Are modern Greeks really related to ancient Greeks?

[poiuytrewq0987]

Vote.

[Sikeliot]

Yes, and so are southern Italians, Sicilians, and western Turks.

[Ushtari]

no, ancient greeks are direct descendants of modern greeks

[Midori]

Yes of course.

[Linet]

Oh i see who vote what..what a strange thing...Sebastos voted no...i am shocked...:shocked:
...Ok...i feel my inner powers to unleash :lightbul:....i feel someone that his name starts with O to reply no as well....someone who says is Turk but has Balkanic blood....:icon_ask:
Who is he? Who is he? :noidea:
OOooooh my baby Onur :love0033:...thats who he is....
Nah, that could never happen :no:....Onur loves me so much :eyes... he would never do vote :love0045: something so stupid against his love...:love0034:

[Queen B]

Oh i see who vote what..what a strange thing...Sebastos voted no...i am shocked...:shocked:
...Ok...i feel my inner powers to unleash :lightbul:....i feel someone that his name starts with O to reply no as well....someone who says is Turk but has Balkanic blood....:icon_ask:
Who is he? Who is he? :noidea:
OOooooh my baby Onur :love0033:...thats who he is....
Nah, that could never happen :no:....Onur loves me so much :eyes... he would never do vote :love0045: something so stupid against his love...:love0034:
I already know which ones are going to vote no. :coffee:

[Linet]

I already know which ones are going to vote no. :coffee:

I think we will be surpriced...many people will vote what they would like us to be...
Being so stubborn with our purity doesnt make us sympathetic to nations that arent pure and dislike us just for that...we remind them what they have not..

[Queen B]

I think we will be surpriced...many people will vote what they would like us to be...

That's why I already know who are going to vote that..

[Boiorix]

Of course they are, who else could be except them ?!

[Crn Volk]

Majority are not. Perhaps Cretans can make the greatest claim to be be.

[Dacul]

I think is actually alboz who are descendants of old greeks.

[Vasconcelos]

no, ancient greeks are direct descendants of modern greeks

:thumb001:

[Pecheneg]

There must be few more options like "some of them".

[Queen B]

The poll is not correct.

You should chose between :

Yes - I am Greek
Yes - I am not Greek
No - I am Albanian,Fyromian,Turk or Bulgarian
No

[Contra Mundum]

Of course modern Greeks are descended from ancient Greeks, but they mixed in with others along the way, so they probably look different from their ancient ancestors.

[Incal]

Of course modern Greeks are descended from ancient Greeks, but they mixed in with others along the way, so they probably look different from their ancient ancestors.

I agree with that.

[Ivo Arandur]

I find questions of this kind ridiculous...how can a modern nation of the 21st century be a direct descendant of a people that lived 3,000 years ago? :loco: This doesn't go just for the Greeks but for most other nations and people on Earth, as well. The Australian Aborigines can claim to be direct descendants of the people that lived there 4-5,000 years ago because the continent was so isolated...there are some other places (mostly islands) like that - where people have lived isolated for hundreds and thousands of years...everybody else though is a mix - some more, others less...this is especially true for the Greeks - the Balkans have been a crossroad of 3 continents since ancient times - so many people of different ethnicity have past through here that I don't think anybody has an exact count - the Balkans are the exact opposite of Australia - we (cos I also live on the Balkans) are one of the most unisolated places in the world...so yeah ancient Hellenes had an important part in the ethnogenesis of the modern Greek nation but the same ancient Hellenic genes probably run in the veins of most people of the southern Balkans - and they are mixed with hundreds of other genes/ethnic traits....tbh I find this melting pot of countless ethnicities called "Balkans" pretty cool and dislike the Nazi-inspired dreams of "pure nations" that some people obviously have...

[morski]

I find questions of this kind ridiculous...how can a modern nation of the 21st century be a direct descendant of a people that lived 3,000 years ago? :loco: This doesn't go just for the Greeks but for most other nations and people on Earth, as well. The Australian Aborigines can claim to be direct descendants of the people that lived there 4-5,000 years ago because the continent was so isolated...there are some other places (mostly islands) like that - where people have lived isolated for hundreds and thousands of years...everybody else though is a mix - some more, others less...this is especially true for the Greeks - the Balkans have been a crossroad of 3 continents since ancient times - so many people of different ethnicity have past through here that I don't think anybody has an exact count - the Balkans are the exact opposite of Australia - we (cos I also live on the Balkans) are one of the most unisolated places in the world...so yeah ancient Hellenes had an important part in the ethnogenesis of the modern Greek nation but the same ancient Hellenic genes probably run in the veins of most people of the southern Balkans - and they are mixed with hundreds of other genes/ethnic traits....tbh I find this melting pot of countless ethnicities called "Balkans" pretty cool and dislike the Nazi-inspired dreams of "pure nations" that some people obviously have...

Cheers mate! Гласът на разума.:)

[Queen B]

Yes 12 votes
3 of them are from Greeks

No 12 votes
5 of them are Bulgarian-Fyromian-Albanian-Turkish
4 are Ex-Yugoslavs.

:coffee:

[jerney]

Of course modern Greeks are descended from ancient Greeks, but they mixed in with others along the way

The same can be applied to virtually every European population.

And I also noticed what dandelion noticed. Hmm.. :chin:

[Mistic]

I'm divided so I put "No". Some Greeks are true ancient Greek descendants but since ancient Greece there have been many invasions and immigration. I can't say all modern Greeks are descendants of ancient Greeks because that isn't fair.

[Siginulfo]

From Dienekes:


Angel noted that from the earliest times to the present “racial continuity in Greece is striking.”

Buxton who had earlier studied Greek skeletal material and measured modern Greeks, finds that the modern Greeks “possess physical characteristics not differing essentially from those of the former [ancient Greeks].”

The most extensive study of modern Greeks has been carried by the Greek anthropologist Aris N. Poulianos [10,11]. Poulianos’ study included the collection and study of more than seventy anthropometric measurements from a large sample of thousands of Greeks from different parts of the country. His main conclusions are that both Greeks and their neighboring populations are basically a mixture of Aegeans (a Mediterranean type local to the area) and Epirotics (Dinarics(e)) and are descended from the ancient inhabitants of the lands in which they live.

http://dienekes.110mb.com/articles/hellenes/

[Linet]

You judge another nation by your customs....

The fact that we are one of the few nations on earth that we considered mixing as lowlife practice for the last 2000 years means nothing to you....

The fact that those that you called "mixed" Greeks have the same face and you cant tell them apart from isolated Greek populations (Cretans, Spartans, South Italians) or from populations that had totally different kind of conquerors (Ionian islands) also mean nothing to you...

Is like telling me you have a a piece of yellow colored isolated somewhere so you know that this is yellow for sure (Spartans), then someone brings you another piece of yellow but tell you...you know, this was once yellow (Macedonians, Thessalians etc) but i had it in the same storage with blue (Slavs,Turks) so i dont think is pure yellow anymore, i think is green (mixed).. then you take of your isolated piece and you see that they look the same... so how on earth was the other mixed? Theories are theories.. and obvious facts are that facts....

[gold_fenix]

I find questions of this kind ridiculous...how can a modern nation of the 21st century be a direct descendant of a people that lived 3,000 years ago? :loco: This doesn't go just for the Greeks but for most other nations and people on Earth, as well. The Australian Aborigines can claim to be direct descendants of the people that lived there 4-5,000 years ago because the continent was so isolated...there are some other places (mostly islands) like that - where people have lived isolated for hundreds and thousands of years...everybody else though is a mix - some more, others less...this is especially true for the Greeks - the Balkans have been a crossroad of 3 continents since ancient times - so many people of different ethnicity have past through here that I don't think anybody has an exact count - the Balkans are the exact opposite of Australia - we (cos I also live on the Balkans) are one of the most unisolated places in the world...so yeah ancient Hellenes had an important part in the ethnogenesis of the modern Greek nation but the same ancient Hellenic genes probably run in the veins of most people of the southern Balkans - and they are mixed with hundreds of other genes/ethnic traits....tbh I find this melting pot of countless ethnicities called "Balkans" pretty cool and dislike the Nazi-inspired dreams of "pure nations" that some people obviously have...

well in the case of Spain i can say that we are the same that at least 2000 years ago (celtiberians rests), too i read that the hominids found in Iberia keep genetical identity that modern Spanairds but this last i can't confirm it

[Crn Volk]

I find questions of this kind ridiculous...how can a modern nation of the 21st century be a direct descendant of a people that lived 3,000 years ago? :loco: This doesn't go just for the Greeks but for most other nations and people on Earth, as well. The Australian Aborigines can claim to be direct descendants of the people that lived there 4-5,000 years ago because the continent was so isolated...there are some other places (mostly islands) like that - where people have lived isolated for hundreds and thousands of years...everybody else though is a mix - some more, others less...this is especially true for the Greeks - the Balkans have been a crossroad of 3 continents since ancient times - so many people of different ethnicity have past through here that I don't think anybody has an exact count - the Balkans are the exact opposite of Australia - we (cos I also live on the Balkans) are one of the most unisolated places in the world...so yeah ancient Hellenes had an important part in the ethnogenesis of the modern Greek nation but the same ancient Hellenic genes probably run in the veins of most people of the southern Balkans - and they are mixed with hundreds of other genes/ethnic traits....tbh I find this melting pot of countless ethnicities called "Balkans" pretty cool and dislike the Nazi-inspired dreams of "pure nations" that some people obviously have...

Even with the Aborigines of Australia now you will find it very hard to find a pure-blood Aborigine. And this is just after 200+ years of European settlement....

[Crn Volk]

The poll is not correct.

You should chose between :

Yes - I am Greek
Yes - I am not Greek
No - I am Albanian,Fyromian,Turk or Bulgarian
No

what's wrong you don't like democratic voting? not very greek of you....:coffee:

[Skandi]

:rolleyes:Of course not, all the ancient greeks vanished into thin air without producing any offspring...:coffee:

must have been all those goats

[ikki]

I already know which ones are going to vote no. :coffee:

you see because the ancient greeks were blond :thumb001:

[Libertas]

you see because the ancient greeks were blond :thumb001:

In your dreams. LOL

[Kanuni]

They are mostly descended from Hellenized PIE Greeks and minor IE Greeks>which is reasonable since they were probably a ruling class and a minority back in ancient times.

[Vojnik]

I voted NO. The answer is in the question 'who are the modern Greeks?'.

The first constetution of Greece, 1827.
A Greek is a Christian.

http://i50.tinypic.com/2e3pbt0.jpg


??? —> 4. Provinces of Greece are all those that were taken and will be taken by weapons against the Ottoman Dynasty.

1) —> 6. Greeks are:
2) —> a. All those indigenous people of the Greek State who believe in Christ.
3) —> b. All those, believers in Christ, who under the Ottoman slavery, came or they will come to the Greek State to struggle or to reside in it.
4) —> e. All those aliens, who come and enrol as citizens.

NOTE: To become a Greek, it was enough to be a Christian!

So regardless if you are a Albanian, Turk, Macedonian, Bulgarian, Gypsy or Vlach, you are a Greek if you were a Christian and born in the Greek state. So what makes them the 'direct decendents of the ancient Hellens?'.

[Osprey]

Hellenes were better than the modern greeks, especially if the greeks on this forum are any representation of the modern greeks.

[Lithium]

Most of the people in Bulgaria think they are not, but I think the Modern Greeks are the direct descendants of the Ancient Greeks. There are no pure nations nowadays so they are probably mixed.

[poiuytrewq0987]

Yes 12 votes
3 of them are from Greeks

No 12 votes
5 of them are Bulgarian-Fyromian-Albanian-Turkish
4 are Ex-Yugoslavs.

:coffee:

:lol: You're just mad because Balkanoids know the region's history better than deluded philhellenes who believe in fairy tales produced by your modern state.

[Lithium]

:lol: You're just mad because Balkanoids know the region's history better than deluded philhellenes who believe in fairy tales produced by your state.

I think it's a bit impossible to talk about real history in the Balkans. Our peoples had a lot of conflicts and wars between each other. Every nation has different claims and "proofs".

[poiuytrewq0987]

I voted NO. The answer is in the question 'who are the modern Greeks?'.

The first constetution of Greece, 1827.
A Greek is a Christian.

http://i50.tinypic.com/2e3pbt0.jpg



So regardless if you are a Albanian, Turk, Macedonian, Bulgarian, Gypsy or Vlach, you are a Greek if you were a Christian and born in the Greek state. So what makes them the 'direct decendents of the ancient Hellens?'.

Yep, modern Greek identity is religious and not an ethnic one.

[poiuytrewq0987]

I think it's a bit impossible to talk about real history in the Balkans. Our peoples had a lot of conflicts and wars between each other. Every nation has different claims and "proofs".

True, but we do know the truth and sometimes we manipulate it to fit our ambitions better but in end we know what the "Greeks" are.

[Lithium]

True, but we do know the truth and sometimes we manipulate it to fit our ambitions better but in end we know what the "Greeks" are.

What other peoples think isn't that important. Their identity depends on the way they see it :D

[Vojnik]

The first president of Greece was an Albanian! 1824.

http://i49.tinypic.com/331jajo.jpg

http://i46.tinypic.com/nn7jmo.jpg

George Konduriottes was the first president of Greece and a ethnic Albanian that did not know a word of Greek.

[Vojnik]

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...."

[Linet]

Yes....we are all Albanians as much as you are Macedonians= 0....:thumbs:

[Sikeliot]

Greeks today must somewhat be related to the ancients.. Greece appears on my Relative Finder list on 23andme to the top of the list, which must be due to having ancient Greek ancestry. If modern Greeks were not descended from the ancients, this would not happen.

[Linet]

somewhat? :icon_ask:
Greeks dont mix, end of story...
whatever a wanna be Greek says like Vojnik is irrelevant and just pick up lines that distort the truth...no matter how many papers they bring, dna tests, anthropologists and biologists agree in one thing... Greeks are strikingly alike to their ancestors...:D
But even if dna tests were not invented, still we know our history, past and ancestors and most of all we know what our parents teach us before we are even able to talk... Greeks dont mix.... :thumbs:

[Vojnik]

Greeks today must somewhat be related to the ancients.. Greece appears on my Relative Finder list on 23andme to the top of the list, which must be due to having ancient Greek ancestry. If modern Greeks were not descended from the ancients, this would not happen.

there are Greeks out there that are related to the Ancient ones, i am not denying that, but the majority of modern Greeks today are just Hellenized Albanians, Slavs, Vlachs and Turks. I believe that certain people of Italian heritage, such as yourself, would have more in common genetically with ancient Greeks then what the majority of Modern Greeks living in Greece.

[Sikeliot]

I believe that certain people of Italian heritage, such as yourself, would have more in common genetically with ancient Greeks then what the majority of Modern Greeks living in Greece.

Assuming this is true, it would mean that since ancient times, Greece had somehow found its native population overwhelmed by outside influences to the extent which they outnumbered those native to the land.

[iNird]

somewhat? :icon_ask:
Greeks dont mix, end of story...
whatever a wanna be Greek says like Vojnik is irrelevant and just pick up lines that distort the truth...no matter how many papers they bring, dna tests, anthropologists and biologists agree in one thing... Greeks are strikingly alike to their ancestors...:D
But even if dna tests were not invented, still we know our history, past and ancestors and most of all we know what our parents teach us before we are even able to talk... Greeks dont mix.... :thumbs:

Okok we get it, Greeks don't mix. Such rubbish.

:rolleyes2:

[Midori]

Greeks dont mix

Yeah right... :coffee: I mean, you're the last person who should be saying this.

[Vojnik]

somewhat? :icon_ask:
Greeks dont mix, end of story...
whatever a wanna be Greek says like Vojnik is irrelevant and just pick up lines that distort the truth...no matter how many papers they bring, dna tests, anthropologists and biologists agree in one thing... Greeks are strikingly alike to their ancestors...:D
But even if dna tests were not invented, still we know our history, past and ancestors and most of all we know what our parents teach us before we are even able to talk... Greeks dont mix.... :thumbs:

Yes, I know. Yous are brainwashed by your parents, papou and yaya from a young age.

[Vojnik]

Assuming this is true, it would mean that since ancient times, Greece had somehow found its native population overwhelmed by outside influences to the extent which they outnumbered those native to the land.

