How is 'ethnicity' defined?

[Soldier of Macedon]

I hear you, but just because a people may come to detest a name they used to call themselves, does not mean they are now a different people. The terms just changed.

To a certain extent and in certain areas this is correct, but keep in mind that the Macedonian and Roman occupations in Greece caused severe depopulations in many areas, even Corinth. In addition to this, there were thousands of colonists from Rome and elsewhere in the empire that settled in Greece, and the term 'Hellene' had already began to refer not to a race but of a social group marked by distinction in learning and/or status, and also, of Pagans.

In many, if not most cases, I don't believe it was a simple matter of changing between the Hellenic and Roman hats as one saw fit. The Roman identity, this originally imperial identity, was embedded in the people of the Balkans for centuries along with its attributes. It was not a nation-state or a state with a majority and minorities, it was an multi-ethnic empire (see only the amount of prominent Armenian and Slavic-speaking figures) where from the 600's the official language became Greek, and where the people collectively referred to themselves as Romans. It was a generic identity, loosely applied to fit all citizens of all ethnicities, that is why the people were Romans who happened to speak Greek and not Greeks who happened to call themselves Romans. In the same way, when we look at modern nations today such as that of Americans, Canadians and more specifically Australians, it could be said of the citizens in a multi-ethnic country like Australia, that the people are Australian who happen to speak English, and not Englishmen who happen to call themselves Australian. And while there are bonding factors like the official language we all speak here, our culture, customs, native languages, etc greatly vary, as did that of the Romans in the Balkans.

Only in the Morea and some coastal areas would I agree that there was a continuation of native Greek-speaking groups, the rest of the people that came to be solely Greek-speakers over the subsequent centuries were, as you yourself have said, non-Greeks who became Greeks.

The greek speakers of what is today Greece, now referred to themselves/were referred to as Eastern Romans, or Romans.
If they were actual Romans from Rome, wouldnt they speak latin?

I am glad you brought up this point, as I find it an excellent parallel for another situation - The Macedonian-speakers in Samuel's Empire were often referred to as Bulgarians, but if they were actual Bulgarians, shouldn't they be speaking Turkic? I trust you see my point.

The Roman identity was shared by us all, but certain circumstances like the official language of the state and church, and the later control of the Roman Millet in the Ottoman Empire by Greek-speakers contributed to limiting this identity with only Greek-speakers and their Grkoman followers, who were in large part Macedonians, Albanians and Vlachs by ethnicity. However, this was a later development in the second half of the Ottoman reign in the Balkans, and cannot be applied to the overall history of the (east) Romans in the Balkans. You can understand then, how the jump to a Hellenic identity and the circumstances surrounding it, can raise a number of questions and doubts, and I guess if it weren't for the anti-Macedonian position of the Greek state, we never would've bothered to delve so far into the history of the (east) Romans ourselves, at least not in the context of a Greek 'hunt'. But here we are

[Spartan]

You are one of the very few Greeks to accept the fact. Shouldn't the same logic apply to Macedonians and other ethnicities?

I dont see why not.

[makgerman]

I dont deny that many non-Greeks, became Greeks.

and

I hear you, but just because a people may come to detest a name they used to call themselves, does not mean they are now a different people. The terms just changed.

You are one of the very few Greeks to accept the fact. Shouldn't the same logic apply to Macedonians and other ethnicities?

And dont put too much into what priests say, lol. I know i dont.

You may not put too much into what the priests say, however the majority of the Greeks including the Highest ranking officials do (ie Greek Politicians) and go even further to use it as a weapon against people who want to declare themselves as Macedonian.

[Spartan]

Look the issue of ethnicity in modern greece is one in which identity religious politics dictates your ethnicity. Does this make sense? No. However watch what this grk priest states and you tell me if this makes sense;

I dont deny that many non-Greeks, became Greeks.
And dont put too much into what priests say, lol. I know i dont.

The terminology means alot Spartan, especially when one considers that the people who are claimed to have initiated this process of 'Hellenization' in fact detested the term and its connotations.

I hear you, but just because a people may come to detest a name they used to call themselves, does not mean they are now a different people. The terms just changed. The greek-speakers who have inhabited the Morea have had many different names over time, yet it has always maintained a predominantly greek-speaking population.

