From rolandmo at pacbell.net Mon Jul 1 00:11:25 2002 From: rolandmo at pacbell.net (Roland Moore) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:52 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] New issue of Historein out Message-ID: <0GYK00JBX6MZ7R@mta6.snfc21.pbi.net> From: Historein INVITATION The journal Historein announces the release of its 3rd issue devoted to European Ego-histoires: Historiography and the Self, 1970-2000 and organises a discussion on "Subjectivity, Experience and Academic Writing". Discussants: Ioanna Laliotou, Antonis Liakos, Eleni Varikas. Ioulia Pentazou [Email historein@historein.gr for ordering information -Roland] From hlei at loc.gov Mon Jul 1 03:36:46 2002 From: hlei at loc.gov (Harold M. Leich) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:52 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Chernobyl and Pasca, 1986 In-Reply-To: <000a01c2206a$53274560$1ba0fa43@oemcomputer> Message-ID: Easter/Pascha in 1986 fell on May 4 (April 21 "old style" or Julian calendar). Harold Leich European Division The Library of Congress On Sun, 30 Jun 2002, acadbury wrote: > For an essay on the effects of Chernobyl: how do I find out the date of Pasca for 1986? Chernobyl occurred on April 26, 1986. Also, any personal reminiscences anyone has wd be welcome. AC > From jbeneker at email.unc.edu Mon Jul 1 06:50:25 2002 From: jbeneker at email.unc.edu (Jeff Beneker) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:52 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Chernobyl and Pasca, 1986 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: This might be of general interest to list members: Ralph Hancock has a handy (and free) program for Windows that will tell you the day of the week for any day since January 1, 1 AD, and the date of Easter for every year since 325. Download it from http://www.users.dircon.co.uk/~hancock/antioch.htm. Jeff -----Original Message----- From: mgsa-l-admin@uci.edu [mailto:mgsa-l-admin@uci.edu]On Behalf Of Harold M. Leich Sent: Monday, July 01, 2002 6:37 AM To: acadbury Cc: mgsa Subject: Re: [MGSA-L] Chernobyl and Pasca, 1986 Easter/Pascha in 1986 fell on May 4 (April 21 "old style" or Julian calendar). Harold Leich European Division The Library of Congress On Sun, 30 Jun 2002, acadbury wrote: > For an essay on the effects of Chernobyl: how do I find out the date of Pasca for 1986? Chernobyl occurred on April 26, 1986. Also, any personal reminiscences anyone has wd be welcome. AC > _______________________________________________ List-Info: https://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/mgsa-l From rolandmo at pacbell.net Mon Jul 1 09:32:32 2002 From: rolandmo at pacbell.net (Roland Moore) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:52 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Historein invitation to discussion, July 4, 2002, Exarxeia Message-ID: <0GYK00KS9WM8RH@mta7.pltn13.pbi.net> From: Historein INVITATION The journal Historein announces the release of its 3rd issue devoted to European Ego-histoires: Historiography and the Self, 1970-2000 and organises a discussion on "Subjectivity, Experience and Academic Writing". Discussants: Ioanna Laliotou, Antonis Liakos, Eleni Varikas. The discussion will take place on Thursday 4th July at 20:30 in "Syxnothtes" (Emm. Benaki 87, Exarxeia). Ioulia Pentazou From JUNESAM at aol.com Mon Jul 1 16:42:09 2002 From: JUNESAM at aol.com (JUNESAM@aol.com) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:52 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Greek summer school Message-ID: <16b.fe3c7f3.2a5242d1@aol.com> This was a brief note in the ANA bulletin : >>>Simitis' Preveza tour: After the inauguration, Simitis visited the Fanari municipality to inaugurate a summer school for teaching Greek language and culture to Greek and foreign students at an Ioannina University department.<< Does anyone have any additional details ? From bsyrrakos at yahoo.com Mon Jul 1 19:04:15 2002 From: bsyrrakos at yahoo.com (Barbara Syrrakos) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:52 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Chernobyl and Pasca, 1986 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20020702020415.12290.qmail@web11204.mail.yahoo.com> Odd that the query has come up; I have a very vivid memory of spending Easter (my first in Greece) with relatives in the small village of Eva, not far from Kalamata. The weather was great, we daily drank fresh goat milk, ate the surrounding horta, hung out in the cypress woods, smoked -- then suddenly Chernobyl, and following, if I recall correctly, much rainfall. The talk at the time was of our consuming fresh this and fresh that after the disaster and rainfall, potentially contaminated by the fallout. I turned a skeptical eye on the whole thing, being an American where things like that just didn't happen (I was quite young then), and anyway, what was the likelihood of just right weather patterns to carry the fallout from way up and over there to where we were. But back in Athens there were many reports and jokes (and a cartoon I have saved) made about the hoarding of Nounou canned milk, etc. Years later in New York I knew a Ukrainian who related to me in most dire terms the effects of the fallout in his town, vicinity, the destruction of his family. Of course there was nothing I could say in response. Barbara Syrrakos New York --- Jeff Beneker wrote: > This might be of general interest to list members: > Ralph Hancock has a handy (and free) program for > Windows that will tell you the day of the week for > any day since January 1, 1 AD, and the date of > Easter for every year since 325. Download it from > http://www.users.dircon.co.uk/~hancock/antioch.htm. > > Jeff > > -----Original Message----- > From: mgsa-l-admin@uci.edu > [mailto:mgsa-l-admin@uci.edu]On Behalf Of Harold M. > Leich > Sent: Monday, July 01, 2002 6:37 AM > To: acadbury > Cc: mgsa > Subject: Re: [MGSA-L] Chernobyl and Pasca, 1986 > > > > Easter/Pascha in 1986 fell on May 4 (April 21 "old > style" or Julian > calendar). > > Harold Leich > European Division > The Library of Congress > > > On Sun, 30 Jun 2002, acadbury wrote: > > > For an essay on the effects of Chernobyl: how do I > find out the date of Pasca for 1986? Chernobyl > occurred on April 26, 1986. Also, any personal > reminiscences anyone has wd be welcome. AC > > > > _______________________________________________ > List-Info: > https://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/mgsa-l > > _______________________________________________ > List-Info: https://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/mgsa-l __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Sign up for SBC Yahoo! Dial - First Month Free http://sbc.yahoo.com From baloglou at Oswego.EDU Tue Jul 2 13:11:08 2002 From: baloglou at Oswego.EDU (George Baloglou) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:52 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Cyprus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Sun, 23 Jun 2002, George Baloglou wrote: > > > On Sat, 22 Jun 2002, Elias Vlanton wrote: > > > Third, I find the oft-repeated assertion that " Kissinger did not like > > Makarios, whom he identified as one of the most reactionary and > > anti-American elements of > > the third world," unsupported by the material I have seen. Many claim > > this to be true--and it may be--but I am still waiting for convincing > > evidence. > > I believe that, just a few days after the coup, most likely before the > Turkish invasion, the New York Times did print Kissinger's statement on > Makarios: "he may not be physically dead, but he is politically dead". ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Not quite -- at least not during the two hours I spent going through NYT microfiche this afternoon -- but close enough, even though not by Kissinger himself (who, in the words of Christopher Hitchens, "inherited the Greek junta and the official dislike of Makarios"*). Let me cite two NYT excerpts (both of them *preceding the Turkish invasion*): (I) ["U.S. in Talks With New Cypriot Chiefs", p.17 (Continuing "U.S. BEGINS TALKS WITH NEW CHIEFS OF CYPRUS REGIME -- Administration Said to Lean Toward Leader of Coup Rather Than Makarios", p.1), The New York Times, July 18, 1974] {From Turkey, it was reported that Mr. Kissinger had sent a note saying the United States would oppose any moves by any Cypriote government toward unity with Greece. "We think he is finished politically," a Kissinger aide said of Archbishop Makarios. "He can't go back to Cyprus unless General Ioannides is thrown out in Athens and, even though the junta has problems, that doesn't seem likely now."} (II) ["Kissinger and Makarios To Meet in Washington", p.9, The New York Times, July 20, 1974.] {Nevertheless, the official said, it was the general opinion in the State Department that the Archbishop and not the Greek Government was responsible for forcing the cituation in Cyprus to the point of crisis and bringing on the coup of last Monday.} *"The Case Against Henry Kissinger", Harper's Magazine, March 2001, p.57 From AKarpathak at aol.com Wed Jul 3 09:39:54 2002 From: AKarpathak at aol.com (AKarpathak@aol.com) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:52 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Fwd: CFP: Global Media Monopoly Message-ID: <3FAFD1D7.665EEC75.09E588BC@aol.com> A couple of months ago there was a discussion of music on the list and I got the impression there are a couple of people working int he area. FYI. Anna K. -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: Martina Rieker Subject: H-Gender-MidEast: CFP: Global Media Monopoly Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2002 19:13:50 +0300 Size: 3007 Url: http://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/public/mgsa-l/attachments/20020703/cc79bd35/ForwardedMsg.mht From JUNESAM at aol.com Fri Jul 5 23:04:57 2002 From: JUNESAM at aol.com (JUNESAM@aol.com) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:52 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] National Library Refurbishment Message-ID: <146.1107aca3.2a57e289@aol.com> Nice to know the BUILDING will have money spent on it ... but what about funding for books, staff, collection development, preservation, cataloguing & other services ?? (And 1.7 million may not go very far to restore the building properly) June Samaras _ Kalamos Books (Wearing my Librarian Hat) ------------------------------------------- >>> Library refurbishment A total of 1.7 million euros is to go toward the refurbishment of the 19th-century building currently housing the National Library on Athens's central Academias Street which is due to be transformed into an exhibition center for rare publications, Education Minister Petros Efthymiou said yesterday. The works have already begun and should continue for two years, said Efthymiou. The library will close to the public gradually until December. Efthymiou failed to end years of speculation about where the contents of the library would move, saying options included the Athens University campus at Zografou, a ministry building on Pireos Street or a site at Goudi. <<<< From iatridesj1 at southernct.edu Mon Jul 8 16:57:44 2002 From: iatridesj1 at southernct.edu (John Iatrides) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:52 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Email messages lost? Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20020708194413.00a9e260@mail.southernct.edu> During the last ten days of June the Connecticut State University computer system underwent major changes which affected incoming email. I am therefore concerned that I may have missed MGSA-related messages sent to me between 20 June and 5 July. If you did send me a message during that period and have not received from me an acknowledgement I would appreciate it if you would repeat the message. Please note my new email address: John O. Iatrides From montandon1 at earthlink.net Tue Jul 9 10:02:28 2002 From: montandon1 at earthlink.net (Thea Montandon) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:52 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] REQUEST FOR INFORMATION Message-ID: <3D2B1723.21EA3654@earthlink.net> Dear Friends, I'm seeking current and historical information on libraries in Greece. I welcome any information from list members. Thea Montandon Walnut Creek, CA From JUNESAM at aol.com Wed Jul 10 15:50:28 2002 From: JUNESAM at aol.com (JUNESAM@aol.com) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:52 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Cyprus Message-ID: If the report below is correct it looks as though the ghostly spirit of Henry Kissinger still wanders around in some of the murkier political basements in Washington. One would have thought that the US State Department might have had plenty of time since 1974 to learn that conciliating Turkey has not been a notably productive policy in resolving any of the real issues in Cyprus, in Turkey, or in the region generally. They don't seem to have caught on to the the simple fact that, once it is a fully participating member of the EU, Cyprus will no longer be quite the same pawn on the US chess board that State has been playing with for years - in fact it might be able to play its own games on a different board entirely (Even if the Bishop is no longer in the game) There is another option that the US does not seem able to contemplate - to simply tell Turkey to grow up politically and to negotiate in good faith or else (which they could well have done to good effect in 1974, and even now it might not be too late to exert a little productive pressure where it actually might have some good effect.) Anyway - why all this emphasis on how to "avoid" a crisis ? Might it not be wiser and more statesmanlike (even for young Dubya's shining intelligence ) to take useful steps to "resolve" the problem rather than leaving the whole thing to stew for even longer. Odd that all the options mentioned are those where the pressure is to be exerted on Cyprus and the EU and NOT on Turkey or on Denktash. (I have only read this account of the report, not the original text, and would be delighted to be corrected if I have totally misunderstood the point of these recommendations) Personally (and I am NOT Cypriot) I take great exception to the fact that the following option should even be hinted at - "namely for the US to oppose Cyprus' EU accession" - it should be none of the business of ANYONE in the USA to prevent this ! Not that such action would contribute much to "avoiding" a crisis, but it would certainly make the USA look even more foolish to any thinking European than is currently the case (US international policies are not widely approved of, even by unthinking residents of the EU ) Just what kind of advisors are being hired in Washington to come up with dumb ideas like this ? (And then to publish this stuff just 2 weeks before the anniversary of the invasion ! ) Tell me - IS there a word (even in Greek) to describe this stupidity ??? June Samaras 21] Report gives US four options for avoiding Cyprus crisis WASHINGTON, 10/07/2002 (CNA/ANA - T. Ellis) Brookings Institution in Washington has prepared a report on Cyprus, in which it presents four options for US involvement in efforts to solve the Cyprus problem, namely for the US to oppose Cyprus' EU accession, to present a US plan for a settlement, to link a Cyprus deal to the launching of Turkey's EU accession talks, or link a Cyprus deal to Turkey's eventual EU accession. It notes that deferring the unification of Cyprus until Turkey is also in a position to join the Union is far preferable to the regional crisis that, in the absence of intense American engagement, will almost certainly occur, and that ''in the absence of a political settlement, Cyprus' EU accession could have very negative consequences for the entire Eastern Mediterranean region and beyond''. The report, with the title ''Avoiding a Cyprus Crisis'', was prepared by Henri Barkey, a Cohen Professor of International Relations at Lehigh University and a former member of the State Department's Policy Planning Staff, and Philip H. Gordon, a senior fellow in Foreign Policy Studies and the Brookings Institution and former Director for European Affairs at the National Security Council. Barkey and Gordon note that ''the US should persuade the parties not to close any doors if the Greek portion of Cyprus joins the EU and to link a future Cyprus settlement to Turkey's own EU membership'', adding that ''regional cooperation could thus go on in the short term'' and that ''in the longer run, a comprehensive Cyprus settlement would become possible as Turkey itself is integrated into Europe''. They add that ''accession to the EU by only the Greek portion of Cyprus, strongly opposed by Turkey, could raise tensions on the island, set back the recent progress in Greek-Turkish cooperation, and undermine Turkey's difficult but steady evolution toward Europe at a time when the development of a democratic and stable Turkey is more important than ever''. ''To prevent such a crisis, some Americans may be tempted to oppose Cyprus' accession or to seek to impose a specific settlement plan, but neither approach would work'', Barkey and Gordon point out in their report. They note that ''Greek Cypriot leaders genuinely seem to want to see a reunified island before EU accession'', adding that ''given all the obstacles to a deal, outside observers would be gravely mistaken to assume that a political settlement will spare them from the difficulty of dealing with a Cyprus EU accession crisis at the end of this year''. In the first option for the US, which is to oppose Cyprus' EU accession, Barkey and Gordon note that ''for better or for worse, EU leaders seem to have decided that Cyprus is going to join the EU whether there is a settlement or not, and no member state appears prepared to veto Cypriot accession on Washington's behalf''. In the second US policy option, which is to come forward with a specific American settlement plan, the report notes that ''the logic of such an approach would be that only intensive outside diplomatic pressure, combined with a very precise international plan, will produce a deal'', but adds that although tempting, this option ''has significant risks''. ''While an international plan might be welcomed by the Greek side, the Turkish side would be deeply skeptical'', Barkey and Gordon note, adding that a ''heavy-handed'' approach could ''undermine Turkey's already fragile political stability and complicate its relations with the West''. As regards option three, which is to link a Cyprus deal to the start of Turkey's EU accession talks, Barkey and Gordon note that ''even beyond the fact that the EU might not agree, there is a real risk that accepting accession negotiations with Turkey with the sole purpose of avoiding a Cyprus crisis would only raise false expectations in Turkey about near-term EU membership and lead to a new set of disappointments down the road''. In option four, which is to link a Cyprus deal to Turkey's eventual EU accession, Barkey and Gordon note that deferring a Cyprus settlement until Turkey can join the EU ''would not only give Turkey an added incentive to continue down the European path, but it would give Greece and the Greek Cypriots an incentive to promote Turkey's EU membership''. In such a case, ''the EU should make clear that the requirement to meet the Copenhagen criteria applies as much to northern Cyprus as it does to Turkey'', the report adds. Barkey and Gordon conclude their report by saying that ''an agreement by the two Cypriot communities to live together in a bi-national state that would join the EU in 2004 remains the best solution to the Cyprus problem'' but note that ''in diplomacy, optimal solutions are rarely available''. ''Deferring the unification of Cyprus until Turkey is also in a position to join the Union is far preferable to the regional crisis that, in the absence of intense American engagement, will almost certainly occur'', they add. From AKarpathak at aol.com Mon Jul 15 10:30:45 2002 From: AKarpathak at aol.com (AKarpathak@aol.com) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:52 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] question Message-ID: <1313215E.73058627.09E588BC@aol.com> Greetings: Are there any Turkey/Ottoman historiographers, buffs of Turkish historiagraphy on the list? I have a couple of questions to ask. Thanks, Anna K. From malista9 at hotmail.com Mon Jul 15 10:46:56 2002 From: malista9 at hotmail.com (Alex A) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:52 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Slavery of Greeks Message-ID: Can anyone recommend to me about the Slavery of Greeks during the Ottoman Empire? I always hear of Greek women forcibly taken to Ottoman Turkish whore houses, and slaves taken after massarces. What happened to these slaves? Did they end up being sold and work till they died of torture? What about the Ottoman whore houses? Greeks endured slavery under these years and has there been scholarship on it? -Alex >From: AKarpathak@aol.com >To: mgsa-l@uci.edu >Subject: [MGSA-L] question >Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2002 13:30:45 -0400 > >Greetings: > >Are there any Turkey/Ottoman historiographers, buffs of Turkish >historiagraphy on the list? I have a couple of questions to ask. > >Thanks, >Anna K. >_______________________________________________ >List-Info: https://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/mgsa-l _________________________________________________________________ Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com From AKarpathak at aol.com Tue Jul 16 09:59:57 2002 From: AKarpathak at aol.com (AKarpathak@aol.com) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:52 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] question Message-ID: <1CE7C9B2.373CA9EB.09E588BC@aol.com> Yitzchak, thank you for your response. I'll try to repeat the questions I posted earlier in the day, and to which Doxis has already responded (sorta left me thinking, oh