Here is one example. The Greek language is supposedly over 4,000 years old. Why if it is such an old and influential language hasn't it spread all over the world? why has it only remained mostly within the borders of modern Greece? that's because it is a newly imposed language with no dialects to show any sought of continuity. The same applies to the people of modern Greece, 200 years ago it was a multi ethnic land and then Hellenised.

[Archduke]

Modern Greeks are direct descendants of Slavs and Albanians. Slavs inhabited the area till Peloponnese, so probably only people from the islands have Ancient Greek blood.

[Sikeliot]

Here is one example. The Greek language is supposedly over 4,000 years old. Why if it is such an old and influential language hasn't it spread all over the world? why has it only remained mostly within the borders of modern Greece? that's because it is a newly imposed language with no dialects to show any sought of continuity. The same applies to the people of modern Greece, 200 years ago it was a multi ethnic land and then Hellenised.

It did at one point. Everywhere from Sicily to the Levant spoke Greek at one point, but conquests from other peoples brought languages that overtook Greek.

[Linet]

We have many dialects in Greece. Can you speak Greek and know the differences? :rolleyes:
Sleepy...if Greeks were not Greeks, you wouldnt be compatible with anyone and the result would just show a general mediterranian influence such as the balkanic etc... :coffee:

iNird, whats your problem if we dont mix? Do we stop you doing whatever you like :confused2:? Next time someone says crap about the Illyrians remind me to follow your attitude...viva Bosnia! :thumb001:

[Onur]

Here is one example. The Greek language is supposedly over 4,000 years old. Why if it is such an old and influential language hasn't it spread all over the world? why has it only remained mostly within the borders of modern Greece? that's because it is a newly imposed language with no dialects to show any sought of continuity. The same applies to the people of modern Greece, 200 years ago it was a multi ethnic land and then Hellenised.
Thats an interesting and a very good point.

Non-existence of Greek dialects and branch languages within, is the biggest proof of the unnatural development of Greek language. I mean this is a proof of the revival of Greek culture and language after it`s been dead for 1500 years.

I mean while we have several Germanic languages like Flemish, English, German or Romance languages like Romanian, Italian, French or Turkic languages like Azerbaijani, Turkish, Turkmen, Tatar etc. Why we only have modern Greek under the branch of Greek language? Why there is not many different dialects of it today and why no other Greek related language in the same family other than modern Greek of Greece?

Isn't it absurd that Greek has no other closely related language in it`s own family branch while it`s supposedly older than Germanic, Romance and Turkic languages? The answer is; Greek culture was long dead and it has been revived after 1500 years of gap. Thats why this is the case.

[Linet]

Here is one example. The Greek language is supposedly over 4,000 years old. Why if it is such an old and influential language hasn't it spread all over the world? why has it only remained mostly within the borders of modern Greece? that's because it is a newly imposed language with no dialects to show any sought of continuity. The same applies to the people of modern Greece, 200 years ago it was a multi ethnic land and then Hellenised.

Darling, We read the Gospels that were written 2000 ago in the language they were written. they arent translated but the official text...know why? Because we dont need translation :lightbul:. The Greek language hasnt changed much in the last 2000 years :old:. Do you know a reason why that happened? Because we didnt mix and so we didnt have influences :eyes:
Thanks for helping me point out that...:thumb001:

And here is the wiki of the day :rose:
Historical unity and continuing identity between the various stages of the Greek language is often emphasised. Although Greek has undergone morphological and phonological changes comparable to those seen in other languages, there has been no time in its history since classical antiquity where its cultural, literary, and orthographic tradition was interrupted to such an extent that one can easily speak of a new language emerging. Greek speakers today still tend to regard literary works of ancient Greek as part of their own rather than a foreign language.[14] It is also often estimated that the historical changes have been relatively slight compared with some other languages. According to one estimation, "Homeric Greek is probably closer to demotic than twelfth-century Middle English is to modern spoken English."[15] Ancient Greek texts, especially from Biblical Koine onwards, are thus relatively easy to understand for educated modern speakers. The perception of historical unity is also strengthened by the fact that Greek has not split up into a group of separate, regional daughter languages, as happened with Latin.

[Linet]

So i could speak with Socrates...if he was alive and understand each other....
Is that because we mixed? :eyes:

[Flintlocke]

In the 2nd high school class I had to learn Antigone by heart, the WHOLE TEXT! Because although it was Greek different words were used otherwise back then and now have been replaced with new words. Οίμοι τάλαινα καμπλάκω του σου μόρου.

Btw, I totally understand Arberesh and Arvanite languages although there are 800 years older than today's Albanian.

[Pecheneg]

Darling, We read the Gospels that were written 2000 ago in the language they were written. they arent translated but the official text...know why? Because we dont need translation :lightbul:. The Greek language hasnt changed much in the last 2000 years :old:. Do you know a reason why that happened? Because we didnt mix and so we didnt have influences :eyes:
Thanks for helping me point out that...:thumb001:

And here is the wiki of the day :rose:
Historical unity and continuing identity between the various stages of the Greek language is often emphasised. Although Greek has undergone morphological and phonological changes comparable to those seen in other languages, there has been no time in its history since classical antiquity where its cultural, literary, and orthographic tradition was interrupted to such an extent that one can easily speak of a new language emerging. Greek speakers today still tend to regard literary works of ancient Greek as part of their own rather than a foreign language.[14] It is also often estimated that the historical changes have been relatively slight compared with some other languages. According to one estimation, "Homeric Greek is probably closer to demotic than twelfth-century Middle English is to modern spoken English."[15] Ancient Greek texts, especially from Biblical Koine onwards, are thus relatively easy to understand for educated modern speakers. The perception of historical unity is also strengthened by the fact that Greek has not split up into a group of separate, regional daughter languages, as happened with Latin.

your posts are so colourful and complicated with thousands of similies :D

[Linet]

my baby :baby2000: , my love :hug2:, my angel Onur :angel....you know how much i adore it when you throw crazy things that are only based in the fantastic world you have create in your mind :flypig: but ....dont talk please :taped-shut:...not when your love is talking... first of all you dont even know what you are talking about :no:...so let me do it for you...:eyes:
And baby, before to speak, consult me... Greek language has many dialects...ok my love :smilie_liebe9:?

[Lithium]

So i could speak with Socrates...if he was alive and understand each other....
Is that because we mixed? :eyes:

Oh, common. If you haven't mixed why do you have so many phenotypes in your country? You can actually find anything in the Balkans, from Nordid to East Med. and Dinarid

[Linet]

In the 2nd high school class I had to learn Antigone by heart, the WHOLE TEXT! Because although it was Greek different words were used otherwise back then and now have been replaced with new words. Οίμοι τάλαινα καμπλάκω του σου μόρου.

Btw, I totally understand Arberesh and Arvanite languages although there are 800 years older than today's Albanian.

Why did you say that :shocked:? You remind me the good days that the professors made us learn the dfinition of tragedy by Aristotelis and told us that even if we get old :old: enough not to remember our name we have to be able to say that in one go...:sweat:
do you want me to say it to you? :p

[Archduke]

So i could speak with Socrates...if he was alive and understand each other....
Is that because we mixed? :eyes:

So? What will you do with the slavs, who inhabited almost whole Greece?They just disaperaded? :confused:

[Kanuni]

Most of those people who voted that modern Greeks are not descended from ancient Greeks hold inferiority complexes toward them.Linguistic and historical datas are clear cut regarding their cohesion.Genetic datas suggest that Greeks are slightly less Northern Euro and more Southern European than other Balkanites.It is logical that they would be mostly descended from Ancient Greeks.Everyone who scratches otherwise is either a troll or obsessive retard.

[iNird]

In the 2nd high school class I had to learn Antigone by heart, the WHOLE TEXT! Because although it was Greek different words were used otherwise back then and now have been replaced with new words. Οίμοι τάλαινα καμπλάκω του σου μόρου.

Btw, I totally understand Arberesh and Arvanite languages although there are 800 years older than today's Albanian.

Well I can understand it as well ,for the most part, and I was raised in the diaspora. But understanding the language does not equate to people not mixing. That's simply illogical.

Anyways I don't really care if Greeks are descendants or not, I do think they have the most claim to Ancient Greeks though. I just find this whole "we never mixed" mindset to be ignorant by Linet.

:coffee:

[Linet]

your posts are so colourful and complicated with thousands of similies :D

Oh come on... i do it for you :eyes:... i know how much you love it...i give color to your lives :stricken:

[Flintlocke]

I only remember τράγου ωδή or something like that. The memories I have from high school is playing ball, grabbing boobs, and beating up the guys from the class next door :P And my professor was a melancholic old man who always almost cried and went "Oooh why did I miss those opportunities when I was young?" :D


Well I can understand it as well ,for the most part, and I was raised in the diaspora. But understanding the language does not equate to people not mixing. That's simply illogical.

Anyways I don't really care if Greeks are descendants or not, I do think they have the most claim to Ancient Greeks though. I just find this whole "we never mixed" mindset to be ignorant by Linet.

:coffee:

One of my cousins is married to a French woman, another with an Irish, another with a Belarussian. Of course people mix.

[Linet]

Well I can understand it as well ,for the most part, and I was raised in the diaspora. But understanding the language does not equate to people not mixing. That's simply illogical.

Anyways I don't really care if Greeks are descendants or not, I do think they have the most claim to Ancient Greeks though. I just find this whole "we never mixed" mindset to be ignorant by Linet.

:coffee:

Its not arrogant but true. What do the others care if we are and we say we are :confused:? How does that diminish them? :icon_ask:
If i fall in love with a non Greek, i wont say no because he is not Greek, first of all he made me love him and that means he worth it. If my nations purity was hanging on me, of course i would never do it but i trully do not believe my nation hangs on me. I love Greece but i also believe in love and in the name of the latter i would accept any couple no matter the nationality...

[Linet]

...And anyway i have Onur :propeller:, so of course i accept mixing... i cant stand letting him cry :cry every night alone for his love for Greece and write melancholic songs :fbard:...i am so soft-hearted...:eyes:

[iNird]

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_ELFl2_1q7DI/TObn1HnV2fI/AAAAAAAAAaQ/5JkvAtpbv7k/s1600/Not_sure_if_serious.jpg

[Queen B]

what's wrong you don't like democratic voting? not very greek of you....:coffee:
What's wrong with you, what's no democratic in that I prupose? :crazy:

:rolleyes:Of course not, all the ancient greeks vanished into thin air without producing any offspring...:coffee:
must have been all those goats
:cool:

Most of the people in Bulgaria think they are not, but I think the Modern Greeks are the direct descendants of the Ancient Greeks. There are no pure nations nowadays so they are probably mixed.
Direct and pure is different.

:lol: You're just mad because Balkanoids know the region's history better than deluded philhellenes who believe in fairy tales produced by your modern state.
Mad? Are you nuts?
Not at all Dusan. I m just pointing out the results. It prove what I said in the start. That I know who are going to vote no :wink

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...."
Athens was a village of 3.000 back then, Einstein. Wasn't even the capital of Greece :lol00002:
[B]
Here is one example. The Greek language is supposedly over 4,000 years old. Why if it is such an old and influential language hasn't it spread all over the world? why has it only remained mostly within the borders of modern Greece? that's because it is a newly imposed language with no dialects to show any sought of continuity. The same applies to the people of modern Greece, 200 years ago it was a multi ethnic land and then Hellenised.
I can read texts from antiquity, Roman times, Byzantine times.

If this isn't continuity, then I wonder what it is :loco:

Modern Greeks are direct descendants of Slavs and Albanians. Slavs inhabited the area till Peloponnese, so probably only people from the islands have Ancient Greek blood.
So, the Albanians and the Slavs overpopulated the areas, yet, the NON-Existant Greeks managed to Hellinize them?
Makes absolute sense :coffee:

[Lithium]

Oh, common. If you haven't mixed why do you have so many phenotypes in your country? You can actually find anything in the Balkans, from Nordid to East Med. and Dinarid

[Incal]

Modern Greeks are direct descendants of Slavs and Albanians. Slavs inhabited the area till Peloponnese, so probably only people from the islands have Ancient Greek blood.

That's like saying that since Spaniards were living here for a while then all of us spics must be 100% spanish lol

[Sikeliot]

Greeks obviously do have some Slavic ancestry though.. if you compare a Greek to a Calabrese or Sicilian, the genetic difference is solely the Slavic input in the Greeks.

Essentially i believe Greeks are descendants of the ancients, only with some assimilated Slavic blood that was absorbed into the Greek gene pool, otherwise unchanged.

[Kanuni]

Greeks obviously do have some Slavic ancestry though.. if you compare a Greek to a Calabrese or Sicilian, the genetic difference is solely the Slavic input in the Greeks.

Essentially i believe Greeks are descendants of the ancients, only with some assimilated Slavic blood that was absorbed into the Greek gene pool, otherwise unchanged.

Calabreses and Sicilians are not descended from Greeks anyway.They have mostly Pre-IE Greek(Neolithic) ancestry not IE Greek.

And IE Greek invaders were not WestAsian or Mediterranean bunch but Central>East European ones.

[Duke]

Sicilian Croats: During the medieval Croatian Kingdom of Terpimiri dynasty at Adriatic, a considerable number of coastal Croats emigrated in Sicily and also in Spain; during the rule of Croatian king Tomislav in 928-929 an entire Croatian navy ot 30 warships sailed in western Mediterranean along Maghreb coasts, and at the end their 1,200 seamen landed in Sicilian Emirate and inhabited at Palermo, where they persisted as elite guard of emirs and then of local Norman rulers. New genomic studies now confirmed their descendants present in western Sicilians as 16% od specific Dinaric genom I1b-Eu7 (mostly characteric of Croatia & Bosnia).

So its obvious Sicilians also have some Slavic input, they also have Norman, Arab, Albanian... etc, as well as from original tribes that was there(Sicani, Sicels, Elymians) so they shouldn't be considered as pure and directs descendants Antic Greeks :eek:

[Sikeliot]

Calabreses and Sicilians are not descended from Greeks anyway.They have mostly Pre-IE Greek(Neolithic) ancestry not IE Greek.

And IE Greek invaders were not WestAsian or Mediterranean bunch but Central>East European ones.

Then is it just a coincidence they cluster nearly identically with Greeks?

[Kanuni]

Then is it just a coincidence they cluster nearly identically with Greeks?

East-European component present at Greeks is crucial for their IE Greek ancestry(this is another perspective that should be taken in consideration despite Slavic influence).Calabrians and Sicilians lack that.I don't know what R1a subclades are present at Greeks but i suppose they are different from Slavic ones.

[Prince Carlo]

East-European component present at Greeks is crucial for their IE Greek ancestry(this is another perspective that should be taken in consideration despite Slavic influence).Calabrians and Sicilians lack that.I don't know what R1a subclades are present at Greeks but i suppose they are different from Slavic ones.

Here are all the maps-

http://www.familytreedna.com/public/R1a,R1a/default.aspx?section=results

I do think that East Euro admix in Greece is also linked to the I2a1b1 and I2a2a haplos.

[Kanuni]

Here are all the maps-

http://www.familytreedna.com/public/R1a,R1a/default.aspx?section=results

I do think that East Euro admix in Greece is also linked to the I2a1b1 and I2a2a haplos.

Yes,Atlanto-Baltic or Northern component seems to correlate well with haplogroup I on general.The R1a seem to have acquired high Atlanto-Baltic component through breeding with the Mesolithic European females.

[Vasconcelos]

And IE Greek invaders were not WestAsian or Mediterranean bunch but Central>East European ones.

They were all tall, blonde blue eyed men, right?

[Kanuni]

They were all tall, blonde blue eyed men, right?

I am not a Nordicist.It is a fact that Greece was invaded from steppe warriors(who were those that brought the IE language) who mixed with the natives.Whether they were tall blonde/blue eyed i can't say.

[Onur]

Essentially i believe Greeks are descendants of the ancients, only with some assimilated Slavic blood that was absorbed into the Greek gene pool, otherwise unchanged.
Slavs cannot possibly be the only group of people who got assimilated within Greeks.

Modern Greeks also have considerable amount of Armenian, Vlach and Albanian admixture.

I have to remind you that when their population was around 3,5 million in 1920s, there was around 60-70.000 Gagauz Turkish christians in Greece. Christian Tatar groups also migrated to Greece from Crimea to Georgia, Azerbaijan. Their population was around 60.000 again. In 1923 population exchange, 400.000 out of 1 million christians was Turkish christians again, named as Karamanlis. So, modern Greeks also have considerable amount of Turkish admixture too.

