Albanian Forums, Zerion Zeri yt Zeri Info, Forumi Shqiptar Al Virtual, Diskutime, Biseda, Chat Njofje, Informatika, Teknologjia, Gazeta Tema, Gazetat Shqiptare, Bota Sot, www Channel Albania, Telegrafi Kosovo, Ballkani Web, Gazeta Lajme shqip, Lajmet e Fundit Shqiperia Kosova, Dita, Panorama, Kryeartikull, Faqja Kryesore, Video Shqip, Muzike Shqipe, Njoftime, Lajmerime, Temat Online, Gazetat, Kosovare, Shtypi Ditor, Sporti Shqiptar, Dashuria, Pyetje Pergjigje, Keshilla, Ndihme, Webmaster Shqiptar, Familja, Shqiptaria, Muzika, Receta Gatimi, Imazhe, Vipat-shqiptar, Aktualiteti
Media Sociale
Mesazhe Private
Shqiptaret duke lexuar tema interesante dhe te ndryshme
Tema re



· 3 · 2480

  • Postime: 27290
  • Karma: +48/-5
  • Gjinia: Mashkull

ne: 17-01-2010, 16:44:01



It is very clear that the Greek propagandists have started to become intimidated from the coming to light of true historical facts that affect directly their mythology made from their political propaganda that they learn since in primary schools to become a “worthy Greek”. That is why Greeks look so frighten, although their illusions are being broken one by one. They want to live inside their illusion world. For this we can not blame them: let them live in their illusion world, but they have to know where the illusion ends and the reality starts.

Across their nationalistic web-sites on the internet, the Greek propagandists spread their demagogy by concealing his Albanian heritage of Alexander the Great of Macedonia. It is very odd how they name their “answer”. In the name of the war of the ‘Albanian Propaganda’ they are not doing anything else other than reconfirm themselves what they are doing: blinded propagandist from Megali Idea. Greeks have to know that what they are presenting in their propagandistic environments is only propaganda:

    “Propaganda often presents facts selectively (thus lying by omission) to encourage a particular synthesis, or gives loaded messages in order to produce an emotional rather than rational response to the information presented. The desired result is a change of the attitude toward the subject in the target audience to further a political agenda.“ Propaganda is the deliberate, systematic attempt to shape perceptions, manipulate cognitions, and direct behavior to achieve a response that furthers the desired intent of the propagandist”.

We can not add more, for the reason that Greeks have manifested all the characteristics that one manipulated propagandists has. First they demonstrate their ‘facts’ categorical and selectively and so they deform them according to their pleasures. That’s why is not surprising that the Greek ‘argument’ is always in the emotional sphere and never rational. We can not leave aside this important ascertainment:

The Greeks learned about Macedonia and Alexander the Great in 1988 when they named the northern territories invaded with war as ‘Macedonia’ in a way to arrogate the history of Macedonia. While the SlavoMacedonians have learned and heard for the first time about Alexander the Great and the real Macedonia after 1991 when the state was establish and pretend that is a progeny of that of the ancient.  Both sides rely on the emotional sphere, and consequently ‘macedonism’ of both sides is very artificial and fake. Let’s take one example how much the modern Pseudo-Greeks know about the ancient Greek ‘heroes’.

    “The eighteenth-century Greek scholar Koumas tells of a visit he made to one of the most influential klephts, Nikotsaras. In order to show respect Koumas addressed the klephtic leader as Achilles. Nikotsaras retorted angrily: ‘What rubbish are you talking about? Who is this Achilles? Handy with a musket, was he?”
    (~The Balkans: Nationalism, War & the Great Powers, 1804-1999′~ Misha Glenny, 2000, page 31″.)

It seems that Pseudo-Greeks and their propagandists in the internet have done a big progress evolving, because now not only that they don’t mix ancient heroes with ordinary individuals of the market, but also claim them as their own!