my, this is much more complicated than I thought.) Basically I was asked a series of questions by one of my students yesterday regarding Greek-Turkish/Ottoman, Cyprus/Turkish relations. The questions themselves were not something that I could not handle even tho I am not a historian. What caught my attention and sorta confused me was the framework implied by the questions, and also even more confusing was that this student was/is Pakistani--I would have expected a person educated in Turkey (i.e., received the Turkish state official history) to ask these questions. So, the "simple" ::)) task/question I asked is: is there a uniquely "Muslim" way of viewing the Ottoman Empire, the Greek War of Independence and the Turkish invasion of Cyprus. As you see from the way I phrase these questions, particularly the last, I am functioning out of a particular framework. From malista9 at hotmail.com Tue Jul 16 11:46:09 2002 From: malista9 at hotmail.com (Alex A) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:53 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] question Message-ID: The Arabs and Persians don't hold good opinions of the Ottomans. The Arabs were subjects as well. The Pakistanis have this governmental relation with Turkey and all Pakistanis hold high regard for Turkey and Ataturk. Maybe, the Muslims should look at the current Islamic Genocide of African Christians/Animists in South Sudan. Khartoum has been forcibly converting Southern Christians, and SPLA forces fighting to defend themselves. Turkey should recognize the Armenian Genocide and stop rewriting history books for propaganda. Turkish Studies are headed by revisionists and propagandists. Is this a Ottoman History Forum or Modern Greek? -Alexandros >From: AKarpathak@aol.com >To: ykerem@actcom.co.il ("Actcom Mail"), mgsa-l@uci.edu >Subject: Re: [MGSA-L] question >Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2002 12:59:57 -0400 > >Yitzchak, thank you for your response. > >I'll try to repeat the questions I posted earlier in the day, and to which >Doxis has already responded (sorta left me thinking, oh my, this is much >more complicated than I thought.) >Basically I was asked a series of questions by one of my students yesterday >regarding Greek-Turkish/Ottoman, Cyprus/Turkish relations. The questions >themselves were not something that I could not handle even tho I am not a >historian. What caught my attention and sorta confused me was the >framework implied by the questions, and also even more confusing was that >this student was/is Pakistani--I would have expected a person educated in >Turkey (i.e., received the Turkish state official history) to ask these >questions. >So, the "simple" ::)) task/question I asked is: is there a uniquely >"Muslim" way of viewing the Ottoman Empire, the Greek War of Independence >and the Turkish invasion of Cyprus. As you see from the way I phrase these >questions, particularly the last, I am functioning out of a particular >framework. >From what Doxis said, and this confused me, for altho I was aware of the >multi-ethnic nature of the Ottoman Empire, I also knew/thought the Ottoman >Empire was Muslim in the same manner that the Byzantine Empire was >Christian. >If this interpretation is correct, then the question that arises is: are >fundamentalist Muslims revisiting the Ottoman Empire, and if yes, how? >Which are their inferences, conclusions and (perhaps by extension >projections of the future--I am a firm believer that our today and what we >want of tomorrow affects what we see in the yester-years.) (Although this >last question is probably a different question altogether.) > >Doxis pointed to much diversity in the Arab and non-Arab Muslim worlds and >their changing interpretations of the Ottoman period. He also mentioned >ethnic groups I was not even aware of and these groups of course complicate >the picture in this historiography. > >Perhaps you can locate Doxis' posting on the mgsa-list. > >Thank you, >Anna K. > > >In a message dated Tue, 16 Jul 2002 15:28:22 +0200, "Actcom Mail" > writes: > > >I'm an Ottoman historian. What are your questions. > >Sincerely, > >Yitzchak Kerem > >ykerem@actcom.co.il > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: > >To: > >Sent: Monday, July 15, 2002 7:30 PM > >Subject: [MGSA-L] question > > > > > >> Greetings: > >> > >> Are there any Turkey/Ottoman historiographers, buffs of Turkish > >historiagraphy on the list?  I have a couple of questions to ask. > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Anna K. > >> _______________________________________________ > >> List-Info: https://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/mgsa-l > >> > > > > >_______________________________________________ >List-Info: https://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/mgsa-l _________________________________________________________________ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com From baloglou at Oswego.EDU Tue Jul 16 14:02:34 2002 From: baloglou at Oswego.EDU (George Baloglou) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:53 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Tue, 16 Jul 2002, Alex A wrote: > Is this a Ottoman History Forum or Modern Greek? One cannot discuss and understand Modern Greece without discussing and understanding the Ottoman Empire. Your seemingly misplaced question has some depth, though: Ottoman studies and Modern Greek studies are often carried out by the same academic departments (or even scholars), a fact that may and does have consequences, not the least because such studies are supported by the corresponding present-day states in qualitatively distinct ways ... that I leave to other list members to ponder :-) G. B. From malista9 at hotmail.com Tue Jul 16 14:24:32 2002 From: malista9 at hotmail.com (Alex A) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:53 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] question Message-ID: I like it how Turkish Studies Programs like the Florida Atlantic University is named after a Turkish General, Kenan Evren, who invaded Cyprus and instigated the 1980 coup. Is this scholarship when the Turkish Government uses Turkish Studies for its own propaganda machine in the USA? Health Lowry of Princeton Turkish Studies was found to be paid by Turkey to deny the Armenian Genocide in his research. Is this ethical scholarship? Ottoman history should be studied as it how related or affected the Greeks of Greece and Asia Minor. The way of life or what kind of hardships did the Greeks endure? Also, Vryonis mentions how before the Turkic invasion and assimiliation of Anatolia, that there were numerous churches, 400 bishops, and Christians(Armenians, Greeks, Assyrians). What happened to them? They were assimiliated to become Turks. Assimiliation whether forced or voluntary is a form of killing another culture. Did anyone know that the Greeks who fled Constantinople in 1453 started the Renassiance in Florence and Venice? Modern Greek Studies has put out great books, and professors do interesting research. Congradulation to you all. I posed some questions and comment for you to ponder and analyze. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Alexandros >From: George Baloglou >To: Alex A >CC: >Subject: Re: [MGSA-L] question >Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2002 17:02:34 -0400 (EDT) > > > >On Tue, 16 Jul 2002, Alex A wrote: > > > Is this a Ottoman History Forum or Modern Greek? > >One cannot discuss and understand Modern Greece without discussing and >understanding the Ottoman Empire. Your seemingly misplaced question has >some depth, though: Ottoman studies and Modern Greek studies are often >carried out by the same academic departments (or even scholars), a fact >that may and does have consequences, not the least because such studies >are supported by the corresponding present-day states in qualitatively >distinct ways ... that I leave to other list members to ponder :-) > > G. B. > > >_______________________________________________ >List-Info: https://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/mgsa-l _________________________________________________________________ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com From JUNESAM at aol.com Tue Jul 16 14:29:04 2002 From: JUNESAM at aol.com (JUNESAM@aol.com) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:53 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Turkish History Message-ID: <4e.e6afb51.2a65ea20@aol.com> > Is this a Ottoman History Forum or Modern Greek? > -Alexandros Now, now, Alex ! Somehow feel it is just a little bit difficult to try to understand the post-Byzantine history of Greece (or of the Greeks in Asia Minor or in Egypt for example) if one totally ignores the culture of the Turks in the Islamic world, or neglects to research the structure & objectives of the Ottoman administration or its policies during that period. An understanding of the factors which governed life during those centuries is critical in trying to interpret the economic and social and political consequences to Greeks between 1450 and 1800 :- Was it the fatalistic tenets of Islam, or the the dead hand of a state bureaucracy that denied the Ottomans an artistic and cultural "renaissance" ? Was it the same factors which inhibited them from developing an Industrial and scientific Revolution revolution of their own ? Was it the initial division of their society by religious groupings that prevented them from establishing a unified society with strong common social and economic interests, one which need not have cracked into disparate and antagonistic linguistic, religious and nationalistic tribes as soon as the central authority of the state was challenged by the modern world ? Most of the strongest ethnic hatreds we witness today are between peoples who lived, until this past century or so, under Ottoman jurisdiction. One which created a state, but which did not cultivate a society in which all could share equally in either the responsibilities or the rewards of living under an equitable civil government. The Decline & Fall of the Ottoman Empire is, I think, in some ways even more significant than that of Rome (though no Gibbon has written it, yet ) and the consequences of that failure still seem to reverberate through all these bloody contemporary conflicts in the Middle East & the Balkans. To examine all of the factors involved in the way the Ottoman Empire both gained and maintained its power for centuries is also to gain an understanding of the the way Modern Greek history & society developed both during the Turkokratia and since. (Is success yet assured in the campaign to change the role of government employees in Greece from that of heavy handed agents of the state into civil servants of the people ? I can't quite imagine an Ottoman Ombudsman !) As a matter of fact not all Turkish historians & publishers are totally blind to the realities of that period, or to alternate opinions and interpretations of their past. For example I have just received a translation into Turkish of Gerasimos Augustinos' book for a client. I think Greek historians could equally benefit from access to translations of useful Turkish materials into Greek. June Samaras KALAMOS BOOKS 725 Vermouth Ave. (# 1) Mississauga, Ontario Canada. L5A 3X5 Tel : 905-272-4841 E-mail : kalamosbks@aol.com http://www.kalamosbooks.com http://www.abebooks.com/home/SAMARAS/ From JUNESAM at aol.com Tue Jul 16 18:58:40 2002 From: JUNESAM at aol.com (JUNESAM@aol.com) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:53 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Book on Cyprus in 1974 Message-ID: <1bd.7b7434c.2a662950@aol.com> Does anyone know anything more about this book ? All I have is this brief announcement - I don't know who published it or where (? Athens ? Nicosia ?) (and 3,000 pages ???) >>> A book by two Cypriot journalists on ''The secret archives of Kissinger - The decision for (Cyprus') partition'' was presented in Athens on Friday. In over 3,000 pages, Costas Venizelos and Mihalis Ignatiou provide the Greek reader with the opportunity to become acquainted with backstage actions made by the former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger to substantiate Turkey's ''right'' to invade Cyprus. Revealing documents are also produced, including a map showing the regions to be occupied during the second Turkish invasion, codenamed ''Attila-2'' two days before the corresponding Turkish military operations were carried out.