The Real Ethnic Composition of Modern Greece

[Soldier of Macedon]

This thread and the path it has been diverted to are not in synchronisation. Further deliberate deviation will be deleted.

I advise the Greeks here to show some character and address the topic at hand and the questions posed to them rather than continuosly reverting to their typical question for a question routine.

A thread that began with the purpose of discussing the Racial Composition of Modern Greece now has Alexander the Great and Misirkov as points of discussions. This ends now.

[leonidas]

The concept of "ethnicity" has received a good deal of attention in recent years. For some it has a 'primordial' quality. It exists in nature, outside time. It is one of the "given" of human existence (this is a view that has received some backing recendy from socio-biology, where it is regarded as an extension of processes of genetic selection and inclusive fitness). At the other extreme ethnicity is seen as situational. Belonging to an ethnic group is a matter of attitudes, perceptions and sentiments that are necessarily fleeting and mutable, varying with the particular situation of the subject.As the individual situation changes, so will the group identification or at least, the many identities and discourses to which the individual adheres will vary in importance for that individual in successive periods and different situations. This makes it possible for ethnicity to be used "instrumentally" to further individual or collective interests, particularly of competing elites who need to mobilize large followings to support their goals in the struggle for power. In this struggle ethnicity becomes a useful tool.Between these two extremes lie those approaches that stress the historical and symbolic-cultural attributes of ethnic identity. This is the perspective adopted here. An ethnic group is a type of cultural collectivity, one that emphasizes the role of myths of descent and historical memories, and that is recognized by one or more cultural differences like religion, customs, language or institutions.

In terms of script and language, certain values, a particular environment and its nostalgia, continuous social interactions, and a sense of religious and cultural difference, even exclusion, a sense of Hellenic identity and common sentiments of ethnicity can be said to have persisted beneath the many social and political changes of the last 2000 years.

[Risto the Great]

In terms of script and language, certain values, a particular environment and its nostalgia, continuous social interactions, and a sense of religious and cultural difference, even exclusion, a sense of Hellenic identity and common sentiments of ethnicity can be said to have persisted beneath the many social and political changes of the last 2000 years.

What fluff.
It could be construed that the Hellenic identity under the above ridiculous statement is one that is 2000 years behind every other identity.

[leonidas]

What fluff.
It could be construed that the Hellenic identity under the above ridiculous statement is one that is 2000 years behind every other identity.

Why ?
Can we then speak of ethnic extinction - the disappearance of an ethnie not just in the form it possessed until that point but in any form ?
I think we can if we hold to the historical, cultural and symbolic criteria of ethnic identity I have been employing. There are two main kinds of ethnic extinction in the full sense: genocide and ethnocide, which is sometimes - at times misleadingly - called "cultural genocide". Hellenic identity survived both genocides.

[Pelister]

Why ?
Can we then speak of ethnic extinction - the disappearance of an ethnie not just in the form it possessed until that point but in any form ?
I think we can if we hold to the historical, cultural and symbolic criteria of ethnic identity I have been employing. There are two main kinds of ethnic extinction in the full sense: genocide and ethnocide, which is sometimes - at times misleadingly - called "cultural genocide". Hellenic identity survived both genocides.

Show me the empirical evidence your an ancient Greek ! Otherwise, your a historical noboby.

Better still, show me the evidence your not descended from an Albanian, Turk or Vlach, or any one of the Macedonian tribes that wiped Greece out.

[osiris]

Show me the empirical evidence your an ancient Greek ! Otherwise, your a historical noboby.

Better still, show me the evidence your not descended from an Albanian, Turk or Vlach, or any one of the Macedonian tribes that wiped Greece out.
Pelister is offline Reply With Quote

pelister you are asking someone who calls himself leonidas and has a picture of an ancient spartan to confront the reality of modern greece. the joke of continuity cannot be sustained by history its a politicaly inspired modern greek myth, nothing more or less.

[Risto the Great]

pelister you are asking someone who calls himself leonidas and has a picture of an ancient spartan to confront the reality of modern greece. the joke of continuity cannot be sustained by history its a politicaly inspired modern greek myth, nothing more or less.

Poetry my friend.

[Pelister]

pelister you are asking someone who calls himself leonidas and has a picture of an ancient spartan to confront the reality of modern greece. the joke of continuity cannot be sustained by history its a politicaly inspired modern greek myth, nothing more or less.

Here "is" some evidence to prove it too.

This is an exerpt from George Finlay's "History of the Greek Revolution". It was first published in 1861. So, its a contemporary account, and draws on many little known about, and scarcely read English sources on the Revolution. But, what makes this an important source for Macedonians, and for Greeks, is its references to the ethnic makeup of Greece, and the "Greek" forces.