In her great book anthropologist with Greek origin, Anastasia N. Karakasidou “Fields of Wheat Hills of Blood” confesses that the inhabitants of Aegean Macedonia don’t have any memory about Alexander the Great and his inheritance. For more, Alexander the Great to them has been imposed more as a propagandistic obligation that the Greek state teaches from the primary schools whereas indoctrinated with a fake history. Let’s go further!

Differently from the Greeks and Slavs that have learned about Alexander the Great in 1988 and 1991 respectively, Albanians have considered Alexander as theirs since in Middle Ages. The memory for Alexander the Great in Albania is more present than anywhere else. Different German ethnographers indicate in their recollections that in Shkodra of 19th century there were still being sang songs from rhapsody’s for Alexander the Great. Beside this the Albanian National hero Gjergj Kastriot-Scanderbeg has considered himself as ‘Prince of Epir and Macedonia‘ and Alexander the Great and Pyrros of Epiri as the Albanians ancestors. Even the short name for Alexander in Albania is ‘Lek’ is the synonym of courages (Robert Elsie: 2000).

    The notable Byzantine historian Laonicus Chalcocondylas (1423 – 1490) makes known that: “”I can say that Albanians are nearer to Macedonians than to any other people in the world”.

    Also the College Rector of Palermo, Nikolle Keta, writes “The origin of Albanians derives from Macedonians and are the same as them (here he talks about ancient Macedonians), that Albanian language is one of the most oldest in the world and that Albania in ancient times has been that part of Macedonia that extended over the White Drin, Epirit and a part of Peloponnese and was called ‘Alvanitia’ from the byzantine writers”.

Is known that Greece is one of three Balkan countries that has been expanded more territorially in disadvantage of other nations. As result, the occupation of Epir and Macedonia-two Albanian regions-made possible that Greece to justify this occupation to fabricate the history for the past Hellenistic.

We are informing these Pseudo-Greeks of our times that they can not sell their old tales for their continuity from ancient until now. There is no need to for us to commemorate this midst Jakob Philipp Fallmerayer, but for their information we have to let them know where they were a century ago:

    “Being Greek at the beginning of the nineteenth century was no simple matter. Greek-speakers were spread across the Ottoman Empire. They lived in the Empire’s Near Eastern territories in today’s Syria, Lebanon and Israel; they were settled in large areas of Anatolia, especially close to the Black Sea littoral. (…) Greek merchants benefited substantially from the Diaspora that stretched deep into the Caucasus, along the Black Sea coast of southern Russia”
    (~The Balkans: Nationalism, War & the Great Powers, 1804-1999′~ Misha Glenny, 2000; page 22-23)

Paradoxical, progeny of these Greek-speakers of Lebanon, Syria, Israel and regions of Black Sea today  consider themselves as ‘Macedonians’!

  • Postime: 27290
  • Karma: +48/-5
  • Gjinia: Mashkull

#1 ne: 17-01-2010, 16:47:33

Let’s start to expose some fallacies and liars signed by Greek Propaganda

    ***Greek Claim 1 #: “Barbarian term does not mean denied of being Greek”

Is that right?  The Greek nationalists speak with so much accuracy as if to have lived in that time to know what meaning had the term ‘barbar’.  The term ‘barbar’ precisely means non-Greek, since implies another language that doesn’t get understood by the Greeks.  Taking in consideration the hinge that recognized that ‘the language determined the ethnicity’ therefore comes to light that Macedonians as well as the Epirotes were non-Greeks.

-For Macedonians as barbarians talk: Herodotus,Demosthenesnes, Trasimachus, Strabo etc.

-For Epirotes as barbarians talks: Thucididies, PseudoSylax, Strabo, etc.

    The word ‘Barbarian’ is onomatopoeic, the bar-bar representing the impression of random hubbub produced by hearing a spoken language that one cannot understand, similar to blah blah, babble or rhubarb in modern English. Related imitative forms are found in other Indo-European languages, such as Sanskrit barbara-, “stammering” or “curly-haired.

Clearly is shown the term barbar has been given to the people that were not Greeks and didn’t spoke Greek.  Greeks want to be more smart than Herodotus, Thucididies and Strabo, saying that ‘barbar’ intends ‘uncivilized Greek’ as should be or ‘Greek dialects’.

