Talk:Vergina Sun

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Heraldry and Vexillology Portal Vergina Sun is within the scope of the Heraldry and vexillology WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of heraldry and vexillology. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale. (FAQ).

What does "Vergina" mean? Can we see a representation? Even a link to one on the Net? -- Zoe

Vergina is a small town in the Greek province of Macedonia that in 1991 had a population of 1255 people. Ancient ruins at the town's area were discovered during the mid-19th centurie. A systematic archaelogical excavation started on 1937. It was discovered that the ruins belonged to the ancient city of Aiges. Settled around 1000 BC, it served as the earliest capital of the Kingdom of Macedon from the 7th century BC to the late 5th Century BC. The city continued to be the religious center of the Kingdom and it was traditional for the marriages of the royal familie to be celebrated there. It was also the traditional burial site of the Macedonian Kings, with the exception of Alexander the Great. Many of the royal graves have been excavated and research continues. It is unknown when the city was abandoned but ancient sources last mention it as captured by the Celtic mercenaries of the King of Heperus on 274 BC.

It is considered one of Greece's most important archaelogical sites and the findings, including the symbol, have been named afterr the nearby modern town. Judging from my personal visit there a few years ago , it is an interesting place for those interested in the past User:Dimadick

Contents 1 CONSISTENCY, PLEASE! 2 Wiki isn´t propaganda platform!!! 3 Name issue again 4 Naming Policy 5 trademarks and inaccuracies 6 New flag not derivative of Vergina 7 Chronology and official status of the blue flag 8 The "Sun" has been also found in Ohrid in 2002 and other stuff

[edit] CONSISTENCY, PLEASE!

Folks, we don't need the terms "Republic of Macedonia" and "FYRoM" used intermittently or interchangably in the same article. I don't have a side in this dispute. I think that FYROM, FYRoM, or whatever is very ambigious to most people without a specific interest in the disupute, which is the vast majority of readers of a general-interest encylopedia and should never be used without an antecedent somewhere in the article.

As I have no reason to back either side, I'm going to leave this as it is for the time being, but it needs to be fixed, one way or the other, soon, and if no one else does then I might.

Rlquall 14:53, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I agree - I've fixed it. -- ChrisO 18:10, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Wiki isn´t propaganda platform!!!

• I`m from Greek Macedonia , und i´m Greek Macedonians (Μακεδόνας Makedónas) and i know what is truth und what ist propaganda...!

See you http://www.macedoniaontheweb.com/articles/?p=2

When independence was obtained in 1992, the flag of the Socialist Republic of Macedonia was retained until it was replaced with the flag with the so-called sun of Vergina.

The Vergina Sun was found on a gold larnax in the main burial chamber of Philip, located at Vergina, Imathia, Greece. The larnax (gold casket) which Andronikos identified as containing the remains of Philip II has a symbol of a sun or star on its lid, and this Vergina Sun has been adopted as a symbol of Greek Macedonia.[[1]]

The Vergina Tombs - (The Hellenic Ministry of Culture) Museum in Greece [[2]]

The Present Flag adopted was adopted in 5 October 1995 and has been in use until now.

Meaning of the Flags - A Political Glimpse

The evolution of the FYROM flags stems from polical movements in the region. This is based chiefly on events that occurred in the 1940’s. As is evident, the idea of a “Macedonia” to these Slavic people came quite late, and most of us were alive when this occurred. This is quite obviously not the same people that fought with Alexander the Great. Those people lie South, in Macedonia Greece.