Chapter II. The Albanians

"...the Greeks have been as completely expelled as the Celtic race in England by the Saxon.

Albanian colonist now occupy all Attica and Megaris, with the exception of the towns of Athens and Megara, where they form only a portion of the population. They possess the greater part of Boeotia and a small portion of Locris, near Talanta. The southern part of Euboa and the northern part of Andros, the whole of Salamis, and a part of Egnia, are peopled by Albanians. In the Peloponnessus they are still more numerous. They occupy the whole of Corinthia and Argolis, extending themselves into the northern part of Arcadia and the eastern part of Achaia. In Laconia they inhabit the slopes of Taygeuts, called Bardunia, which extend to the plains of Helos ... In the Western part of the peninsula they occupied a considerable part of the mountains which extend from Lalla to the norther easter corner of Messenia, south of the Neda. Besides these large settlements there are some smaller clusters ... The islands of Hydra and Spetzas were entirely populated by Albanians."

But wait, it gets better. Want to know more about the ethnic composition of Modern Greece. Where are the Hellenes ?

"Marathon, Plataea, Leuctra, Salamis, Mantinea, Ira and Olympia are now inhabited by Albanians, and not by Greeks. Even in the streets of Athens, though it has been for more than a quarter of a century the capital of a Greek kingdom, the Albanian langauge is still heard among the children playing in the streets near the temple of Theseus and the arch of Hadrian." (emphasis added)

Here's what he has to say about the Peloponese, the regions of Lalla, Bardunia, Carystos and Euboea, of Eurotas and Marathon ...

"For three centuries this district was possessed by albanians ... It may, perhaps, be inferred from this ignorance, that the Barduniots expelled the Sclavonion population, which the Byzantine writers tell us occupied this district at the time of the Turkish conquest, and that they embraced Mohammedanism to become landlords instead of peasants..."

Macedonian tribes, overlaid by Albanians. When will it end?

"Poros, Kastri and Kranidit are albanian..."

It goes on.
pp. 34-39

[toothpaste]

Here "is" some evidence to prove it too.

This is an exerpt from George Finlay's "History of the Greek Revolution". It was first published in 1861. So, its a contemporary account, and draws on many little known about, and scarcely read English sources on the Revolution. But, what makes this an important source for Macedonians, and for Greeks, is its references to the ethnic makeup of Greece, and the "Greek" forces.

Chapter II. The Albanians

"...the Greeks have been as completely expelled as the Celtic race in England by the Saxon.

Albanian colonist now occupy all Attica and Megaris, with the exception of the towns of Athens and Megara, where they form only a portion of the population. They possess the greater part of Boeotia and a small portion of Locris, near Talanta. The southern part of Euboa and the northern part of Andros, the whole of Salamis, and a part of Egnia, are peopled by Albanians. In the Peloponnessus they are still more numerous. They occupy the whole of Corinthia and Argolis, extending themselves into the northern part of Arcadia and the eastern part of Achaia. In Laconia they inhabit the slopes of Taygeuts, called Bardunia, which extend to the plains of Helos ... In the Western part of the peninsula they occupied a considerable part of the mountains which extend from Lalla to the norther easter corner of Messenia, south of the Neda. Besides these large settlements there are some smaller clusters ... The islands of Hydra and Spetzas were entirely populated by Albanians."

But wait, it gets better. Want to know more about the ethnic composition of Modern Greece. Where are the Hellenes ?

"Marathon, Plataea, Leuctra, Salamis, Mantinea, Ira and Olympia are now inhabited by Albanians, and not by Greeks. Even in the streets of Athens, though it has been for more than a quarter of a century the capital of a Greek kingdom, the Albanian langauge is still heard among the children playing in the streets near the temple of Theseus and the arch of Hadrian." (emphasis added)

Here's what he has to say about the Peloponese, the regions of Lalla, Bardunia, Carystos and Euboea, of Eurotas and Marathon ...

"For three centuries this district was possessed by albanians ... It may, perhaps, be inferred from this ignorance, that the Barduniots expelled the Sclavonion population, which the Byzantine writers tell us occupied this district at the time of the Turkish conquest, and that they embraced Mohammedanism to become landlords instead of peasants..."

Macedonian tribes, overlaid by Albanians. When will it end?

"Poros, Kastri and Kranidit are albanian..."

It goes on.
pp. 34-39

Ok...some more quotes of your expert Mr.Finlay.

-George Finlay's
History of the Greek Revolution

p.3
"..the whole number of the Greek nation cannot be estimated at more than three millions and a half.
Two christian races in the sultan's european dominions were more numerous :the Vallachian or Roman race was not less than 4 millions; the Sclavonian ,including the Bulgarian, which speaks the Slavonic language exceeded five millions."