According to this idiotic logic, Egyptians and Persians have been ‘uncivilized Greeks’. That is why the truth that were told by  Herodotus, Thucididies, Strabo etc stand even to this day.

    ***Greek claim 2#: ‘Macedonians were non-Illyrian because they spoken distinct languages’

Greeks can hold all they want this attitude- no one has stopped them-in their propaganda, but the science of history is not a Greek propaganda.  All the historians, linguistics and modern archaeologists, are in the same mind that Illyria, Macedonia and Epir have been represented from one uniformed ethnicity, as in aspect of language as of that of traditions and customs, archeology, etc.  Let’s serve a short message from the father of Geography Strabo:

    “The Amphibiansre the peoples who are situated above them and border on the Illyrian mountains, inhabiting a rugged country — I mean the Molossi, the Athamanes, the Aethices, the Tymphaei, the Orestae, and also the Paroraei and the Atintanes, some of them being nearer to the Macedonians and others to the Ionian Gulf. It is said that Orestes once took possession of Orestias — when in exile on account of the murder of his mother — and left the country bearing his name; and that he also founded a city and called it Argos Oresticum. But the Illyrian tribes which are near the southern part of the mountainous country and those which are above the Ionian Gulf are intermingled with these peoples; for above Epidamnus and Apollonia as far as the Ceraunian Mountains dwell the Bylliones, the Taulantii, the Parthini, and the Brygi. (…) Then, because one tribe or another was always getting the mastery over others, they all ended in the Macedonian empire, except a few who dwelt above the Ionian Gulf. And in fact the regions about Lyncus, Pelagonia, Orestias, and elimeia, used to be called Upper Macedonia, though later on they were by some also called Free Macedonia. But some go so far as to call the whole of the country Macedonia, as far as Corcyra, at the same time stating as their reason that in tonsure, language, short cloak, and other things of the kind, the usages of the inhabitants are similar, although, they add, some speak both languages.”

    (~Strabo, Geography, Book VII, Chapter 7)

Strabo here talks without a doubt for a unity between the tribes of Illyrians, Epir, and Macedonia in the aspect of language, traditions and customs.

“But there remain to be described the southerly parts of the aforesaid mountainous country and next thereafter the districts that are situated below them, among which are both Greece and the adjacent barbarian country as far as the mountains. Now Hecataeus of Miletus says of the Peloponnesus that before the time of the Greeks it was inhabited by barbarians. Yet one might say that in the ancient times the whole of Greece was a settlement of barbarians…

And even to the present day the Thracians, Illyrians, and Epeirotes live on the flanks of the Greeks (though this was still more the case formerly than now); indeed most of the country that at the present time is indisputably Greece is held by the barbarians — Macedonia and certain parts of Thessaly by the Thracians, and the parts above Acarnania and Aetolia by the Thesproti, the Cassopaei, the Amphilochi, the Molossi, and the Athamanes — Epeirotic tribes“

(~Strabo, Geography, BOOK VII, Chapter 7, 1).

Some have to really ache from ignorance to show the contrary of what Strabo said.  He clearly says that barbarians live in the biggest part of Macedonia and Epir considering allusive Thracian’s and Illyrians. Strabo, even makes it known which was the original Macedonia and her ancient name.

    “What is now called Macedonia was in earlier times called Emathia. And it took its present name from Macedon, one of its early chieftains. And there was also a city emathia close to the sea. Now a part of this country was taken and held by certain of the Epeirotes and the Illyrians, but most of it by the Bottiaei and the Thracians“

    (~Strabo, Geography, Book VII, 11)

    “MACEDONIA was formerly called Emathia, from the name of king Emathion, of whose prowess the earliest proofs are extant in those parts”.

    (~Marcus Junianus Justinus~Epitome of the Philippic History of Pompeius Trogus, Book VII, 1).