How the Idea Began: STALIN TO BULGARIAN DELEGATION (G. Dimitrov, V. Kolarov, T. Kostov) The Kremlin, 7 June 1946 Cultural autonomy must be granted to Pirin Macedonia within the framework of Bulgaria. Tito has shown himself more flexible than you - possibly because he lives in a multiethnic state and has had to give equal rights to the various peoples. Autonomy will be the first step towards the unification of Macedonia, but in view of the present situation there should be no hurry on this matter. Otherwise, in the eyes of the Macedonian people the whole mission of achieving Macedonian autonomy will remain with Tito and you will get the criticism. You seem to be afraid of Kimon Georgiev, you have involved yourselves too much with him and do not want to give autonomy to Pirin Macedonia. That a Macedonian consciousness has not yet developed among the population is of no account. No such consciousness existed in Belarus either when we proclaimed it a Soviet Republic. However, later it was shown that Belarusian people did in fact exist. …

Thank you! --Asteraki 17:32, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Hi Asteraki :-) The reason for which I've reverted your edits is very simple: rightly or wrongly, wikipedians have opted for RoM over FYROM, and so we have Republic of Macedonia, Macedonians (ethnic group), List of Macedonians, and not Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, etc. I can add that I do not disapprove this; personally, I wouldn't have problems if Switzerland decided to change its name in Tuscany (even if I would find it a bit queer ;-)) Aldux 18:19, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

I don't understand why you've deleted the modern RoM flag - you've provided no explanation. The article discusses the change in flags, so it seems sensible to have a "before and after" comparison to illustrate the point. -- ChrisO 20:02, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Name issue again

It is bad enough that these edit wars exist; basic rules of civility dictate that you don't try to impose your view on articles that are about Greek topics. Doing so just invites others to do the same in articles that are purely about FYROMian topics such as cities, people, etc. This is an article about a Greek subject; in Greece "Macedonia" means a very specific thing, totally unrelated to FYROM. Respect that if you wish others to respect your subjects. This will go a long way towards promoting some calm between us here and in general. Walking into other people's home and staking claims only promotes hatred and perpetuates the problem. Sysin 14:09, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Sysin, neither I nor ChrisO are from the Balkans, and neither have any axe to grind regarding the article. If Greeks want to contribute to articles concerning the RoM, they are more than welcome; but Greeks cannot expect to have a special right for Greek subjects. As for FYROM, I repeat what I've already said on this same talk: RoM has been preferred to FYROM for the standard article, and so the other articles must also prefer RoM over FYROM. And please don't revert again, or you will violate the 3 reverts rule. Aldux 15:06, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Naming Policy

Naming conflict policy clearly states that "If the term "Cabindan" (i.e. RoM) is used in an article, the controversy should be mentioned and if necessary explained, with both sides' case being summarised". Sysin 19:04, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Is this edit war really needed? Apart from the fact that using the RoM name is humiliating to Greeks and that FYROM is found perfectly acceptable by the UN and EU, is there some special reason for insisting on using RoM? I'm just curious why using RoM is so important and using FYROM is so unacceptable. My point is that the other side (the Greek side) in this contrversy should be clearly menitoned (the footnotes). I see no reason for the RoM POV to be enforced (there's no way around this - the naming conflict guidelines) without appropriate links to the naming conflict. --Latinus (talk (el:)) 23:26, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

The reason for insisting on using RoM on articles about Greece is to provoke and annoy people. I don't see Greeks going to articles about cities people and objects in FYROM and forcing their view. The civilized thing to do is leave the other side's articles alone. Since some people won't act civilly, we should at least respect the rules and the rules are clear: If the term X is used in an article, the controversy should be mentioned and if necessary explained, with both sides' case being summarised (exact quote). There is nothing in the rules to justify the deletion of the footnote from the article. Sysin 07:39, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Sysin, believe me, neither I, nor ChrisO, nor Jonathunder, have any interest in annoying people. And as I said before, nobody of us is Greek-Macedonian-Bulgarian-Albanian-Turkish-Serbian: I'm Italian, Jonathunder is American, and ChrisO is British or American, I think. The point is that Greeks have no right to possess ANY article regarding Greece more than have Japanese. The same is obviously true for Roman and Italian articles; my being does not give me and my fellow countrymen a special right on those articles. The same is obviously true for RoM related articles: if Greek editors want to seriously help editing RoM articles, they're welcome, especially considering that many Macedonian nationalists are repeatedly trying to impose their views. As for the RoM/FYROM question, the point is that in wikipedia the choice for the main article has been Republic of Macedonia and not Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia; and it's a wikipedia rule that direct links are preferred to redirects. I think we should search consistency for the whole wikipedia, and not for national sections of it; or else, what's the sense of building an international encyclopedia? As for putting a note, I have nothing against this: but I would prefer that the explanation could be built so to go to one page, that concerning the Republic of Macedonia. I think somebody had already done this (the mark on all pages sent to the single endnote of RoM) but it appears Macedonian nationalists have removed it sometime. Aldux 12:31, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