You should also not minimize southern Levant admixture only within Cypriots. This is not true. Mainland Greeks and especially Cretans also have considerable amount of north African admixture.

[Viljuska]

Are Modern Greeks direct descendants of Ancient Greeks?
Yes, some of them.

[Kanuni]

Slavs cannot possibly be the only group of people who got assimilated within Greeks.

Modern Greeks also have considerable amount of Armenian, Vlach and Albanian admixture.

I have to remind you that when their population was around 3,5 million in 1920s, there was around 60-70.000 Gagauz Turkish christians in Greece. Christian Tatar groups also migrated to Greece from Crimea to Georgia, Azerbaijan. Their population was around 60.000 again. In 1923 population exchange, 400.000 out of 1 million christians was Turkish christians again, named as Karamanlis. So, modern Greeks also have considerable amount of Turkish admixture too.

You should also not minimize southern Levant admixture only within Cypriots. This is not true. Mainland Greeks and especially Cretans also have considerable amount of north African admixture.

How many years did you study to become such a retard?

[Prince Carlo]

You should also not minimize southern Levant admixture only within Cypriots. This is not true. Mainland Greeks and especially Cretans also have considerable amount of north African admixture.

Greeks have 0.5 North West African admix on Dodecad. That's less than Northern and Central Italians.

[Onur]

Yes, some of them.
Yes thats true but the direct descendants of ancient Greeks in Greece is not more or less than the ones in Italy, Turkey, north African countries.

Also in that sense, some of us are direct descendants of Lydians, Hittites, Etruscans, Sumerians too but who knows where and how many.



Greeks have 0.5 North West African admix on Dodecad. That's less than Northern and Central Italians.
I don't care what Dodecad or any other ethnic mix calculator says. It`s easy to manipulate these. If they consider E1b1 as native Balkan, then ofc north African admixture shows up as 0,5% in your calculator OR if they consider all the J2 and R1b as "native Anatolian hellenic" then it shows up 0,5% again.

Southern Levantine migrations to Cyprus, Crete and central Greece during whole middle ages to 19th century is a fact and these people have been hellenized throughout time.

Also, all the additions that i have mentioned in my previous post about the different ethnic groups to the modern Greek ethnos is very well documented in Byzantine and Ottoman archives. I trust these, rather than some calculator which can easily be manipulated.

[exceeder]

Given that the question asks if modern greeks are descended from ancient greeks (and NOT if modern greeks have some external influences), the answer is obviously yes. Maybe modern greeks have some external influences, but the original greeks weren't just wiped out and replaced with foreign populations.

[Sturmgewehr]

Yes they are, at least 90% of them are.

[arcticwolf]

Yes they are, at least 90% of them are.

What he said.

[Onur]

Yes they are, at least 90% of them are.
lol, you say this by being an Albanian?

I think you would be better to join your so-called "Arvanite" brothers and consider yourself as "hellenes of Epirus" :D

I am sure modern Greece wouldn't mind adding another Albanian to join their pseudo-hellenic ranks. Too bad for you but you still didn't loose your chance because i heard that recent Albanian immigrants in Greece also trying to hellenize themselves so badly

[Sturmgewehr]

lol, you say this by being an Albanian?

I think you would be better to join your so-called "Arvanite" brothers and consider yourself as "hellenes of Epirus" :D

I don't get your non-sequitar but anyways, very funny :thumb001: :thumb001:

I say it based on what i have read, studied and learned from History, of course I am no expert but that is what my own research has led me to.

Anyways, Selamlar :)

p.s: I am not trying to Hellenize myself, I don't know what the fuck u talking about, I see Greeks the same as I see Turks, Germans and Latvians, I couldn't care less.

Your ad Hominens and straw man arguments don't make much sense to begin with.

[iNird]

I am sure modern Greece wouldn't mind adding another Albanian to join their pseudo-hellenic ranks. Too bad for you but you still didn't loose your chance because i heard that recent Albanian immigrants in Greece also trying to hellenize themselves so badly

They were hellenized just like all of the ethnic groups moved to Turkey that were Turkified. For example, a Bulgarian Muslim family moving to Turkey 100 years ago and today the ancestors are proud turks....

[Kanuni]

lol, you say this by being an Albanian?


You have just exposed your mindset.Him being an Albanian doesn't neccessary mean he should blind himself and say nonsesical things like you do.

This forum should add Quality before Quantity ban rule.And that rule should be applied firstly to you.Your anti-scientific/anti-intellectual posts heart my eyesight.

Continue with your lowbrow trolling in this forum for now.:)

[Onur]

They were hellenized just like all of the ethnic groups moved to Turkey that were Turkified. For example, a Bulgarian Muslim family moving to Turkey 100 years ago and today the ancestors are proud turks....
Yes but these people were less than 1% of Turkey while Albanians were the main ethnic group of modern Greece back then. Almost all the prominent figures of Greece from 19th century were Albanians. They adopted Albanian folk elements, dances, cloths as their own. These pages are not enough to count Albanian elements in Greece and you Albanians come up and say that 90% of Greece are ancient hellenes. I just found that a bit absurd, thats it. Ofc it`s up to you, believe whatever you like.

[Prengs]

Yes they are, at least 90% of them are.

It is a bit exaggerated.

You know how a big role played Arvanites and Vlach during XII-XIX century in modern Greece and today all of them are assimilated.

[Sturmgewehr]

It is a bit exaggerated.

You know how a big role played Arvanites and Vlach during XII-XIX century in modern Greece and today all of them are assimilated.

SO???????

I don't see how that makes any sense, it is the same as saying:

Premise #1: DO YOU KNOW WHAT KIND OF VITAL ROLE THE AUSTRO-HUNGARIAN EMPIRE PLAYED DURING THE FORMATION OF MODERN DAY ALBANIA??

Conclusion: Albanians are Austrians and Hungarians or Ancient Albanians are not the same as Modern Albanians.

it is a non-sequitar, it makes no sense.

[Vanguard]

No,not by a long shot.

[iNird]

SO???????

I don't see how that makes any sense, it is the same as saying:

Premise #1: DO YOU KNOW WHAT KIND OF VITAL ROLE THE AUSTRO-HUNGARIAN EMPIRE PLAYED DURING THE FORMATION OF MODERN DAY ALBANIA??

Conclusion: Albanians are Austrians and Hungarians or Ancient Albanians are not the same as Modern Albanians.

it is a non-sequitar, it makes no sense.

There was an Arvanite population in Greece (how large it is another story.)

There was no Austrian/Hungarian population in Albania.

I think his point was other ethnic groups have been assimilated into the Greek population.

[Prengs]

SO???????

I don't see how that makes any sense, it is the same as saying:

Premise #1: DO YOU KNOW WHAT KIND OF VITAL ROLE THE AUSTRO-HUNGARIAN EMPIRE PLAYED DURING THE FORMATION OF MODERN DAY ALBANIA??

Conclusion: Albanians are Austrians and Hungarians or Ancient Albanians are not the same as Modern Albanians.

it is a non-sequitar, it makes no sense.

What is this ridiculous nonsese comparison? :eek:

[Sturmgewehr]

There was an Arvanite population in Greece (how large it is another story.)

There was no Austrian/Hungarian population in Albania.

I think his point was other ethnic groups have been assimilated into the Greek population.

Big deal, so have a lot of Slavic people assimilated into modern day Albanians, I have 2 HUGE volumes of the Albanian history in my shelf, published in TIrana 1976, it CLEARLY states how several Slavic Tribes settled in middle Albania during the 6th and 7th Century, also many Albanians in Montenegro have been consumed by the Serbian population thus assimilated but in the end terms such as Albanian, Greek, Serb are social constructs, when I said Modern day Greeks are the exact descendants of Ancient Hellens I meant that regardless if they are Hellenized Thracians or Albanians or Bulgarians they are still Hellens, the term Hellen refers to a culture not to a genetic cluster or racial sub group.

it is a fact that Greeks cluster closely with the other nations surrounding them that most probably were hellens or were influenced by hellens, it is a fact that Greeks racially are a Balkan bunch so what more do we need ???

Let's not talk about the Greek language, could u translate the ancient Hellenic texts through Turkish, Albanian, Slavic or Vlachian ??? I don't think so.

There is no Pure population, national and racial purity are retarded.



What is this ridiculous nonsese comparison? :eek:

it is a valid one, could u mind giving ur own not so ridiculous analogy instead of trying to lampoon me like this ??

[Prengs]

it is a valid one, could u mind giving ur own not so ridiculous analogy instead of trying to lampoon me like this ??

Your comprasion is funny because we are talking about origins/people while you argues with formation of Modern State, the same situation as Kosovo (from UN)!
Arvanites were one of mayor ethnic group who lived there and has written stories about them since Byzantine times until XIX century.

[Onur]

I have 2 HUGE volumes of the Albanian history in my shelf, published in TIrana 1976,
Nice... I am sure it`s like a holy bible; "History of Illyrians written by Enver Hodja and his comrades" :)


it CLEARLY states how several Slavic Tribes settled in middle Albania during the 6th and 7th Century, also many Albanians in Montenegro have been consumed by the Serbian population thus assimilated but in the end terms such as Albanian, Greek, Serb are social constructs,
6-7th century is long time ago, even Bulgars were speaking Turkic back then. I was talking about the 19-20th century Albanians of Greece but you turn back to 6th century and say that we all are mixed !!!


it is a fact that Greeks cluster closely with the other nations surrounding them that most probably were hellens or were influenced by hellens, it is a fact that Greeks racially are a Balkan bunch so what more do we need ???
You say yourself that Greeks are just another bunch of Balkanites. So, where is your 90% ancient hellenes then? how come they become direct descendants of ancient hellenes if they are bunch of Balkanites? If they are hellenes, then other bunch of Balkanites like Bulgarians, Albanians, Serbians are ancient hellenes too.

[Kanuni]

Arvanites didn't make any huge impact on Greek genepoole.It is very silly to say so.Anyway even if they did so what?They are close to Greeks genetic wise.The only think they could have introduced is slightly more Northern European component.Onur's babbling against Greeks and Albanians is because he is a FYROMANIAN who adopted Turkish identity and holds inferiority complexes/hates both Albanians and Greeks.That is why he tries and push himself so hard to troll Greeks and writes anti-Albanian comments.

[Panopticon]

Social constructs weren't based on genetics and therefore genetics shouldn't be a criteria for whether one social construct is the continuation of another social construct. Genetics plays a small role as it only helps to emphasize on whether a people are largely native or not, and that it shows ancestry, admixture, etc.

That there would be foreign admixture is inevitable, but it doesn't change much as the base is still largely the same as it was before. That foreign blood was eventually absorbed anyway, so it has been "watered down".

You can't say that x doesn't descend from y because z influenced x. There were migrations of non-Hellenes into Greece, but it doesn't matter. If it doesn't change the language, culture, etc. that the social construction was based then there is a continuation.

The language, culture, etc. of modern Greeks is a continuation of the language, culture, etc. of the ancient Greeks. And therefore modern Greeks are the descendants of the ancient Greeks, with or without x% foreign admixture.

I think national bias should be kept out of this.

[Sturmgewehr]

Nice... I am sure it`s like a holy bible; "History of Illyrians written by Enver Hodja and his comrades" :)

Nice try, you are still not funny, it is actually called THE ALBANIAN HISTORY, it talks a lot about Illyrians since we descend from Illyrians and Thracians and this is a well known fact.


6-7th century is long time ago, even Bulgars were speaking Turkic back then.

Like I give a shit, who the fuck mentioned Bulgars?


I was talking about the 19-20th century Albanians of Greece but you turn back to 6th century and say that we all are mixed !!!

Albanians have as well played a HUGE role maintaining and administering the Ottoman empire, there have been more than 40 Albanian Grand Viziers in the Ottoman empire, some 30 something Serbian Grand Viziers and many Greek ones, so tell me now how did it happen that you came out Turkish ????

How can Turks be Turks when Balkan people have had such a VITAL and significant impact in the ottoman empire and in many other aspects of your semi-real identity ???

Turning back to the 6th Century is a valid argument, Albanians did contribute to the formation of Modern Greece but then so what??? as I said before terms such as GREEK, ALBANIAN, BULGARIAN are socio-Cultural constructs not genetic or racial terms, get it in ur head.


You say yourself that Greeks are just another bunch of Balkanites. So, where is your 90% ancient hellenes then?

As I said Ancient Hellens are modern Greeks, even during antiquity Hellens were not a pure genetic or racial group, there were many Hellenized Anatolians, Illyrians and so on, one population had impact on the other one and so on and forth so I don't see what u trying to say, it is not like Ancient Greeks were pure or whatever.

19th Century Albanians got Hellenized and that is it, they are hellens, end of story.


how come they become direct descendants of ancient hellenes if they are bunch of Balkanites?

They inherited the LANGUAGE, CULTURE, SCRIPTURE, BLOOD AND RACE of the Ancient Hellens, as simple as that.

What did u think ????


If they are hellenes, then other bunch of Balkanites like Bulgarians, Albanians, Serbians are ancient hellenes too.

You are straw manning me, you are totally taking me out of context.

I don't buy it.

p.s: Prengs u can find ur own reply here.

[Prengs]

Even ancient greeks were very mixed (like other ancient peoples), without mentioning that 1/3 of the population in Greece were Slaves that come from all non-greek tribes, the same situation was in other developed empires.

[Γέλως]

Yes but these people were less than 1% of Turkey...
Circassians, Georgians, Laz, Chechens, Kurds, Serbs, Bosniaks, Albanians, Pomaks, Armenians, Hamshenis, Gorani, Greeks, Turkmens, Azeris, Tatars, Karachays, Karakalpaks, Uzbeks, Crimean Tatars, Uyghurs, Arabs, Assyrians, Jews and Romas make only 1% of Turkish Population.

[Onur]

Circassians, Georgians, Laz, Chechens, Kurds, Serbs, Bosniaks, Albanians, Pomaks, Armenians, Hamshenis, Gorani, Greeks, Turkmens, Azeris, Tatars, Karachays, Karakalpaks, Uzbeks, Crimean Tatars, Uyghurs, Arabs, Assyrians, Jews and Romas make only 1% of Turkish Population.
Your response is irrelevant because we never claimed to be the direct descendants of 11th century Turks.

This is what Greeks claims for themselves and while your situation is no different than ours, you still claim to be the direct descendants of ancient hellenes.

So, if i say;
Vlachs, Arvanites (Albanians), Gagauzs, Karamanlis, Urum Tatars, Gypsies, Turks, Laz, Georgians, Macedonian slavs, Armenians, Jews, Levantines, Bulgarians....

You respond "NO" unlike me.

[Γέλως]

Your response is irrelevant because we never claimed to be the direct descendants of 11th century Turks.
I quoted you, and you said "these people were less than 1% of Turkey..."

So, if i say;
Vlachs, Arvanites (Albanians), Gagauzs, Karamanlis, Urum Tatars, Gypsies, Turks, Laz, Georgians, Macedonian slavs, Armenians, Jews, Levantines, Bulgarians....

You respond "NO" unlike me.
I would say yes to certain of the aforementioned groups, but some are way off and put there merely as an attempt to smirch our ancestry.

[Pecheneg]

--

[Queen B]

lol, you say this by being an Albanian?

I think you would be better to join your so-called "Arvanite" brothers and consider yourself as "hellenes of Epirus" :D

I am sure modern Greece wouldn't mind adding another Albanian to join their pseudo-hellenic ranks. Too bad for you but you still didn't loose your chance because i heard that recent Albanian immigrants in Greece also trying to hellenize themselves so badly

You have just exposed your mindset.Him being an Albanian doesn't neccessary mean he should blind himself and say nonsesical things like you do.



Since when being Albanian means that he must be following your stupid mindset?
Not all people are born and raised with hate, and have been brainwashed with propaganda.

It is a bit exaggerated.

You know how a big role played Arvanites and Vlach during XII-XIX century in modern Greece and today all of them are assimilated.

If by assimilated you mean that they feel Greeks, yes, this is true, but Arvanites and Vlachs are not blind about their origin, neither they claim that Socrates is their forefather.



