Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 71 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #345020

    Anonymous

    http://www.historyofmacedonia.org/AncientMacedonia/greekmyth.html

    Greeks as Slavs. In recent historical time other Europeans have held the view that the people of modern Greece have little ethnic connection with the ancient Greeks. Robert Browning, 32 a writer who is sympathetic to the Greeks, discusses the writings of the Bavarian Johann Philipp Fallmerayer, who in 1830 proposed that the Slav invasions and settlements of the late sixth and seventh centuries resulted in the "expulsion or extirpation of the original population of peninsula Greece. Consequently the medieval and modern Greeks … are not the descendants of the Greeks of antiquity, and their Hellenism is artificial." Fallmerayer's view that not a drop of pure Greek blood is to be found in the modern Greek is often held to be extreme. A more moderate version of essentially the same idea was presented more recently by R.H. Jenkins.

    Browning concedes that the Slavic impact was considerable in the Balkan peninsula, and that there was great intermixture of races in Balkan Greek lands. He says Fallnierayer wits right in drawing attention to the extensive Slav invasion and settlement in continental Greece. Despite the great attention given by the Greek government to renaming towns, villages, rivers and other geographic locations, there remain large numbers of place names of Slavonic origin. Even so, Browning suggests, the majority of the Greek-speaking people lived in Constantinople and Asia Minor, and in these more distant locations were not so strongly affected by the Slavs. He says also that the original population was not extirpated or expelled, since many remained in coastal regions, cities, and inaccessible areas.

    Nicholas Cheetham is uncompromising in the language he uses to describe the Slav influence. He says that between the fifth and seventh centuries "a sharp and brutal revolution altered the whole character of Hellas… It also involved a steep decline of civilized life and an almost total rejection of former values… The most striking change affected the ethnic composition of the people and resulted from the mass migration of Slavs into the Balkans which began in the sixth Century.”

    Cheetham explains that the eastern emperor held back the Slavs for decades. For instance, the emperor Constans Il (642-68) successfully forced back the "Macedonian Slavs" (as Cheetham calls them) who were threatening Thessalonika. Later Constans' grandson, Justinian II, undertook a major campaign against the Slavs and settled many in Asia. But in the end there was a continuous infiltration followed by settlement. It seems that earthquakes and the bubonic plague had thinned the population on the eve of the Slav invasion. After the great plague of 744-747, Constantinople was repopulated with Greeks from the Balkan peninsula and the islands, and this may have made even more room for the newcomers. The land was repeopled, Cheetham says. The Slavs occupied the fertile plains and river valleys, while the original peoples were forced into the numerous mountain ranges. The Slavs remained rural dwellers, so the cities may have suffered less from their arrival. The Slav settlements extended the length and breadth of the Balkan peninsula. They overran the "whole of Greece," and more, Cheetham says. Their influence extended across the Balkans from the Danube to Cape Tainaron. In the process, Roman authority was submerged, and the remnants of classical culture and the Christian religion were extinguished. There were few areas remaining where the Greeks predominated, though at least in those early times Thessalonika was one of them. In the eighth century Strabonos Epithomatus wrote, "And now, in that way almost all of Epirus, Hellada, the Peloponnese and Macedonia have also been settled by the Skiti-Slavs." In general, the lands that had been Greek in ancient times were commonly regarded by foreigners as a Slav preserve.

    In 805 the Slavs came under imperial control. They learned the ways of Roman citizens and were probably being attracted to Christianity. Eventually, peasant farmers from Asia minor were brought in to recolonize coastal plains and river valleys of "Hellas." Those Slavs who did not assimilate were gradually pushed back into the more rugged and inhospitable regions of the interior.

    The distinction between Romans and assimilated Slavs became blurred. As early as 766 Niketas, a (Macedonian) Slav, became patriarch of the Constantinople patriarchate.

    Nicholas Cheetham claims that the Orthodox church made intense efforts to convert the Slavs in Greece, and that this took effect more or less in the period from A.D. 800 to 1000, only when the Greek language had ousted Slavonic. Again, this effect was stronger in the southern part of the peninsula than further to the north, since the Christianization of the Slavs as a whole was made possible only when some Slav monks from Thessalonika created a suitable script in their own language as the vehicle for this task. Yet the central point, that the ethnic mix was profound, is quite clear.

    Another historian, Tom Winnifrith, says that the Slav conquest of the Balkans was rapid, eliminating the Latin heritage. He says the Slavs "spread throughout Greece." However, it was not just the Slavs who created ethnic change at this time. Winnifrith says there were many Latin-speaking refugees from cities in the thickly populated areas of the Danube frontier and Illyricum who are likely to have gravitated to Salonika and Constantinople and exchanged their Latin for Greek. These refugees added another element to the constantly changing ethnic equation in the Balkans.

    The extent of the Slavic inroad is evident on m……………………………………………

    #409620

    Anonymous

    Well we can see that the modern Greeks don't look like Pericles or Socrates.  The Greeks are mixed with Slavic people, as well as Turks.  Probable some Norman and northern Italian as well. 