I co-wrote Wikipedia:Naming_conflict, and I wrote the disclaimer that you added to the article. The naming policy simply does not require the kind of tagging every mention of the RoM name that you're engaging in. You are clearly doing this for POV reasons, and your claim that the use of the name RoM is just "to annoy people" is bollocks. The naming conflict policy explains very clearly why the name is used. I find it odd that you're reading into the policy something that isn't there, while ignoring what is there. -- ChrisO 23:17, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Sigh - Sysin, just leave it, ασ' το. The flip side of what you're doing it that it seems like you're trying to make a point by tagging every mention of the RoM name. As long as the explanation of the policy is there, in its own section, it is extremely unlikely that a reader would not notice it. --Latinus (talk (el:)) 12:37, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Yes, he's just playing silly POV games. -- ChrisO 23:17, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

ChrisO, shame on you. Since the policy proves you wrong (and you know it), you tried to edit the policy without any prior discussion or consensus. If you are determined to simply disregard the rules, simply say so and don't pretend otherwise. The rules as the are make no exceptions of the kind that you claim, and you know it. Sysin 19:15, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

The naming policy absolutely does not prove me wrong. I should know; I wrote it! Your interpretation of it is simply not correct, and the line that I added is a clarification of an existing guideline, not something new. As I've said on the policy's talk page, your interpretation would lead to ridiculous results, like having to discuss the China-Taiwan issue on every single page that mentioned the Republic of China (i.e. Taiwan) even in passing. -- ChrisO 19:28, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

You re-wrote it after the fact. Very few people would resort to doing something that low. And this is not "even in passing", this article is very relevant to the dispute. Sysin

Chris, by any objective reading of the policy, the footnote is presently permitted. You have proposed a change in the policy; fair enough. Please let's carry on a civilized discussion in the appropriate forum (there) instead of a silly rv war here. Sysin 23:22, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] trademarks and inaccuracies

The 16-ray sun is a trademark of Intersalonica since 1978 (or 1979). The Bank of Macedonia-Thrace had the 12-ray sun during the 1980s and not after 1992 as the article implies. talk to +MATIA 13:15, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] New flag not derivative of Vergina

I deleted the official flag of ROM/FYROM from this articel because when it was introduced in 1992 there was no indication from the parliament in Skopje or from the government that this was an adaptation of Vergina. There have never such been official claims from the government (to my knowledge). Therefore to make such claims are POV. I hope you take my point and agree to keep my edit. Thank you in advance for your generous cooperation, your concern for editoria accuracy and for your understanding. I am sure all our friends agree with this, if not, they will provide official evidence to the contrary. With all due respect and for the sake of accuracy please allow me to re-delete that particular flag.