You say yourself that Greeks are just another bunch of Balkanites. So, where is your 90% ancient hellenes then? how come they become direct descendants of ancient hellenes if they are bunch of Balkanites? If they are hellenes, then other bunch of Balkanites like Bulgarians, Albanians, Serbians are ancient hellenes too.
Balkan -> Geographical region
Balkan =/= Greek <- stupidity

[El Gre]

The language, culture, etc. of modern Greeks is a continuation of the language, culture, etc. of the ancient Greeks. And therefore modern Greeks are the descendants of the ancient Greeks, with or without x% foreign admixture.

This is by far the best quote in this whole thread. I applaud the user Horten.

Language and Culture not bloodlines. This is the key here.

[Onur]

Since when being Albanian means that he must be following your stupid mindset?
Not all people are born and raised with hate, and have been brainwashed with propaganda.

If by assimilated you mean that they feel Greeks, yes, this is true
Wanna see some examples of the real propaganda and brainwashing?

Here is your so-called hero PM Venizelos, begging for the Albania proper to be included into Greece during the Paris peace conference, 1919. From the book called "Paris 1919: Six Months That Changed the World" by Margaret Mcmillan.

http://img46.imageshack.us/img46/8288/clipboard01vtg.jpg

If Albania would be a part of Greece back then, i bet we were going to discuss the ancient hellenic roots of Epirus in this forum today and same people here would come up and claim that they are 90% direct descendants of ancient Epirus hellenes :D but it was mostly the Italians who prevented this.

So, whenever Venizelos criticized by the Italians about his false claims, the only explanation of Venizelos was "Greeks have higher civilization than Albanians, so Albania(Epirus, according to them) should be part of Greece". The usual fantasy called ancient Greece, also the fallacy of "Orthodox = Greek"

Also, Margaret McMillan is right about the so-called hellenic army. The Greek army who came to Anatolia for invasion in 1919 was mostly consisted with Albanians and there are several British officers noting that the Greek soldiers speaks Albanian among themselves as late as 1920s.

[Linet]

Yes thats true but the direct descendants of ancient Greeks in Greece is not more or less than the ones in Italy, Turkey, north African countries.

Also in that sense, some of us are direct descendants of Lydians, Hittites, Etruscans, Sumerians too but who knows where and how many.


So baby yu feel Greek? Thats why you make all this fuss? :eyes
Sorry to disappoint you, but although you may have some greek blood, that doesnt make you Greek...sorry baby....:sorry:

Baby, baby, baby :baby2000:....because you are a mix of everything that doesnt mean that people all around are milk-shakes like you...:party-smiley-006:


lol, you say this by being an Albanian?

I think you would be better to join your so-called "Arvanite" brothers and consider yourself as "hellenes of Epirus" :D


So he should hate us :eek:? There is a rule like that :twitch00:? Oh i didnt know :fcrazy:

[Linet]

Slavs cannot possibly be the only group of people who got assimilated within Greeks.

Modern Greeks also have considerable amount of Armenian, Vlach and Albanian admixture.

I have to remind you that when their population was around 3,5 million in 1920s, there was around 60-70.000 Gagauz Turkish christians in Greece. Christian Tatar groups also migrated to Greece from Crimea to Georgia, Azerbaijan. Their population was around 60.000 again. In 1923 population exchange, 400.000 out of 1 million christians was Turkish christians again, named as Karamanlis. So, modern Greeks also have considerable amount of Turkish admixture too.


1. Slavs did not assimilate with us...find me a single Greek, just one to say his grandfather is Slav or half Slav...or that he has any kind of Slavic ancestry and then come to talk...:wink

2. in 1920 million of not Greeks came here...and now they feel Greeks mmm ok...:thumb001:
where are they :sherlock:? We erased their memory like men in black do :cam:? Damn...we are too good :cool:...i grew up here, i know so many people, i ve so many friends from minor Asia and they all think they were pure Greeks, Ionians who lost their ancient lands :mad:...but i suppose you know better what they are than themselves ...right baby :wacko:?


Onur my baby...shut up :eusa_silenced:...just do it...no no ...dont open that silly mouth of yours :party000:...no no no :no:... sssshhhh ... first cut the ties with your fantasy world :taz:...get in contact with reality and then we can talk all you like (i bet never in your case :rolleyes:)...ok baby :eyes? Niiiiice....now sit down and play with your playmobil and i ll find you some choco-milk or lolly :flolly:to award you...gooood boy...:propeller:

[Archduke]

No, they're not, nowaday Greeks are too much of a mixture from diffferent nations which passed through their lands throughout the centuries.

[Linet]

Dear Armani, you are the one who said that Greece is the country you hate most in a thread sometime ago right? Hmmmm... that explains the answer...go to Onurs side...you ll get along just fine :thumbs:

[Archduke]

Dear Armani, you are the one who said that Greece is the country you hate most in a thread sometime ago right? Hmmmm... that explains the answer...go to Onurs side...you ll get along just fine :thumbs:

Hate has nothing to do with facts. As for the Greeks I believe they are bastards (not all of them) and most of them are lazy self-centered fags who like to depend on government and social services and are about to decline from a wealthy nation to a fucking third-world country.

[Linet]

Well we are "bastards" in the sense of character if you like and fags and whatever you like...but mixed we are not and we will never be... we can betray everything but not our blood...we can be the worse but we will always honor one thing...our ancestry...and till someone here like you have any facts that we are mixed...you better cut off those general words...we know who we are...we know our grandfathers...we have never been mixed... as a Slav i dont expect you to start comrehending what i talk about since your mentality was, is and have always been different and mixing was always like hobby to you...

[Sikelos]

I didn't read past posts. However, I think answer this question is very simple to. Modern Sicilians overlap with modern greeks. What's the reason?
Of course, it's due to ancient hellenistic colonization.

[Γέλως]

Hate has nothing to do with facts. As for the Greeks I believe they are bastards (not all of them) and most of them are lazy self-centered fags who like to depend on government and social services and are about to decline from a wealthy nation to a fucking third-world country.On the other hand, Bulgars are a lovely rat-eating steppe Asiatic nation that like to depend on pickpocketing for a living. They are about to decline from a shit-hole to a shit-well but the prefix is always a damn shit.

[Sikeliot]

I didn't read past posts. However, I think answer this question is very simple to. Modern Sicilians overlap with modern greeks. What's the reason?
Of course, it's due to ancient hellenistic colonization.

This should be common sense, in my opinion.

[Archduke]

On the other hand, Bulgars are a lovely rat-eating steppe Asiatic nation that like to depend on pickpocketing for a living. They are about to decline from a shit-hole to a shit-well but the prefix is always is damn shit.

Sorry, we are not an Asiatic nation, because stidues have shown that are people used to live on the Balkans and on the north coast of the Black sea for thousands of years. We are a European nation, a descendent to the Thrace.

[Queen B]

Hate has nothing to do with facts. As for the Greeks I believe they are bastards (not all of them) and most of them are lazy self-centered fags who like to depend on government and social services and are about to decline from a wealthy nation to a fucking third-world country.
Yes, hate has nothing to do with that, but your post shows that ignorance has. :rolleyes:

[Queen B]

This should be common sense, in my opinion.
Common sense lacks from haters :wink

[Sikeliot]

Well, whether or not people on here think I have the right to claim Ancient Greek ancestry, Greeks are a group that I hold in high regard and feel close to.

[Onur]

Here are some more examples of the findings of western European philhellenes from 1830s who traveled all around Greece at that time to find any trace of ancient Greece in Greece;

http://i754.photobucket.com/albums/xx190/TM2_album/Hellenism/Hobhouse.jpg
http://i754.photobucket.com/albums/xx190/TM2_album/Hellenism/Hobhouse596.jpg


Some loses hope from the mainland Greece and tries Aegean islands;

http://i149.photobucket.com/albums/s43/truemacedonian/bent.png
http://i149.photobucket.com/albums/s43/truemacedonian/bent1.png
http://i149.photobucket.com/albums/s43/truemacedonian/bent237.png
http://i149.photobucket.com/albums/s43/truemacedonian/bent246.png
http://i149.photobucket.com/albums/s43/truemacedonian/bent286.png
http://i149.photobucket.com/albums/s43/truemacedonian/bent291.png
http://i149.photobucket.com/albums/s43/truemacedonian/bent294.png


I can even see the teardrops on these pages.

Literally 100s of philhellenes from western Europe traveled all around Greece after 1821 to find a Greek in Greece but their disappointments are beyond words because of the people they saw in Greece comparing to their ancient Greece which was fantasized in their minds.

They managed to create a Greek nation tough with Germans building the Athens right after their independence and the British philhellenes working for the new Greek language to teach to the non-Greek mob and in other social areas. So it was such a accomplishment at start but we see the result of it today, a nation which gone bankrupt 5-6 times in it`s relatively short history and constantly on life support from western Europe.

[Siginulfo]

Sorry, we are not an Asiatic nation, because stidues have shown that are people used to live on the Balkans and on the north coast of the Black sea for thousands of years. We are a European nation, a descendent to the Thrace.

Actually, genetic studies state that Ancient Thracians are more similar to Italians and Greeks instead of Bulgarians and Romanians:

http://www.alketux.altervista.org/web/dati/foto/shkarko/thracianDNA.pdf

And in race, they were mostly Dinaro-Meds with few Alpinids, according to anthropologists:

http://s1.zetaboards.com/anthroscape/topic/4724200/1/


I have a Thracian surname too:cool:

[Turkophagos]

Classical Greeks were hellenised Pelasgians. Real Greeks died with Mycenaeans.

[Albion]

Well they've absorbed Albanians, Slavs, Bulgarians and Turks but they also have a lot of Classical Greek ancestry so I'd say they do descend from the Ancient Greeks.
The Ancient Greeks didn't just disappear or mass assimilate into the inferior cultures around them, they continued to develop through the Byzantine Empire and only really declined and started mixing after that fell to the Turks.

It's kind of ironic with the Turks here claiming the Greeks to be mixed whilst they themselves claim to be pure Turkics whilst actually descending from many different ethnicities.
Neither Greeks nor Turks are pure to their claimed origins but they do descend from them in a large part and have assimilate others, I don't think this makes them any less Greek or Turk really.

[Optimus]

Classical Greeks were hellenised Pelasgians. Real Greeks died with Mycenaeans.

This is my opinion also.Short but great post.Just why do they link the Dorians with R1b and Myceneans with R1a is somewhat blurry to me.Or that is just a wild guess from Eupedia based on modern percentages.

[Albion]

Classical Greeks were hellenised Pelasgians. Real Greeks died with Mycenaeans.

Can those be called Greeks or just the people who lived there before them?

[Sikeliot]

Turks have more Greek ancestry than Greeks have Turkish, if I do say so myself.

[Pecheneg]

Turks have more Greek ancestry than Greeks have Turkish, if I do say so myself.
hmm..
Population of Greece in 1923 = ~5 million (including 500.000 Turks, 600.000 balkan slavs, 500.000 vlach+albanian)

in 1923;
400.000 Karamanlides of central anatolia + 600.000 pontian orthodox people of north east anatolia + 500.000 orthodox people of different regions moved to Greece (see population exchange between Turkey and Greece)


don't need to talk about +400 years Turkish rule...

modern Greeks = vlach + albanians + central anatolians (karamanlides) + north east anatolians (pontians) + balkan slavs + pomaks + greeks

quite pure indeed.

Althought Greece is a tiny country, there is significant genetic difference between northern greeks and southern greeks.

[Onur]

It's kind of ironic with the Turks here claiming the Greeks to be mixed whilst they themselves claim to be pure Turkics whilst actually descending from many different ethnicities.
I`ve never met any Turk in my life who claims that Turks are pure Turkics. No Turk in this forum said such a thing either but it`s the Greeks who claims that they are pure descendants of Homeros, Heredotus, Achilles. Thats the problem here.

Greece is just another Balkan state with a mixed population. Neither any balkan state nor Turkey claims racial purity. Only the Greeks does that. The level of ethnic admixtures is no different in any Balkan state including Greece. Every nation is mixed up to some degree but the level of admixture is probably highest among Greeks, much higher than Turks of Turkey but ironically they are the ones who claims purity.

[Archduke]

Actually, genetic studies state that Ancient Thracians are more similar to Italians and Greeks instead of Bulgarians and Romanians:

http://www.alketux.altervista.org/web/dati/foto/shkarko/thracianDNA.pdf

And in race, they were mostly Dinaro-Meds with few Alpinids, according to anthropologists:

http://s1.zetaboards.com/anthroscape/topic/4724200/1/


I have a Thracian surname too:cool:


We are 49% thracians.

As you can see, the most famous treasures and tombs of the anciant thracians are found in Bulgaria. The heart of Thrace is Bulgaria.

[dralos]

absolutely not,only the hellenized alboz are

[Optimus]

Actually, genetic studies state that Ancient Thracians are more similar to Italians and Greeks instead of Bulgarians and Romanians:

http://www.alketux.altervista.org/web/dati/foto/shkarko/thracianDNA.pdf

And in race, they were mostly Dinaro-Meds with few Alpinids, according to anthropologists:

http://s1.zetaboards.com/anthroscape/topic/4724200/1/


I have a Thracian surname too:cool:

They are closer to Thracians only based on mtDNA which is not any authoratitive or of any importance.There is no autosomal DNA made upon Thracians so we can put such a claim.I doubt Italians will be closer to Thracians than Bulgarians and Macedonians.I also doubt that most of them were Dinarid-Mediterranid.Robust Mediterranid remains are hard to differentiate between Nordid types.

Btw soon we will have answer regarding the first farmers in Balkans.Whether they are our ancestors or not.Too bad they are not testing the remains of Thracians/Illyrians and Greeks and compare the results with modern Balkan nations.


The common focus of the project partners centers around questions associated with the origin of first farmer settlements, which were established some 8,000 years ago in West Anatolia and the Balkans. Where did they come from? Were they migrants from the Middle East? Are they our ancestors?

She will analyze DNA from the bones of the last hunter-gatherers and the first settled farmers in the region between West Anatolia and the Balkans using the new cutting-edge technology of Next Generation Sequencing (NGS).



Source (http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2012/06/bean-bridging-european-and-anatolian.html)

[Queen B]

hmm..
Population of Greece in 1923 = ~5 million (including 500.000 Turks, 600.000 balkan slavs, 500.000 vlach+albanian)
in 1923;
400.000 Karamanlides of central anatolia + 600.000 pontian orthodox people of north east anatolia + 500.000 orthodox people of different regions moved to Greece (see population exchange between Turkey and Greece)

population exchange and civil wars.
Majority of Turks and slavs GTFO over here.
After 1923, GREEKS of Asia Minor and Pontus, came to Greece.



don't need to talk about +400 years Turkish rule...
Christian + Muslim -> Muslim.

Only if rapes happened there is Turkish-Greek mix, but Turks weren't that barbarian, were they ?:cool:


Althought Greece is a tiny country, there is significant genetic difference between northern greeks and southern greeks.
Of all the Greeks I posted , I challenge you to guess who the nothern are.
Can you ?

[Turkophagos]

Can those be called Greeks or just the people who lived there before them?

Only the Mycenaen invaders before they assimilate Pelasgians, Avantes, Minoans and the rest of pre-hellenic Barbarians. So, Homeric "Greeks" weren't direct descedants of the real invaders, proto-Mycenaen Greeks. Those Achilleus, and Odysseuswere the modern Greeks of their time, not real ones.

[chipriota]

LOL at people saying that Greeks have (what?) Turkish blood! How the heck? If a person was half Turkish and half Greek, he was immediately Turkish, not Greek. Just see how pathetic Monkeydonians and Turks are, and how much they are obsessed with Greeks, because it's clear that they have Greek blood and they want to deny it! :lol:

[Linet]

Thanks Cypriota...couldnt have said better :rose2:

No matter what you say and your theories dna talks...and the Greeks all over Greece have common dna and also common dna to the South Italians... a population cut off from us for thousant of years....if we were not descendants of the same people... if we hadnt both sides stayed pure to our blood...if us or them had mixed...then our and their dna would be as common as with the Scandinavians...but its ther same, we are children of the same father AND mother....and thousant of years now dna prooves it....

[Turkophagos]

It is funny how people talk about "ancient Greeks" and they don't realise they speak about a period of 2500 years which includes at least 3 different Greek civilisations (Mycenaean, Classical, Hellenistic-Roman), culturally linguistically and religiously speaking.

[only1]

Yes most Greeks are. But they are mostly derived from the pre-aryan Pelasgians, and not the blond Dorian conquerors.

[Libertas]

Yes most Greeks are. But they are mostly derived from the pre-aryan Pelasgians, and not the blond Dorian conquerors.

