A quite interesting research over the term Μακεδόνας and its derivatives in Byzantine era, comes from Professor Ioannes Tarnanides in his book entitled “Οι Κατά Μακεδονίαν Σκλαβήνοι“. Professor Tarnanides begins with the ancient Macedonians and dwells particularly on the Macedonians of the Byzantine era who were forced to accept the Slavs in question in their territory. From his invenstigation of contemporary historical sources, he draws on his own words:that Orestiada could, that is, cease to be a Macedonian city or its inhabitants be Μακεδόνες. Even less could the scion of a famous Macedonian family, such as the “Gomoste” mentioned by Georgios Monachos (who does not of course specify where they came from) cease to be called a Μακεδών, just because an administrative shit in the Theme of Macedonia might leave him outside its borders.
a) The two terms, Μακεδών (noun, Translation: ”a Macedonian”, plural Μακεδόνες ) and Μακεδονικός (adjective - “Macedonian”) do not always have the same significance: they coincide only to the extend that they refer to a geographical concept.
b) The term Μακεδoνικός is used exclusively to characterise forces or armies coming from the Byzantine Theme, that is, the administrative or military district, of Macedonia. Since the theme of Macedonia was not a fixed entity always contained within geographical boundaries, a military unit coming from a specific place, could be described as Macedonian at one historical moment or another. This, consequently could mean that the leaders of these troops could at one time be designated Macedonian generals and at other times not. This usage derives from the fact that the meaning of the term was purely geographical, dependent upon the administrative district- the “theme” - that bore the name at any given time.
c) The term Μακεδών also was to a considerable extend used in its geographical sense, when it designated a Byzantine inhabitant of Macedonia. Since, however, it could at the same time have other, non-geographical, connotations (racial, family, etc.). it does not appear blindly to follow the successive administrate changes effected by the central authority.
It is characteristic that those who from time to time are designated as Μακεδόνες are always members of Byzantine society or the Byzantine army, speaking the same language and apparently following the same failh, and that they never appear to turn, as the head of a certain group, against ihe Byzantine state.
d) In this sense, the term Μακεδών could be applied lo a person who was not of Macedonian descent. The characteristic example here is that of the Emperor Basil I, who is clearly described as being descended “from the Armenian nation“: This however, did not stop the Byzantines from calling him a Macedonian.
e) This category does not appear to include the more recent immigrants to Macedonia, evidently because they retained their own ethnic particularity (language, religion, culture, etc.) and, more important still, their independence from the Byzantine rule. Thus, for example, in no case could any Bulgars, Slavs or Turks who were known to have settled in the region after a certain period (and who, indeed, became the permanent residents) ever be described as Μακεδόνες.
Διαβάστε τη συνέχεια του άρθρου εδώ
a) The two terms, Μακεδών (noun, Translation: ”a Macedonian”, plural Μακεδόνες ) and Μακεδονικός (adjective - “Macedonian”) do not always have the same significance: they coincide only to the extend that they refer to a geographical concept.
b) The term Μακεδoνικός is used exclusively to characterise forces or armies coming from the Byzantine Theme, that is, the administrative or military district, of Macedonia. Since the theme of Macedonia was not a fixed entity always contained within geographical boundaries, a military unit coming from a specific place, could be described as Macedonian at one historical moment or another. This, consequently could mean that the leaders of these troops could at one time be designated Macedonian generals and at other times not. This usage derives from the fact that the meaning of the term was purely geographical, dependent upon the administrative district- the “theme” - that bore the name at any given time.
c) The term Μακεδών also was to a considerable extend used in its geographical sense, when it designated a Byzantine inhabitant of Macedonia. Since, however, it could at the same time have other, non-geographical, connotations (racial, family, etc.). it does not appear blindly to follow the successive administrate changes effected by the central authority.
It is characteristic that those who from time to time are designated as Μακεδόνες are always members of Byzantine society or the Byzantine army, speaking the same language and apparently following the same failh, and that they never appear to turn, as the head of a certain group, against ihe Byzantine state.
d) In this sense, the term Μακεδών could be applied lo a person who was not of Macedonian descent. The characteristic example here is that of the Emperor Basil I, who is clearly described as being descended “from the Armenian nation“: This however, did not stop the Byzantines from calling him a Macedonian.
e) This category does not appear to include the more recent immigrants to Macedonia, evidently because they retained their own ethnic particularity (language, religion, culture, etc.) and, more important still, their independence from the Byzantine rule. Thus, for example, in no case could any Bulgars, Slavs or Turks who were known to have settled in the region after a certain period (and who, indeed, became the permanent residents) ever be described as Μακεδόνες.
Διαβάστε τη συνέχεια του άρθρου εδώ
Δεν υπάρχουν σχόλια:
Δημοσίευση σχολίου
Υβριστικά σχόλια θα πηγαίνουν στα αζήτητα.