• There is also incomplete information regarding the first flag, it is not just the 'pre-1995 flag' but 'the official flag between 1992-1995'; that also needs correctinig. Politis 16:50, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

We've already passed through this, and I will simply repeat you the exact words that another editor, ChrisO, said a few months ago: "The article discusses the change in flags, so it seems sensible to have a "before and after" comparison to illustrate the point." --Aldux 16:59, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Chronology and official status of the blue flag

I have removed the sentence "Flags displaying the Vergina Sun in this fashion have been used since the 1980s", and I would prefer to revert the chronological representation of this whole chapter, as the blue flag came up only after the Slavic Macedonians adopted their flag, cf. Dorothea Schell, "Der Stern von Vergina als nationales Symbol in Griechenland" (in: Symbole: Zur Bedeutung der Zeichen in der Kultur, ed. by R. W. Brednich and H. Schmitt, Münster et al. 1997, pp. 298-307), p. 301:

"Bis zum Beginn der 1990er Jahre fand der Stern als historisches Emblem der altmakedonischen Dynastie vor allem unter Fachleuten Beachtung. Nach dem Parlamentsbeschluß der ehemaligen jugoslawischen Republik Makedonien im August 1992, eben diesen Stern auf rotem Grund als Staatsflagge einzuführen, ist er auch in Griechenland zum nationalen Symbol avanciert. Das Athener Parlament erklärte ihn – allerdings auf blauem Grund – im Februar 1993 zum Symbol der griechischen Republik."

"Until the beginning of the 1990s the star [i.e. the Vergina Sun, D. B.] as a historical emblem of the Old Macedonian dynasty was noted predominantly by specialists. After the decision of the parliament of the former Yugoslav republic of Macedonia in August 1992 to introduce just this star on a red field as the state flag it became a national symbol in Greece as well. In February 1993 the Athens parliament declared it – though in a blue field – to be a symbol of the Greek republic." (Translation and bold type mine.)

I have also replaced "state emblem" by "unofficial emblem", because on none of the official websites of the Macedonian peripheries (Central Macedonia, Western Macedonia and Eastern Macedonia and Thrace) can I find this emblem or an official flag regulation. Feel free to add such references if you know that the blue flag is the official emblem of any administrative unit anywhere in Greece.

See also the discussion at the German Wikipedia.

--Daniel Bunčić (German Wikipedia · talk) 12:34, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The "Sun" has been also found in Ohrid in 2002 and other stuff

Let me point out the fact that this symbol (the 16-rayed sun) was also found in Ohrid, Republic of Macedonia or FYROM if you insist in 2002. Personally I own two museum certificated copies of:

1. one ceramic cup decorated with a relief of the sixteen-rayed sun on it
2. one hmm how should I call it, medallion perhaps? (the certificate says "application") with the 8th rayed sun inside. The material is stated as gold. forging.

I have uploaded the images of the cup and that thing on my photobucket account, the certificates in english are photographed too so you can read them. I think that pics of these artefacts should be added to the article too.

The link to my photobucket album is: http://s111.photobucket.com/albums/n138/vbb_wiki/sun/ it includes pics of (click on the links):

the ceramic cup,

the ceramic again

that application

the application closeup (a bit blurry)

and the stamp on the certificate incl. email adress of the institution.

Also one unusual thing. How come that sun appears on the printed pamphlets of VMRO from the 1890s? check the corners of the papers and u can see the "suns" in the following image: CLICK HERE

Some form of а sun also appears on the flag of the Macedonian colony in St. Petersburg from 1914 together with a somewhat mythological depiction of Alexander's horse Bucefalus, check the pic HERE. The text says: United and Independent Macedonia. This flag can also be seen in the Museum of Macedonia in Skopje and it is presented on the website of the State Archives.

Also, one related trivia. Few years ago one historian from Republic of Macedonia claimed on a TV interview that the creators of the Coat of arms of the Socialist Republic of Macedonia (check the pic here) knew about the 16 ray sun back then after the WWII so that's why they've placed an 16-ray sun on it. His explanation was something like this: on the coat of arms itself you can only see the 8 sun rays shining from the top of the mountain (count them), but the remaining 8 are logically behind that mountain (as they are in a circle around the sun). Ok, this was nothing academic and it is not a veryfible source but anyway.

