The Real Ethnic Composition of Modern Greece

[Daskalot]

do you have the original quote in greek and can this book be purchased somewhere?

It is quite hard to find, but eventually we will get our hands on it. It is just a matter of time.

[George S.]

Carlin that's an excellent find,maybe if the greek version is found & the english it could be used like refence point as evidence.

[Carlin]

Carlin, do you the full quote of Cananus? Also, which scholars have tied the people of Mani to those who spoke a Slavonic language in the Peloponnese?

SOM, I do not have the full quote.

Here's where I got it from - George Nakratzas:

http://makedonika.wordpress.com/2008/03/23/the-book-that-demolishes-the-greek-myth-in-macedonia/

Click on the link which should direct you to this PDF file:

http://makedonika.files.wordpress.com/2008/03/the-close-racial-kinship-between-the-greeks-bulgarians-and-turks-by-nakratzas.pdf

Once you open the book scroll all the way to the Appendix, and then go to page 269. It's a reply to Marios Ploritis by Dr. Nakratzas... Anyway, you can ignore page 269 and go directly to page 271.

The entire page 271 is worth reading; towards the end we find the following:

"May I add to your historical education by informing you that, according to Byzantine traveller Cananus, writing in 1418, the Slavonic tongue was spoken in Zygos (Exo Mani), i.e. the area roughly between Itylo and Kalamata. The fact that the Maniots of this area were descended from the Slavonic Melingians is accepted both in the international literature and by Politis and Zakythinos."

PS: You may also like this -

"Elsewhere in your article, you ironically wonder whether the 'most sagacious' Professor Weithmann believes that the inhabitants of Turkish-held Greece, who supposedly maintained the continuity of the Greek language and kept it intact, were Slavs or Albanians."

[Carlin]

I should also add the following 'random' links which I have cited on this forum already. They may come as a surprise to both Greeks and Macedonians.

The author is Constantine Buhayer (University of Westminster, London).
He states that "many of the Greeks of Crimea were EllinoVLACHI". I'll let the reader draw their own conclusions here.

Here are the links:

http://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/public/mgsa-l/2004-May/003691.html

http://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/public/mgsa-l/2004-May/003688.html

[Onur]

I should also add the following 'random' links which I have cited on this forum already. They may come as a surprise to both Greeks and Macedonians.

The author is Constantine Buhayer (University of Westminster, London).
He states that "many of the Greeks of Crimea were EllinoVLACHI". I'll let the reader draw their own conclusions here.

The so-called Crimean Greeks were native Turkish speakers with Tatar dialect, all of them without any exception. Already, when they came to Greece, they didn't know a word of Greek.

Their origin is quite clear. We even have books of the western European travelers from 1390 AD which notes the existence of christian Tatars in Crimea, converted by both Byzantine orthodox and western catholic missionaries.

Crimea has been inhabited by Goths [`till 17th century], Turks [`till 20th century] and slavic speaking Ruthenians [to become Ukrainians laters]. I don't think there was any Greeks or Vlachs in there throughout history.

[Carlin]

The so-called Crimean Greeks were native Turkish speakers with Tatar dialect, all of them without any exception. Already, when they came to Greece, they didn't know a word of Greek.

Their origin is quite clear. We even have books of the western European travelers from 1390 AD which notes the existence of christian Tatars in Crimea, converted by both Byzantine orthodox and western catholic missionaries.

Crimea has been inhabited by Goths [`till 17th century], Turks [`till 20th century] and slavic speaking Ruthenians [to become Ukrainians laters]. I don't think there was any Greeks or Vlachs in there throughout history.

Hi Onur, I do not disagree with your statements.

As far as I was able to understand the author stated that "many" (not "most"/"all") of the so-called Crimean Greeks were of Vlach origin. They were most likely a minority though... Most of them were Turkish-speakers, and others, like you pointed out.

Can you provide some links/books on this subject matter? I would be very interested to learn more about this. Thanks!

[Carlin]

Additional points regarding the Vlachs in Greece. Many modern historians and authors have attempted to minimize the historical ethnic presence of Vlachs all over Greece.