<<<< June Samaras KALAMOS BOOKS 725 Vermouth Ave. (# 1) Mississauga, Ontario Canada, L5A 3X5 Tel: 905-272-4841 E-mail : kalamosbks@aol.com http://www.kalamosbooks.com http://www.abebooks.com/home/SAMARAS/ From AKarpathak at aol.com Wed Jul 17 07:25:57 2002 From: AKarpathak at aol.com (AKarpathak@aol.com) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:53 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] question Message-ID: <2A7DAC56.50DD81BF.09E588BC@aol.com> Alex, sorry for posting the question on this list. However, I do know that there are a number of people on this list who are actively working in the area of Ottoman and Turkish studies, and since my question really entailed the merging of the two areas, (Ottoman & Greek, modern Greek that is) I thought this would be a good forum for presenting the question. Again, my apologies my posting something that you (and perhaps others???) found inappropriate for the list. Anna K. In a message dated Tue, 16 Jul 2002 18:46:09 +0000, "Alex A" writes: > > > ?Is this a Ottoman History Forum or Modern Greek? > ?-Alexandros > >>From: AKarpathak@aol.com >>To: ykerem@actcom.co.il ("Actcom Mail"), mgsa-l@uci.edu >>Subject: Re: [MGSA-L] question >>Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2002 12:59:57 -0400 >> >>Yitzchak, thank you for your response. >> >>I'll try to repeat the questions I posted earlier in the day, and to which >>Doxis has already responded (sorta left me thinking, oh my, this is much >>more complicated than I thought.) >>Basically I was asked a series of questions by one of my students yesterday >>regarding Greek-Turkish/Ottoman, Cyprus/Turkish relations. ?The questions >>themselves were not something that I could not handle even tho I am not a >>historian. ?What caught my attention and sorta confused me was the >>framework implied by the questions, and also even more confusing was that >>this student was/is Pakistani--I would have expected a person educated in >>Turkey (i.e., received the Turkish state official history) to ask these >>questions. >>So, the "simple" ::)) task/question I asked is: is there a uniquely >>"Muslim" way of viewing the Ottoman Empire, the Greek War of Independence >>and the Turkish invasion of Cyprus. ?As you see from the way I phrase these >>questions, particularly the last, I am functioning out of a particular >>framework. >>From what Doxis said, and this confused me, for altho I was aware of the >>multi-ethnic nature of the Ottoman Empire, I also knew/thought the Ottoman >>Empire was Muslim in the same manner that the Byzantine Empire was >>Christian. >>If this interpretation is correct, then the question that arises is: are >>fundamentalist Muslims revisiting the Ottoman Empire, and if yes, how? >>Which are their inferences, conclusions and (perhaps by extension >>projections of the future--I am a firm believer that our today and what we >>want of tomorrow affects what we see in the yester-years.) (Although this >>last question is probably a different question altogether.) >> >>Doxis pointed to much diversity in the Arab and non-Arab Muslim worlds and >>their changing interpretations of the Ottoman period. ?He also mentioned >>ethnic groups I was not even aware of and these groups of course complicate >>the picture in this historiography. >> >>Perhaps you can locate Doxis' posting on the mgsa-list. >> >>Thank you, >>Anna K. >> >> >>In a message dated Tue, 16 Jul 2002 15:28:22 +0200, "Actcom Mail" >> writes: >> >> >I'm an Ottoman historian. What are your questions. >> >Sincerely, >> >Yitzchak Kerem >> >ykerem@actcom.co.il >> >----- Original Message ----- >> >From: >> >To: >> >Sent: Monday, July 15, 2002 7:30 PM >> >Subject: [MGSA-L] question >> > >> > >> >> Greetings: >> >> >> >> Are there any Turkey/Ottoman historiographers, buffs of Turkish >> >historiagraphy on the list? ?I have a couple of questions to ask. >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> Anna K. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> List-Info: https://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/mgsa-l >> >> >> > >> > >>_______________________________________________ >>List-Info: https://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/mgsa-l > > > > >_________________________________________________________________ >Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com > > From AKarpathak at aol.com Wed Jul 17 07:42:28 2002 From: AKarpathak at aol.com (AKarpathak@aol.com) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:53 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] question Message-ID: <2605AC50.70C1A7FA.09E588BC@aol.com> Alex, as George Baloglou pointed out, one cannot understand modern Greece, even today's Greece, without understanding the Ottoman Empire and today's Turkey. The things that I got from the questions that were posed to me from my student were along the following lines (you know, the sub-text stuff): the Greek War of Independence was a war against Turkey (I distinguished between Turkey and zottoman Empire, and the student looked baffled.) The invasion of Cyprus was a war between Greece and Turkey, and Turkey gloriously took over & liberated the northern part of the island but those **** whatever Greeks took the southern part. Mainland Greece was Turkish land. Turks were in the region before or as long as the Greeks were (didn't ask him which precisely was the case in his view.) The southern part of Cyprus is ruled by Greece. After a 10 minute discussion in which I, a non-historian, was talking about the history of the region, the student looked at me baffled. He kept asking me, "are you sure?" "where did you learn this?" "says who?" He said he learned history in school in Pakistan. The same student earlier in the semester is one who made the point that Bin Laden has been misunderstood in the West. He himself by all appearances is not religious. I am familiar with Turkish attempts to redefine Ancient Greek Civilization as Mediterranean Civilization, the commonalities between contemporary cultures, etc. that come from quite secular circles among the Turkish intellegentsia. And so, the questions still remain quite unclear in my head: this student is not Turkish, but seemed to somehow work within a framework of Turkish, or is it Muslim??? "deservedness"/"rights to land", etc. in the region. Where is this thing coming from? What type of historiagraphy is this? Which academics/intellectuals, which political parties/groups are writing history in such a way? Why is even the history of modern Greek-Turkish relations taught in Pakistan? Who cares? And why? Anna K. In a message dated Tue, 16 Jul 2002 21:24:32 +0000, "Alex A" writes: > ?I like it how Turkish Studies Programs like the Florida Atlantic >University is named after a Turkish General, Kenan Evren, who invaded Cyprus >and instigated the 1980 coup. > ?Is this scholarship when the Turkish Government uses Turkish Studies for >its own propaganda machine in the USA? Health Lowry of Princeton Turkish >Studies was found to be paid by Turkey to deny the Armenian Genocide in his >research. Is this ethical scholarship? > ?Ottoman history should be studied as it how related or affected the Greeks >of Greece and Asia Minor. The way of life or what kind of hardships did the >Greeks endure? Also, Vryonis mentions how before the Turkic invasion and >assimiliation of Anatolia, that there were numerous churches, 400 bishops, >and Christians(Armenians, Greeks, Assyrians). What happened to them? They >were assimiliated to become Turks. Assimiliation whether forced or voluntary >is a form of killing another culture. > ?Did anyone know that the Greeks who fled Constantinople in 1453 started >the Renassiance in Florence and Venice? > ?Modern Greek Studies has put out great books, and professors do >interesting research. Congradulation to you all. > ?I posed some questions and comment for you to ponder and analyze. Everyone >is entitled to their own opinion. > ?Alexandros > > > >>From: George Baloglou >>To: Alex A >>CC: >>Subject: Re: [MGSA-L] question >>Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2002 17:02:34 -0400 (EDT) >> >> >> >>On Tue, 16 Jul 2002, Alex A wrote: >> >> > ? Is this a Ottoman History Forum or Modern Greek? >> >>One cannot discuss and understand Modern Greece without discussing and >>understanding the Ottoman Empire. Your seemingly misplaced question has >>some depth, though: Ottoman studies and Modern Greek studies are often >>carried out by the same academic departments (or even scholars), a fact >>that may and does have consequences, not the least because such studies >>are supported by the corresponding present-day states in qualitatively >>distinct ways ... that I leave to other list members to ponder :-) >> >> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? G. B. >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>List-Info: https://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/mgsa-l > > > > >_________________________________________________________________ >Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com > >_______________________________________________ >List-Info: https://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/mgsa-l > From AKarpathak at aol.com Wed Jul 17 07:47:26 2002 From: AKarpathak at aol.com (AKarpathak@aol.com) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:53 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Turkish History Message-ID: <65E7C9C1.6CA7B717.09E588BC@aol.com> June, Victor Roudometoff has written on the Balkans post-Ottoman period and how this multi-ethnic, multi-religious but predominantly Muslim Empire disintegrated into factioning ethno-confessional groups of the 20th & of course 21st century. Who knows, he may be working on something during the Ottoman period too??? :::))) I think he's on this list??? Anna K. In a message dated Tue, 16 Jul 2002 4:29:04 PM Eastern Standard Time, JUNESAM@aol.com writes: >> ? Is this a Ottoman History Forum or Modern Greek? >> ? ?