And one more thing. I just personally wonder why is this symbol called "the star of Vergina"? First of all Vergina itself is just an ordinary village, not ancient at all, while the archeological site is The Royal tombs of Aegae right? Then it is said that the symbol is discovered for the first time in 1977, I gave u some examples that it may have appeared much earlier. Also I think I remember seeing it (in some form maybe 8th rayed, dont remember exactly) in the movie Alexander the Great starring Richard Burton from the 1950s (on the shields of the fighters). Check the movie if u can.

I think that SOME of this stuff that I presented should be taken into account (of course those supported by reliable sources)

--Vbb-sk-mk 12:29, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

and some info on the institution that excavated those artefacts:
Institute for Protection of Cultural Monuments and the National Museum
"Boro Sain" 10, Ohrid
Tel.: + 389 46 262 498
The framework of this institution incorporates several departments: archaeology, history, ethnology, Slav architecture, history of art, and contemporary arts. It also has its own library, and a photo-preparatory laboratory. The essential part of its activities is the depot which give a shelter to approximately 800 icons dating from the period between XII and XIX century. The most representative ones were relocated in the Galley of Icons. The Institute current activities involve reconstruction and restoration of Samuel's Fortress, The Classical Theatre and St. Clement's Church of St. Pantaleimon at Plaosnik and earlier complete reconstruction of the Robevs House. Today the house contains an archaeological display, exhibition of articles from the Robevs household, artwork of the Ohrid Woodcarving School and archeological excavations of Ohrid and its vicinity.
zimohrid@mt.net.mk
Contact: Pasko Kuzman
--Vbb-sk-mk 13:19, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

What are you trying to say, dear Vbb-sk-mk, by showing those items with 'stars'? That the Greeks were in Ohrid over 2,000 year ago? That is a well known fact. Historically speaking, the impact of the 1977 discovery is that, it was assossiated with Philip of Macedon, father of Alexander the Great. The Greeks were delighted to find such a relic of one of their greatest ruling dinasties, and the world briefly held its breath. By 1984 it was already used by Greeks as a symbol of the historical province of Macedonia (Μακεδονία). When the 'Vergina star' was briefly adopted in 1992, by the new, ex-Yugoslav republic, the decision had very little to do with the desires of Skopje, but just about everything to do with the lobbying of Australilan Slav Macedonians from Greece. President Gligorov, an experienced politician, saw it as a useful bargaining chip with Athens regarding the name issue. Perhaps you are influenced by the trend to re-invent history, to justify something with those pictures. But fortunately, the reality of the Vergina symbol and its usage, exists, and that historical reality belongs to all of us when we may need a reality-check. Politis 13:20, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Politis, be POLITE. Why such an angry reaction? Why these facts are so irritatting for you?
Who really ever mentioned Gligorov, the diaspora in Australia, the re-inventing of the history, the polar bears, the meaning of life? And frankly, your reply sounds like a populist political speech, and I must admit my favourite line is "and the world held its breath". And yes, you are not AT ALL BIASED in this case, right?
Now lets be serious: As everyone can see in the article, there ARE already other examples of same or similar "stars/suns" to that in Vergina, for example that one in Olympia or Kratovo right? Can you tell me please, why should I not be allowed to place my stuff in the article? I presented everything properly and in a civilized manner, with pics, info and even some trivia. Or I'm an Untermensch perhaps?
I want the readers to see these things, that was my main intention, not to bomb Athens of course. Why should these facts be hidden from the readers?
As you can see I didn't spread any nationalist propagandha like "we are the grandsons of Alexander" and all that. I just said what I said, people can read for themselves, they don't need your interventions. A fact is that the SUN can be found in so many places and it has been brought to the light of the day LONG before the exchavations in Vergina in 1977 by Andronikos. Now, it may sound trivial, but do check Richard Burton's movie too, why not? (don't worry it's not a "Skopyan" movie, its a Holywood classic). Seems that Vergina is perhaps just one place in a milion where that "sun" can be found. And who knows maybe its an universal ancient symbol for many countries? I mean check the article, there are several opinions on it's origin and meanings right? Some even say it's just a decoration, nothing to shout about. And some of the other exchavated "suns" may be even older than the one in Vergina. As I said it has been found in Ohrid and thats the fact which i think should be added there, it's for the readers and I dont care whether it was made by Greeks or Swedish or Tuvaluans or Martians. At least for that ceramic cup you must admitt, it's the same star as the one in Vergina, not just similar, its 100% SAME. Ohrid is not in central Antarctica but just a few kilometers from the greek border you can check everything yourself. And the food is inexpensive, unlike in Greece.