The East Romans did pursue a policy of 're-Romanization', and in the East Christian world this also included the employment of Greek as an official language. I am in no way disputing this, I just don't think it is accurate to make reference to this process as 'Hellenizing' for the earlier outlined reasons

I see your point here.

Romans who happened to speak Greek - That is a very telling statement, don't you think? How should one interpret this?

The greek speakers of what is today Greece, now referred to themselves/were referred to as Eastern Romans, or Romans.
If they were actual Romans from Rome, wouldnt they speak latin?

[Soldier of Macedon]

Okay, Im not gonna argue about a term.
Can we agree to call it Greekspeakingeastromanized?

The terminology means alot Spartan, especially when one considers that the people who are claimed to have initiated this process of 'Hellenization' in fact detested the term and its connotations. The East Romans did pursue a policy of 're-Romanization', and in the East Christian world this also included the employment of Greek as an official language. I am in no way disputing this, I just don't think it is accurate to make reference to this process as 'Hellenizing' for the earlier outlined reasons, neither its ancient or modern meanings are fitting descriptions for what took place. Afterall,

http://www.macedoniantruth.org/forum...story%2C+Truth
Until 1821, Greeks knew that there had once been a Christian empire with its capital at Constantinople, but they did not think of it as a Greek empire, and they certainly didn’t call it the Byzantine Empire. (Katerina Zacharia, Hellenisms)

Furthermore;

http://macedoniantruth.org/forum/showthread.php?p=27369
The Byzantine's were Romans who happened to speak Greek and not Greeks who happened to call themselves Romans...... (Anthony Kaldellis, Hellenism in Byzantium)

Romans who happened to speak Greek - That is a very telling statement, don't you think? How should one interpret this?

[TrueMacedonian]

Look the issue of ethnicity in modern greece is one in which identity religious politics dictates your ethnicity. Does this make sense? No. However watch what this grk priest states and you tell me if this makes sense;

YouTube - GREEK IDENTITY - WHAT IS GREEK (ΤΙ ΕΙΝΑΙ ΕΛΛΗΝΙΚΗ) ???

[Spartan]

I've cited this one before, here is a rare reference to 'Hellenes' by an East Roman, Porphyrogenitus;

http://www.macedoniantruth.org/forum/showthread.php?p=11841&highlight=porphyrogenitus#post11841

Notice the context in which it is stated? Now, Porphyrogenitus is not too harsh in language, other writers during the period make their view on 'Hellenes' more clearer, and damning. Even the term 'Greek' was an insult, as noticed in an East Roman response to a letter sent by a church figure from West Rome, where he referred to the western Christians as Romans and the eastern Christians as Greeks. I will try and find the quote, it has been posted often in the past.

I also remember you posting text about some tribe that referred to themselves as "hellenes"/descendants of Roman soldiers, or something like that.Cant remember, it was a while ago, I could be way off lol.

I agree that the term Hellene came to be anti-christian for a long period, and was thus 'dropped' .

[Spartan]

Brother, I am talking about the contemporary sources, can you show me a Byzantine writer from the middle ages that spoke about "hellenization" or "re-hellenization"? I doubt you can, because such a term was not in use back then and was frowned upon by East Romans, Greek-speaking one's included. The Hellenes to the East Romans were devils, that is why you will not find such terms as "Hellenization" in Porphyrogentius and co. The later analysis' from Britannica say "Hellenized" - But who said it when it happened? In fact, who said anything about East Roman populations being "Hellenized", period, prior to the 19th century?

Okay, Im not gonna argue about a term.
Can we agree to call it Greekspeakingeastromanized?
Its all the same to me.
Im just saying the Byzantine authorities implemented a process in the Morea to eliminate the slav/non-Greekspeakingeastromanized presence that arrived in the region.

So if they didn't lose their identity and language under the sway of Greek-speaking Romans and Venetian occupiers, then what was the final factor in their demise in the Peloponnese, the Ottomans? The Albanians? Interesting point.