-Alexandros > >Now, now, Alex ! > >Somehow feel it is just a little bit difficult to try to >understand the post-Byzantine history of Greece (or of >the Greeks in Asia Minor or in Egypt for example) if one >totally ignores the culture of the Turks in the Islamic world, >or neglects to research the structure & objectives of the >Ottoman administration or its policies during that period. > ? >An understanding of the factors which governed life during >those centuries is critical in trying to interpret the economic >and social and political consequences to Greeks between >1450 and 1800 :- > >Was it the fatalistic tenets of Islam, or the the dead hand of >a state bureaucracy that denied the Ottomans an artistic and >cultural "renaissance" ? > >Was it the same factors which inhibited them from developing >an Industrial and scientific Revolution revolution of their own ? > >Was it the initial division of their society by religious groupings >that prevented them from establishing a unified society with >strong common social and economic interests, one which need >not have cracked into disparate and antagonistic linguistic, >religious and nationalistic tribes as soon as the central >authority of the state was challenged by the modern world ? > >Most of the strongest ethnic hatreds we witness today are between >peoples who lived, until this past century or so, under Ottoman >jurisdiction. One which created a state, but which did not cultivate >a society in which all could share equally in either the responsibilities >or the rewards of living under an equitable civil government. >The Decline & Fall of the Ottoman Empire is, I think, in >some ways even more significant than that of Rome (though no >Gibbon has written it, yet ) and the consequences of >that failure still seem to reverberate through all these bloody >contemporary conflicts in the Middle East & the Balkans. > >To examine all of the factors involved in the way the Ottoman >Empire both gained and maintained its power for centuries >is also to gain an understanding of the the way Modern Greek >history & society developed both during the Turkokratia and since. > >(Is success yet assured in the campaign to change the role of >government employees in Greece from that of heavy handed >agents of the state into civil servants of the people ? >I can't quite imagine an Ottoman Ombudsman !) > >As a matter of fact not all Turkish historians & publishers are >totally blind to the realities of that period, or to alternate opinions >and interpretations of their past. For example I have just received >a translation into Turkish of Gerasimos Augustinos' book for >a client. I think Greek historians could equally benefit from >access to translations of useful Turkish materials into Greek. > >June Samaras > >KALAMOS BOOKS >725 Vermouth Ave. (# 1) >Mississauga, Ontario >Canada. L5A 3X5 > >Tel : 905-272-4841 >E-mail : kalamosbks@aol.com > >http://www.kalamosbooks.com >http://www.abebooks.com/home/SAMARAS/ > > >_______________________________________________ >List-Info: https://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/mgsa-l > From C.Buhayer at westminster.ac.uk Wed Jul 17 08:02:18 2002 From: C.Buhayer at westminster.ac.uk (buhayec) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:53 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Greeks, Ottomans & MGSA In-Reply-To: <2A7DAC56.50DD81BF.09E588BC@aol.com> Message-ID: A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/enriched Size: 5624 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/public/mgsa-l/attachments/20020717/05ee8064/attachment.bin From baloglou at Oswego.EDU Wed Jul 17 08:58:06 2002 From: baloglou at Oswego.EDU (George Baloglou) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:53 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] question In-Reply-To: <2605AC50.70C1A7FA.09E588BC@aol.com> Message-ID: > Mainland Greece was Turkish land. Turks were in the region before or > as long as the Greeks were (didn't ask him which precisely was the case > in his view.) The southern part of Cyprus is ruled by Greece. After a > 10 minute discussion in which I, a non-historian, was talking about the > history of the region, the student looked at me baffled. He kept asking > me, "are you sure?" "where did you learn this?" "says who?" > He said he learned history in school in Pakistan. Just a 'minor' recollection: two Muslim graduate students (one Egyptian, the other Jordanian/Palestinian) I personally knew about 15 years ago had trouble saying who came first to Palestine, the Romans or the British... G. B. From ssm at panafonet.gr Wed Jul 17 09:42:27 2002 From: ssm at panafonet.gr (Simeon Magliveras) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:54 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] beginings of turkish culture? Message-ID: <004101c22db0$f0cbd760$b321f9d5@simoswmtjisc08> Clearly the Turks did not end up on the doorstep to the Byzantine capital one day and take it the next. Question: When did the turkic people arrive in Asia Minor and how did they come in conflict with the 'Greeks' in the first place? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/public/mgsa-l/attachments/20020717/29fc9003/attachment.html From malista9 at hotmail.com Wed Jul 17 10:06:08 2002 From: malista9 at hotmail.com (Alex A) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:54 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] question Message-ID: Anna, Don't feel sorry. I have no hard feelings towards no one. I know for a sure fact that Pakistani History and people love the Turks and praise Ataturk. They study the Turkish version of history. Pakistani Muslims have alliances with Turks. -Alex _________________________________________________________________ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com From malista9 at hotmail.com Wed Jul 17 10:40:57 2002 From: malista9 at hotmail.com (Alex A) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:54 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] beginings of turkish culture? Message-ID: Simeon, Good question. People want to forget how Turks are actually from Central Asia(Kazakstan,Turkmenistan,Uzbekistan,Uyghurs)..not native to Asia Minor unlike the Armenians, Assyrians, Greeks, Georgians, Kurds, etc. Most of them Turks are Turks because their ancestors assimiliated to become Turkic Muslims. Pontos today, my friend reports, are numerous Pontian Greek Muslim villages. My Pontic Greek Russian friend who traveled to Pontos last year reported how he found many Greek Muslims who still spoke Greek. His family moved from Pontos to Russia close 70-80 years ago. Like Americans. All Americans are assimiliated Anglos, but many are not English but mixed German, Irish, Latin, Slavic, etc. -Alexandros >From: Simeon Magliveras >To: MGSA-L@uci.edu >Subject: [MGSA-L] beginings of turkish culture? >Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2002 19:42:27 +0300 > >Clearly the Turks did not end up on the doorstep to the Byzantine capital >one day and take it the next. > >Question: When did the turkic people arrive in Asia Minor and how did they >come in conflict with the 'Greeks' in the first place? > _________________________________________________________________ Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com From AKarpathak at aol.com Wed Jul 17 10:42:01 2002 From: AKarpathak at aol.com (AKarpathak@aol.com) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:54 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] question Message-ID: <39A410C8.378CB249.09E588BC@aol.com> Thanks Alex ::)) The question then is: what is the nature of these relationships, identitifications, affinities between who in Pakistan with whom/what in Turkish Ottoman history. My undersatnding is that nationalism takes two different forms in Turkey, one from secular one from religious sources. Both (like all versions of nationalism) are ultimately "imperialist" (don't mean to offend anyone here). But the historical reconstructions of the two differ. So, what are the connecting dots between the history this person was presenting and Turkish or Ottoman history? Anna K. In a message dated Wed, 17 Jul 2002 17:06:08 +0000, "Alex A" writes: > > >Anna, > ?Don't feel sorry. I have no hard feelings towards no one. I know for a >sure fact that Pakistani History and people love the Turks and praise >Ataturk. They study the Turkish version of history. > ?Pakistani Muslims have alliances with Turks. > ?-Alex > >_________________________________________________________________ >Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com > >_______________________________________________ >List-Info: https://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/mgsa-l > From ssm at panafonet.gr Wed Jul 17 14:06:45 2002 From: ssm at panafonet.gr (Simeon Magliveras) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:54 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Historic constuctions..contraditions Message-ID: <001601c22dd6$0d8645f0$cb23f9d5@simoswmtjisc08> It is not uncommon that the historical construction of the state be in 'reality' is made up of contradictory pasts. Just look at the Modern Greek, Hellenic- Byzantine construction of the state . Historic constructions focus on some elements and forgets others. Much of Byzantine beliefs are in direct opposition to Hellenic ones. Interestingly enough, I visited Tokapi several years ago, They have a sacred Islamic places in the middle of the palace which tie their Ottoman/ Islamic past to today. Relics of Mohamed are there with a letter to the Coptics telling them to either surrender to Allah or feel his wrath. This is not remembering a Turkish memory but an Islamic one. Just as the Greeks make a balancing act between their Hellenic, Byzantine and Ottoman legacies. Modern Turks must also do the same balancing act between their Ottoman/non-secular past and their Secular National Turkish present. ssm ----- Original Message ----- From: To: ""Alex A"" ; Cc: Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2002 8:42 PM Subject: Re: [MGSA-L] question > Thanks Alex ::)) > > The question then is: what is the nature of these relationships, identitifications, affinities between who in Pakistan with whom/what in Turkish Ottoman history. > > My undersatnding is that nationalism takes two different forms in Turkey, one from secular one from religious sources. Both (like all versions of nationalism) are ultimately "imperialist" (don't mean to offend anyone here). But the historical reconstructions of the two differ. > > So, what are the connecting dots between the history this person was presenting and Turkish or Ottoman history? > > Anna K. > > In a message dated Wed, 17 Jul 2002 17:06:08 +0000, "Alex A" writes: > > > > > > >Anna, > > Don't feel