The following regions were known under these (ethnic) names in the late Middle Ages:

1. Thessaly and adjacent areas - Megali Vlachia or Great Wallachia. Vlachs formed the ethnic majority well into the 19th century. There were also many Slavic-speakers, Albanians, Armenians, Jews, and others.

2. Epirus - Upper Wallachia. There were also many Albanians in Epirus. Quote from George Nakratzas (from the same book cited above): "...mere mention of the historically established Albanian, Vlach, and Slavonic origin of the modern Greeks of Epiros...".

3. Acarnania, Aetolia, including the mainland side of Pindus, along the coast to Corinthian gulf (including Doris, Locris, Phokis, etc.) - Mikri Vlachia or Small Wallachia. In 1221 AD, the bishop of Nafpaktos John Apokafkos noted the existence in Acarnania a rather large number of "Roman colonists", 'now called Vlachs'.

4. Let's not forget that Attica and Boeotia was mostly inhabited by Albanians, but there were also Italians, Franks, Vlachs, Turks, well into the 19th century.

Two more points:

5. G. Nakratzas, page 79: "Thessaloniki had always had a very large Vlach population". In 1605 AD, half of the city's Christian population was of Vlach origin. Serres: in 1878 the majority of the population was Vlach or Slavonic-speaking (pg. 82).

6. "Political Science Quarterly" edited by the Faculty of Political Science Columbia University, Twenty-Third volume, published in 1908; page 307:

"...THEY THEMSELVES KNEW THE DIFFERENCES IN THEIR ORIGINS AND IN SUCH TRADITIONS AS THEY HAD; SOME WERE SLAVS, SOME VLACHS AND SOME ALBANIANS...".

[Onur]

Hi Onur, I do not disagree with your statements.

As far as I was able to understand the author stated that "many" (not "most"/"all") of the so-called Crimean Greeks were of Vlach origin. They were most likely a minority though... Most of them were Turkish-speakers, and others, like you pointed out.

Can you provide some links/books on this subject matter? I would be very interested to learn more about this. Thanks!

Carlin, the very first missionaries who tried to baptize the Turks of northern Blacksea was Cyril&Methodious. When they gone there in 9th century, these places was part of Khazar empire and they couldn't convince the Khazar Khan for baptizing him and his people. Then after Khazar empire was no more in early 11th century, there was a political gap in there and during this orderless time, Venetians came to Crimea and occupied the seaports of Crimea to do commerce in there in 12-13th century.

After Venetians came, western christians focused on baptizing shamanist and recently islamized Turks (Cumans, Tatars, Bulgars) in these places. German Franciscans gone there at first and tried to baptize Cumans. They learned Turkic and wrote a Latin/German to Turkic dictionary and a guidebook for how to approach Cumans to christianize them in 12-13th century;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codex_Cumanicus

Genghis Khan, Goldenhorde and Timur occupied these places for a brief period but christian missionary works from various catholic sects continued `till the formation of Crimean Khanate in 15th century. This is the book of a traveler named J. Schiltberger who traveled all around Anatolia and Caucasus in 1396 AD. He writes this while he was traveling around Crimea;

For the info; "Order of Shoeless" is a catholic sect called as Calamites.

And more surprisingly, there are many Turkish dialogues in J. Schiltberger`s book. He wrote many Turkish sentences with latin script just as he heard himself. He wrote the Pater Noster prayer as he heard from these christian Tatars (they might be Bulgars or Cumans but Schiltberger just calls them all simply as Tatars);

http://www.archive.org/stream/bondagetravelsof00schirich#page/n5/mode/2up

I can understand most of this Turkic prayer despite that it`s written by J. Schiltberger himself with broken orthography. Btw this prayer, Pater Noster in Cuman Turkic also exists in Codex Cumanicus, written by the Franciscans in 12th century, about ~200 year earlier than J. Schiltberger;

****
The Codex is generally regarded as accurate, but it differs slightly from other sources on Kipchak language.

For example, the Codex's Pater Noster reads:
Atamız kim köktesiñ. Alğışlı bolsun seniñ atıñ, kelsin seniñ xanlığıñ, bolsun seniñ tilemekiñ – neçik kim kökte, alay [da] yerde. Kündeki ötmegimizni bizge bugün bergil. Dağı yazuqlarımıznı bizge boşatqıl – neçik biz boşatırbız bizge yaman etkenlerge. Dağı yekniñ sınamaqına bizni quurmağıl. Basa barça yamandan bizni qutxarğıl. Amen!

