The thing to do is narrow your focus to a particular timeframe. 1. Ancient Macedonians of 500 BC may have been descended from an early Greek tribe. They may not have been though. 2. However they if they were they lived on the edges of the Greek world and in contact with barbarians. Otherwise they lived in close contact with Greeks. 3. Hence their culture was different to that of Greeks in many ways (had kings, adopted other practices, lees emphasis on arts- sciences, more on war etc). By the same token their culture was similar to that of the Greeks, when compared to other barbarians. 4. Further they had less contact with Greeks than other city- states. Or conversely more than other barbarians.

Thus

1. They were considered as less Greek than the rest, because they were in the periphery of their world. They were considered as somewhat Greek, when compared to barbarians, although not truly. 2. Eventually the begun adopting more of the Greek culture. They begun a process of Hellenisation. Whether they were descendants of Greeks or not, doesn’t matter by this point. Even if they were, their culture had already diverged from Hellenic mainstream. 3. That process begun with Perdicas and Phillip II and was still in progress at the time of Alexander. 4. The process however had certainly concluded by the time of the Roman conquest of Greece. The Macedonians, not only had adopted more of the common elements of the Greeks, but now would juxtapose these with the Roman invaders from the West, who were much more different. (150 BC)

The thing to remember is that being Greek is not about blood or genetics, but culture. And the adoption of it takes time and a will to do it. Additionally it does not happen all in one go. As Aimless mentioned there are degrees of it. So the Macedonians of 400 BC would have been considered barbarians when compared to other Greek city-states, and almost Greeks when compared to other barbarians, like the Persians and Thracians. This was a gradual process that eventually led to the Hellenisation of Macedonians.

· So were Macedonians in 500 BC Greek? Not in the strict sense. Call them Hellenising. · Were Macedonians in 150 BC Greek? Yes.

Finally the definition of being a Greek changes during the Hellenistic years. Many people, not of Greek “ethnic” descent, adopt Greek culture. Their blood is not Greek, yet THEY are. Hence Greeks are those whose culture and language and religion is Greek

-- Anonymous, October 09, 2004

Answers

Aimless, you do realize that when Herodotus wrote about 'Alexander', he spoke of Alexander I, not the Great (who was Alexander the III). Alexander I was the king during the times of Herodotus, and was the one who claimed to be Argosian(from Argolis, in central Peloponnisos). By being an Argive, Alexander I was admitted into the Olympic games.

Now, knowing that Alexander I was a Greek by descent, you can jump down the hereditary line to King Amyntas III, who was son of Arridheus, great-grandson of Alexander I, meaning that this Greek bloodline is still active. With his wife Eurydice, Amyntas III I gave birth to Philip II of Macedon. Once again, with a solid line of relative blood going on, Philip II is still a Greek by blood. This means, Alexander III (the Great) would have to be Greek by blood since his father, and so many blood relatives before him were descendants of Alexander I, the Greek from Argolis.

So, it is clear that the royal line of Macedon was of Greek descent, which is what really matters. Whether or not the people were 100% will never be known for sure, since there were most likely citizens who had come from Illyria or Thrace, not to mention Persia during occupation. But with a Greek royal bloodline, greek religion, architecture, a language which was indeed a dialect of Greek (I can prove this too if you don't believe me), it is safe to say that the ancient Macedonians, if anything, were Greek.

Any questions or clarification needed?

-- Anonymous, November 28, 2004

Homer was not writing about Alexander the Great, he was writing about his ancestor Alexander I. He was the first of the Argae line who came from Argos(Peloponese). He wasn't denied entrance after he showed his ancestry. He told them that his father and ancestors came Argos. They checked his history out and allowed him to join, thus showing he was GREEK.