God, not this Kemp/Gunther nonsense again!:eek::eek::eek:

[Turkophagos]

I've mentioned before the double standards when it comes us Greeks. Greeks are not the same nation since they stopped speaking like Homer or when they became Christians. Unfortunately the language of Iliad and Zeus' worshiping are no more, unlike, for example, the Swedes who still speak the language of Sagas and sacrifise to Odin...

Unless you consider all ancient european civilisations dead after christianisation, then there's no point on mentioning the greek one seperately.

In fact there's not an "ancient greek" civilisation opposed to a modern one, as you mean it, but different ancient greek heritages, separate in terms of language and religion (with assimilation of non-greek populations in between), such as mycynaean, classical and hellenestic.

According to Toynbee:

"FOUR THOUSAND YEARS OF GREEK HISTORY have produced four Greek heritages, each of which has had an effect on the life of the Greeks in later stages of their history. The Hellenic (Classical) Greeks received a heritage from the Mycenean Greeks, the Byzantine Greeks received on from the Hellenic Greeks, the Modern Greeks have received one heritage from the Byzantines and a second from the Hellenes. (...)

Few, however, of the peoples that possess distinctive identities today have had as long a history as the Greeks, if we interpret history as meaning, not simply chronological duration of existence, but continuity which has never ceased to be recognized and to be remembered."


The Greeks and their Heritage, A.J Toynbee

[Albion]

LOL at people saying that Greeks have (what?) Turkish blood! How the heck? If a person was half Turkish and half Greek, he was immediately Turkish, not Greek. Just see how pathetic Monkeydonians and Turks are, and how much they are obsessed with Greeks, because it's clear that they have Greek blood and they want to deny it! :lol:

Wouldn't it be possible that some managed to keep it a secret? Being a Turk may have brought privileges but it wouldn't help you fit into the local Greek community.


It is funny how people talk about "ancient Greeks" and they don't realise they speak about a period of 2500 years which includes at least 3 different Greek civilisations (Mycenaean, Classical, Hellenistic-Roman), culturally linguistically and religiously speaking.

Most people understand this, but generally speaking these were contiguous and the people themselves stayed much the same even though the cultures evolved and changed.

When people speak of "Ancient Greeks" they are usually referring to classical Greeks, I think that is pretty easy to notice.

[Gospodine]

Aren't Maniots the only Greeks with an unbroken continuity since Classical Antiquity?

[Linet]

Not the only :)
....but yes....never any enemy conquered Mani...neither Turks, nor Slavs...nobody...the people of Mani are undeniably pure Greek :rose:
....Have i said i am from there? :eyes...

[Linet]

Wouldn't it be possible that some managed to keep it a secret? Being a Turk may have brought privileges but it wouldn't help you fit into the local Greek community.


Why to hide it :icon_ask:? They were being born into a muslim family with their Turk father and family to rase them as Turks, the lords of the Greeks and the place....I dont get how you may mean it....:eusa_eh:

[Nurzat]

no, they are not

[Linet]

no, they are not

Nice answer...with strong arguments and points...:thumbs:

[Turkophagos]

Most people understand this, but generally speaking these were contiguous and the people themselves stayed much the same even though the cultures evolved and changed.

As contiguous as the next periods, the Byzantine and Modern Greeks. I don't see how Greeks didn't change from Mycenaean to Classical, after assimilating Pelasgians, Carians, Lydians, Minoans and a bunch of other ancient nations but the link broke after assimilating a few thousands of Slavs and Albos.


When people speak of "Ancient Greeks" they are usually referring to classical Greeks, I think that is pretty easy to notice.


They usually mean the whole 2500-year period. Like when they speak about the "ancient greek language" they mean all forms from Linear B Mycynaean to Koine.

[Linet]

When people speak of "Ancient Greeks" they are usually referring to classical Greeks, I think that is pretty easy to notice.

Actually i didnt notice at all before that comment you made...my language is my language....one organism with continuity....ancient Greek is the Minoan, The Aegean, The Doric, the Ionian etc of all times and periods till Hellenistic period.... Why to be the Classical Greek? I see no reason...

[Albion]

Why to hide it :icon_ask:? They were being born into a muslim family with their Turk father and family to rase them as Turks, the lords of the Greeks and the place....I dont get how you may mean it....:eusa_eh:

Turk mother? What happens then? ;)


As contiguous as the next periods, the Byzantine and Modern Greeks. I don't see how Greeks didn't change from Mycenaean to Classical, after assimilating Pelasgians, Carians, Lydians, Minoans and a bunch of other ancient nations but the link broke after assimilating a few thousands of Slavs and Albos.

The link isn't broken - absorbing a few neighbouring European nations means nothing. If it did then the English who've absorbed a lot of Celts in the Dark Ages and Irish more recently would no longer be English.

There are very few ethnicities in Europe today which haven't partially (or fully) absorbed another. Ethnicities evolve from earlier ethnicities and tribes, they don't just develop out of nowhere.
They are formed when a group of people undergo an 'ethnogenesis', that is the develop a common culture, language and other traits. From then on the ethnicity will stabilise if it is to survive in the long run and during the course of its existence will probably partially or fully absorb earlier ethnicities or neighbouring ones.

When an ethnicity is destroyed it is then incorporated into another one by assimilation (unless the people are killed). Usually assimilation happens when the conquered ethnicity is subjugated - sometimes this leads to a strong identity, but often it leads to people emulating the culture of the conquerors and thus becoming assimilated into that ethnicity.


Actually i didnt notice at all before that comment you made...my language is my language....one organism with continuity....ancient Greek is the Minoan, The Aegean, The Doric, the Ionian etc of all times and periods till Hellenistic period.... Why to be the Classical Greek? I see no reason...

I wouldn't quite say Minoan, they were just an earlier pre-Greek civilisation which were absorbed into the Greek nation.

[Midori]

32 votes for no... So many jealous haters :coffee:

[Siginulfo]

We are 49% thracians.

As you can see, the most famous treasures and tombs of the anciant thracians are found in Bulgaria. The heart of Thrace is Bulgaria.

Show me the paper where it is written that you are 49% Thracians, please.

[kabeiros]

I don't know if we are direct descendants of the ancient Greeks but what I do know is that we have the largest amount of ancient Greek ancestry in the world. That's pretty cool by it self, isn't it?

[Onur]

The statement of Prof. Thanos Veremis, the president of Greece's national council of education, would be a proper answer for all Greeks;

"Unfortunately, we (Greeks) are deeply conservative as a society. This (ethnic) homogeneity has been harmful to us. The situation during the 19th century was different. It was rather fortunate that at that time Koraes and others had the inspiration to connect us with Ancient Hellas (an undertaking) which became the main preoccupation of the newly born state. In those days, there were Arvanites, Vlachs and Slavs. All of them had to become a part of one national body. And so they became. But this is not to say that in this day and age we should be under the illusion that we are descendants of Pericles. This assimilating process of ethnic/national homogenization might have been helpful before -even though we could not avoid a civil war- but it does not help us nowadays. Today we are not alone. We are surrounded by many neighbors. The Greek society must adapt to new realities instead of remaining insular and introvert."

10-08-2008

http://news.kathimerini.gr/4dcgi/_w_articles_politics_2_10/08/2008_280821

You guys are just being comical with your ancient Greek claims. Just stop that anymore and quit denying the facts. Greece is just an another Balkan country and their connection with the antique peoples is so faint and shallow [if there is any connection at all] after the 2000+ years of gap and all the events happened in these lands.

[Balmung]

Its the equivalent of saying the English are direct decendents of Saxons, despite many groups coming into and settling in the area.

I don't think most groups are direct decendents of the ancients.

[Albion]

Its the equivalent of saying the English are direct decendents of Saxons, despite many groups coming into and settling in the area.

I don't think most groups are direct decendents of the ancients.

A nation would have to be either very isolated or very powerful to have kept other groups away, and even that doesn't ensure that they remain pure.

[Hayalet]

Well, these things can only be evaluated in relativism. Of all the modern nations, modern Greeks are the ones who have most to do with ancient Greeks by far. Alternatively, you could compare different countries or peoples in different ages; like the differences between ancient and modern Egypt versus the differences between ancient and modern Greece, in which case Greeks will probably score above average.

[Balmung]

A nation would have to be either very isolated or very powerful to have kept other groups away, and even that doesn't ensure that they remain pure.

Its cool, because a homogeneous land with no outside influence or an exchange between cultures could lead to stagnation.

I believe the British isles was so successful because it had so many ancients coming into its borders leaving their imprint on its culture forever.

[Linet]

Its not about power...its about mentality....:nerd:
Greeks since ancient times didnt want to mix :nono: , when the other nations around wouldnt mind and wouldnt even knwo that somethign like national perservation exist. You cant force a girl marry you if she doesnt want, neither the young lad to ask your hand if he doesnt want to. Greeks were marrying Greeks no matter if they lived in the same village with others. The only babies that would be born with a parent not Greek, would be kids from rapes. And even in that case, i know that my people were cruel with any girl that would want to keep a kid like that and either they would kill her if she didnt agree to drop the child or they would kill the baby at birth.

[Panopticon]

A nation would have to be either very isolated or very powerful to have kept other groups away, and even that doesn't ensure that they remain pure.

That is why I think that what pertains to ethnicity should be the by far most important factor in matters like these. An ethnicity is basically a social construct whose foundation is language. There cannot be an ethnicity without a common language. There are other factors too, but they are less important.

Therefore, if one social construct derives from another, there is continuity, and the young social construct can be said to descend from the its parent. The modern Greek language quite obviously descends from the ancient Greek language, ergo, there is continuity.

Ancestry is also important, but mixes happen everywhere and will always continue to happen; it is impossible to avoid. (It is possible, although the result is quite unappealing, see: Aborigines and Tasmanians.) That the people living in Greece today have mixed, something their precursors probably did plenty of before them, is simply quite unimportant.

Balkan history is simply too politicized. At the same time, politics in the Balkans is too "historicized". That is why those two are always fitted together in the Balkans, nothing goes without the other, in the Balkans, the two fit like hand in glove. This is why I do not expect objectivity. Then there is also the fact that this is a forum and everyone probably has a personal reason for holding certain beliefs, which makes their opinions subjective rather than objective. I could have written several pages of insightful insights (:P) about just that.

[Albion]

That is why I think that what pertains to ethnicity should be the by far most important factor in matters like these. An ethnicity is basically a social construct whose foundation is language. There cannot be an ethnicity without a common language. There are other factors too, but they are less important.

Therefore, if one social construct derives from another, there is continuity, and the young social construct can be said to descend from the its parent. The modern Greek language quite obviously descends from the ancient Greek language, ergo, there is continuity.

Ancestry is also important, but mixes happen everywhere and will always continue to happen; it is impossible to avoid. (It is possible, although the result is quite unappealing, see: Aborigines and Tasmanians.) That the people living in Greece today have mixed, something their precursors probably did plenty of before them, is simply quite unimportant.

Balkan history is simply too politicized. At the same time, politics in the Balkans is too "historicized". That is why those two are always fitted together in the Balkans, nothing goes without the other, in the Balkans, the two fit like hand in glove. This is why I do not expect objectivity. Then there is also the fact that this is a forum and everyone probably has a personal reason for holding certain beliefs, which makes their opinions subjective rather than objective. I could have written several pages of insightful insights (:P) about just that.

The problem is that when you start getting vastly different peoples and other races in the mix it reaches a point where claiming continuity would be quite wrong.
Look at the Malagasy - they used to be Austronesians (related to Malays, Indonesians and Polynesians) before the Bantu showed up - now they're black and the only thing connecting them with SE Asia is language.

I think some mixing from nearby groups is acceptable, but sometimes mixing can destroy an ethnic group too.

[Panopticon]

The problem is that when you start getting vastly different peoples and other races in the mix it reaches a point where claiming continuity would be quite wrong.
Look at the Malagasy - they used to be Austronesians (related to Malays, Indonesians and Polynesians) before the Bantu showed up - now they're black and the only thing connecting them with SE Asia is language.

I think some mixing from nearby groups is acceptable, but sometimes mixing can destroy an ethnic group too.

Sure, but the difference between Austronesians and Bantus is much larger than the difference between Greeks and other Europeans f.e., and the mixing was much smaller than that, so these are different cases.

Although your point would be valid in a different case, let's say Britain became black over the years although they still retained the language. In that case, they couldn't claim continuity to the English, or further back, to the Anglo-Saxons and other peoples.

[Linet]

edit

[Sforza]

In 1923 population exchange, 400.000 out of 1 million christians was Turkish christians again, named as Karamanlis. So, modern Greeks also have considerable amount of Turkish admixture too.


I have avowed not to post here and I know that the above quote is a throwback from/to the past but in (re-)reading this thread I found this point to be the most poignant of all... So excuse my following tone and also that I'm quoting what was written a month -or so- back, but I feel the overwhelming need to do so:

First of all my lovely fellow neighbour, what makes you believe that you are a "Turk" to begin with? Or rather what is being a Turk? If it's cultural or linguistic I can grant you that, but since we write here about *genetics* there's no such thing as a Turk Christian/Muslim/Jew/whatever in "Asia Minor" (as it's called geographically). Quite the opposite in fact.

When Seljuks first came to that land (they) were 10 *thousand* in a place of 10 million. Pushed by forces in modern day Iran they were "made" to move westwards in what you people (as well as they -the Seljuks) called Rum (the country of Romans).

It was not much different than how Slavs had moved southwards 4 centuries before that into what was the Balkan side of the "Byzantine" (Roman) Empire. The difference was that the Seljuks were mostly a warrior tribe further radicalized by Islam, while the Slavs (that moved southwards) were pastolarists (turned agriculturalists eventually).

In two words it only was a matter of time before the Seljuks would come at odds with the Byzantine govenrment which anyway was losing support/power over the Anatolian provinces (that they would often bleed dry by great taxation). The result was the Seljuks slowly but surely most often w/t taking arms to annex those very Provinces. The battle of manzikert (circa 1071 AD) was merely the final nail on the coffin of Byzantian influence on Anatolian provinces.

What you get after that is an increasingly more powerful Turkish state (first of Seljuk extraction, eventually of Ottoman) in the heart of Asia Minor. Now here's the important information. The "invasion" of Turks from Cental Asia into Asia Minor was an *one time event*.
It started in the turn of the previous millenia (the last decades of 10th century, i.e around 970-980 ad). *Never* again Turks ever came in this part of the world.

In other words the only original Turks in Asia Minors were the Seljuks and the only ones with Mongol/Central Asian phenotypes. But as I said they were the 1/1000th of the population of the land they found themselves into. So -genetically- what formed the *vast* bulk of the poweful Seljuk and later Ottoman empires? Oh what else but "Turkified" Anatolians, isn't it obvious? Even in modern Turkey only one in 20 people show clear Central/East Asian (Turkish) heritage genetically. The rest are *overwhelmingly* of the local Anatolian population (and Balkanian due to the "Devshirme"). So instead of calling a big bulk of modern Greeks, Hellenized Turks, why don't you call yourselves "Turkified Anatolians"? (which BTW is what you are).

And *yes* many of the Anatolians (particualrly those who lived in the western end of Asia Minor as well as many of those living on the shores of the Black sea) *were* of Hellenic extraction, because of the massive influx of Greeks which -intermintently- was taking place for two millenia, not unlike what happened to Southern Italy as well. So until the start of 20th century South Italy, West Asia Minor, Black sea shores *were* greek lands genetically (and many of them culturally as well). The Greeks that came from those places into modern day Greece were/are a lot closer to Mainland (and indeed ancient) Greeks than you -my dear neighbor- are or you will *ever* be to being Turkish (i.e. of Central Asian extraction).


As I said on my preface, sorry for the length of what I just wrote, but there's quite a general historical ignorance on this thread and sadly -often- coming from people who very much live in these areas I'm describing above. Probably it's a waste of my time that I wrote all that, most people prefer to go on believing whatever silly belief they happened to be brought up with even if overwhelming evidence is being amounted against it, but still this (the above) is a kind of information that I would like to see/be out there....