    #409621

    Anonymous

    Found research about Venetian colonies in the Greek empire.
    assets.cambridge.org/…/9780521782357…

    #409622

    Anonymous

    I think they do look like Pericles, Socrates, Archimedes and the rest, but today you got Hollywood movies starring with actors of Anglo-Saxon origin and many get the wrong picture.
    Turks are mostly foreign Byzantinian Greeks and minor Arabs/Persians/Kurds/Slavs. Real Turks are really rare even in Turkey. Their case is something like Bulgaria in Slavic realm.

    #409624

    Anonymous

    Guess I'm going by Greeks I know and see in the news.  I see a very mixed bag of nuts

    #409625

    Anonymous

    Turks are mostly former Byzantinian Greeks and minor Arabs/Persians/Kurds/Slavs. Real Turks are really rare even in Turkey. Their case is something like Bulgaria in Slavic realm.

    made a mistake there

    #409626

    Anonymous


    image

    Obviously not all modern Greeks look like famous ancient Greeks. What I meant to say is that they didn’t look like actors of Troy, Immortals, 300 or any other Hollywood movie.
    Anyway by calling anyone gypsy just means he lacks that sapiens sapiens part next to homo. The way I see it you don’t have to drop down to this pathetic level or even to react at such/similar statements.

    #409628

    Anonymous

    why you always  have to excuse them and take their side???  why by default you defend their view of history and present is it that when we say that we are not serbs makes you crazy in defending anybody and everybody who is trowing s*** over us?

    #409630

    Anonymous

    I’m taking my side, not yours, not theirs. I personally don’t care if you want to be Serbs or not, makes no difference for me. Its your choice.

    I view Macedonians as Slavs, nothing else, so that’s why I simply can’t see you as ancient Macedonians or ancient whatsoever but ancient Slavs, understand?

    #409633

    Anonymous


    neither we nor present greeks have anything to do with those people living 2500 years ago ethnically nor genetically we are slavs they are some other mixture including the slavic element so this thread is dedicated to put more light on that…we never claimed that we are direct decedents of the ancient macedonians since 2500 years makes a huge span..but we do claim that the history of macedona and the macedonians is our history ever since the first human being set up a foot on the macedonian soil even though that geographical area had no name at that time  …so i cannot see the reason why the serbs are upset when we erect monument dedicate to alexander the great although we are salvs and he wasn’t he is still part of the macedonian history and that should be respected…the greeks can claim the history of the hellenic city states now limited within their national borders of  of modern greece which was founded in 1830 for the first time in history..what we call ancient greece is a fictional reflection of the modern greece to the past when such a state never existed only because they want to have present ownership of the past

    #409634

    Anonymous

    Yes, exactly. I don’t know if Serbs bothers Macedonia or not as I do not share view of many Serbs…

    The way I see is like this:
    Macedonia’s statehood is very young, and all of the sudden this Alexander the Great and his gang of raiders enters history in your schools, you start to identify with his nation, carving him the statues, meanwhile denying your core cultural, traditional and genetic element, and making your nation to believe they got some sort of glamorous historical significance(by acts of Alexander’s raiding and pillaging half of known world?), like its a different country we’re talking about… Worst thing here is: Poor Balkan citizen identifies himself with nation and national history and absorbing brainwashing national propaganda. This poor peasant gets the false impression that his nations has big significance in the world(and this makes him believing he’s also significant) which then makes him struggle less, completely losing interests to make his environment a better place, ultimately underachieving and creating a laziest bastards and parasites a population could be(same story over whole ex-Yugoslavia, Bulgaria and Greece, except its overemphasized among the last). I wouldn’t mind anything if by propagating this Alexander the Great values would do any good to Macedonians, but its just in contradiction with Balkan mentality.

    #409639

    Anonymous

    The way I see is like this:
    Macedonia’s statehood is very young, and all of the sudden this Alexander the Great and his gang of raiders enters history in your schools, you start to identify with his nation, carving him the statues, meanwhile denying your core cultural, traditional and genetic element, and making your nation to believe they got some sort of glamorous historical significance(by acts of Alexander’s raiding and pillaging half of known world?), like its a different country we’re talking about… Worst thing here is: Poor Balkan citizen identifies himself with nation and national history and absorbing brainwashing national propaganda. This poor peasant gets the false impression that his nations has big significance in the world(and this makes him believing he’s also significant) which then makes him struggle less, completely losing interests to make his environment a better place, ultimately underachieving and creating a laziest bastards and parasites a population could be(same story over whole ex-Yugoslavia, Bulgaria and Greece, except its overemphasized among the last). I wouldn’t mind anything if by propagating this Alexander the Great values would do any good to Macedonians, but its just in contradiction with Balkan mentality.

    all that started after our independence and the macedonian recognition as an independent state and admission to the UN and other bodies… the greeks objected that we have some irredentist claims over their territory and demanded change of our flag .. the flag had been changed and gligorov gave the well know announcement “we are slavs” and something like we don’t have anything with the state of alexander the great…but that was not enough the greeks demanded changing of our name by excluding any  resemblance of the new name with the word macedonia….and that was too much to bear…changing the name means it is over with us as a separate nation…so the question became “to be or not to be” then what followed ..fighting back of course…so the ancient macedonian history of only half a page in the past become one of the major portions of the content of the macedonian history books..not because we are not slavs ….you cannot blame us for that…..so going literally the history of serbia is your history since the first human being settled in the territory what is now serbia regardless if there were roman times or slavic times or some other occupations by germans or hungarians or turks …so why ancient history of macedonia to be a history of present greece which by the way didn’t exist during the ancient times..even knowing that we were determined to deny any claim to that part of our history ..but they want us dead as a macedonian nation and you are helping them why?   