Regardless whether today's population in RoM/FYROM is related or not related to the Ancient Macedonians, let's put those well known disputes aside, the "star" has been found here too (in Ohrid by Pasko Kuzman) and also according to Wikipedia, in Kratovo too and maybe in many other places. Lets say for a moment that the population here is like you say- Slavic and completely unrelated to Ancient Macedonians. So what?
Todays' Egypt is predominatly Arabic, but that doesn't stop them from "selling Ancient Egypt" to the tourists right? What Arabs have incommon with the Pharao's? They don't care. Modern Mexico is spanish speaking and mostly catholic but that doesn't stop them from cashing in on the Aztech culture. Also Turkey is very rich with ancient Greek culture, then Italy with their Etruscian art and all. Anyway, these countries proudly celebrate the ancient culture found on their territories and they're doing it worldwide,they organize exhibitions, write books, make movies and what not. I see no reason why we are not allowed to use something that has been found here in a same way these other nations do. I dont say we should claim it as an "ethnic" symbol, cause that would cause disputes and all, but..dunno, to use it as something, in some way.

But there's one more thing that may be interesting. the albanian municipality of Liqenas or Pustec mostly inhabited by people who declare as Ethnic Macedonians and where the macedonian language came into officiall use, adopted the 16-ray sun as an official municipal flag and coat of arms.
CLICK HERE TO SEE IT --Vbb-sk-mk 16:23, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Of course 'Arab' Egyptians can sell Ancient Egypt in their brochures because they live across the same territories of Ancient Egypt. But for the tourist board in Skopje to sell Alexander the Great, etc, can seem like irredentism because those Alexandrine territories are in Greece (it could also be seen as free advertising for Greece). The point remains that it was the Vergina Star - and nothing else - that triggered the flag frenzy in Skopje. That is a fact and part of FYROM/ROM's history. What you present is intersting but it gains its importance with hindsight; you choose it because of Vergina. This article is about the Vergina Star; what you present are not 'the' VS. But please continue your research in that field, it enriches our knowledge of Greek history and its impact in the region, before the Slavic invasions and the impact of a Bulgarian civilisation in the central Balkans. Personally, I also find the history of FYROM/ROM very interesting and perhaps one day I may interst you in it, also ;-) Politis 17:13, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your statements. Really, thank you. Efharisto parapoli (without any cynicism!). At least, now people from around the world can finally see that wikipedia articles related to Macedonia are offten arogantly abused as personal PRIVATE WEBPAGES by a bunch of greek and/or bulgarian and/or albanian nationalists (mostly right-wing yuppie students who rarely have visited their motherlands). Almost any suggestion from Skopje is always being refused by default even if it's supported by somewhat reliable sources. They are refused "automatically" without any further exploration, and this is not a first time (eh long stories, I've experienced this already). A 12-rayed star found in some village in the middle of nowhere near Olympias is allright, OK, but a 16-ray sun found in Ohrid is not okay enough TO BE PRESENTED IN THE ARTICLE? What kind of justice is that? Double standards, well Orwell himself would congratulate you for this (shame he's dead). And look who's talking about RE-INVENTING THE HISTORY. You don't Re-invent it, but you INVENT IT. Let's say a third party observer (an ordinary internet surfer from the USA or Uk or Burma or whatever) comes to Wikipedia and he/she can read only what you and your mates are serving to them. Pure brainwashing. I would be ashamed for that really (if you have any sence of shame, which I doubt)
And let me remind you of one thing by the way, the refugees from Asia Minor, Pontus and Caucasus who were setled in Greek Macedonia in the mid 1920s after the Turkish-Greek war were also NEWCOMERS on the Ancient Macedonian soil. They were not an authentic population there, but still it's obvious for every normal human being on this stupid Planet that they are the loudest to defend the exclusive Greek right to use the "sun" symbol. While at the same time, a paradox, someone living in Ohrid for centuries (regardless of his/her ethnic backround) is not allowed to use it in any possible way. At least as a symbol of the "land" or a region or a municipality flag or something (not as an ethnic symbol, I never said that, cause it's disputable and Im not sure about it!). I explained you everything in a simple way (for dummies) without any nationalistic sentiments like "Alexander is ours bla-bla-bla, you greeks are dumb bla-bla" and all those well known rhetorics. Still you don't want to face the facts. After all Politis, who cares if the "sun" is made by Greeks or Martians as I said already, you really think that this whole planet is sleepless because of that? They "hold they breaths" and suffer every day because of Greece and the village of Vergina with one school, one restaurant and one newspaper kiosk (ok and one souvenir open-air shop) and many tractors wandering around? You are not ETHNO-CENTRIC aren't you, right? Noo, we are not BIASED here ;-) The fact is (again): the "sun" has been found here too like the pyramids and sphinks have been found in the modern arabic state of Egypt, like the Etruscian stuff has been found in modern Italy, like the Aborigional culture has been explored in Australia or whatever (milions of examples). Also you didn't explain me how this same "star" (or at least a SIMILAR star) has been found in Kratovo, a place so far away from Greece and not within the boundaries of Ancient Macedonia (I mean the historical boundaries according to the official historiography of Greece). It's a "Skopyan conspiracy" perhaps? (ah and how can we make any conspiracies when a huge amount of our economy has been already bought by Greece?! Ah Gligorov that cunning vixen)--Vbb-sk-mk 03:30, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

