How is 'ethnicity' defined?

[Soldier of Macedon]

Originally Posted by Spartan

However, if thats how they choose to identify, who are we to argue? All we can do is snicker behind their backs as Risto alluded to in another topic.

If I was not Macedonian, it probably wouldn't concern me much, but when I know that this guy who claims to be a 'Greek' speaks no Greek and only speaks Macedonian (apart from English), goes to his family and has the same customs, phrases, habits as me and other Macedonians, says "sho praish zheno, dai tro kafe" to his wife when he gets home, etc, I feel compelled to argue my case, because I find that many do not hold any 'strong' convictions of their 'Greek' heritage, they just accept the status quo. Many have been very willing to delve further into their histories after the initial discussions, and from a guy who only identifies as 'Greek' previously, he came out to admit that when he was younger he identified as a Macedonian, then political issues arose among his family and extended family, then to 'avoid confusion' he just says he is Greek, but later he goes on to say that his mother's village in Aegean Macedonia is so patriotically Macedonian that at one point the Greek police hesitated to enter. Spartan, these people are ethnic Macedonians, regardless of the propaganda, state-sponsored or otherwise. It is important to me because they are the way they are as a result of what the Greeks have done to them, and if I can even have one guy look back in his family history in a truthful manner and accept the reality, I feel as if I have accomplished something, the memory of his grandfather and great grandfather, as Macedonians, will not go on buried.

Ethnicity - Έθνος, Ethnos
Nationality - Υπηκοότητα , Ypikootita

Thanks, I will use this distinction in future.

Personally, I dont know why it would matter anyway.

It depends, how many Greeks today, even older one's in the 50's, 60's, etc, know that their first president was an ethnic Albanian who didn't and couldn't speak Greek? I would say next to none. There is a reason for this, a deliberate one.

[Soldier of Macedon]

Originally Posted by Spartan

But can its continuity from the more ancient greek language be denied?
Can the continuity of the modern greek language from Koine be denied?

No it cannot, I think our views differ only in the means that were used to meet that end (modern Greek).

[Risto the Great]

Originally Posted by Soldier of Macedon

RtG, can you please elaborate.

As an example, I have no doubt about a modern Greek ethnicity. Many Albanians of 100 years ago can/have easily become ethnic Greeks.

As another example, I have no doubt about the Macedonian ethnic identity. Attempts to bundle us into Bulgarian or Serbian or even ... I can't remember that new one ... oh I remember "Bulgarophone Greeks" is a sick attempt to exclude a race of people from an ethnicity.

It would appear that Greeks are afforded a free reign on ethnicity because our modern Western history books are replete with suggestive imagery of continuity. Even though we know they spent well over 1000 years as good Romans.

Macedonians are not afforded the same luxury in many spheres of discussion. It is dangerous at its worst and it is inconsistent in its least harmless interpretation.

[Spartan]

Originally Posted by Soldier of Macedon

If I was not Macedonian, it probably wouldn't concern me much, but when I know that this guy who claims to be a 'Greek' speaks no Greek and only speaks Macedonian (apart from English), goes home and has the same customs, phrases, habits as me and other Macedonians, says "sho praish zheno, dai tro kafe" to his wife when he gets home, etc, I feel compelled to argue my case, because I find that many do not hold any 'strong' convictions of their 'Greek' heritage, they just accept the status quo. Many have been very willing to delve further into their histories after the initial discussions, and from a guy who only identifies as 'Greek' previously, he came out to admit that when he was younger he identified as a Macedonian, then political issues arose among his family and extended family, then to 'avoid confusion' he just says he is Greek, but later he goes on to say that his mother's village in Aegean Macedonia is so patriotically Macedonian that at one point the Greek police hesitated to enter. Spartan, these people are ethnic Macedonians, regardless of the propaganda, state-sponsored or otherwise. It is important to me because they are the way they are as a result of what the Greeks have done to them, and if I can even have one guy look back in his family history in a truthful manner and accept the reality, I feel as if I have accomplished something, the memory of his grandfather and great grandfather, as Macedonians, will not go on buried.

I see your point, and cant disagree with much of what you state here.

It depends, how many Greeks today, even older one's in the 50's, 60's, etc, know that their first president was an ethnic Albanian who didn't and couldn't speak Greek? I would say next to none. There is a reason for this, a deliberate one.

Perhaps, and again I see your point.
My point was that the ethnicity of a nations ruler, doesnt have anything to do with the ethnic make-up of the populations they rule.
Just look at the royal families of Europe the last 500 years lol.

[Risto the Great]

Originally Posted by Spartan

@Risto
So when did Koine die, and how long was the greek language out of use for?

Sorry to answer with a question.
Is Latin dead?

[Spartan]

Originally Posted by Soldier of Macedon

No it cannot, I think our views differ only in the means that were used to meet that end (modern Greek).