Strabo and Justin in one voice confirm that the ancient name for Macedonia was Emathia.  Justin seems to have given us the answer inside the lines.  He says that the king of Emathia existed as the first model of bravery.   Albanian comes as a help in this case for the reason that toponym-eponim Emathion may correlate with the Albanian word ‘I Madh’, ‘E Madh’ that is synonym for the mighty, strongest, and largest.

    ***Greek Claim #3: ‘Polybius denied that Macedonians were Illyrian. Macedonians need translator to communicated with Illyrians”

If the original text of Polibit truncates, then we come in the same conclusion as the greeks.  But, for the sake of the truth the ‘problematic’ paragraph we are giving that all for the sake of clarity:

    Perseus, on arriving at Syberra, sold the booty, and rested his army waiting for the return of the envoys. 9 Upon their arrival, after hearing the answer of Genthius, he once more dispatched Adaeus, accompanied by Glaucias, one of his bodyguard, and again by Pleuratus owing to his knowledge of the Illyrian dialect, with the same instructions as before, just as if Genthius had not expressly indicated what he was in need of, and what must be done before he would consent to the request.

    Polybius, XXVIII, 8,9

With this it can’t come to the wrong conclusion that Illyrians spoke a different language from Macedonians.  This would have been in contradiction with the truths of Starbon.  In the cited text Polibi nowhere tells for a translator in the Illlyrian language. He spoke for ‘dialect’ not for language. He firmly said: ” Pleuratus owing to his knowledge of the Illyrian dialect”. Meanwhile, when we are at translators and  misunderstanding of languages, have to recall the Greeks that Eumenes, the Greek commander in the Macedonian Falange need  translator to address the orders toward the Macedonian falanges that didn’t speak one word Greek.

We advise for the reading of the book: ‘Eumenes of Cardia: A Greek among Macedonians’ of Edward Anson.

However, Greeks given they go by from wrong premises  come out with wrong conclusions.  They look that don’t have it easy to separate from their emotions, prejudgments and selectiveness.  More important is to come out from this paragraph another message.  Why Macedonian kings collaborated with Illyrians against the Romans?  Why did the Macedonians did not collaborate with greeks, if they were of the same origin, but with Illyrians?  We ask the greeks: Do you know anything about the Alliance Illyro-Macedonian?


  • Postime: 27290
  • Karma: +48/-5
  • Gjinia: Mashkull

#2 ne: 17-01-2010, 16:49:12



This is response to:

___________________ ___________________ _____________

Greeks seem to disappoint everyone that has thought of them as benignant of knowledge, civilizations and science.  Naturally the ancient Greeks hold it these virtues with a lot of dignity, until the Pseudo-Greeks of today who are totally different from the ancients.  In lack of proves, Greeks don’t have the spunk to get engaged directly with citations of the above mentioned authors, but come with prejudgments and low classification of kind: ‘ This is not a historian, this does not have any connection with history‘ and same like this.

Let’s remind to the Greeks that: History to give a full and better look of the ancient past needs collaboration with other sciences.  Only with interdisciplinary collaboration can enable to arrive in more certain conclusions.  Therefore, History needs constantly the help of other sciences like Linguistic, Anthropology, Archeology, Ethnology, Geography, etc.

Is clear what prevents Greeks Linguistics, Anthropology, Archeology, Ethnology and Geography: for the reasons that this hurts them, in other words these contribute in excretion of the truth, different from the Greeks that hide these true facts. Greek ignorance has no boundaries.  Is worse that this.  That is not an ignorance but…The Greatest enemy of Acknowledge is not ignorance but the illusion of knowing‘ says S. Hopkings.  Greeks seem to have the second: they have the illusion of knowledge! Here is a sample how far the Greek ignorance can go:

    “Mary Edith Durham isn’t related with History but she is a traveler. Her books are good only for coffee table discussions but not history. Still no credible historical source that points out an ‘Albanian’ origin of Alexander“

Greeks not having any arguments to counter reply Edith Durham, start with insults that her books are conversations for coffee shops!  These show clearly that the brilliance of the English scientist Edith Durham as anthropologists don’t recognize it. Let’s remind the Greeks that Edith Durham as evidential anthropologist and ethnologist spent over 20 years among the people of the Balkans where she wrote unrepeatable books, because she is known very close with the psychology, character and the history of Balkans.  Unfortunately, in Greece she is known as an enemy!

