Interesting isn't it, that such names are found inupper Macedon, as well as justsouth ofMacedon (>Perrhaibon, a district that can be said to have been between Macedon and Thessaly); and evenin Macedon "proper" (>Cyrrhus). Hmm ... maybe that's because these formswere Macedonian forms after all.Alexander 00708:01, 18 July 2005 (UTC)Reply

How do you define "non-Hellenic"? All the Greek-os islands have pre-IE (i.e. "non-Greek") names.--Theathenae12:31, 18 July 2005 (UTC)Reply

Wrong.Andros andDelos are at least two Indo-European exceptions.Alexander 00704:42, 1 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

Non-Hellenic, as far as I can tell, is defined according to whether a given element has a Greek Indo-European etymology or not. For instance,Pyrrhus can be said to be Hellenic.Cyrrhus, until it has an agreed upon Greek etymology, cannot be said to be Hellenic. So, at present, such terms are in a kind of "limbo", until new research gives them etymologies, demonstrating that they are Greek or non-Greek.Alexander 00720:41, 18 July 2005 (UTC)Reply

There are countless examples of Greek names that have no Greek etymology. What does Naxos mean in Greek? Or Zakynthos, Mykonos, etc.?--Theathenae20:47, 18 July 2005 (UTC)Reply

Exactly, so those terms are generally considered pre-Greek or "non-Greek" (though they have become Greek). Those Macedonian examplesmay also be from a pre-Greek substratum, but they may all be native (which would have interesting implications if they can't be given Greek etymologies), or they may be from an adstratum (late loans).Alexander 00720:51, 18 July 2005 (UTC)Reply

Any scenario is possible, of course, but having pre-Greek or "non-Greek" names in and of itself is not sufficient evidence to argue that they themselves weren't Greek.--Theathenae21:04, 18 July 2005 (UTC)Reply

Don't worry, the way Decius keeps moving further North, soon enough he will move past the Danube: which was his intention all alongChronographos21:18, 18 July 2005 (UTC)Reply

No, I'm not trying to connect Macedonians to Dacians or Getae. This information from Upper Macedonia fits in with the idea of Macedonians being Highlanders (Makedones), and perhaps these Highlanders were the original Macedonians.Alexander 00721:25, 18 July 2005 (UTC)Reply

Why,of course they were! It's interesting how you keep moving the goalposts until you find something no one can disprove.Chronographos21:28, 18 July 2005 (UTC)Reply

Something should be done on that.Ifly6 (talk)03:56, 3 February 2025 (UTC)Reply