sorry. I have no hard feelings towards no one. I know for a > >sure fact that Pakistani History and people love the Turks and praise > >Ataturk. They study the Turkish version of history. > > Pakistani Muslims have alliances with Turks. > > -Alex > > > >_________________________________________________________________ > >Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com > > > >_______________________________________________ > >List-Info: https://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/mgsa-l > > > _______________________________________________ > List-Info: https://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/mgsa-l -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/public/mgsa-l/attachments/20020718/ea6c154f/attachment.html From dkatseto at bellatlantic.net Thu Jul 18 04:10:00 2002 From: dkatseto at bellatlantic.net (Christos D. Katsetos) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:54 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Historic constuctions..contraditions References: <001601c22dd6$0d8645f0$cb23f9d5@simoswmtjisc08> Message-ID: <3D36A209.F01E1558@bellatlantic.net> Simeon Magliveras wrote: > It is not uncommon that the historical construction of the state be in > > 'reality' is made up of contradictory pasts. Just look at the Modern > Greek, > Hellenic- Byzantine construction of the state . Historic > constructions > focus on some elements and forgets others. Much of Byzantine beliefs > are in > direct opposition to Hellenic ones. From ssm at panafonet.gr Thu Jul 18 02:57:18 2002 From: ssm at panafonet.gr (Simeon Magliveras) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:54 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Historic constuctions..contraditions References: <001601c22dd6$0d8645f0$cb23f9d5@simoswmtjisc08> <3D36A209.F01E1558@bellatlantic.net> Message-ID: <001301c22e41$81914b50$e723f9d5@simoswmtjisc08> An academic question is..... Is our constuction of Greece, Othodoxy, Romiosini, or what have you, the same as it was for people 70, 170 ,270 or 1270 years ago? I would beg to argue that our reality is not, and therefore our interpretation of culture is not. Sure there is a common thread between our past and our present but what we choose to remember and what we or past generations choose to forget alters our perseption of the present and the future. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/public/mgsa-l/attachments/20020718/f8a72648/attachment.html From ssm at panafonet.gr Thu Jul 18 03:04:51 2002 From: ssm at panafonet.gr (Simeon Magliveras) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:55 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Historic constuctions..contraditions References: <001601c22dd6$0d8645f0$cb23f9d5@simoswmtjisc08> <3D36A209.F01E1558@bellatlantic.net> Message-ID: <002101c22e42$8fc00300$e723f9d5@simoswmtjisc08> You Say, "But in the early 19th century Mnemosyne smiled upon individual ethnic histories while Lethe swallowed up ecumenical Orthodoxy. And almost two centuries later, as the chief representative of the Orthodox oikoumene stands here amid some of the greatest monuments of ancient Greece, we have yet to reconcile nationalism and Orthodoxy" I would beg to argue that Othodoxy a major part of the Modern Greek Identity. Why did over 3 mill. People sing a petition so as to keep religious affiliation on the national identity cards, even if it was a legacy of German Nazi occupation? ----- Original Message ----- From: Christos D. Katsetos To: Simeon Magliveras Cc: MGSA-L@uci.edu Sent: Thursday, July 18, 2002 2:10 PM Subject: Re: [MGSA-L] Historic constuctions..contraditions Simeon Magliveras wrote: It is not uncommon that the historical construction of the state be in 'reality' is made up of contradictory pasts. Just look at the Modern Greek, Hellenic- Byzantine construction of the state . Historic constructions focus on some elements and forgets others. Much of Byzantine beliefs are in direct opposition to Hellenic ones. From the perspective of Romiosini: " In Greek mythology, Mnemosyne, or Memory, had several children - Clio, Euterpe, Thalia, Melpomene, Terpsichore, Erato, Polymnia, Urania, and their leader, Calliope. Collectively known as the Muses, they came to be associated with the liberal arts or sciences. ............... Mnemosyne has forgotten Romiosyne! The history and life-giving legacy of Orthodox Christianity has been lost in the waters of oblivion. ............... The Mother Church was the repository of memory - our Mnemosyne, if you will - during those difficult centuries, and we who continue that tradition today are her children. But let us be clear about this: the memory preserved by the church during the Ottoman years was not of a single ethnic group, whether Greek of otherwise. As shown in Dr. Runciman's great books, the memory preserved by the Mother Church throughout the centuries was the memory of an Orthodox ecumenical civilization. But in the early 19th century Mnemosyne smiled upon individual ethnic histories while Lethe swallowed up ecumenical Orthodoxy. And almost two centuries later, as the chief representative of the Orthodox oikoumene stands here amid some of the greatest monuments of ancient Greece, we have yet to reconcile nationalism and Orthodoxy. The Mother Church believes that before this reconciliation can occur, Mnemosyne must reclaim ecumenical orthodoxy - the wayward child we gave up early last century. We must recover our Orthodox faith and heritage and proclaim its virtues. At this point, we must mention the similar treatment accorded our Muslim neighbors. They, too, have their faith dissected and their history disfigured.For this reason, the Ecumenical Patriarchate is a sponsor of "a dialogue of loving truth" between Muslims and Orthodox Christians. We hope to put behind what is unpleasant while putting forward the best values of humankind. We have a sacred duty, especially in light of our 540 years of co-existence in a predominantly Muslim milieu, to affirm the Christian gospel that we must "love God with all our heart and our neighbor as ourself". ................ Entire libraries have been written about nationalism. But a curious element of most nationalisms is the way they combine distant memories with new ideas. In art, this combination of old and new is called "post-modernism", and state-builders are certainly "artists" in the most literal sense of the world. The genesis of nationalism involves selective memory, and in the case of the Orthodox countries, nationalism has favoured past periods of ethnic glory over the combined splendour of Orthodox civilization. We lament this imbalance. Without the church, we of the Orthodox tradition can never have more than a lop-sided, skewed, and incomplete view of who we are. ............. If we respect our Greek Orthodox inheritance, others will likely respect it, too. We may yet rescue our inheritance - our parakatatheke from the oblivion to which it seems to have been doomed in the West." [Excerpts from the address by His Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch Varholomaios I, entitled "MNEMOSYNE AND THE CHILDREN OF MEMORY" (British Museum, London, on 12th November, 1993)] C.D.K. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/public/mgsa-l/attachments/20020718/5cf066b9/attachment.html From AKarpathak at aol.com Thu Jul 18 04:07:23 2002 From: AKarpathak at aol.com (AKarpathak@aol.com) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:55 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Historic constuctions..contraditions Message-ID: <74D41FB5.60E7FB32.09E588BC@aol.com> Alex, Greeks keep revisiting and rewriting their histories (yes, plural, there is no ONE history for any one group). While I am not a historian, I am fully aware of the fact that historiagraphy has a dialectical relationship with the society at the particular time in which a particular history is written. And so the histories written in the 70s were quite different from the histories written in the 90s. This has more to do with the political winds of the time than with the actual past itself--the "contradictions" were/are and will always be there in the same way that the "moon" was/is and short of the moon blowing up or deteriorating, will "always" be there. Now, what we choose to do with these "objective" realities is something else. Anna K. In a message dated Thu, 18 Jul 2002 00:06:45 +0300, Simeon Magliveras writes: >It is not uncommon that the historical construction of the state be in >'reality' is made up of contradictory pasts. Just look at the Modern Greek, >Hellenic- Byzantine construction of the state ?. Historic constructions >focus on some elements and forgets others. Much of Byzantine beliefs are in >direct opposition to Hellenic ones. >Interestingly enough, I visited Tokapi several years ago, They have a sacred >Islamic places in the middle of the palace which tie their Ottoman/ Islamic >past to today. Relics of Mohamed are there with a letter to the Coptics >telling them to either surrender to Allah or feel his wrath. This is not >remembering a Turkish memory but an Islamic one. >Just as the Greeks ?make a balancing act between their Hellenic, Byzantine >and Ottoman legacies. Modern Turks must also do the same balancing act >between their Ottoman/non-secular past and their Secular National Turkish >present. > >ssm >----- Original Message ----- >From: >To: ""Alex A"" ; >Cc: >Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2002 8:42 PM >Subject: Re: [MGSA-L] question > > >> Thanks Alex ::)) >> >> The question then is: what is the nature of these relationships, >identitifications, affinities between who in Pakistan with whom/what in >Turkish Ottoman history. >> >> My undersatnding is that nationalism takes two different forms in Turkey, >one from secular one from religious sources. ?Both (like all versions of >nationalism) are ultimately "imperialist" (don't mean to offend anyone >here). ?But the historical reconstructions of the two differ. >> >> So, what are the connecting dots between the history this person was >presenting and Turkish or Ottoman history? >> >> Anna K. >> >> In a message dated Wed, 17 Jul 2002 17:06:08 +0000, "Alex A" > writes: >> >> > >> > >> >Anna, >> > Don't feel sorry. I have no hard feelings towards no one. I know for a >> >sure fact that Pakistani History and people love the Turks and praise >> >Ataturk. They study the Turkish version of history. >> > Pakistani Muslims have alliances with Turks. >> > -Alex >> > >> >_________________________________________________________________ >> >Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com >> > >> >_______________________________________________ >> >List-Info: https://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/mgsa-l >> > >> _______________________________________________ >> List-Info: https://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/mgsa-l > > From AKarpathak at aol.com Thu Jul 18 04:32:44 2002 From: AKarpathak at aol.com (AKarpathak@aol.com) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:55 