Not sure. I have read that these were the 2 slavic tribes that survived the 'process', and that the last written record of them is from the 1400s .
Maybe they are still up there(Taygetus), lol.
Ill have a look when I go this summer
Not that far from where my house is actually

[Soldier of Macedon]

I've cited this one before, here is a rare reference to 'Hellenes' by an East Roman, Porphyrogenitus;

http://www.macedoniantruth.org/forum/showthread.php?p=11841&highlight=porphyrogenitus#post11841

The inhabitants of the city of Maina are not of the race of the aforesaid Slavs, but of the ancient Romans, and even to this day they are called 'Hellenes' by the local inhabitants, because in the very ancient times they were idolaters and worshippers of images after the fashion of the ancient Hellenes; and they were baptized and became Christians in the reign of the glorious Basil. The place where they live is waterless and inaccessible, but bears the olive, whence their comfort is. This place is situated on the tip of Malea, that is, beyond Ezeron towards the coast.

Notice the context in which it is stated? Now, Porphyrogenitus is not too harsh in language, other writers during the period make their view on 'Hellenes' more clearer, and damning. Even the term 'Greek' was an insult, as noticed in an East Roman response to a letter sent by a church figure from West Rome, where he referred to the western Christians as Romans and the eastern Christians as Greeks. I will try and find the quote, it has been posted often in the past.

[Soldier of Macedon]

Brother, I am talking about the contemporary sources, can you show me a Byzantine writer from the middle ages that spoke about "hellenization" or "re-hellenization"? I doubt you can, because such a term was not in use back then and was frowned upon by East Romans, Greek-speaking one's included. The Hellenes to the East Romans were devils, that is why you will not find such terms as "Hellenization" in Porphyrogentius and co. The later analysis' from Britannica say "Hellenized" - But who said it when it happened? In fact, who said anything about East Roman populations being "Hellenized", period, prior to the 19th century?

Agreed, from what Ive been reading its more like the 1400s.
The Ezeritai and Millingi survived in the Taygetus mnt until around this period.

So if they didn't lose their identity and language under the sway of Greek-speaking Romans and Venetian occupiers, then what was the final factor in their demise in the Peloponnese, the Ottomans? The Albanians? Interesting point.

[Spartan]

Spartan, i'd rather go to the contemporary sources and let them tell it, and then go to later analysis' that base their findings on such sources, wouldn't you agree?

Sure, do they tell a different story?

Where do they mention anything termed 'Hellenization'?

The issue must be explored in the context of the influx of large numbers of Slavs during the late 6th to the 8th centuries as well as the migration across Greece of nomadic or seminomadic pastoral groups such as the Vlachs from the 10th or 11th century and the Albanians from the 13th century. Although the evidence of place-names suggests some lasting Slavic influence in parts of Greece, it is qualified by the fact that the process of re-Hellenization that occurred from the later 8th century seems to have eradicated many traces of Slavic presence. Evidence of tribal names found in both the Peloponnese and northern Greece suggests that there were probably extensive Slavic-speaking populations in many districts; and from the 10th century to the 15th century Slavic occupants of various parts of the Peloponnese appear in sources as plunderers or as fiercely independent warriors. Whereas the Slavs of the south appear to have adopted Greek, those of Macedonia and Thessaly retained their original dialects, becoming only partially Hellenophone in certain districts.

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/...-and-languages

In the early ninth century, Byzantine military and ecclesiastical authority was re-established in most parts of the penninsula. The success of the misionary effort to convert and hellenize the Slavs must have owed much to the presence of a greek population(Charanis 1970). The Byzantine strategos or governer (who combined military and civil authority) invited back, at this time, a certain number of greeks from abroad. Such, for example, were the inhabitants of Rhegion(Reggio) in Calabria whose fathers had fled from Patras before the Slavs.

http://books.google.ca/books?id=KCK8...age&q=&f=false

If you google it, many links will come up.

Where do they refer to the Peloponnese as having a Greek identity by 1000AD?

Like I said earlier, I was going from memory.
I was obviously mistaken with that date...my apologies
But anyways, thats nit-picking.
Its not the exact year that im debating, but the process that was implemented by the Byzantine authorities.

Even in your quoted text it says from the 10th century to the 15th century Slavic occupants of various parts of the Peloponnese appear in sources as plunderers or as fiercely independent warriors, which does not correspond with the Peloponnese having a Greek identity by 1000AD.

Agreed, from what Ive been reading its more like the 1400s.
The Ezeritai and Millingi survived in the Taygetus mnt until around this period.

[Soldier of Macedon]

SoM this post rocks

Thanks TM, the truth rocks.

