Talk:Antiquization

The country's name
Please take note of Naming conventions (Macedonia), thanks. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 05:40, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Vague language in the article which omits some of the more concrete issues
This article uses a lot of semi-abstract social sciences jargon, but doesn't really cover some of the more specific and concrete issues created by antiquization -- including the fact that in some cases it leads to irresponsible irredentist and territorial expansionist claims (or the rhetorical appearance of irresponsible irredentist and territorial expansionist claims, which can be just as bad for external relations). For example, the Republic of Macedonia leaders freely lay claim to the legacy of Alexander the Great and ancient Macedonia, but most of the core area of the ancient Macedonian Kingdom (including its capital Pella) lay within modern Greece. Most of the modern Republic of Macedonia lies within what was a late-conquered expansion area of the ancient Macedonian kingdom (Paeonia etc.), rather than within ancient Macedonia proper. Similarly, the first version of the modern Republic of Macedonia's flag was based on "antiquizing" a symbol found in tomb excavations in Vergina, Greece around 1978 -- so it was very reasonable to interpret that flag as laying a claim to Greek territory.

Also, an attempt to "antiquize" the pre-WW1 Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization has led to friction with Bulgarians, but this article doesn't mention IMRO...

Under "reasons and motivation for antiquization", there's a lot of theoretical sociology jargon, but no mention of the basic fact that a Slavic Macedonian ethnic-linguistic identity (as opposed to a Slavic Macedonian geographic identity) barely existed before the 1930s (or even the 1940s), so that the post-1991 Republic of Macedonian authorities have felt the need to over-compensate by making inflated and grandiose claims to sometimes- remote historical legacies... AnonMoos (talk) 08:46, 8 February 2018 (UTC)


 * I agree about the strange use of semi-abstract social sciences jargon. The article is also too long for reading. However there is a difference between the process of macedonisation, that occurred mainly during during the 1940-s and that of antiquisation, which occurred at the beginning of the 21 century. Jingiby (talk) 09:11, 8 February 2018 (UTC)


 * I don't want to recapitulate the Macedonian identity formation article(s) in this one, but one of the obvious main "reasons and motivation" for major historical appropriationism is the need to compensate for the relatively shallow historical roots of a separate Macedonian ethnic-linguistic identity (which was mostly just idle intellectual theorizing before the 1940s, though discontent with forced Serbian assimilation was real enough even earlier). However, this is only tangentially alluded to in the "reasons and motivation for antiquization" subsection of the article... AnonMoos (talk) 09:01, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Added "Essay-like" template.
I have inserted the "Essay-like" template on this page because it feels too much like a personal reflection, and seems to ignore NPOV. Dunutubble (talk) 16:26, 25 July 2021 (UTC)


 * It would probably take the collective effort of hundreds of non-Greek and non-Macedonian Wikipedia editors to rewrite this page in a more neutral, unbiased, centrist, moderate tone. Epitome of Creativity (talk) 09:40, 25 May 2022 (UTC)