejectasirrelevantallthenonGreekevidence,since thepassagesconcerningthemareofmuchlaterdate. A.Greekelements a)Panhellenicelements From the data at our disposal at present, we know that the Macedonians worshipped the twelve Olympian gods (fig. 32), both collectively and individually, and also Pluto, Persephone, Dionysos, Pan, Hestia, Herakles (fig. 29), Asklepios, Okeanos, Amphitrite, the Nereids,Tethys,Orpheus,theDioskouroi,Amphilochos,theNymphs,theGraces,theFates, Hygieia,Lethe,NemesisandEros.TheyalsogavethemthefamiliarGreekepithets,suchas Agoraios, Basileus, Olympios, Hypsistos of Zeus, Basileia of Hera, Soter of Apollo,

FOR FAIR USE ONLY

27Hagemona(AtticIonicHegemone)andSoteiraofArtemis,BoulaiaofHestia,etc.Someofthe evidencefortheworshipofGe,Helios,Dionysos,Pan,AsklepiosandHeraklesisearlierthan theperiodofPhilip,whiletheearliestevidenceforthetwelvegodscomesfromthisperiod.114 The large number of these gods names and the early date of the evidence militates against the familiar false argument advanced by those opposed to the idea that the Macedonians were Greeks namely, that the Greek cultural features that appear in Macedonia were imposedbykingswhoadmiredthingsGreek,especiallyPhilip.Moreover,Philiporoneofhis immediatepredecessorsintroducedtheAtticdialectastheofficiallanguageofthestate,and iftheGreeknamesofgodsusedbytheMacedonianswereimported,theyoughttobeAtticin form.Thename115however,hasretainedtheoriginallongainboththefirstsyllable ofthestemandthetermination.IfthisworddidnothaveitsrootsinMacedoniabuthadbeen importedasaresultofroyalinitiative,wewouldknowitintheform. b)Elementslimitedtoparticularareas In Macedonia, the name () was used of a god who was identified with Ares. The hypothesis that this god was ThracoPhrygian is groundless. On the contrary, he has been convincinglyrelatedtoZeusThauliosofThessaly,theclanoftheThaulonidaiofAttica,and the Doric festival, the Thaulia.116 The god Thaulos was probably originally a separate god who had qualities which later led to his identification with Ares in some regions and with Zeusinothers. PasikrataisattestedasagoddessinMacedoniaandatDemetriasinThessaly;wealsofindan ArtemisPasikratainAmbrakiaandaPasikrateia(Persephone?)atSelinous.117 PhoboswasworshippedbytheMacedoniansandtheDorians.118

IthasbeenconjecturedthattheMacedonianshadafestivalcalledtheApellaia,bothfromthe name of the month Apellaios and from an independent reference to a special bread called ;thiswassimilarinbothformandetymologytothe,anofferingmadebythe inhabitants of Delphi during the Apellaia. This same festival was widespread amongst the Dorians. The bread or or or is also attested amongst the ThessaliansandtheAthamanes.119TheHetaireidiawerecelebratedbytheMacedoniansand theMagnesians.120

The monthsArtemisiosand Apellaiosconnect the Macedonians with the Dorians.Panamos or Panemos was also known in mainland Greece and some of the cities in Ionia. Loos, or HomoloosappearstohavecomefrompreThessalian,orAiolianThessaly,whencehespread tomainlandGreeceandLesbos.orisattestedtoacertainextentinDoric regions,andalsoappearsinAiolicterritory.DiosisattestedintheMycenaeancalendarand in