Although Mr.Finlay NOWHERE writes something about Macedonian nation...obviously the ancestors of modern Macedonians are among the "Slavonic race".
Thats the Serbians,Bosnians,Bulgarians too...just 5.000.000,when Greeks alone(not including arvanites,or vlachs) are 3.500.000 .
Wow...there where no Greek speaking people back then ...Or not?

...and Mr.Finlay continues ...

"The provinces which the Greeks formed a majority of the inhabitants were divided into six pahaliks of high rank and many smaller districts governt immediately by inferior pashas.
1.The most iportant....of the Islands and of the part of coast of Greece....Cyprus Rhodes and Mytilene...
2.The pashalik of Morea.....
3...4...
5.The pashalik of Selanic ,or Thessalonica,extending over the greater part of Macedonia...
6The island of Crete.."

Uhm...
What about this expert Mr.Finlay ...?

[Daskalot]

Ok...some more quotes of your expert Mr.Finlay.

-George Finlay's
History of the Greek Revolution

p.3
"..the whole number of the Greek nation cannot be estimated at more than three millions and a half.
Two christian races in the sultan's european dominions were more numerous :the Vallachian or Roman race was not less than 4 millions; the Sclavonian ,including the Bulgarian, which speaks the Slavonic language exceeded five millions."

Although Mr.Finlay NOWHERE writes something about Macedonian nation...obviously the ancestors of modern Macedonians are among the "Slavonic race".
Thats the Serbians,Bosnians,Bulgarians too...just 5.000.000,when Greeks alone(not including arvanites,or vlachs) are 3.500.000 .
Wow...there where no Greek speaking people back then ...Or not?

...and Mr.Finlay continues ...

"The provinces which the Greeks formed a majority of the inhabitants were divided into six pahaliks of high rank and many smaller districts governt immediately by inferior pashas.
1.The most iportant....of the Islands and of the part of coast of Greece....Cyprus Rhodes and Mytilene...
2.The pashalik of Morea.....
3...4...
5.The pashalik of Selanic ,or Thessalonica,extending over the greater part of Macedonia...
6The island of Crete.."

Uhm...
What about this expert Mr.Finlay ...?

you reading skills are somewhat lacking, he says that the Sclavonians EXCEED 5.000.000, thus they are probably more.
The Greek nation on the other hand are MAX 3.500.000 could be less, that is what Finlay says.

Who are the Greek nation? They are Christian belonging to the Patriarchate of Constantinople.

At the time the most numerous in the Pashalik of Selanik were the Turks, then came the Jews. This is a fact.

[toothpaste]

Not at all.
Mr Finlay clearly separates Arbanites from Greeks.Arbanites belonged to the Patriarchate too.He calls them Albanians.

Also he talks about the situation in 1821.Then there was no Exarchy.All christians were under the Patriarchate.

So,GREEKS were the GREEKS.
And Greeks according to Mr.Finlay formed the majority in pashalik of Selanik (Thessalonica) ,over the greater part of Macedonia.

Mr Finlay is clear.

[Pelister]

Of course Finlay talks about the Greeks. He constantly and regularly uses the term, and refers to it.

He constantly refers to Greek bandits ...etc, and Greek rebels, and Greek leaders doing this and that, but at the same time, Finlay has no reason to hide or deny their Albanian origin, or Vlach origin ...etc and openly says so.

That's the difference.

The Greeks Finlay refers to, are clearly a mish-mash of various ethnic groups, and religions.

That is undeniable.

When Finaly refers to "Greeks" having Albanian customs, wearing Albanian dress ... etc, throughout his works, clearly he can't separate them. Albanians as Greeks, Vlachs as Greeks, Turks as Greeks ... and so it goes on.

In fact, he seems to have Greeks confused? at various points with many other people. Coincidence?

He is SPECIFIC about the locations of Albanians, and VAGUE about the location of Greeks.

All of this is even more remarkable, because Finlay shows a bias to the new, and young nation State. For example, he says that 70% of the "Greek" fleet was Albanian ! He is most probably overstating the new Greek element, an exercise in nation building more than anything. He's going in to bat for the NEW Greek nationality. After all that's the title of his book.

The idea of establishing a Modern Greek nation state, shouldn't take precedence over how we describe who is fighting, but unfortunately it does.

It's a Greek State, only in name, and as much as Finlay tries to FIND Greeks, the contradictions appear almost immediately, as he is writing them because he has no reason to deny hide the ethnic identity of this Greek or that Greek, or the religion of this Greek or that Greek, whereas someone like yourself in this day and age, does have a reason to hide that information.

[El Bre]

Finlay was a notorious philhellene. That fact that he couldn't deny what he saw is telling.