[Soldier of Macedon]

Spartan, i'd rather go to the contemporary sources and let them tell it, and then go to later analysis' that base their findings on such sources, wouldn't you agree?

Where do they mention anything termed 'Hellenization'?

Where do they refer to the Peloponnese as having a Greek identity by 1000AD?

Even in your quoted text it says from the 10th century to the 15th century Slavic occupants of various parts of the Peloponnese appear in sources as plunderers or as fiercely independent warriors, which does not correspond with the Peloponnese having a Greek identity by 1000AD.

[Spartan]

I am not sure if that is entirely accurate, although as I understand it that is the official version of things in Greece. The term 're-Hellenize' is also innacurate, because there was no 'Hellenic' identity to speak of, rather, it was a Roman identity in a state where the official tongue was Greek. How did you conclude that by 1000AD the Peloponnese again had a Greek-speaking identity?

Well if its innacurate, tell it to Britanica, and the many authors who use it when referring to what happened in the Peloponnese during this time period.

The issue must be explored in the context of the influx of large numbers of Slavs during the late 6th to the 8th centuries as well as the migration across Greece of nomadic or seminomadic pastoral groups such as the Vlachs from the 10th or 11th century and the Albanians from the 13th century. Although the evidence of place-names suggests some lasting Slavic influence in parts of Greece, it is qualified by the fact that the process of re-Hellenization that occurred from the later 8th century seems to have eradicated many traces of Slavic presence. Evidence of tribal names found in both the Peloponnese and northern Greece suggests that there were probably extensive Slavic-speaking populations in many districts; and from the 10th century to the 15th century Slavic occupants of various parts of the Peloponnese appear in sources as plunderers or as fiercely independent warriors. Whereas the Slavs of the south appear to have adopted Greek, those of Macedonia and Thessaly retained their original dialects, becoming only partially Hellenophone in certain districts.

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/244154/Greece/26397/Population-and-languages

In the early ninth century, Byzantine military and ecclesiastical authority was re-established in most parts of the penninsula. The success of the misionary effort to convert and hellenize the Slavs must have owed much to the presence of a greek population(Charanis 1970). The Byzantine strategos or governer (who combined military and civil authority) invited back, at this time, a certain number of greeks from abroad. Such, for example, were the inhabitants of Rhegion(Reggio) in Calabria whose fathers had fled from Patras before the Slavs.

http://books.google.ca/books?id=KCK8l-DNJigC&pg=PA65&lpg=PA65&dq=slavs+peloponnese+re+hellenization&source=bl&ots=Atd7-Fut-O&sig=RD7J5PZvBDTIWtoUi6xfva6wiu4&hl=en&ei=_tAyS8WDE5POlAe7itynBw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=9&ved=0CB8Q6AEwCA#v=onepage&q=&f=false

http://books.google.ca/books?id=PjMts15kLz0C&pg=PA193&lpg=PA193&dq=slavs+peloponnese+re+hellenization&source=bl&ots=h0AhEuomu8&sig=jRnnqYjtzo6Gi8O0Ae-qpgs9nbQ&hl=en&ei=ldUyS4iYNJGHlAfWypSTBw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CA0Q6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=slavs%20peloponnese%20re%20hellenization&f=false

There are many more, I justed posted a few.

[TrueMacedonian]

I was waiting for this to be brought up. The situation is completely different, the Bulgarian langauge is similar to Macedonian as they both belong to the Slavic language group, whereas Greek and Albanian are completely alien to each other. Furthermore, no Bulgarian propaganda can refute Nikola Karev's own words for the Greek newspaper Acropolis on the 8th May 1903, where he clearly states that he identifies as a Macedonian only, and considers Alexander the Great as his historical ancestor. Can you appreciate how markedly this situation differs from that of Kondouriotes? I can speak to my former president no problems, whereas your former president would not understand a word coming out of your mouth, I think this is a significant point.

I am not sure if that is entirely accurate, although as I understand it that is the official version of things in Greece. The term 're-Hellenize' is also innacurate, because there was no 'Hellenic' identity to speak of, rather, it was a Roman identity in a state where the official tongue was Greek. How did you conclude that by 1000AD the Peloponnese again had a Greek-speaking identity?

SoM this post rocks