    #409640

    Anonymous

    The city of Thessaloniki remained unconquered even after being attacked by the Slavs around 615. The Slavs were eventually defeated, gathered by the Byzantines and placed into segregated communities known as Sclaviniae. During the early 7th century, Constans II made the first mass-expulsions of Slavs from the Greek peninsula to the Balkans and central Asia Minor. Justinian II defeated and destroyed most of the Sclaviniae, and moved as many as 110,000-200,000 Slavs from the Greek peninsula to Bithynia, while he enlisted some 30,000 Slavs in his army (whop later joined arabic forces)

    we are talking about the 95% of slavs in Greece who were expelled to turkey and balkans (including fyrom) and mainland Greece being colonised again with Greeks from islands and coastal areas of mainland

    Quote:
    Well we can see that the modern Greeks don't look like Pericles or Socrates.  The Greeks are mixed with Slavic people, as well as Turks.  Probable some Norman and northern Italian as well.

    Greece:60% mediterannean, 20% alpine, 10% dinaric, 5% "south mediterannean" 5% nordic, 0% Turanid, 0% ladogan, 0%baltic so both slavic and turkish mixed elements anthropologically in Greece do not exist

    eastern-western slavs:ladogan and turanid:1%-20% (turkish admixture, except of south slavs where percentage is 0%)

    so is it Greeks who are mixed with turks and slavs

    the reason that Greeks could not be mixed with Turks is the same for Iraqis to not be mixed with americans: Turks were not a tribe which invaded and settled in Greece, it was an empire which sent its army and occupied the country.Unlike fyrom and northern greece, there were not turkish colonists in south, central and islands.

    the same goes for northern Italians.

    the biggest part of slavic element on the other hand was expelled to balkans and turkey, so if there was any admixture it was too small.

    Quote:
    Well we can see that the modern Greeks don't look like Pericles or Socrates.

    thank god, you never tried to become an anthropologist, cause the only chance for you would be to fail.

    from charlenton Coon to modern anthropologists noone see any difference between ancient and modern greeks, and i really can not understand what is "very mixed bag of nuts" to you, do not watch to much tv. ;)

    #409641

    Anonymous

    Greece:60% mediterannean, 20% alpine, 10% dinaric, 5% “south mediterannean” 5% nordic, 0% Turanid, 0% ladogan, 0%baltic so both slavic and turkish mixed elements anthropologically in Greece do not exist

    eastern-western slavs:ladogan and turanid:1%-20% (turkish admixture, except of south slavs where percentage is 0%)

    so is it Greeks who are mixed with turks and slavs

    the reason that Greeks could not be mixed with Turks is the same for Iraqis to not be mixed with americans: Turks were not a tribe which invaded and settled in Greece, it was an empire which sent its army and occupied the country.Unlike fyrom and northern greece, there were not turkish colonists in south, central and islands.

    the same goes for northern Italians.

    the biggest part of slavic element on the other hand was expelled to balkans and turkey, so if there was any admixture it was too small.

    thank god, you never tried to become an anthropologist, cause the only chance for you would be to fail.

    from charlenton Coon to modern anthropologists noone see any difference between ancient and modern greeks, and i really can not understand what is “very mixed bag of nuts” to you, do not watch to much tv.

    The Myth of Greek Ethnic ‘Purity’
    Macedonia and Greece, John Shea, 1997 pp.77-96

    Greeks as Albanians. Slavs were not the only groups to move into the southern part of the Balkan peninsula. Many Albanians came in also. Albanians settled in Athens, Corinth, Mani, Thessaly and even in the Aegean islands. In the early nineteenth century, the population of Athens was 24 percent Albanian, 32 percent Turkish, and only 44 percent Greek. The village of Marathon, scene of the great victory in 490 B.C., was, early in the nineteenth century, almost entirely Albanian.”

    #409648

    Anonymous

    Yeah sure there was no mixing,  even by rape or slavery.  My observations of Greeks are based on the thousands of Greeks I see here and by my several trips to Greece and Turkey.  Saw plenty of people who looked very similar in both countries.  I see hundred of Greeks here that are very dark,  darker than Arabs or Sicilians.  Not all are,  but these first generation Greeks here are not all looking alike. 

    As for my profession,  I'm good at what I do…. if you don't agree with me, try and change my mind with research,  not by insults.  They really weaken your argument.  Now, why don't you go bother the Macedonians and convince them that they are all really Greek. 

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 71 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.