I hope you are not underestimating former President Glogorov and his tactics to keep his state afloat during the violent break up of Yugoslavia. But my point remains. The representation of the stars you showed are small, decorative and incidental designs amongst hundreds of other designs. No one would have paid attention to them if it were not for the Vergian Star. If you are showing those other stars for stylistic purposes, to illustrate how they have been used, that is quite normal. But I have the impression that the statement being made is: the star was also discovered in 2002 in the region of Ohrid, therefore it can become a national symbol and flag.

• As for the VMRO pamphlet, I see no VS symbol, but I do see the Bulgarian flag (top right hand corner); as for the decorative border, it is Greek.
• Regarding the St. Petersburg flag, I see no Bucephalus or VS, but I do see a horse with a horn on its head: its name is Pegasus (Bucephalus was a real horse).
• Also, the symbol of the sun is quite common since it was worshiped, and it can only be represented as a circle with rays. However, the VS is quite specific; going by the other samples I have seen here, then the VS should become the symbol of the entire world. By the way, aesthetically, the 16 ray VS is remarquably ugly, it is all spiky, more like an urchin than a sun - I am not surprised that no serious used it after Philip. Politis 14:26, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

---

I had to place a horizontal line cause it put things in order otherwise its hard to read everything.
No, Im not underestimating Gligorov at all, its just he is not the subject of my discussion here, its you that brought him in this party (just btw he is somehow important to Greece too as he granted asylum to Grilakis from the Greek inteligence service back in the early 1990s).
Doesnt matter, lets go on:

