Wen | Qingyou said
Editor|Editor
On the whole, the formation process of Hellenism, like the development process of Greek civilization, is in the process of cultural function, diachronic nature, and the results of its construction are presented at different stages.
The historical reason why the two identities of "Greek" and "Macedonian" can be justifiably distinguished and opposed by Isocrates is the difference in the degree of Greek development between the two.
"Greek" is opposed to "Macedonian identity."
Macedonia was on the fringes of Greek civilization and was nowhere near as prosperous as the Greek city-states in the core area of Greek civilization.
By the time of its rise, unlike the slow post-war revival of the Greek city-states, Macedonia itself had surpassed the Greek city-states.
This situation has had an impact on the hearts of citizens on both sides. From the standpoint of the citizens of the Greek city-states, especially the Athenians, represented by Isocrates, who tried to solve internal and external troubles with the help of Macedonian power.
For the sudden rise of Macedonia, its conformity with the ethnic standards of language, blood lineage, religion and other ethnic groups previously established by the Greek city-states made it a prerequisite for opposition to the "barbarians", although the form of the state was different, but always under the administration of the "Greeks" (that is, the "Greek" identity of the Macedonian king).
And its great strength provided an opportunity for the Greek city-states to get out of trouble. But on the other hand, the Greek city-states could not let go of their vision of the remote and backward terrain of the past, or that the barbarian lands had great power to conquer themselves.
As a result, the confrontation between "Greeks" and "Macedonians" became a solution on the premise that "Greeks" and "Macedonians" were jointly opposed to "barbarians".
Therefore, the practical consideration of the fact that the identity of the "Macedonian" can be mobilized to stand on the opposite side of the "barbarian" identity with the "Greek" is that Athens needs to rely on the great strength of Macedonia to get out of the crisis.
What she could rely on was her cultural prestige in Greece.
"In fact, identity is a choice." Not only Athens, but even if we look at the Greek city-states from her to the wider range of Greek city-states, we can find that the Hellenism between them and Macedonia can give Athens, as the subject of ethnic construction, the criterion for choosing "Macedonians" against "barbarians".
As Herodotus recounts, Greece began as a weak ethnic group, but it was with the active participation of many Piracis and other non-Greek speaking groups that it gradually grew.
Thucydides wrote about the Argos of Amphilocia and the barbarians of other parts of Amphilocia.
The union of the Argos of Amphirochia with the Ambrachians, whom they had invited, was, in a sense, a movement of "unification of the settlement" through which they became Greeks speaking the same dialect, while the inhabitants of the rest of Amphirochia were still recorded as barbarians by Thucydides.
Further, when did non-Greek-speaking groups join the "Greeks"? How long was assimilation by the "Greeks"? To what extent has it been assimilated? These factors will have an important impact on the Greeks' perception of ethnicity.
In the case of Herodotus, for example, the first inhabitants of the Attica region were the Piracis, who absorbed Greek culture or, more accurately, created Greek culture before assimilating into the Greeks after they lived with the Ionians, the first Greeks to go south.
At that time, the Piraces, who had not absorbed Greek culture, were still regarded as barbarians by the Greeks.
Just as "every people is convinced that its customs are much better than those of all others", the above list reflects the strong pride of the Greeks in their civilization, which can be more accurately called superiority.
Therefore, it is understandable that the citizens of Athens, represented by Isocrates, directly subsumed the Macedonian royal family into the identity of "Greeks".
In this way, they can attribute the great power that Macedonia was able to dominate the Greek situation in part to the fact that the "Macedonians" were under the leadership of the king with the identity of "Greeks".
The wise governance of the Macedonian king was inseparable from his wisdom as a "Greek", and the aforementioned Aristotle view that "the Greeks are capable of ruling all mankind" is most representative.
Trichotomy identity of "Greek-Macedonian-Barbarian"
The trichotomy of "Greek-Macedonian-Barbarian" identity not only catered to the orthodox "Greek" perception that the citizens of the Greek city-states were proud of, but also reflected that the "Macedonians" who were deeply influenced by Greek civilization (Greek from the researcher's "object" standpoint) were not "barbarians" at this time.
Although different from the citizens of the city-state, it is not a completely opposite "other". Moreover, the Macedonian kings were "Greeks" with excellent leadership skills like them, so they were only defeated by their people.
With this understanding, the citizens of the Greek city-states could accept the "Greek-Macedonian-Barbarian" identity with a strong sense of pride in being the inhabitants of the core area of Greek civilization and a sense of superiority over the Macedonians.
This situation is not unique, and the Jewish population of the Hellenistic period also divided the entire Jewish community into secondary terms of "Hellenistics" and "Hebrews", emphasizing the opposition between the two.
So far, the emergence of the "Greek-Macedonian-Barbarian" trichotomy identity concept is the product of the joint effect of the citizens of the Greek city-states represented by the Athenians, after recognizing the huge gap in strength between their own city-states and the Macedonian kingdom, and the rebellion against Persia, which was the culprit and had been stirring up the situation in Greece.
Among them, the division of "Greek-Macedonians" is the citizens of the Greek city-states, especially the Athenians, who have been committed to the expansion of the struggle for Greek hegemony,
The compromise of the status quo that Macedonia was superior to itself and dominant in Greece and the remembrance of its glorious history sought to preserve their pride as the core of the Greek civilization tradition.
Based on this concept, when we re-examine the trichotomy of identity of "Greek-Macedonian-Barbarian", we can find that the expansion concept of "Greek-Barbarian" polarity and "Greek superiority over Barbarian" was perpetuated by the Macedonian royal succession. “
The identity of the "Macedonians" was separated from the "barbarian" belonging by the Athenians, who were the main body of the "Greek" ethnic construction, and formed the "Greek-Macedonian" division, in order to preserve the pride of their own civilization among the citizens of the Greek city-states that Athens contained in and represented therein.
The essence of this division was that the Greek city-state represented by Athens turned to emphasize its glorious history after the collapse of hegemony, and they distinguished "Greeks" and "Macedonians" as the creators and beneficiaries of Greek civilization.
And when we look at Macedonians as the category of "lords", we can see that the "Greek-Macedonian" division is acceptable to them because they are equally proud of their identity differences from "Greeks".
Specifically, this period was the period of Macedonia's rise and conquest, and the Greek concept of identity evolved from the "Greek-Barbarian" dichotomy to the "Greek-Macedonian-Barbarian" trichotomy, and Macedonia accepted the expansion concept of panhellenism and trichotomy identity to whitewash its conquest. “
The Greek-Macedonian distinction for them was an emphasis on the fact that Macedonia had conquered the Greek city-states in a thriving state.
Macedonia lagged behind the Greek city-states in the development of Hellenism, and lacked historical thickness in Greek culture, but she was able to build a new ethnic group in Athens, which still had a strong cultural influence during this period, and looked forward to her help, relying on its own strong strength.
Thus, in the eyes of the Macedonians, the division of "Greek-Macedonian" was an emphasis on the citizens of the Greek city-states and the Macedonians as conquerors and conquerors respectively.
It is also deeply different from the deep heritage of the citizens of the Greek city-states in Greek culture, and the Macedonians who rose in the conquest relied more on their own powerful force, and the extension of this connotation was manifested in the strong competitive spirit of the Macedonians.
Among the Macedonians, there was an ancient custom of tying the head of a horse around the waist for those who had not killed the enemy, and those who had not killed a boar while hunting could only sit and not lie down during the feast (in Greek culture, being able to lie down and eat in a banquet Κλίνω was a noble act).