Or another case:

    “Lou Giaffo, an Albanian himself isn’t considered anything related to “unbiased neutral source” as also his desperate attempts show, therefore his input is totally worthless.”

It is clear that Greeks start everything from prejudgments.  They none of the above mentioned authors that defend the idea that Alexander was Albanian don’t acknowledge. Always they start from prejudgments that this does not have connection with history, or this is not a historian. If we come from this kind of logic, then Greeks themselves need to reappraise their prophet Nicolas Hammond. Do you know what Hammond was in his youth? Well, he was…

    “… an operative for the British Special Operations Executive (SOE) in occupied Greece during World War II”.

More detailed: Hammond was a British spy that has worked in SOE.  If we start from your logic, then you have to rest citing your prophet for the reason that he has no connection with history.  He once was a spy, can you deny it?!

The Greek ignorance and cynicism has many chapters, here’s one of them:

    “On the contrary Tarn isn’t regarded as “having written the definitive work on Alexander the Great”. W.W Tarn wrote his book in 1948. Until then, Alexander’s biographies were only a few. Since then lots more better documented biographies about Alexander have been written, we have huge archaeological discoveries (Vergina tombs, Pella Katadesmos, molossian decrees etc) which certainly change perspectives about Alexander and ancient Macedonian history in general. Hence, Tarn’s claims are considered from modern historians ‘outdated’ and non-valid“

Tarn’s work in writings is one of the best and written in his time.  Tarn is known as one of the best Britannic academics for antiquity studies. In any case today we know many new things that historians many years ago didn’t know.  However, the essence of the ascertainment of Tarn continues to stay, even to be enforced from discovery and progress of science. Tarn is cited often in other modern biographer authors for Alexander the Great, and this shows that Tarn is not considered ‘outdated’ or ‘non-valid’, but is considered as a quality source of knowledge of Alexander the Great.  By the way:

For which archaeological discovery are you talking that have changed the perspectives for Alexander the Great?  For archaeological findings in Vergina?  This is where you are asking?  Discoveries of Vergina only have enforced even furthermore the ascertainment of Tarn for the reason that the discovered civilization in Vergina indicated vigorously for a irrefutable presence of Illyrians, something that all archaeologists comply with.

The discovered graveyard in Vergina is considered as ‘tuma’.  Do you know what ‘tumas’ are?  Tumulus were the Illyrian burial ground and of the other peoples close ethnicity with them. Thus, precisely ‘Tumuli’ of Vergina is another plus that reconfirms that Macedonia was Illyrian. Pella, Aigiai, Eddesa were cities founded and established by Illyrians. Can you find a scholar or scientist that can challenge them?

With regard to the ‘Greek’ inscriptions in Pella these don’t say anything that Macedonia was Greek. If we start from this kind of logic, then Macedonia is Roman for the reason that exists a big number of inscriptions exclusively Roman.  Even according to one study of University of Minnesota, Latin inscriptions in Macedonia come up to 650 as such.  But American scholars and researchers of Minnesota are not idiots as you to say:  Macedonia is Latin, because there are Latin inscription!!!

In regard of Molossians, freshly these are not talking for the Helen element in Epir for the reason that if we believe the modern archeology, Epir makes part in the archaeological complex that is the same with that of Illyirans.  In the end all of onomastic materials are in our favor, since Epir has been Illyrian.

Thus, all the possible facts in Epir but also in Macedonia talk for a Pelasgian-Illyrian character.  Therefore, Alexander the Great may be Greek only in the dreams of delirium of Greeks. In the end we thank cordially the Greeks for continuing to deny that Alexander the Great is not Albanian. The French dramaturgy Prosper Merime was going to say: ‘Two disavowal are equal with one confession‘.  Retraction of the Greek nationalists that Alexander the Great is not Albanian are giving a counter effect; are doing the confession that Alexander the Great was Albanian.


Temat e fundit