Hacker News Reader

Comment by shapiro92 | Hacker News Reader

I personally do not care about the naming. Name each place / country whatever you want. What I care about is the political games that are being played behind it.

People in this thread miss one point about FYROM, they want to use the name Makedonia with relations to the ancient Makedonas. Which in turns creates issues with the Greek nation.

Now with the new "deal" they will take the name North Macedonia but they strictly mention that they do not have any relation to the Ancient Makedonas. So at the end of the day, why didnt the two goverment or EU or UN take 20 historians and ask them, "guys do they bare the right to have that name?" Whatever the historians say should be the verdict.

Now as for the name, there is a reason it is being pushed right now. The balkans are a chessboard for many many years and we will see soon the effects on "North Macedonia".

View on HN

> Which in turns creates issues with the Greek nation

It creates zero issues for Greece. Alexander the Great died over two millenia ago [1]. Shortly after his death, the ancient kingdom of Macedon fell to Rome [2]. Again, over two millennia ago.

Instead of working on something productive, these two nations found something totally irrelevant to squabble over.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_the_Great

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macedonia_(ancient_kingdom)#Co...

I think you grossly underestimate how much tourism Greece gets for the Macedonian museums/artifacts/etc. That would be like saying that Germany calling themselves "Rome" has zero issues for Italy.

Did it cause issues for Germany to call themselves the “Holy Roman Empire [of the German Nation]” for a thousand years? (Honest question.)

Or the Byzantine Empire, who only ever referred to themselves as the Roman Empire.

Actually, the naming there was not incorrect. Recall the Roman empire split into East and West, with West disappearing shortly after. So it was the only remaining (piece) of the Roman empire at that point and there was later an attempt to liberate Rome etc (see Justinian for the most serious one).

The Holy Roman empire was an attempt of Charles I (to be named Charlemagne, i.e. the great) to recreate such an empire.

But there's more to the name. Ironically, large parts were roman territory, once. They did trace their ancestors back to ancient heroes and kings, too, even if that might be seen as hyperbole now, it continued a roman tradition.

> Now with the new "deal" they will take the name North Macedonia but they strictly mention that they do not have any relation to the Ancient Makedonas. So at the end of the day, why didnt the two goverment or EU or UN take 20 historians and ask them, "guys do they bare the right to have that name?" Whatever the historians say should be the verdict.

The name Macedonia expanded to cover the modern country of Macedonia sometime during the Roman Empire. The historians (well, everyone but the Greeks) would all agree that there is absolutely no issue with calling the modern country of Macedonia from a historical naming perspective. Sure, there's confusion between the Slavic-speaking Macedonians and the Hellenic-speaking Ancient Macedonians, but this is far from the only instance of the same name referring to completely different entities.

As you said the Macedonia region covers way more territory than the territory of the modern country. Add to this the fact the nationalists want the modern country to eventually gain all these territories. And before you claim, that these people are minority, having been there it seems that a lot of people share these feelings. For example you can see everywhere maps where the borders of the modern country are way more expanded including a huge part of Greece.

> Macedonia region covers way more territory than the territory of the modern country

Should people in Western Turkey get pissed off about Greece calling itself Greece?

Are you aware of Cyprus?

Based on their claims in Thrace and Aegean sea they are. So I guess you agree with me then.

I think thats the point, Greece doesn't want Macedonia to be able to claim the territory of Macedonia by virtue of naming.

The consensus of historians is clear. They ignore them because they don't like to side with any single country. Think of it more like politicians ignoring consensus about Global Warming (e.g. Trump as an obvious example) or financial issues.

Politicians do not care about what is right, or what the scientific community thinks. They want to make things easier for them.

> "guys do they bare the right to have that name?"

Oh really? We need to have an authority deciding if we can have a name or not. Why not just let people label themselves what they want.

I'm pretty sure if I name my island the "United States of America" people will not start paying their taxes to me anytime soon.

On a side note, try to name your cheese "Feta" or any other commercial product with a licensed name and you would be getting a lawsuit. I dont understand why the same does not happen here.. or wait capitalism :P

Reply on news.ycombinator.com