[Onur]

I have avowed not to post here and I know that the above quote is a throwback from/to the past but in (re-)reading this thread I found this point to be the most poignant of all... So excuse my following tone and also that I'm quoting what was written a month -or so- back, but I feel the overwhelming need to do so:
You shouldn't have bothered to write the same stupid story because this is not something we hear for the first time. But you lack a common point like everyone who believes this story;

Show me a single proof from Turkish, Arabian, Byzantine, Armenian chronicles about the presumed mass conversion of Anatolian christians to islam and mass assimilation of the formerly christian community after 11th century. Show me a single proof for that and i will believe you. Byzantine chroniclers wrote everything, even if one of their priests got sick or some members of their christian community had diarrhea. I am sure they should have wrote something about the mass conversion of 10s of millions people and about the so-called turkification. Show me then.


The difference is i can show you numerous proofs for the Turkishness of Anatolian christians (Urums, Karamanlides, Gagauz etc.) from Byzantine and Armenian chronicles of 13th century to western European travelers from 15...20th century.

But you cant show me a single one for your claim. All you can do is to repeat this same argument about us and then boast about your so-called "direct ancestry" from Pericles, ofc without any proof for both.

[Sforza]

The difference is i can show you numerous proofs for the Turkishness of Anatolian christians (Urums, Karamanlides, Gagauz etc.) from Byzantine and Armenian chronicles of 13th century to western European travelers from 15...20th century.

But you cant show me a single one for your claim. All you can do is to repeat this same argument about us and then boast about your so-called "direct ancestry" from Pericles.

DNA... (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_history_of_the_Turkish_people#Haplogroup_d istributions_in_Turks), it never lies.
I made no claims of Greeks being direct descendants though, I mostly wrote that (the Greeks) are natives, and for this matter of fact (as DNA -most of all- states) so are Turks (natives of Asia Minor in a percentage of 70%-80%).

It's rare truly rare to have mass migrations in human history. It almost never happened and when it did (in historical times) it was constrained on newly inhabited places (like Scandinavia for example).

What the Turkish migration did was to add to the mix and altaic/uralic genetic input on asia minor, but it never superseded what was there. At large the modern Turks are genetically not much different than the old Anatolian populations... you cannot deny that, it's written in your blood. History is not a science, but Biology is, look for answers there primarily...

[Ushtari]

Greeks should hand over stolen lands naooo!

[Onur]

Sforza, thanks for proving my point about you having no proof for your claim about us and repetition of same arguments like a parrot.

Yes, we turkified 10 million Greeks with our laser tech assimilation machine but we also covered the eyes of the Byzantines while we did that but thanks to the modern technology of genetics, you busted our 1000 year old secret because our DNA sequence flashes with blue Greek flag under microscope (!!!)

[Sforza]

Sforza, thanks for proving my point about you having no proof for your claim about us and repetition of same arguments like a parrot.

Yes, we turkified 10 million Greeks with our laser tech assimilation machine but we also covered the eyes of the Byzantines while we did that but thanks to the modern technology of genetics, you busted our 1000 year old secret because our DNA sequence flashes with blue Greek flag under microscope (!!!)

What's your point? I do not quite get it... What point did you prove about me and even if you did what does it matter with the topic at hand?

Anyhow... the writing of history is a tricky business. Often there are periods were historical evidence is scarce, others that it is one sided (and valuable data is not being reported on purpose). On others yet we lack the tools to really decode what the historian is telling us. There are one million parameters which pretty much make seeing the past through history, like seeing through a keyhole into a giant room.

There's only so much one can get right through the study of history, this very lack of rigor places it into the humanities instead of the sciences. Now humanities are studies of the human condition alright, but they're closer to an art than (they are) to science...

Biology on the other hand has developed multiple and important standards of rigor the last 150 years. To the point that we can know with a very high certainty the ancestry of a person merely by analyzing his/her dna. In other words if your DNA tells you that you're 90% Anatolian, then that's what your ancestors were (90% of them anyhow), not Central Asian, not East Asian, not European... *Anatolians*.

There's no way out of it, I can recommend you a couple of reads which may help you understand a bit further how this works and *why* we can be so certain that you -for example- are mostly of Anatolian extraction.

I can understand why the modern Turkish nation wouldn't like that (in the way it is built). And frankly I prefer you people being Kemalists rather than Wahhabists, but where I draw the line is when you distort your neighbor's history so severely to fit your dreams of Turkishness...


PS: Please avoid the strawman arguments they don't quite work (i.e. I never did write that 10 million "Greeks" were assimilated instantly, that's not how it works).

[Pecheneg]

Biology on the other hand has developed multiple and important standards of rigor the last 150 years. To the point that we can know with a very high certainty the ancestry of a person merely by analyzing his/her dna. In other words if your DNA tells you that you're 90% Anatolian, then that's what your ancestors were (90% of them anyhow), not Central Asian, not East Asian, not European... *Anatolians*.

Tell me for God's sake do you think the Seljuk Turks were Japanese from east asia?? Is there any single DNA sample from Seljuk Turks of 1000 years ago?
What is Turkic gene? What's central asian gene?
If the anatolian Turks are 90% anatolian just because of their 90% caucasoid (non-mongoloid) admixture, then what are the Turkmens with 85% caucasoid admixture?
So even our Oghuz-relatives in central asia (Turkmens) are only 15% mongoloid, how can you expect us to be more mongoloid than them?
They are overwhelmingly (85%) caucasoid, even though they lived in central asia & with central asian neigbours for more than +1000 years
Turks-Turkmens-Azerbaijanis-Qashqai-Gagauz >> all of them are Oghuz Turkic and heavily caucasoid. Does it ring any bell to you?


btw, Greeks are indo-european speakers but they have nothing to do with original indo-european nomads. near 50% of your nation are e3b carriers.

[Pecheneg]

When Seljuks first came to that land (they) were 10 *thousand* in a place of 10 million.
Sorry but you are quite idiot.
http://www.anadoluasiretleri.com/Page.php?pid=26
Ottoman archival datas > There were 655.800 nomadic Turkoman families in anatolia, which means at least 3-3,5 million people.

http://www.populstat.info/Asia/turkeyc.htm
and population of anatolia was only 5,5 million in year 1800 (19th century).
http://i48.tinypic.com/6r57he.jpg




In other words the only original Turks in Asia Minors were the Seljuks and the only ones with Mongol/Central Asian phenotypes. But as I said they were the 1/1000th of the population of the land they found themselves into.
central asian Turkmens are only 15% mongoloid you dumb.
So it basically means Turks are genetically at least 40-50% Turkmen. (average Turk = 7% mongoloid)


So -genetically- what formed the *vast* bulk of the poweful Seljuk and later Ottoman empires? Oh what else but "Turkified" Anatolians, isn't it obvious? Even in modern Turkey only one in 20 people show clear Central/East Asian (Turkish) heritage genetically. The rest are *overwhelmingly* of the local Anatolian population (and Balkanian due to the "Devshirme"). So instead of calling a big bulk of modern Greeks, Hellenized Turks, why don't you call yourselves "Turkified Anatolians"? (which BTW is what you are).


Show me a single fucking evidence. Turks are Turkic, it hurts your ass i know but deal with it.

[Queen B]

Sorry but you are quite idiot.


I don't think he insulted you in any way, to speak like that :rolleyes2::rolleyes2::rolleyes2:

[Linet]

Pech has a wild temp... :angry:
...and Pech yes, she is right....he hasnt insulted you :nono:

[Mortimer]

yes of course, dont need to think twice.:)

[Pecheneg]

I don't think he insulted you in any way, to speak like that :rolleyes2::rolleyes2::rolleyes2:

All of his words and assertions are basically 100% lies.
I can't stand idiots like him.

[Sikeliot]

Apart from Cypriots (Levantine) and northern mainland Greeks (Slavic/Balkan influences), most Greeks are likely close to pure descendants of the ancients, hence how areas that were formerly Greek (like western Turkey, Sicily, etc.) have a genetic profile almost identical to Greeks today despite not having been Greek lands for many years.

[Queen B]

All of his words and assertions are basically 100% lies.
I can't stand idiots like him.

Neither I can stand people like you, but I haven't called you idiot, arrogant bitch, worm, or anything that comes to my mind. So, if you can't stand his arguments, or ''lies'' as you say, fight him with arguments and not with personal insults..Especially when this user have never insulted you (not even talk to you personally, i think)

[Pecheneg]

Huns+ Avars + Kuman-Kypchaks + Turkic Bulgars + Magyars + ~600.000 Pecheneg(Patzinak in byzantine chronicles) crossed the danube river and settled in Balkans but mongoloid admixture in Balkans is only 0.9%.
Whole Oghuz nation ( Seljuk Turks ) migrated to anatolia but Mongoloid admixture in anatolia is 7%.
So Turkic=/=Mongoloid

[Dacul]

Huns+ Avars + Kuman-Kypchaks + Turkic Bulgars + Magyars + ~600.000 Pecheneg(Patzinak in byzantine chronicles) crossed the danube river and settled in Balkans but mongoloid admixture in Balkans is only 0.9%.
Whole Oghuz nation ( Seljuk Turks ) migrated to anatolia but Mongoloid admixture in anatolia is 7%.
So Turkic=/=Mongoloid

Yes because actually these "turks" were populations of caucasians people that were turkized .
So actually these turks were not turkic.

[Pecheneg]

Yes because actually these "turks" were populations of caucasians people that were turkized .
So actually these turks were not turkic.
yea, all the Turkic nations on earth are Turkicized...
perhaps, except Yakuts, but even they are not pure Turkics because they have also some caucasoid admix. right?

[Flintlocke]

Pfffffffffff.....

http://6inchmove.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/bored-baby.jpg

You are all such nerds, you get so many historical and genetic data in your heads, do you ever get laid?

[Dacul]

yea, all the Turkic nations on earth are Turkicized...
perhaps, except Yakuts, but even they are not pure Turkics because they have also some caucasoid admix. right?

Not even altayans speaking turkic are not pure turkic because they have some nordish admixture.
But those altayan people speaking turkic are most pure turks.

[Linet]

Pech...how does it feel someone else to do what you do to us? :eyes
...We Hellenised all Anatolia, Pontus and Macedonia :joy: when we werent even there :hiding: (magic :frog:) isnt that what you say :chin: ? I suppose you used the same magic to Turkifie people around :wink...with the only difference that you also admit admixture :grouphug:

[Linet]

where ancient Greeks chinese?

[Pecheneg]

Not even altayans speaking turkic are not pure turkic because they have some nordish admixture.
But those altayan people speaking turkic are most pure turks.

Think about your own nation before talk about Turkic identity.
Your nation is romance-speaker but Roman input in Romania is near 0%.

Also most present day indo-european speakers have nothing to do with original indo-european nomads from steppes.

Indo-european speaker with haplogroup e3b, seems legit..

[Dacul]

Pech...how does it feel someone else to do what you do to us? :eyes
...We Hellenised all Anatolia, Pontus and Macedonia :joy: when we werent even there :hiding: (magic :frog:) isnt that what you say :chin: ? I suppose you used the same magic to Turkifie people around :wink...with the only difference that you also admit admixture :grouphug:
You could hellenise yourself for the start,lol.
Because you are rather jewish than greek,after how you are behaving and what nonsenses you are talking.
Look here,you have no logic,what was your contributions in hellenising Anatolia and so on?
It was 0.
Is not like old greeks were best at logic,lol.
It does not really matter what genetics you have,is about your character and wisdom - after characters and wisdom most today greeks are no way descendants of old greeks.
Wise and non-ultra-nationalist people could be called descedants of old greeks,rather than you or Dandelion,lol.

[Linet]

....Ok....the person above didnt even get what i said...:chin:
....but i gues is not a surprice :lol:...he almost never does :roll eyes:
...Romanul, dont answer when you havent understand at least :fcrazy:...and also i dont think is anything relevant to you :nono:...so keep your poison for others :eyes

[Ellin Arhon]

Yes but these people were less than 1% of Turkey while Albanians were the main ethnic group of modern Greece back then. Almost all the prominent figures of Greece from 19th century were Albanians. They adopted Albanian folk elements, dances, cloths as their own. These pages are not enough to count Albanian elements in Greece and you Albanians come up and say that 90% of Greece are ancient hellenes. I just found that a bit absurd, thats it. Ofc it`s up to you, believe whatever you like.

ok, you have horrible complex by the fact that you are invaders coming from central Asia, I can understand that, but you don't have to shout it to the point of ridiculus.

[kabeiros]

The statement of Prof. Thanos Veremis, the president of Greece's national council of education, would be a proper answer for all Greeks;


Veremis :puke:
He's just a New World Order's charlatan, ready to say anything his masters dictate... not a very reliable source.

[Sforza]

@Pecheneg: Hehe, I must have hit some weak spot because I didn't expect this kind of reaction. But again let me clear up, that I haven't called Turkic tribes East Asian, they *were* Central Asian Eurasians, not much different than Hunns and even to those who gave the culture/language to the Finnish people...

Having said that let me back up on my claims, your DNA is anatolian, though and through, Not Eurasian, not Cental Asian, you cluster with the people who are around you, not with Uzbekis or Turkmen. The history of conquerors describe how a relatively small -armed- group took over a land of 100 times as many people. The fact that little trully Cental Asian blood is in Europe (coming from the Hunns), little Mongol blood in European Russia (coming from Khan's conquest), and less than you claim of Turkic blood in Anadolu, are all due to similar reasons.

Those places were conquered, not exactly settled...

I know it's not enough of proof, certainly not to you, but notice where Turks cluster: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/files/2010/06/jewstruct.png


Anyhow I/we have derailed this topic enough so I'd prefer not to continue this in here. In fact I would not expect that there is any convincing to someone to whom his whole pride is owed in what he thinks to be his genetic heritage

Oh btw the Ottoman datas are not important in this discussion, the Ottoman empire existed 500 years after the events I'm describing (the initial Turkish "invasion" in Anatolia)

[Dacul]

....Ok....the person above didnt even get what i said...:chin:
....but i gues is not a surprice :lol:...he almost never does :roll eyes:
...Romanul, dont answer when you havent understand at least :fcrazy:...and also i dont think is anything relevant to you :nono:...so keep your poison for others :eyes


Anatolia was not greek and they got hellenised,because how old greeks were,wise and with very righteous laws and so on:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anatolia#Antiquity
Pontus was not greek either and they got hellenised:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontus#History
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontus
"By the end of the Ancient ages, these groups started to become hellenised into the Pontic Greek society."

So they got hellenised from the influence of old greeks,now what contribution do you have in that?
You have no contribution in that.So your contribution is 0 in that.
If you intended to be ironic,than again,you do not know history so you can not be called a descendant of old greeks,since they liked history and they were knowing history.

People from Anatolia got fed by "greeks" from Byzantine Empire which were not actually greeks and this is why they preferred to learn turkish instead and become turks as nation.

[kabeiros]

People from Anatolia got fed by Greeks from Byzantine Empire and this is why they preferred to learn turkish instead and become turks as nation.

True, that's why those who kept faithful to Greek culture and language, were the ones who had a strong Greek ancestry and not the native Anatolians who rejected Hellenism for the benefits of being a Muslim. It seems that the Ottomans secured that who we call Greeks today are predominantly Hellenes... Thank you Osman :D

[StonyArabia]

The South Asian admix in Turks, rather shows the Turkmen tribes did alter the genetic population to some extent, the same in regards to the Mongoloid component. The Seljuks and related Turkic tribes that invaded Anatolia were from Turkmenistan not Sibera.

[Dacul]

True, that's why those who kept faithful to Greek culture and language, were the ones who had a strong Greek ancestry and not the native Anatolians who rejected Hellenism for the benefits of being a Muslim. It seems that the Ottomans secured that who we call Greeks today are predominantly Hellenes... Thank you Osman :D

You do not know history.
Greece and Macedonia and Thrace were conquered by Roman Empire and maintained under Roman Empire control.Dacia was conquered but was not maintained under Roman Empire control,because goths came and allied with free dacian tribes and force Roman Empire troops to leave Dacia.
Do you think old greeks had mostly med admixture or mostly caucasian admixture+nordish admixture?
Go read history,do you heard of meds with blue eyes and light hair how old greeks had plenty of people?

[kabeiros]

You are not in a position to teach me the history of my people, I know it better than you'll ever do - I'm sure you know Romanian history better than me too. Your English are really bad and I can't always understand what you're trying to say, I spoke about Anatolians and you mention Romans, Dacians and old Greeks (what the hell is that?)
Your grumbling about caucasian-nordish, blue-eyes and the rest don't make sense either. Don't ridicule your self...