[Giorikas]

Athens

This question has been asked several times, and should be addressed properly once and for all. While I will agree that pockets of Romaic-speakers lived in what were to become the domains of the modern 'Hellenic' state and elsewhere in the Balkans, particularly where it concerns the main trading areas (where as it so happens the Romaic tongue was the lingua franca of trade) and cities, the number of these people steadily increased in other areas due to the prohibition of Slavic and Latin languages in churches and schools from the second half of the 18th century. So it is not suprising that come the 19th century western travellers and writers speak about so-called 'Greeks' forming large bulks of the population in the region, although the people of other 'origins' were not by and large ignored either, as they are so blindly today.

In the early 19th century John Cam Hobhouse, quoted by John Freely, wrote that "the number of houses in Athens is supposed to be between twelve and thirteen hundred; of which about four hundred are inhabited by the Turks, the remainder by the Greeks and Albanians, the latter of whom occupy above three hundred houses."

During the mid 19th century, Edmond About wrote that "Athens, twenty-five years ago, was only an Albanian village. The Albanians formed, and still form, almost the whole of the population of Attica; and within three leagues of the capital, villages are to be found where Greek is hardly understood.........Albanians form about one-fourth of the population of the country; they are in majority in Attica, in Arcadia, and in Hydra...."

http://books.google.com.au/books?hl=en&id=9wCiFSLmEM4C&dq=Edmond+About,+Greece+and+the+Greeks+of+the+Present+Day&printsec=frontcover&source=web&ots=twsww8l0GN&sig=NJry-7Znriz6nevZwbpxkLU2iL0&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=1&ct=result

Just for a start.

I find this obsession with 'ethnicity' and 'purity' totally ridiculous.

First of all, I read many claims that Greeks are claiming to be pure and unmixed. Could someone please provide me with some solid evidence of this?

Secondly, those discussions are utterly useless and ridiculous in my opinion. It is clear that no country and especially civilization can claim this.
The civilizations having the upper hand in worldhistory always incorporated others into theirs. Greekness in ancient times was never based on race or blood. Romans did pretty much the same and especially when the Roman Empire was in decline, a fair number of generals, governors and especially footsoldiers were individuals who used to be referred to as barbarians.
Going forward to the Ottoman times, these are another good example of a mix of different cultures. I have recently been in Kazachstan and Uzbekistan and these countries are not unlike the Turks how they were supposed to have been before mixing with Greeks, Armenians, Slavs, Arabs, Kurds, and so on. They look Asian/Mongolic there, eat horse pasturma, the national drink in Kazachstan is consists of horsemilk, they eat 'manti' a typical Turkish dish. They tie knots in trees, a typical shaman pre-moslim tradition for good luck, they still have their nomadic roots very close to them, meet in tents on the countryside like their nomadic forefathers did. I would say that it was mostly Turkish who transformed into a mix, then the other way around. (wouldn't it make more sense that the opressed identifies with the oppressor to advance in life, then the other way around?
But naturally Greeks have intermingled and so has everybody else.
In my first job a met a girl who was half Macedonian half local (not from any Balkan country).
She told me that her grandparents were Greek, but that her mother (probably because of these problems) hates Greeks. Yet she is 'by blood' Greek, having both her parents being Greek.
So what does that make her mother? According to me: 'Macedonian' since she chose to identify as such. No matter what I might tell her, that is what she chose to be for reasons that I don't know. Should someone of you - in line with your ethnicity/blood/race theories - tell her that she is anything else then Macedonian, then that would probably be seen as very insulting to her.

According to all those who throw around these 'in vogue' terms as 'etnicity' versus 'nationality', beware that things are not that black and white. I wouldn't be surprised at all, and in fact I am pretty much sure, that there examples all over the place in the Balkans.

There is only one thing what you are 'on paper' and that is what your passport says. What you feel and express yourself as is your own business. No government has the right to tell you what you should feel as. It ends there for me (and in most other countries). Actually, most neutral readers would probably find this obsession with the ethnicity and all pretty much in line with nazi ideology, who were obsessed with this pureness of race.

Giorikas

[El Bre]

The issue as I see it, is that a position was taken whereby being Macedonian automatically meant that one was by extension Greek, (Macedonia 4000 years of Greek history, Macedonia is Greece and so on) this in turn led to the question, what is a Greek? Pervasive in this debate is the sentiment that because someone speaks a slavic language or is a slav (whatever that means) that person somehow cannot be a Macedonian, so naturally the retort becomes, how can someone who spoke Albanian and was clearly an Albanian now be a Greek? The ethnicity card was played by the Greeks as a reflex action and was countered with similar logic. While I agree, there are other issues, the issue of ethnicity has become part of the greater package.

My 2 cents.