Again, fair enough SoM. I can live with this.
I would just like to add that the 'means' used to meet the 'end' differed from the south to the north. The non-Greek populations of southern greece were not exposed to the same methods of Hellenization, as those in the north.

[Spartan]

Originally Posted by Risto the Great

Sorry to answer with a question.
Is Latin dead?

Yes, i believe it is.
Well, I dont know anyone who speaks Latin anyways, lol.
As far as I know,It has broken into the 5 or 6 romance languages.
The level of intelligibility of these 5 or 6 languages is very low with proper Latin I believe. And although a part of the same linguistic family, they are different languages from each other, and latin.

[Soldier of Macedon]

Originally Posted by Risto the Great

As an example, I have no doubt about a modern Greek ethnicity. Many Albanians of 100 years ago can/have easily become ethnic Greeks.

How long does it take for one to become another ethnicity? Can it be done in their lifetime, or would their children be bestowed upon with the new identity as a 'natural' one?

Originally Posted by Spartan

My point was that the ethnicity of a nations ruler, doesnt have anything to do with the ethnic make-up of the populations they rule.

I agree, but this ruler was from the ethnic populations of the areas that came to be the new Greece, he was not an 'outsider' or selected from some western monarchy. Consequently, he cannot be put in the same basket as the Germanic royalty/rulers of early Greece and Bulgaria. Kondouriotes was chosen to be president as a representative of his people that were at war with the Ottomans, just like Nikola Karev was chosen in the same manner during the Macedonian uprising of 1903 and the establishment of the Krushevo Republic. I am 100% certain that Macedonians today would have some issues to deal with and accept, were they to reveal that Nikola Karev was an ethnic Albanian who could not speak Macedonian. Thankfully, this is not the situation in our case.

I would just like to add that the 'means' used to meet the 'end' differed from the south to the north. The non-Greek populations of southern greece were not exposed to the same methods of Hellenization, as those in the north.

I agree with that, but I would like to take the theme back a few centuries and ask, how did the Greek-speaking populations manage to survive and re-assert themselves in the Peloponnese given the large Slavic-speaking and Albanian-speaking settlements that took place during the middle ages? The presence of the former must have been significant regardless of the timeframe, as the placenames of the past and present all too clearly demonstrate.

[Spartan]

Originally Posted by Soldier of Macedon

I agree, but this ruler was from the ethnic populations of the areas that came to be the new Greece, he was not an 'outsider' or selected from some western monarchy. Consequently, he cannot be put in the same basket as the Germanic royalty/rulers of early Greece and Bulgaria. Kondouriotes was chosen to be president as a representative of his people that were at war with the Ottomans, just like Nikola Karev was chosen in the same manner during the Macedonian uprising of 1903 and the establishment of the Krushevo Republic.

Well, there is no denying that the Arvanites played a huge role in the war of independance, but i can not conclude that this meant that the whole population was not greek.
As for karev, I have read that the Bulgarians claim him as well, and that he was part of the Bulgarian Macedonian-Adrianople Revolutionary Committees (BMARC). Now Im not saying that I agree with this, as i dont know much about these things. But even if he was bulgarian, i dont think that means that the people he led were.

I agree with that, but I would like to take the theme back a few centuries and ask, how did the Greek-speaking populations manage to survive and re-assert themselves in the Peloponnese given the large Slavic-speaking and Albanian-speaking settlements that took place during the middle ages?

As for the slavic populations of the peloponnese, from what I understand, they ran wild in the Morea from 550 ad to around 800ad, at which point the byzantine emporor(cant remember which one) decided to re-hellenize the region by
1.Waging war on the Slavic populations, either killing or chasing them out.
2.assimilation
3. by bringing greeks from Ionia and Sicily to repopulate the region.

Whatever the case was, the peloponnese had once again, a Greek identity by 1000ad.

Now Im going from memory here, so please dont crucify me if Im not 100% accurate. I need to read up on these things again, its been a while.

In the case of the Arvanites a few centuries later, imo they were hellenized rather easily, as they were orthodox and didnt have a fierce sense of 'ethnicity'. Also, the ones who migrated to the peloponese would have found a pre-dominantly greek identifying population when they arrived making their assimilation that much quicker and easier.

The presence of the former must have been significant regardless of the timeframe, as the placenames of the past and present all too clearly demonstrate.

I agree.

[Soldier of Macedon]

Originally Posted by Spartan

Now Im not saying that I agree with this, as i dont know much about these things. But even if he was bulgarian, i dont think that means that the people he led were.

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.

As for the slavic populations of the peloponnese, from what I understand, they ran wild in the Morea from 550 ad to around 800ad, at which point the byzantine emporor(cant remember which one) decided to re-hellenize the region by
1.Waging war on the Slavic populations, either killing or chasing them out.
2.assimilation
3. by bringing greeks from Ionia to repopulate the region.

Whatever the case was, the peloponnese had once again, a Greek identity by 1000ad.

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?