Did they really speak Greek?

 Ancient Macedonia, was not a country which would look like a modern state, with an unified language and culture. Most of the ancient state entities were run by powerful theocrats who usually didn't speak the same language/s as the regular people.

The Macedonian rulers and theocrats, most likely have used a Greek dialect, for their religious activity,  but the regular people must have used one or more different spoken languages. We simply don’t know. We don’t even know if the Greek spoken by the elite, for their liturgy, is the Greek we know, because although many believe Greek was the vernacular language of a distinct nation, in fact it wasn’t. But that’s another issue, which leads to a long discussion, because people use the modern standards, to judge about the ethnicity and nationality of the past.

So for now lets leave the ancients, and lets go to the Middle ages.

In 1685 Petro Bogdano the archbishop of Scopie and Kingdom of Serbia, published in Italy his bilingual Gospel called “Cyneus Prophetarum” in Italian and Epirotic

What language is the Epirotic? It is certainly Albanian and there is no discussion about that:

but Bogdano calls himself a Macedon, which apparently is another identity. Not for Bogdano thou, he calls himself: born a Macedonian who master only Albanian, his native language well, out of the two languages Italian and Epirotic(Albanian) that he wrote the book.

So Macedonian is the Epirotic language, Albanian language.
Now someone would assume that because of the “bad habit” of the Middle Ages authors to call the new nations by their ancient names, will justify the fact that Macedonian and Epirotic are called Albanian . Fair enough, but then what happened to the Greek if the language of Macedonians and Epirots were to be originally Greek?
At this point someone will assume… I don’t know what.
The truth is that we don’t know what face the Greek language, have had in the past, but during Middle ages, the language scholars called it DEAD LANGUAGE, SCHOLASTIC a language USED ONLY BY THE LEARNED, NOT A NATIONAL LANGUAGE.

And by that we already know that the Greek, has been in the first place A SACRED LANGUAGE, not used by regular people.

The same authors(Johannes Amos Comenius 1592-1670), of the Great Didactic (Didactica Magna) keep calling Epirotic as Albanian, used in Epirus and Macedonia, and not strangely enough Serbian a dialect of the Bulgarian, and by Bulgarian they mean Old Church Slavonic, another sacred language, created almost 1000 years after, ancient Macedonia.

Now, the same Petro Bogdano, gives a time and a place about Alexander the Great Monarchy:

At this point, the time is not important but the place is, according to Bogdano, is Petrela Albania, which in Italian version is Pella. Strangely enough the name Macedonia(in Italian version) is called Matti in Albanian version, which reminds us the old name of it Emathia, a significant meaning in Albanian language: e mathia= the big one. As if this was not enough, he calls Alexander the Great: LEKA I MATH, which means the same thing: Alexander the Great, with a meaningful difference, that calling him like this, means he was son of that land, Albanian land. It’s clear that Bogdano, didn’t just create a spoiled name for Alexander, but he calls him by the name his own people call their son LEKA, and the name that 400 years after, Albanian nation would name their currency LEK

The same LEKA, was not an unclaimed Albanian figure, Scanderbeg himself, claimed him, his followers and Epirots who successfully fought against Rome, as Albanians:

But Scanderbeg had no idea that a time would come that a new nation created only in the 19th century will manage to convince the entire world, that Macedonians were Greeks, a thesis they will have hard time to prove, because the intellectuals long before them, in their own language, have permanently established what nation the Macedonians belong:

The Albanians more than any other nation on the face of Earth deserve to be called Macedonians.

Abbreviation of the semantics and the semantics of the abbreviations

 

Con—συν—Κοινή—oμόνοια--common—comune=N=I=1

All these terms regardless the language (Latin/English/Greek) dedicate their meaning to the uni-ty, number one.

                                                                             fig1

Number one pronounced in different languages:

Uno(ital)---One(Eng)----Ena(Greek)

Unit—unison-unite-unity-universal, are all terms derived from the number 1 (un-o) semantics.

Unit---one entity

Unite---join in one

Unity----joined around one

Universal---one inclusion

So all these terms in English are about joining around a singularity.

Now linguistically, the analog terms in every language, has in common the letter N:

Latin-unus, Neolatin-uno, Germanic eins, Semi Latin/Germanic one, Greek ena, Catalan un

And goes like this for every language of this family. Therefore is obvious that the sound /N/, is the ideosound behind the meaning of this word, the ideo-sound of the singularity and continuity.

If you watch the structure of this word in most languages, we have v-c-v structure. Albanian is an exception, in this language we have a pure c-v monosyllabic structure një( and the dialectical variations nja, nië, një, njo, nje) which keep the nasal /N/ as the meaning spinal bone followed by a fluid vowel, which performs the function of a closing sound.

It’s obvious that in Proto-Albanian, a primitive NATURAL  language, this language employees an the ideo-sound /N/, to give a meaning to the word one-një. If we had to explain how did we arrive from proto n-à një, the evolution went like this. The sound /n/ although a powerful ideo-sound that serves as a bone, is not a complete body of a word, to express a complex semantics, like the meaning of singularity and unity, it needs a “flesh” around it, and this “flesh” is a the closing vowel /i/ in the case of Albanian:

N(as a ideosound)--->ni(completed followed by a closing sound)

But “ni” in Albanian creates a sound ligature: "nj", a phoneme on its own, which would request the necessity of  another vowel, to follow, usually ë, a, o, that doesn’t carry a semantic value, but is just there to complete the pronunciation, as a closing sound. So the initial /n/ evolves to “një” in a real spoken language, without losing the ability, to tell us the former primitive form. Other languages all derivates of a Sacred cultivated languages carry an initial vowel, which in fact different from the closing vowel, carries a semantic value, and this value is the meaning: is(to be)

is-est-është-osht-asht are all equal to a meaning e(in latin-italian). So if we had to use an abbreviation of this meaning, we simply use the initial vowel:

ena= e na= is one  (Greek)

one= o ne= is one  (English)

unus= u n(e) –us(parasitive suffix)  (Latin)

It’s clear that the words in these languages are manufactured terms and not a product of a spoken language.

Let’s get back to the Greek, this language is no exception, every single word in that language in this particular dictionary(fig 1), has originated from the meaning of one( unus), The word συν that normally has been translated “together” is just the “Greek version” of the Latin “con”=together, where:

c(latin)= σ (greek)

and υν =un=uno=one=1

What do represent c & σ? They simply are a short form of the word “qui” in Latin, and they instate its meaning by being represented as this same family letters:

σ->c->ç-> k->q in words like this:

cili or që (Albanian)---qui(Latin)---quale(Italian)---(whi)ch(English) and dozens of similar words in other languages.

So  συν in Greek, is exactly the same meaning as “con” in Latin=which one=which are included in one= together

And kοινή is exactly the same qi në= qui one

The word mono(μόνο) simply means: me no=with one, only one

Oμόνοια—>o-oμόνο-ια= the unity( ia feminine noun suffix) and o a definite article creating  an adjacent word παρακείμενος, par exelence.   The examples are countless, every single word in every language does follow the rules  of the semantics, and the abbreviations used by “the language engineers”,  who created the sacred languages.  There is NO PIE language, this hypothetical language, is a pure fabrication of the linguists mind,  it’s a falsehood theory, which fails to understand that languages are in two forms,  natural and cultivated by men, none of them comes from empiric primitive roots,  but the former are created by served ideo-sounds in nature, mostly onomatopoeic ,  and the latter are just adjacent forms of the natural words, that join together in one the  simple meanings, making them visually more complex.