-- Anonymous, November 28, 2004

I am not and don't need to prove it to you

-- Anonymous, November 26, 2004

You are all Greek by injection no quit it

-- Anonymous, November 23, 2004

I have to sy that the Macedonians were pretty close to the Greeks in education, as many educated people (mostly nobles) of the time went to what is now considered Greek territory, to study, and might I ad the the concept of nation was vistually non-existent then. What this really meant is that at the time what was Greek was not a certain ethnicity, as we know that Greeks were a mix of 3 or 4 different ethinicities. What was called Greek at the time was one who studied in a Greek school and thus adopted or learned through Hellenic culture. There is not such thing as a Solid Greek ethnicity, as I have said before since they were a mix of completely different cultures. Let me mention at least three here. First were the Pelasgians, who are the forefathers of several Balkans people, and then came the Doric people from the North, who at fist destoyed everything in sight until they mixed and learned to live with the local people to become Hellenised. Also on the other hand there were the Phoenicians, a Semite race by origins, who came and contributed their share of geneology and culture (they were the ones who brought the greek alphabet), not to mention then the Ionian cultures, who is also different from the rest. ALL of these DIFFERENT c\people mixed to gether, to create what was then called the Classical Greek world, which was more of a system of government. In concept it's a lot like today's America, Canada. or Australia, which are countries that have created their unique culture, but are not composed of a homogenic race of people.

So to say that Alexander the Great was a Greek, is kind of an oxymoron, as the Macedonians are known for having their own fixed ethnic identity and their own separate language (other than Greek). The Greeks would not even let Alexander the Great participate in the Olimpic games due to the fact that he wasn't a Greek. So any considerations that Macedonia of that time was considered by the Greeks to be part of their territory or culture is absurd. Cultural ties? YES off course! many nations had dealings with the Greeks, especially their neighbours. I would personally exclude anyone that has a different language and culture from being a GREEK.

Alexander the Great was a Macedon. Waht are Macedonians and who were their kins? The Thracians and the Illyrians. Phillip II's wife was Olimpia, clearly of Illyrian descent. So it is to be said that if Alexander the Great had any relation at all to any people living today, it is the modern southern Albanians, the direct descendants of the Illyrian tribes where Alexander's mother was from.

-- Anonymous, October 23, 2004

Hej Yannis you really meant what you said that if somebody is greek by culture and religion he is Greek.It's the most silliest thing I have heard.Oh I am so sorry this is the second.The first one was about Scanderbeg and his Greek BLOOD (Bullshit) because he changed religion from muslim to christian.Hej did you know that I love the Democrats in the U.S.A I have 100 percent Albanian Blood.I can speak in 4 foreign languages (it is not greek in here) and it doesn't make me an American,English,Polish,Italian or Turkish just because of my political beliefs.Did you know that religion is compared to political views?Because is about your beliefs man.But it doesn't confirms your heritage and blood ancestry you stupid teenager.

-- Anonymous, October 13, 2004

Well whatever!! Maybe it was someone else who told that but I am sure it was said by a historian.So how can you explain that they were considered Barbarian.And please don't start saying that they were proud about their Greek Culture because we want to know about their Heritage or blood heritage and not about what they loved,did,hated or conquered and for what purpose.OK?

-- Anonymous, October 12, 2004

Aimless,

I would appreciate any contribution you may have on the subject of the Hellenism of Macedonians. I would be gratefull for any links, on- line books or books you can suggest on the subject. I have read some on the subject and am beginning to question the propaganda we are taught at school that they were Greeks. Additionaly I have read some of the sources mentioned by Slavist Nationalists as well as the opinions of Borza,Green,Bardian.These people all are respectedf scholars, and appear to support their views. Frankly I am more than a little confused and would appreciate any guidance you may have. Finally I would prefer knowing the truth, even though it goes against my preconceptions, rather than knowingly accept a lie.

-- Anonymous, October 11, 2004

I was wondering about herodotus too Aimless. Why are the responds not in order?

-- Anonymous, October 11, 2004

Genti, you may or may not realize it, but Herodotus died long before Alexander the Great was born. Consequently, anything Herodotus wrote on the subject of Alexander the Great he would need to have known through precognition - unless it was transcribed after his death by a spirit medium during a seance.

-- Anonymous, October 11, 2004

Probably they had some Illyrian blood or maybe mixed blood of Illyrian-Thracians and Greek.They were not considered as Greeks.At that times there didn't exist nationalism.Greeks didn't hate Illyrians and Macedonians or Thracians and the adverse.By himself Herodotes writes that Alexander could't participate at the olympic games because he was a "Barbarian".And you know Yannis what did "Barbarian" mean at that times,don't you??

-- Anonymous, October 11, 2004