Philotas Trial

[akritas]

As you know there is a passage in the history of Livius (6.9.31) that could be considered as an FYROMian argument which distinguishes Macedonian and Greek lannguages.

Livius describes Filotas’ trial in front of Macedonian army. Alexander asks him if he is to apologize in Macedonian speech as the heritage says. Filotas answers:

Latin

"Praeter Macedones plerique adsunt, quos facilius quae dicam percepturos arbitror, si eadem lingua fuero usus qua tu egisti; non ob aliud, credo, quam ut oratio tua intelligi posset a pluribus".

Greek

Apart Macedonians, there are many people around (who will understand me more easyli if I speak in the language you have spoken for the same reason.

I think Pr Kapetanopoulos Elias give one from the most accurate answer as about this FYROMian argyment in

http://www.history.ccsu.edu/elias/AlexandrosPatrius.htm

or in pdf
http://www.history.ccsu.edu/elias/Ph...triusSermo.pdf

His conclusion is

These instances of evidence of a Makedonian mode of speech date, more or less, from the Roman imperial period and later, although their roots may possibly go back to the time of Alexander and after.

In any event, the significance that could be attached to Curtius' patrius sermo as testimony of a separate Makedonian language23 is compromised by its lateness and by its introduction in a highly charged context, as also observed above. Moreover, with the contradiction noted above Curtius' patrius sermo motif is cancelled out and is of no particular importance as to the Makedones' mode of speech. 24 And this is the more true because of the overwhelming evidence, principally onomastic and epigraphic, that the speech of the Makedones was Greek. 25

[Istor]

Focus on that "more easily" and read my comments if you haven't read them already here:
http://www.network54.com/Forum/41592...38217%3B+trial.

[Torontezos]

If I recall correctly Philottas' trial was a show-trial for the general public so that an example could be made of any traitors.
Having said that, the general population did not speak their conquerors language yet, and therefore it makes sense the language used during this quote was Persian (as Alexander and many of his generals had learned the language).
Since Alexander is known for spreading Hellenic language and culture Eastwards, logic concludes that this trial (since it was in newly conquered territory) was in Persian, and the "Native Macedonian" tongue reffered to in the quote is the Hellenic that Alexander brought with him during his conquests.

Just my two cents.

[Hellas7]

Originally Posted by Torontezos

If I recall correctly Philottas' trial was a show-trial for the general public so that an example could be made of any traitors.
Having said that, the general population did not speak their conquerors language yet, and therefore it makes sense the language used during this quote was Persian (as Alexander and many of his generals had learned the language).
Since Alexander is known for spreading Hellenic language and culture Eastwards, logic concludes that this trial (since it was in newly conquered territory) was in Persian, and the "Native Macedonian" tongue reffered to in the quote is the Hellenic that Alexander brought with him during his conquests.

Just my two cents.

I have always thought the same personally.


Is it so far fetched?


Although Istors explanation does seem the most logical.

[Andrew]

Originally Posted by Istor

Focus on that "more easily" and read my comments if you haven't read them already here:
http://www.network54.com/Forum/41592...38217%3B+trial.

Great Istor ..."MORE EASILY" explains rationaly everything , BRAVO !!!

[Truth Bearer]

Bravo Istor spot on mate!!!

[Andrew]

article by Jona Lendering © about Curtius inflated discription

http://www.livius.org/ct-cz/curtius/qcr.html

Taken as a whole, it is a very fascinating book, although it contains errors. Both can be explained from the fact that it has the History of Alexander of Cleitarchus (a contemporary of Alexander) as its source. The author of this book had written a fine history that focused on Alexander's presumed psychological development from a brilliant young conqueror to a paranoid despot. This psychological dimension makes Curtius' History of Alexander good reading and the Roman readers must have seen through it: of course, the real subject was not Alexander, but the tyranny of Tiberius and Caligula. (It can be shown that Curtius Rufus' description of the trial of Philotas is based on an incident during the reign of Tiberius.)

So the Philotas affair seen as a reconstruction of an incident of the Imperial-Roman period makes perfectly sense :

In the Emperial-roman period the Roman officers were of multiethnical origins and their native languages had begun to vanish giving ground to Latin !!! Latin has kept united the western part of the Roman Empire ...not to mention the multilinguistic Italian peninsula itself !!!

[smokva]

Originally Posted by Truth Bearer

Bravo Istor spot on mate!!!

Bravo Istor, you are the Invicible Makedonas