In English, the text is:
Our Father which art in heaven. Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread. And forgive us our sins as we forgive those who have done us evil. And lead us not into temptation, But deliver us from evil. Amen.

In Turkish, the text is:
Atamız ki göktesin. Alkışlı olsun senin adın, gelsin senin hanlığın, olsun senin dilemeğin – nice ki gökte, ve yerde. Gündeki ekmeğimizi bize bugün ver. Dahi, yazıklarımızı (suçlarımızı) bize boşat – nice biz boşatırız bize yaman (kötülük) edenleri. Dahi, şeytanın sınamağına bizi koyurma. Tüm yamandan (kötülükten) bizi kurtar. Amin!
****
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codex_Cumanicus

Crimean Khanate became an ally of the Ottoman empire in 15th century but actually they were officially a vassal state and they integrated in the Ottoman system. After this, all the muslims in there became part of "muslim millet" and christians became part of "rum millet", adhere to Istanbul patriarchy. After some time, these Turkish speaking christians of Crimea started to be called as "Urums" by their muslim kinsmen. Btw, the vassal state of Crimea in Ottoman era wasn't consisting only today`s Crimea in Ukraine. It was much bigger, stretching from today`s Romania to Georgia in the east, so Crimea was just a capital of it.


We discussed about these Urums before. I found these threads;

http://www.macedoniantruth.org/forum/showthread.php?t=2988

http://www.macedoniantruth.org/forum/showthread.php?t=1786&highlight=urums&page=2

I saw a document in the link above. According to the official figures from Athens, about ~82.000 Urums came from Russia to Greece between 1912-1924.

[Carlin]

Thanks for the quick response Onur. Great info.

I have read in Nakratzas' book about Turkish-speaking Gagauz as well, and how the Christian Gagauz became 'Greeks' later on.

Here's the link again:

http://makedonika.files.wordpress.com/2008/03/the-close-racial-kinship-between-the-greeks-bulgarians-and-turks-by-nakratzas.pdf

Pages 252 to 257 deal with the origins of the Gagauz (map 55 features the Despotate of Gagauz).

[Onur]

I can understand their point of view about Urums of Crimea because Greece absorbed and assimilated all of them BUT for the case with Gagauzs, calling them as Greeks is the most absurd claim ever.

Forget all the historical proofs about Gagauz people. It`s so absurd to call them as Greeks, simply because there is an autonomous state in Moldova today, called as Gagauzia and they speak Turkish, none of them has any relation with Greeks. Also, Gagauz Turkish is something special for our linguists because their language still contains some archaic Turkish expressions and grammar styles which existed in Turkey during Seljuk era but later disused in Ottoman era. I am calling it Turkish (not Turkic) because Gagauzs gone there from Anatolia and they speak exact same dialect with us.

Bulgarian minister Bozhidar Dimitrov also called Gagauzs as "true Bulgarians" and they probably gave Bulgarian passports to 10.000s Gagauzs from Moldova in the last two years. Already, there was more than 100.000 native Gagauzs in Bulgaria, shown in the censuses between 1890-1940 but most of them has been assimilated anymore. Tough, i asked my brother`s wife about them, she told me that they are still speaking Turkish and she sees some of them in Sofia but they are mostly hesitant to speak Turkish in public for not being branded as "Turks" and not to be discriminated among Bulgarian christians.

Btw, take a look at this thread for stupid actions from Greek government about Gagauzia in Moldova;

http://www.macedoniantruth.org/forum/showthread.php?t=5132

[George S.]

it's all greek to them.