• personally I still claim that this symbol (the exact "star/sun", not some similar one) was known far before 1977, unfortunately I CAN'T PROVE THAT at this particluar moment with serious academic sources according to wikipedia rules, instead I can only post pics found somewhere, so it remains just an interesting non-academic trivia at least somehow RELATED to the subject for now. I said for NOW. If i find aything related later i will gladly post it here. So, for now you can discard the VMRO pamphlet as it is not supported by any source, tho Im personally not blind and I can see it is actually "the thing", no matter of your personal judgement. no insult to you, but your personal opinion is that's not "the vergina star", I dont have to take it as an academic opinion (as you are not obliged to take all my opinions in the same way). yes it is the bulgarian flag, the ppl called themselves Bulgarians, Greeks, Martians and what not (depending on many factors, incl. among others: who payed more or whose gun was pointed into their heads) until Krste Misirkov spoke out for a first time about "Macedonian nation" in 1903 in his book "On the Macedonian matters".
  

Anyway consider it as a trivia for now.
btw an entrance gate of an old private house with those "suns" exists in Prilep too, but again this is not an academic info I just have seen a photo.

• And that HORSE is not Pegasus but an Unicorn (cause the pegasuses have wings and they fly :) while unicorns logically -have a horn, single one to be exact:)), that horse on the flag was indeed meant to be a sort of mythical, artistic or whatver depiction of Bucephalus. Its not just my imagination or nationalistic blindness. Buchephalus means an ox head. Ox is basically a cow (ok a male cow whatever). I tried to search for some connection between Buchephalus and Unicorns and I found something which I cannot claim as a serious reliable source. But anyway it gives some "hint", it encourages further exploration of this subject (Buchephalus and the mythical Unicorns). Here is some website check it if u r interested:
  

Legends about Unicorns incl. Alexander the Great
About Alexander and The Unicorn
on the use of Unicorn horn in the medicine in the myths and beleifs, Alexander is mentioned too
about Alexander and there's a UNICORN too
Again ALEXANDER and UNICORNS and other stuff
AGAIN about Unicorns and Alexander again is mentioned
and again
and again
Academic or just charlatanism, these legends seem to be quite spreaded around!
From all this I give myself a freedom to draw a conclusion that there is something suspicious related between the REAL actual horse Bucephalus and the mythical UNICORNS. also I found somewhere that it was possible that the REAL Bucephalus use to wear "battle horns" (artificial ones made of metal or whatever in the battles).
Again, this is STILL nothing academic, but if we have placed the VMRO pamphlet in the "black zone", the story about St. Petersburg flag deserves a lil bit more attention as it may be true, so I would put it in some "gray zone" for now.

• The only acceptable facts from everything I have presented is the disovery of the Ohrid sun (as I said: I think that SOME of these facts should be added to the article). The Ohrid story is definetly good enough to be mentuioned in the article in couple of sentences incl. a small thumbnail or two. Like: In 2002 during the archeological excavations in Ohrid few archeological artefacts with the 16 ray sun have been discovered bla-bla-bla. This will not be anything nationalistic, or irredentist or bla-bla, it would be just stating facts for the readers. I mean wikipedia exists for them in the first place? --Vbb-sk-mk 02:49, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

I see no reason not to have a mention of the sort " The same symbol was found on artifacts uncovered in a dig in Ohrid in ... "etc.After all, this is irrelevant to the current political dispute.Ohrid was within the boundaries of the kingdom of Macedon. --Jsone 20:50, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

It's because there is no evidence that it is the same symbol. That is Vbb's opinion; we have no expert sources saying it's the same symbol, so saying so is WP:OR.--Tekleni 20:55, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

The only symbol which seems important to this discussion is the one on the cup.It seems to be very similar to the Vergina Sun, but I agree, it would be WP:OR to equate them.

The one on the "Application" is too amorphous to tell.

The one on the VMRO pamphlet could very well be the "points of the horizon" symbol (similar to a compass).Some of the ray's edges in that one seem to have some sort of "point" on their edges.

The "St. Petersburg" flag ( a quarter sun and a unicorn) could be representing just about anything, since both are very common symbols in vexillology, as is the rising sun of the old Yugoslavian coat of arms in socialist iconography.--Jsone 21:33, 16 October 2006 (UTC)