[kabeiros]

The South Asian admix in Turks, rather shows the Turkmen tribes did alter the genetic population to some extent, the same in regards to the Mongoloid component. The Seljuks and related Turkic tribes that invaded Anatolia were from Turkmenistan not Sibera.

Yes, modern Turks are a mix of native Anatolians, Caucasians, Balkanians and Turks (the original ones, of Turanid sub-race). They were not from far East Siberia neither from Turkmenistan, they were from Altay mountains (at least that is what Turkish folklore says). Turkmens themselves are not pure Turkics either, but rather a mix of ''original'' Turks with Iranian tribes.

[StonyArabia]

Yes, modern Turks are a mix of native Anatolians, Caucasians, Balkanians and Turks (the original ones, of Turanid sub-race). They were not from far East Siberia neither from Turkmenistan, they were from Altay mountains (at least that is what Turkish folklore says). Turkmens themselves are not pure Turkics either, but rather a mix of ''original'' Turks with Iranian tribes.

Anatolians and Caucasians are basically the same. Yes there is some Balkanian influence. The Turkic invaders of Anatolia were Turkmens, they were not from Altay and they were not from Siberia but from what is know Turkmenistan. Turkmens are Turkmens :cool:

[kabeiros]

Anatolians and Caucasians are basically the same.

Similar but not the same. Caucasians are not influenced by Meds while Anatolians are...

[Pecheneg]

@Pecheneg: Hehe, I must have hit some weak spot because I didn't expect this kind of reaction. But again let me clear up, that I haven't called Turkic tribes East Asian, they *were* Central Asian Eurasians, not much different than Hunns and even to those who gave the culture/language to the Finnish people...
Finns have ~6% mongoloid admixture and they also cluster with scandinavian-baltic peoples, does it make them assimilated natives???
Here some Uralic speaker (like the Finns) from siberia

Nenets
http://i50.tinypic.com/qn8pye.jpg

Nganasans
http://i45.tinypic.com/k0j2vm.png




Having said that let me back up on my claims, your DNA is anatolian, though and through, Not Eurasian, not Cental Asian, you cluster with the people who are around you, not with Uzbekis or Turkmen. The history of conquerors describe how a relatively small -armed- group took over a land of 100 times as many people. The fact that little trully Cental Asian blood is in Europe (coming from the Hunns), little Mongol blood in European Russia (coming from Khan's conquest), and less than you claim of Turkic blood in Anadolu, are all due to similar reasons.

Those places were conquered, not exactly settled...

Ohh really? Thanks to Ottomans, anyone with little knowledge of history wouldnt believe your bs. There were at least 3-4 million nomadic Turkomans in anatolia, but note that im not saying "Yakut" who are siberian people, im saying "Turkomans", the central asian people who are only x2 times more mongoloid than us.
Also, Turks have same amount of mongoloid genes in mtdna which means Seljuk Turks brought their women too. It was a move of nomadic nation, not an army.They came with their Men, Women, Children, Herds, Horses (such as karaman horse breed of Turkey, genetically relative of Turkmen Akhal Teke horse), etc..
and according to Mahmud of Kashgar, Oghuz Turks were most powerful and populous Turkic tribe in central asia.



I know it's not enough of proof, certainly not to you, but notice where Turks cluster: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/files/2010/06/jewstruct.png

Yea i know this new method.

Turks cluster with georgians etc.
Nogais cluster with Chechens
Turkmens cluster with Eastern Iranians
Qashqai cluster with Iranians
Gagauz cluster with balkan people
Tatars cluster with neigbouring populations
Chuvashs are assimilated local peoples
Uyghurs are assimilated Tocharians
Kumyks-Karachay-Balkar cluster with caucasians
etc. etc. etc...

So there is almost no single Turk on earth, but perhaps only Yakuts?




Oh btw the Ottoman datas are not important in this discussion, the Ottoman empire existed 500 years after the events I'm describing (the initial Turkish "invasion" in Anatolia)
Its not important because it ruined your BS, right? Ottomans counted at least 3,5-4 million Turkoman nomads in anatolia, they also documented their tribal names, locations, family numbers, etc

The Seljuk Turks were Turkmens (which means muslim Oghuz Turks) from Khorasan, not Yakuts or siberian deer hunters. So its nonsense to compare Turks and north east asian isolated tribes.

Khorasan to Anatolia, Seljuk Turks
http://i47.tinypic.com/1zqyh53.png

Western Turkic nations and their mongoloid admixture
Turks ~7%
Karachay ~7%
Balkar ~8%
Kumyk ~8%
Crimean Tatars ~10-12%
Azerbaijan ~7%
Turkmens ~15%
Chuvash ~15-20%


Only some isolated siberian Turkic tribes (like Yakuts) have predominantly mongoloid admixture, and even they are not-Turkic according to genetics because they cluster with non-Altaic native Siberian populations.

So it seems bunch of Turkic ghosts assimilated 200-300 million people in world wide.

and lastly
I'm very well aware of your obsession, but let me remind you, greeks have nothing to do with original indo-european nomads from steppes, they only adopted the language. Most common haplogroup in Greece, E3b which is originated in africa and it means your grandgrandfathers were blacks but they lost their negroid appearance/admixture century by century and lastly ended up with indo-european language (Greek). So according to your mentality, you are not Greeks because you have no original indo-european heritage. You are genetically pre-indo-european locals.

Another reason of your fuss is historical events. If you know what i mean..

[Pecheneg]

Anatolians and Caucasians are basically the same. Yes there is some Balkanian influence. The Turkic invaders of Anatolia were Turkmens, they were not from Altay and they were not from Siberia but from what is know Turkmenistan. Turkmens are Turkmens :cool:
This is exactly the case.
The Turkic conquerors of anatolia were Oghuz Turks (they were aka Turkmens), not Yakuts or Yeniseians from north east asia.

Turkmens in central asia are 15% mongoloid

Turks in anatolia are 7% mongoloid

so why the hell they are comparing us with isolated siberian tribes then saying "Turks are only 10% Turkic bla bla" ???

[Pecheneg]

Yes, modern Turks are a mix of native Anatolians, Caucasians, Balkanians and Turks (the original ones, of Turanid sub-race). They were not from far East Siberia neither from Turkmenistan, they were from Altay mountains (at least that is what Turkish folklore says). Turkmens themselves are not pure Turkics either, but rather a mix of ''original'' Turks with Iranian tribes.
Its true that Altay mountains are probably the birth place of first Turks, but it was thousands of years ago. Turks migrated almost every corner of asia and even some parts of europe and associated/mixed with numberless peoples.
Seljuk Turks came from Khorasan (present day Turkmenistan + east Iran;), not directly from altai mountains.

[Onur]

The history of conquerors describe how a relatively small -armed- group took over a land of 100 times as many people. The fact that little trully Cental Asian blood is in Europe (coming from the Hunns), little Mongol blood in European Russia (coming from Khan's conquest), and less than you claim of Turkic blood in Anadolu, are all due to similar reasons.

Those places were conquered, not exactly settled...
Yes dear grandson of Pericles, we believe you :)

Answer me this question;
If Seljuks were only few conquerors then how come they beat 50.000+ strong Byzantine armies several times and then 100.000+ strong crusaders for more than 10 times? Who defeated these people? According to your opinion, recently turkified sedentary greeks beat them with their mighty DNA from Spartans and Achilles?



So there is almost no single Turk on earth, but perhaps only Yakuts?

So it seems bunch of Turkic ghosts assimilated 200-300 million people in world wide.
Yes Pecheneg, they call 199.990.000 of Turkic speakers as non-Turks and claim that 200 million Turkic speakers in the world is the result of an assimilation by few conquerors. Worst of it all, they call this as "SCIENCE" while this absurd argument lacks the basic ingredient of it, aka LOGIC (!!!)

[Onur]

Look Sforza, this is the National Geographic magazine from 1925, reporting about the population exchange between turkey and Greece. This is the children of the Turkish christians of Anatolia forced to learn modern Greek even in their first days in Greece while they live in tent camps;
http://makedonika.files.wordpress.com/2008/10/nggreatesttrekp582nov1925-1.jpg

Seljuk Turks of 11th century had no modern education techniques to start assimilation of peoples just like you did to the 1000 year old Turkish christian communities of Anatolia.

[Linet]

Yes dear grandson of Pericles, we believe you :)

Answer me this question;
If Seljuks were only few conquerors then how come they beat 50.000+ strong Byzantine armies several times and then 100.000+ strong crusaders for more than 10 times? Who defeated these people? According to your opinion, recently turkified sedentary greeks beat them with their mighty DNA from Spartans and Achilles?

You beat mercenaries, unfortunately, Byzantines were almost at civil war :argue: and the lords didnt trust each other to bring their official armies.
Even intot he battle they didnt trust big number of army to just one general in fear for their throne. Do you think this way an army can win? :noidea:

So dont be so happy, you didnt beat Greeks but our stupid nobles :wacko: ....and because history makes circles...thats going on with Greece even today :coffee:
You beat Greeks at Constantinoupolis...but then...we had already reached bottom and we may fought with everything we had, but we were just a shadow of what we used to be.


Yes Pecheneg, they call 199.990.000 of Turkic speakers as non-Turks and claim that 200 million Turkic speakers in the world is the result of an assimilation by few conquerors. Worst of it all, they call this as "SCIENCE" while this absurd argument lacks the basic ingredient of it, aka LOGIC (!!!)

Wow, but when you claim it for the Greeks in Macedonia and Pontus is ok :eyes? Now is imposible :blink:?
In your case if far more reasonable since you were the rulers :biggrin...poor us, both in Macedon and Pontus we were under submission :cry2: ...and yet you still say your crazy stories... :blah:

[Linet]

Forced to learn Greek? :shocked:
...They spoke Greek....kids go to school you know :crazy: ? If in that school were older people, then come and tell me we teached them Greek because they didnt know....
Do you see anyone older there "learning" Greek :eyes?
No :rolleyes:? Neither do i :wink

[Ushtari]

Linet, Greeks have been doing hardcore assimilation politics on minorities, why els you think there are barely no Arvanites left?

[Linet]

There are Arvanites :eusa_eh: Who ever said they arent :icon_ask:? But they are Greeks....thats all there is to it :)

[Ushtari]

There are Arvanites :eusa_eh: Who ever said they arent :icon_ask:? But they are Greeks....thats all there is to it :)
In order to be Greek you need to have Greek origins, wich Arvanites dont have.

[Queen B]

Linet, Greeks have been doing hardcore assimilation politics on minorities, why els you think there are barely no Arvanites left?
There are still arvanites left, genious.

In order to be Greek you need to have Greek origins, wich Arvanites dont have.
Arvanites are very aware of his origins, but they feel Greeks.
They all know that they share the same ancestors with Albanians, 500 years ago.

[Ushtari]

There are still arvanites left, genious.
Many if not most are assimilated.


Arvanites are very aware of his origins, but they feel Greeks.
They all know that they share the same ancestors with Albanians, 500 years ago.
Point proven.

[Queen B]

Point proven.
Assimiliated would be, if they didn't know their origins, and act like Greeks only.
If you have a 3rd generation Greek in America, that feels American, and acts American, and only knows that his grandfather is Greek, is this assimilation?

Arvanites gave their life for Greece, and they are part of Greek community for more than half millenium, in case you didn't know. Still, most of them speak their language, even after 500 years (while in that case, most of 3rd generation whatever-immigrants in USA, don't).

[Onur]

Forced to learn Greek? :shocked:
...They spoke Greek....kids go to school you know :crazy: ?
Linet, read the national geographic`s quote under the picture.


There are still arvanites left, genious.

Arvanites are very aware of his origins, but they feel Greeks.
They all know that they share the same ancestors with Albanians, 500 years ago.
They feel as Greek due to your assimilation policies. You demonize all your neighboring peoples including Albanians for more than a century and then you expect them to call themselves as akin to Albanians? When your army parades in the streets of Athens, they chant about butchering "Albanian pigs" and rip their guts and skin them FFS!!!
Vrtag9TT4Hg

Now what should we expect from Arvanites? Would you come up and say "Hi, i am an Albanian, nice to meet you" to these people if you would be an Albanian in Greece?


And wtf you talking about by saying 500 years ago? LOL. More than half of the neo-hellenic army was speaking Albanian among each other as late as 1919.

[Linet]

Well...its funny when Albanians go to Arvanites like if they are cousins :wink....
Then you have to see their reaction :lol: ...once you see it you ll be convinced :p

[dralos]

Well...its funny when Albanians go to Arvanites like if they are cousins :wink....
Then you have to see their reaction :lol: ...once you see it you ll be convinced :p
see by your reaction you can see that arvanites live in fear and arent allowed to express themself as albanians,sad people you are

[Queen B]

They feel as Greek due to your assimilation policies. You demonize all your neighboring peoples including Albanians for more than a century and then you expect them to call themselves as akin to Albanians? When your army parades in the streets of Athens, they chant about butchering "Albanian pigs" and rip their guts and skin them FFS!!!

Now what should we expect from Arvanites? Would you come up and say "Hi, i am an Albanian, nice to meet you" to these people if you would be an Albanian in Greece?

Didn't know that we should sing ''How good Albanians are that collaborated with the Nazis, how good Albanians are that have made our criminality go higher'', for their shake.
Maybe you should say that same for Kurds, in order not to ''assimiliate'' them, I guess. :coffee:



And wtf you talking about by saying 500 years ago? LOL. More than half of the neo-hellenic army was speaking Albanian among each other as late as 1919.
More than half, maybe in your mind, genius.
Arvanites in Greece, date as back as their movement here, which is around 14 century, or somewhere around there.
They lived in Greece, they fought about Greece's independance together with Greeks.

see by your reaction you can see that arvanites live in fear and arent allowed to express themself as albanians,sad people you are

Who said that to you ? :rotfl:

[Ushtari]

Assimiliated would be, if they didn't know their origins, and act like Greeks only.
If you have a 3rd generation Greek in America, that feels American, and acts American, and only knows that his grandfather is Greek, is this assimilation?

Obviously, though you make it sound very natural and innocent, when fact is that their almost complete assimilation is the result of aggressive assimilation politics by Greeks.

[Linet]

Arvanites in Greece first of all Dand....are Greeks that lived into what is today Albania and came back to Greece because of wars at the 13th century. There is hgh propability that they have some add-mixing with Albanians but thats all there is to it.... These guys are really proud of their origins and there is no need for them to hide it.... :nono:

Flint and Akis are both Arvanites....do you see them hiding or trembling :chin: ?

[Queen B]

Obviously, though you make it sound very natural and innocent, when fact is that their almost complete assimilation is the result of aggressive assimilation politics by Greeks.

I wonder why there are still many people that speak Arvanitika.
I wonder why there are still people calling themselves as such (I have posted Katerina Zarifi once, for classification).
I wonder why they have been asked to be a minority.

Our ''agressive'' assimiliation is either not aggressive, or we are bad at assimiliating.

On the other hand, Greeks in Albania are KILLED (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Aristotelis_Goumas)for speaking Greek. Oh well..


Btw, ANOTHER thread, where our butthurt neighbors, AGAIN, denying our origins.

Well, inferiority complex much ? :cool:

[dralos]

Arvanites in Greece first of all Dand....are Greeks that lived into what is today Albania and came back to Greece because of wars at the 13th century. There is hgh propability that they have some add-mixing with Albanians but thats all there is to it.... These guys are really proud of their origins and there is no need for them to hide it.... :nono:

Flint and Akis are both Arvanites....do you see them hiding or trembling :chin: ?
lol flint is no arvanites:D,they are albanians and never were greeks,and they werent greeks who migrated from albania to greece but were albanians who fled from ottomans to greece,like the arbereshe in italy or the arbanasi in croatia,bulgaria and romania

[Linet]

You know nothing about the subject....you have never been here...you dont know how Arvanites feel and you have never met any.....
Case closed...i wont continue saying the same things to people that know nothing about a subject but just reapeat the same things :blah:

[dralos]

You know nothing about the subject....you have never been here...you dont know how Arvanites feel and you have never met any.....
Case closed...i wont continue saying the same things to people that know nothing about a subject but just reapeat the same things :blah:
you know it all,you just say they're greeks bcs you know they protected your sorry asses and i do understand that its embarassing to know that your state wouldnt excist without the albanians

[Ushtari]

I wonder why there are still many people that speak Arvanitika.
I wonder why there are still people calling themselves as such (I have posted Katerina Zarifi once, for classification).
I wonder why they have been asked to be a minority.
Its mostly the older generation that can speak it, a great majority cant.