[Voltron]

As usual, wrong again.

Greeks have been in the black sea area long before the Tatars or Vlachs came to be known.

http://thesis.haverford.edu/dspace/bitstream/handle/10066/5709/Pohl_22_2.pdf?sequence=1

Carlin, Your source mentions of Slav Speakers when referenced with groups such as Vlachs, Albanians, Turks, ect. You in agreement with that ? G. Nakratzas is the only person you people always bring up. That and that one lady. I might as well keep using McDermitt for my source and keep repeating like a broken record.

I would like to remind people of the title of the thread. This is about Ethnicity, from the word Ethnos. Look up the meaning in a dictionary to avoid further embarassment.

[Onur]

As usual, wrong again.

Greeks have been in the black sea area long before the Tatars or Vlachs came to be known.

http://thesis.haverford.edu/dspace/b...pdf?sequence=1

NO, It is YOU who are wrong.

We were talking about Crimea, Caucasus and the people at the northside of the Blacksea and neither eastern nor western Romans never had any control in there. It was Scythian, Huns, Avars, Gokturk, Khazar, Kievian Rus, Mongol, Timur, Tatar/Cuman, Ottoman, Russian and finally Ukraine. All of these states was strictly hostile to the eastern Romans, including early Russians and it`s not possible that your Greeks lived in there.

Istanbul patriarchy aka the hand of the Greeks was only able to reach there after it became part of the Ottoman empire in late 15th century. So, it was the same story again;
The Greek patriarch blesses Ottoman soldiers, they go and conquer places and the christian people in that place enters to the patriarch`s domain.

[Soldier of Macedon]

G. Nakratzas is the only person you people always bring up. That and that one lady.

If that is what you really think then clearly you haven't been paying attention to the multitude of sources on this forum.

[Carlin]

As usual, wrong again.

Greeks have been in the black sea area long before the Tatars or Vlachs came to be known.

http://thesis.haverford.edu/dspace/bitstream/handle/10066/5709/Pohl_22_2.pdf?sequence=1

Carlin, Your source mentions of Slav Speakers when referenced with groups such as Vlachs, Albanians, Turks, ect. You in agreement with that ? G. Nakratzas is the only person you people always bring up. That and that one lady. I might as well keep using McDermitt for my source and keep repeating like a broken record.

I would like to remind people of the title of the thread. This is about Ethnicity, from the word Ethnos. Look up the meaning in a dictionary to avoid further embarassment.

Voltron, feel free to comment on the following 'non-Nakratzas' sources.


1. "Political Science Quarterly" edited by the Faculty of Political Science Columbia University, Twenty-Third volume, published in 1908; page 307:

"...THEY (i.e. modern Greeks) THEMSELVES KNEW THE DIFFERENCES IN THEIR ORIGINS AND IN SUCH TRADITIONS AS THEY HAD; SOME WERE SLAVS, SOME VLACHS AND SOME ALBANIANS...".

Even as late as 1908 some authorities still knew and clearly stated that modern Greeks are a mixture of various ethnic communities: Slavs, Vlachs, Albanians, etc.

2. "Travels in Greece and Russia", by Bayard Taylor, published in 1872:

Preface - "Owing to the pressure of other literary labors, this volume has been too rapidly prepared for the press, to allow me to add a special chapter on the Ethnology of Greece, as I had originally designed. I can only record my complete conviction of the truth of the views entertained by Fallmerayer, that the modern Greeks are a mongrel race, in which the Slavic element is predominant, and that the pure Hellenic blood is to be found only in a few localities."

Page 261 - "...not one-fifth of the present population can with justice be called Greeks. The remainder are Slavonians, Albanians and Turks, with a slight admixture of Venetian blood."

Page 262 - "Only in Maina, on the slopes of Parnassus and in parts of Doris, did I find the ancient type in any considerable amount."

3. James Knowles, monthly review "The Nineteenth Century and After" volume LXXXVI, July-December 1919, page 645:

"But who are the Greeks? At least five-sixths of them, if not more, are Christian Albanians of the Orthodox faith..."