Our ''agressive'' assimiliation is either not aggressive, or we are bad at assimiliating.
Its a commonly known fact you did, but whatever.

[Linet]

Go and tell them they arent Greeks next time you see one then :chin:...but i wont put ice on your black eye afterwards :eyes

[dralos]

Go and tell them they arent Greeks next time you see one then :chin:...but i wont put ice on your black eye afterwards :eyes
i would be rich if i got a one dollar for each time i heard this:D
they wouldnt do a think but if they did is just bcs they live in fear and arent allowed to be albanians,bcs greek bullies like your nazis would threat them

[Ushtari]

Arvanites in Greece first of all Dand....are Greeks that lived into what is today Albania and came back to Greece because of wars at the 13th century. There is hgh propability that they have some add-mixing with Albanians but thats all there is to it.... These guys are really proud of their origins and there is no need for them to hide it.... :nono:

Flint and Akis are both Arvanites....do you see them hiding or trembling :chin: ?
Why would Greeks call themselves "Arberesh"?:rolleyes:

[Linet]

I told you how things are and you just keep saying the same things....:blah:
....Next time you see one,ask him what he is...:noidea:...thats all i can do for you :eyes

[Ushtari]

I told you how things are and you just keep saying the same things....:blah:
....Next time you see one,ask him what he is...:noidea:...thats all i can do for you :eyes
Answer my question instead;)

[Drawing-slim]

Why is this discussion still going?! I thought was silently understood and agreed by all that albanians=ancient greeks.

[dralos]

Why is this discussion still going?! I thought was silently understood and agreed by all that albanians=ancient greeks.
now we're talking about our brothers the arvanites

[Gospodine]

Isn't it absurd that Greek has no other closely related language in it`s own family branch while it`s supposedly older than Germanic, Romance and Turkic languages?

I get what you're trying to say, but you're using linguistic evidence to support a GENETIC conclusion.

Languages and genes very rarely coincide. Your own background is a testament to this.

Greek shares numerous affinities with Indo-Iranian tongues (particularly the earliest attested ones like Sanskrit, Avestan and Old Persian) along with Armenian, suggesting a period of mutual habitation in the Anatolia/Caucasus region before progressing to the Balkans.

In all likelihood a Graeco-Aryan proto-language (Aryan is an old-fashioned linguistic term for Indo-Iranian) was the latest stage of PIE linguistic unity circa 3500BC, before it would have split into Proto-Greek, Proto-Indo-Iranian and Proto-Armenic.

That's not to say Greek hasn't taken on foreign influence; in fact the Proto-Greeks immediately encountered a non-Greek speaking population (likely Anatolian or Tyrsenian) that greatly contributed to their vocabulary but Greek is nonetheless, far more archaic than all of it's neighbouring IE languages.

This also explains why Greek is such an isolate in Europe, despite being the earliest attested European language. It preserves a wealth of late PIE morphology, syntax, palatalization and cases that have since been lost in all the subsequent daughter languages of PIE that arrived after Greek in Europe.

Now that still doesn't mean much in terms of genetics or continuity, since we're discussing a period of time before 500 BC, which still leaves 2,500 years of continuity to build on, but it does explain why linguistically the Greeks are an "island" in Europe.

[Flintlocke]

In the Greek areas of Albania, Dropolis, Muzine, Southern Delvina, the city of Himara etc, the locals don't call albos Albanians but Arvanites, so Arvanites is just an old way of saying Albanian.

The first Albanians in Greece arrived in the 1300's. By invitation of the Aragonese Duke of Athens 10,000 families settled from Albania in the areas of Attica and Boeotia. The population was almost obliterated by the Plague and they needed people desperately, two years later the Bishop of Roman Morea invited 10,000 more families offering two year tax free business. Ever since then Albanians have been coming to Greece, as settlers, bandits, merchants, with the last major migration being the 1991 exodus of 500,000 people from bankrupt, starving, communist Albania.

[Linet]

I get what you're trying to say,...

I didnt get what he is trying to say :noidea: ....
What is he trying to say :confused2: ?

[Ushtari]

Linet and Dand, this is for you:

http://img444.imageshack.us/img444/2476/arvanites.jpg
Source (http://books.google.se/books?id=awgJ2LtnU6oC&pg=PA55&lpg=PA55&dq=arvanites+arbereshe&source=bl&ots=ONluEQmMRF&sig=HRLUGncQSORSMO9oXL64rm0wg_k&hl=sv&sa=X&ei=ROIHUOLNKuen4gT79c2JBA&ved=0CDAQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=arvanites%20arbereshe&f=false)

[Linet]

I know my country Ush :flolly: ... i dotn expect you to give me any text...as i said...ask any Arvanitan about how he feels or if he is afraid :fear: ...If Greeks were not sure about the answer :icon_ask:, we wouldnt just say that :wink....But we do know the answer :thumb001: thats why all, with no exceptions give you that reply...because we know Arvanites and we know how they feel and what they want....only you and the rest of the Albanians dont...and you talk on their behalf when you know nothign about them...:wacko:

[Ushtari]

I know my country Ush :flolly:
Apparently not good enough :rolleyes:

[Linet]

Well, better than you know yours :eyes

[Ushtari]

Well, better than you know yours :eyes
Highly unlikely since you didnt even know a commonly known fact, as seen in the impartial source i posted.

[Onur]

I get what you're trying to say, but you're using linguistic evidence to support a GENETIC conclusion.
I didn't try to get any conclusion about genetics. I just pointed out the absurdity of a language from antiquity having no other languages under it`s own branch nor proper number of dialects. I also said that the reason of this absurdity is the resurrection of Greece and Greek language after it`s 2000 year old ashes and the creation of modern Greek language by the philhellenes with an unnatural way. The unnatural thing was their interference to the Ottoman era Rum language and then create a new language on top of that, by trying to erase the natural effects of the whole Byzantine and Ottoman era to the people`s tongue in favor of making it as similar as possible to the ancient Greek tongue


This also explains why Greek is such an isolate in Europe, despite being the earliest attested European language. It preserves a wealth of late PIE morphology, syntax, palatalization and cases that have since been lost in all the subsequent daughter languages of PIE that arrived after Greek in Europe.
Nothing can explain the isolateness of a language spoken in mediterranean. Neither Anatolia nor Morea was like Amazon rain forests or Tanzania. Nothing can be isolate here unless if something/someone intervened it in an unnatural way. These lands was the most active part of the world throughout history.

[Linet]

True true, i know your "solid" proof posts :eyes ....like the Albanians being ancient Greeks because of a hat :baby2000:....proof aprooved 100% :smokin:

[kabeiros]

you know it all,you just say they're greeks bcs you know they protected your sorry asses and i do understand that its embarassing to know that your state wouldnt excist without the albanians

Arvanites settled during the 14th cent. AD in rural Boieotia, Attica, Corinthia, Argolis and on Spetses and Hydra islands. All of them have both Greek and Arvanite origin now, since they have always been Christian Orthodox and intermarriage with Greek speakers was massive. They fought side by side with Greeks against Turk-Albanians (Albanian Muslims) and Turks, they can see that you still are close friends :wink and cooperate against us - do you think that they feel like brothers to your people???

[Linet]

I didn't try to get any conclusion of genetics. I just pointed out the absurdity of a language from antiquity having no other languages under it`s own branch nor proper number of dialects. I also said that the reason of this absurdity is the resurrection of Greece and Greek language after it`s 2000 year old ashes and the creation of modern Greek language by the philhellenes with an unnatural way. The unnatural thing was their interference to the Ottoman era Rum language and then create a new language on top of that, by trying to erase the natural effects of the whole Byzantine and Ottoman era to the people`s tongue in favor of making it as similar as possible to the ancient Greek tongue


Someone is jealous :nod (Onur=:grumpy: ), someone is jealous.... :clap

My grandma didnt go to school and she talked the language of her grandpas...i know alot about them through her...nobody teached them anything :nono:...and they only knew the same language i also speak :rose:

We have many dialects :eusa_eh:...who ever told you that we dont :icon_ask:?

Nobody created anything for us...The thourios and the other revolutionary texts that were meant to rise the spirit of the Greeks against the Turks back in 1800, were all written in Greek by Greek fighters and poets because that was their language and the language of the people they wanted to inspire...:grouphug:
Our traditional songs from back then are all in Greek. The letters of the fighters between them or to their mothers adn sisters, are all in Greek...so cut the crazy :fcrazy: claims of pink fairies that teached us our language :flypig:


Nothing can explain the isolateness of a language spoken in mediterranean. Neither Anatolia nor Morea was like Amazon rain forests or Tanzania. Nothing can be isolate here unless if something/someone intervened it in an unnatural way. These lands was the most active part of the world throughout history.

It explains it the fact that we didnt mix :lightbul: ...remember :eyes?
We tell you that all the time...Greeks didnt like to mix, we liked to be with our people and preserve our dna :wink

[Sforza]

Hmm, as it seems I opened a can of worms. I'm truly sorry for that even though I kinda expected that and I should had stopped myself.

As to what Onur and Pecheneg wrote I only have those two things to say: You rarely if ever challenge my arguments, instead you invent strawmen and attack them.

For one I never implied that Turks are/were of East Asian extraction, yet it's oft repeated (that supposededly is what I claimed).
Secondly I didn't even comment on my ancestry, for all you know I may be an expat Cherokee living in Cambodia. There's a good chance though that I'm not descended of "Pericles" as I have little -if any- ancestry coming from South Greece.

Lastly keeping referring to Otoman sources is not very reliable for the very reasons that I very much wrote regarding the study of history. I had hoped you had taken heed and leave this silliness behind. Most forms of history are false in one way or another. You still haven't explained to me though why your DNA is near to that of Greeks and Syriacs, instead of (that of) Turkomen's, is this some huge conspiracy -maybe- that worlwide geneticists created to weaken the sense of Turkishness on modern-day Turks? Because if that's what you believe I'm afraid there's not much we can talk about...

Anyway I'm the last to make you question your most cherished beliefs, but it is quite an insult to history, biology and anthropology when you rape your neighbors' histories; distort them in such a violent way that you turn history into a meaningless revisionistic mess designed to suit your sense of superiority all the while belittling others. And honestly -with all due respect- what do you people do in a *European* preservation forum? How does your sense of Turkishness can help our cause?

[Gospodine]

The unnatural thing was their interference to the Ottoman era Rum language and then create a new language on top of that, by trying to erase the natural effects of the whole Byzantine and Ottoman era to the people`s tongue in favor of making it as similar as possible to the ancient Greek tongue

That's not even close to being true, but even if it were... so what?

Ataturk did the exact same thing. Purged thousands of words from the vernacular, symbolic of hundreds of years of Ottoman expanse and diversity and that "melting pot" empire, by obliterating the Ottoman Turkish language, and replacing it with stupendously unnatural and ill-fitting European loans that just sound ridiculous.
As well as an alphabet that could not be more ill-suited to a Turkic language with a large Arab/Persian substrate.

Pot meet kettle.

Your formerly prestigious language was butchered to placate a pro-Western, defeatist mentality you guys had after WWI.


Nothing can explain the isolateness of a language spoken in mediterranean. Neither Anatolia nor Morea was like Amazon rain forests or Tanzania. Nothing can be isolate here unless if something/someone intervened it in an unnatural way. These lands was the most active part of the world throughout history.

So I suppose Basque, the Northwest Caucasian languages, Burushaski, Hungarian, Japanese, Coptic, Ossetian and dozens of other linguistic isolates with little dialectic diversity are all reconstructed, formerly extinct tongues that were brought back to life in a nationalist uprising?

No dude... it's you who can't explain it, because you're just being anti-Greek for whatever reason.

[Onur]

Ataturk did the exact same thing. Purged thousands of words from the vernacular, symbolic of hundreds of years of Ottoman expanse and diversity and that "melting pot" empire, by obliterating the Ottoman Turkish language, and replacing it with stupendously unnatural and ill-fitting European loans that just sound ridiculous.
As well as an alphabet that could not be more ill-suited to a Turkic language with a large Arab/Persian substrate.
It`s not the same thing. If it would be same, then we wouldn't understand each other with the Turkish people in all over Balkans because they weren't subject to anything happened in the republic of Turkey but instead, we speak exact same language as them today.

There was two different language in Ottoman era; one of them was the standard Turkish as we speak today and the other one was Ottoman Turkish which only gets used in administration purposes in the state. It was much like the pre-reform Europe where you can find Latin as the language of the state and religion but people speaking English, German etc. Ataturk abolished the Ottoman Turkish with lots of Persian and Arabic word loans and the influence of it in regular Turkish has been largely erased.

This didn't effect the people so much because they were already speaking regular Turkish and largely ignorant to Ottoman Turkish anyway. We can see that even in the 16th century Karagoz&Hacivat shadow theater games. Karagoz who represents the ordinary folk always criticizes and teases with Hacivat who regularly speaks Ottoman Turkish.

This is not the same thing as what Greek language has been through. Today`s modern Greek speakers cannot easily understand the 19th century Romioi language and they cannot easily communicate with a Pontic speaking Romaika tongue. Already, they killed both of these languages in Greece in few decades by forcing modern Greek upon these people. This is not the case with us because our language is same as Turkish people living outside Turkey and who never been in modern Turkey before.


So I suppose Basque, the Northwest Caucasian languages, Burushaski, Hungarian, Japanese, Coptic, Ossetian and dozens of other linguistic isolates with little dialectic diversity are all reconstructed, formerly extinct tongues that were brought back to life in a nationalist uprising?
Caucasian, Hungarian, Japanese are not that isolate at all and they have similarities with many languages. Even if some of them are isolate like Basque, we can explain the reason of it while we cant for Greek language. Also, you shouldn't compare the level of isoliteness between languages in mediterranean and in an island in far east, aka Japan.

[iNird]

It`s not the same thing. If it would be same, then we wouldn't understand each other with the Turkish people in all over Balkans because they weren't subject to anything happened in the republic of Turkey but instead, we speak exact same language as them today.

There was two different language in Ottoman era; one of them was the standard Turkish as we speak today and the other one was Ottoman Turkish which only gets used in administration purposes in the state. It was much like the pre-reform Europe where you can find Latin as the language of the state and religion but people speaking English, German etc. Ataturk abolished the Ottoman Turkish with lots of Persian and Arabic word loans and the influence of it in regular Turkish has been largely erased.

This didn't effect the people so much because they were already speaking regular Turkish and largely ignorant to Ottoman Turkish anyway. We can see that even in the 16th century Karagoz&Hacivat shadow theater games. Karagoz who represents the ordinary folk always criticizes and teases with Hacivat who regularly speaks Ottoman Turkish.

This is not the same thing as what Greek language has been through. Today`s modern Greek speakers cannot easily understand the 19th century Romioi language and they cannot easily communicate with a Pontic speaking Romaika tongue. Already, they killed both of these languages in Greece in few decades by forcing modern Greek upon these people. This is not the case with us because our language is same as Turkish people living outside Turkey.


Caucasian, Hungarian, Japanese are not that isolate at all and they have similarities with many languages. Even if some of them are isolate like Basque, we can explain the reason of it while we cant for Greek language. Also, you shouldn't compare the level of isoliteness

between languages in mediterranean and in an island in far east, aka Japan.

I personally know one Turk from Fyrom that actually speaks Turkish. He told me he can understand for the most part Turks from Turkey but Turks from Turkey have difficult understanding him

[Siberian Cold Breeze]

I`ve never met any Turk in my life who claims that Turks are pure Turkics. No Turk in this forum said such a thing either but it`s the Greeks who claims that they are pure descendants of Homeros, Heredotus, Achilles. Thats the problem here.

Greece is just another Balkan state with a mixed population. Neither any balkan state nor Turkey claims racial purity. Only the Greeks does that. The level of ethnic admixtures is no different in any Balkan state including Greece. Every nation is mixed up to some degree but the level of admixture is probably highest among Greeks, much higher than Turks of Turkey but ironically they are the ones who claims purity.

ditto!

Empire and pure blood cannot be possible. If you were a citizen of an empire or founder of an empire, it means you are carrying many foreign elements in your blood..only insignificant isolated communities can be pure in blood (I also doubt it is healthy..)

We Turks are realistic about this fact..we are a nation ,not a race
I am sure there are some Anchient Greeks in overall Greek population,but were Anchient Greeks homogenious?