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Historic constuctions..contraditions Message-ID: <3396A684.3836E81E.09E588BC@aol.com> Christo, again let me repeat myself, lol: while I am not a historian, and am therefore not familiar with the details of the past, I can perhaps speak on some of the issues from personal experience and also a more contemporary perspective. First, let me ask the question: How did the Greek Orthodox Church, preserve Ancient Greek philosophies, etc. Somewhere along the way I heard a paper by a Greek historian that the Church in the Byzantium destroyed ancient documents. Elsewhere, I think in one of Umberto Eco's (spelling) books I read that ancient Greek documents had been saved by a Catholic monastic order??? What is the Hellenic tradition you refer to? Is it the Ancient Greece-Byzantium-Modern Greece-Diaspora? While growing up in Greece under the junta, I was educated in the following line of thought: Hellenism is: Ancient Greece, Byzantium, Modern Greece, all in one line of continuity. Anyway, enough for now bcz aol is going to kick me off!!! ughgh!!! I am not intending to be antagonistic here, I am simply asking the questions to "connect dots." Anna K. In a message dated Thu, 18 Jul 2002 19:10:00 +0800, "Christos D. Katsetos" writes: > > >Simeon Magliveras wrote: > >> It is not uncommon that the historical construction of the state be in >> >> 'reality' is made up of contradictory pasts. Just look at the Modern >> Greek, >> Hellenic- Byzantine construction of the state ?. Historic >> constructions >> focus on some elements and forgets others. Much of Byzantine beliefs >> are in >> direct opposition to Hellenic ones. > > >From the perspective of Romiosini: > >" In Greek mythology, Mnemosyne, or Memory, had several children - Clio, > >Euterpe, Thalia, Melpomene, Terpsichore, Erato, Polymnia, Urania, and >their leader, >Calliope. Collectively known as the Muses, they came to be associated >with >the liberal arts or sciences. >............... > >Mnemosyne has forgotten Romiosyne! The history and life-giving legacy of > >Orthodox Christianity has been lost in the waters of oblivion. > ............... > >The Mother Church was the repository of memory - our Mnemosyne, if you >will >- during those difficult centuries, and we who continue that tradition >today >are her children. But let us be clear about this: the memory preserved >by the >church during the Ottoman years was not of a single ethnic group, >whether >Greek of otherwise. As shown in Dr. Runciman's great books, the memory >preserved >by the Mother Church throughout the centuries was the memory of an >Orthodox >ecumenical civilization. > >But in the early 19th century Mnemosyne smiled upon individual ethnic >histories while Lethe swallowed up ecumenical Orthodoxy. And almost two >centuries >later, as the chief representative of the Orthodox oikoumene stands here >amid some >of the greatest monuments of ancient Greece, we have yet to reconcile >nationalism and Orthodoxy. > >The Mother Church believes that before this reconciliation can occur, >Mnemosyne must reclaim ecumenical orthodoxy - the wayward child we gave >up early last >century. We must recover our Orthodox faith and heritage and proclaim >its >virtues. > >At this point, we must mention the similar treatment accorded our Muslim > >neighbors. They, too, have their faith dissected and their history >disfigured.For this reason, the Ecumenical Patriarchate is a sponsor of >"a dialogue of >loving truth" between Muslims and Orthodox Christians. We hope to put >behind >what is unpleasant while putting forward the best values of humankind. >We >have a sacred duty, especially in light of our 540 years of co-existence >in a >predominantly Muslim milieu, to affirm the Christian gospel that we must > >"love God with all our heart and our neighbor as ourself". >................ > >Entire libraries have been written about nationalism. But a curious >element >of most nationalisms is the way they combine distant memories with new >ideas. >In art, this combination of old and new is called "post-modernism", and >state-builders are certainly "artists" in the most literal sense of the >world. The genesis of nationalism involves selective memory, and in the >case of the >Orthodox countries, nationalism has favoured past periods of ethnic >glory >over the combined splendour of Orthodox civilization. > >We lament this imbalance. Without the church, we of the Orthodox >tradition >can never have more than a lop-sided, skewed, and incomplete view of who >we are. >............. > >If we respect our Greek Orthodox inheritance, others will likely respect >it, >too. We may yet rescue our inheritance - our parakatatheke from the >oblivion >to which it seems to have been doomed in the West." > >[Excerpts from the address by His Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch >Varholomaios I, entitled ?"MNEMOSYNE AND THE CHILDREN OF MEMORY" >(British Museum, London, on 12th November, 1993)] > >C.D.K. > From info at caratzas.com Thu Jul 18 04:46:06 2002 From: info at caratzas.com (Philobiblos 315) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:55 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Historic constuctions..contraditions References: <001601c22dd6$0d8645f0$cb23f9d5@simoswmtjisc08> <3D36A209.F01E1558@bellatlantic.net> <002101c22e42$8fc00300$e723f9d5@simoswmtjisc08> Message-ID: <3D36AA5D.D4FBDA59@caratzas.com> While there is time to take part in your historiographic discussion, I would like to correct an error of fact; identity cards preexisted the German occupation of Greece and were not its "legacy." A number of governments issued these (with pretty much the same range of information included), certainly since the teens of the last century. Indeed, if identity played a role during the occupation, it was often the deliberate issuance of these by the police, with false information in order to protect the holders from the Germas (i.e. Evert's issuance of identification cards to Jews with the false religious designation of "Christian Orthodox"). This is not to suggest that there were not all manner of other forgeries of this kind of document. Aristide Caratzas Simeon Magliveras wrote: > I would beg to argue that Othodoxy a major part of the Modern Greek > Identity. Why did over 3 mill. People sing a petition so as to keep > religious affiliation on the national identity cards, even if it was a > legacy of German Nazi occupation? > > From AKarpathak at aol.com Thu Jul 18 04:47:56 2002 From: AKarpathak at aol.com (AKarpathak@aol.com) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:55 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Historic constuctions..contraditions Message-ID: <499118AC.03497326.09E588BC@aol.com> Simeon: the question of why 3 million people signed the petition to keep religion ont he id cards is more related to current immigration issues than the Greeks' histories. That which distinguishes Greeks from Albanians and Philipinos and all other immigrants is Church affiliation. This is becoming the litmus test for "true nationhood"--to distinguish between us & them. This is a form of what the Soviets did to Jews where nationality was written on id cards. Funny you mention the Nazis bcz some would go so far as to say that this is a method they also used... (I am here of course not suggesting anything close between Greece and Nazi Germany or ex-Soviet Union...) BUT... religion is the marker used to distinguish "blood lineage" in Greece these days. Anna K. Anna K. In a message dated Thu, 18 Jul 2002 13:04:51 +0300, Simeon Magliveras writes: >You Say, "But in the early 19th century Mnemosyne smiled upon individual ethnic >histories while Lethe swallowed up ecumenical Orthodoxy. And almost two centuries >later, as the chief representative of the Orthodox oikoumene stands here amid some >of the greatest monuments of ancient Greece, we have yet to reconcile >nationalism and Orthodoxy" > >I would beg to argue that Othodoxy a major part of the Modern Greek Identity. Why did over 3 mill. People sing a petition so as to keep religious affiliation on the national identity cards, even if it was a legacy of German Nazi occupation? > > > > > ?----- Original Message ----- > ?From: Christos D. Katsetos > ?To: Simeon Magliveras > ?Cc: MGSA-L@uci.edu > ?Sent: Thursday, July 18, 2002 2:10 PM > ?Subject: Re: [MGSA-L] Historic constuctions..contraditions > > > ? ? > ?Simeon Magliveras wrote: > > ? ?It is not uncommon that the historical construction of the state be in > ? ?'reality' is made up of contradictory pasts. Just look at the Modern Greek, > ? ?Hellenic- Byzantine construction of the state ?. Historic constructions > ? ?focus on some elements and forgets others. Much of Byzantine beliefs are in > ? ?direct opposition to Hellenic ones. > ? ? > ?From the perspective of Romiosini: > ?" In Greek mythology, Mnemosyne, or Memory, had several children - Clio, > ?Euterpe, Thalia, Melpomene, Terpsichore, Erato, Polymnia, Urania, and their leader, > ?Calliope. Collectively known as the Muses, they came to be associated with > ?the liberal arts or sciences. > ?............... > > ?Mnemosyne has forgotten Romiosyne! The history and life-giving legacy of > ?Orthodox Christianity has been lost in the waters of oblivion. > ? ............... > > ?The Mother Church was the repository of memory - our Mnemosyne, if you will > ?- during those difficult centuries, and we who continue that tradition today > ?are her children. But let us be clear about this: the memory preserved by the > ?church during the Ottoman years was not of a single ethnic group, whether > ?Greek of otherwise. As shown in Dr. Runciman's great books, the memory preserved > ?by the Mother Church throughout the centuries was the memory of an Orthodox > ?ecumenical civilization. > > ?But in the early 19th century Mnemosyne smiled upon individual ethnic > ?histories while Lethe swallowed up ecumenical Orthodoxy. And almost two centuries > ?later, as the chief representative of the Orthodox oikoumene stands here amid some > ?of the greatest monuments of ancient Greece, we have yet to reconcile > ?nationalism and Orthodoxy. > > ?The Mother Church believes that before this reconciliation can occur, > ?Mnemosyne must reclaim ecumenical orthodoxy - the wayward child we gave up early last > ?century. We must recover our Orthodox faith and heritage and proclaim its > ?virtues. > > ?At this point, we must mention the similar treatment accorded our Muslim > ?neighbors. They, too, have their faith dissected and their history > ?disfigured.For this reason, the Ecumenical Patriarchate is a sponsor of "a dialogue of > ?loving truth" between Muslims and Orthodox Christians. We hope to put behind > ?what is unpleasant while putting forward the best values of humankind. We > ?have a sacred duty, especially in light of our 540 years of co-existence in a > ?predominantly Muslim milieu, to affirm the Christian gospel that we must > ?"love God with all our heart and our neighbor as ourself". > ?................ > > ?Entire libraries have been written about nationalism. But a curious element > ?of most nationalisms is the way they combine distant memories with new ideas. > ?In art, this combination of old and new is called "post-modernism", and > ?state-builders are certainly "artists" in the most literal sense of the > ?world. The genesis of nationalism involves selective memory, and in the case of the > ?Orthodox countries, nationalism has favoured past periods of ethnic glory > ?over the combined splendour of Orthodox civilization. > > ?We lament this imbalance. Without the church, we of the Orthodox tradition > ?can never have more than a lop-sided, skewed, and incomplete view of who we are. > ?............. > > ?If we respect our Greek Orthodox inheritance, others will likely respect it, > ?too. We may yet rescue our inheritance - our parakatatheke from the oblivion > ?to which it seems to have been doomed in the West." > > ?[Excerpts from the address by His Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch Varholomaios I, entitled ?"MNEMOSYNE AND THE CHILDREN OF MEMORY" (British Museum, London, on 12th November, 1993)] > > ?C.D.K. > > From info at caratzas.com Thu Jul 18 05:10:15 2002 From: info at caratzas.com (Philobiblos 315) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:55 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Historic constuctions..contraditions References: <3396A684.3836E81E.09E588BC@aol.com> Message-ID: <3D36B001.67D0FE3@caratzas.com> AKarpathak@aol.com wrote: > Christo, > again let me repeat myself, lol: while I am not a historian, and am therefore not familiar with the details of the past, I can perhaps speak on some of the issues from personal experience and also a more contemporary perspective. > > First, let me ask the question: How did the Greek Orthodox Church, preserve Ancient Greek philosophies, etc. Somewhere along the way I heard a paper by a Greek historian that the Church in the Byzantium destroyed ancient documents. Elsewhere, I think in one of Umberto Eco's (spelling) books I read that ancient Greek documents had been saved by a Catholic monastic order??? > > What is the Hellenic tradition you refer to? Is it the Ancient Greece-Byzantium-Modern Greece-Diaspora? > While growing up in Greece under the junta, I was educated in the following line of thought: Hellenism is: Ancient Greece, Byzantium, Modern Greece, all in one line of continuity. > > Anyway, enough for now bcz aol is going to kick me off!!! ughgh!!! I am not intending to be antagonistic here, I am simply asking the questions to "connect dots." > > Anna K. > Given the same proviso as in my previous message about the shortage of time, you may want to begin educating yourself about the role of education and transmission of learning played by the (Eastern) Orthodox Church during the Middle Ages, by familiarizing yourself with the work of scholars like Milton Anastos, Demetrios Constantelos, Hans George Beck and many others, etc. This is a vast topic. In short, a relatively general sojourn through Mediaeval Greek (Byzantine) intellectual history will go a long way towards filling the gap in your knowledge. Some salient facts: Virtually all ancient Greek texts (about 98% according to the polymath Anastos) were transmitted to the western Europeans during the late Middle Ages and the Renaissance via the Byzantium. The texts transmitted via Arabic, Syriac etc constitute the remainder (I mention this because it has become an unfortunate and inaccurate cliche to credit the Arabs as "transitters" of ancient Greek knowledge). Some basic examples, Eustathius, Archbishop of Thessalonica (12th C) to this day remains the greatest editor of the Homeric corpus (and many other ancient textst); Patriarch Photius's Bibliotheke (9th C) provides one of the major inventories of works of antiquity. And so on... The point is, as Demetrios Constantelos, never tires of pointing out, that the Greek Church was the major agent that provided not only education (at all levels), but also most all of what we call social services (from hospitals, orphanages, poor houses, homes for battered women etc) throughout the Middle Ages and the Tourkokratia. This is a vast field and it does and it befits scholars and educated laymen at least to get a grasp on its and to avoid facile explanations. On the most basic level history consists of the process by which we gain knowledge (the word "history" derives from the perfect tense of the verb "oida," i.e. to see, hence to know). What we do with the knowledge we gain goes to the next levels, about which the current discussion string... Cheers, Aristide Caratzas From AKarpathak at aol.com Thu Jul 18 05:54:32 2002 From: AKarpathak at aol.com (AKarpathak@aol.com) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:55 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Historic constuctions..contraditions Message-ID: <267F7F62.48DAB2A4.09E588BC@aol.com> Aristede: with all due respect, I will reply to your posting in kind: "a re file, true to the Greek spirit!!!" Thank you for your educational info!!! I will, if I have the time, repost your message in a way that is a bit more befitting of two peers in dialogue. Anna K. In a message dated Thu, 18 Jul 2002 15:10:15 +0300, Philobiblos 315 writes: > > >AKarpathak@aol.com wrote: > >> Christo, >> again let me repeat myself, lol: while I am not a historian, and am therefore not familiar with the details of the past, I can perhaps speak on some of the issues from personal experience and also a more contemporary perspective. >> >> First, let me ask the question: How did the Greek Orthodox Church, preserve Ancient Greek philosophies, etc. ?Somewhere along the way I heard a paper by a Greek historian that the Church in the Byzantium destroyed ancient documents. ?Elsewhere, I think in one of Umberto Eco's (spelling) books I read that ancient Greek documents had been saved by a Catholic monastic order??? >> >> What is the Hellenic tradition you refer to? ?Is it the Ancient Greece-Byzantium-Modern Greece-Diaspora? >> While growing up in Greece under the junta, I was educated in the following line of thought: Hellenism is: Ancient Greece, Byzantium, Modern Greece, all in one line of continuity. >> >> Anyway, enough for now bcz aol is going to kick me off!!! ughgh!!! ?I am not intending to be antagonistic here, I am simply asking the questions to "connect dots." >> >> Anna K. >> > >Given the same proviso as in my previous message about the shortage of time, you may want to begin educating yourself about the role of education and transmission of learning played by the (Eastern) Orthodox Church during the Middle Ages, by familiarizing yourself with the work of scholars like Milton Anastos, Demetrios Constantelos, Hans George Beck and many others, etc. >This is a vast topic. > >In short, a relatively general sojourn through Mediaeval Greek (Byzantine) intellectual history will go a long way towards filling the gap in your knowledge. > >Some salient facts: Virtually all ancient Greek texts (about 98% according to the polymath Anastos) were transmitted to the western Europeans during the late Middle Ages and the Renaissance via the Byzantium. The texts transmitted via Arabic, Syriac etc constitute the remainder (I mention this because it has become an unfortunate and inaccurate cliche to credit the Arabs as >"transitters" of ancient Greek knowledge). Some basic examples, Eustathius, Archbishop of Thessalonica (12th C) to this day remains the greatest editor of the Homeric corpus (and many other ancient textst); Patriarch Photius's Bibliotheke (9th C) provides one of the major inventories of works of antiquity. And so on... > >The point is, as Demetrios Constantelos, never tires of pointing out, that the Greek Church was the major agent that provided not only education (at all levels), but also most all of what we call social services (from hospitals, orphanages, poor houses, homes for battered women etc) throughout the Middle Ages and the Tourkokratia. > >This is a vast field and it does and it befits scholars and educated laymen at least to get a grasp on its and to avoid facile explanations. On the most basic level history consists of the process by which we gain knowledge (the word "history" derives from the perfect tense of the verb "oida," i.e. to see, hence to know). What we do with the knowledge we gain goes to the next >levels, about which the current discussion string... > >Cheers, >Aristide Caratzas > >_______________________________________________ >List-Info: https://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/mgsa-l > From AKarpathak at aol.com Thu Jul 18 05:58:17 2002 From: AKarpathak at aol.com (AKarpathak@aol.com) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:55 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Historic constuctions..contraditions Message-ID: <1D9AC248.0D0F45C9.09E588BC@aol.com> Here it is with quite slight editing: please scroll down. In a message dated Thu, 18 Jul 2002 15:10:15 +0300, Philobiblos 315 writes: ___________________ > > delete [Given the same proviso as in my previous message about the shortage of time, you may want to begin educating yourself about]delete the role of education and transmission of learning played by the (Eastern) Orthodox Church during the Middle Ages, by familiarizing yourself with the work of scholars like Milton Anastos, Demetrios Constantelos, Hans George Beck and many others, etc. >This is a vast topic. > [ DELETE [In short, a relatively general sojourn through Mediaeval Greek (Byzantine) intellectual history will go a long way towards filling the gap in your knowledge.] delete > >Some salient facts: Virtually all ancient Greek texts (about 98% according to the polymath Anastos) were transmitted to the western Europeans during the late Middle Ages and the Renaissance via the Byzantium. The texts transmitted via Arabic, Syriac etc constitute the remainder (I mention this because it has become an unfortunate and inaccurate cliche to credit the Arabs as >"transitters" of ancient Greek knowledge). Some basic examples, Eustathius, Archbishop of Thessalonica (12th C) to this day remains the greatest editor of the Homeric corpus (and many other ancient textst); Patriarch Photius's Bibliotheke (9th C) provides one of the major inventories of works of antiquity. And so on... > >The point is, as Demetrios Constantelos, never tires of pointing out, that the Greek Church was the major agent that provided not only education (at all levels), but also most all of what we call social services (from hospitals, orphanages, poor houses, homes for battered women etc) throughout the Middle Ages and the Tourkokratia. > >This is a vast field and it does and it befits scholars and educated laymen at least to get a grasp on its and to avoid facile explanations. On the most basic level history consists of the process by which we gain knowledge (the word "history" derives from the perfect tense of the verb "oida," i.e. to see, hence to know). What we do with the knowledge we gain goes to the next >levels, about which the current discussion string... > >Cheers, >Aristide Caratzas CHEERS, Anna K. > >_______________________________________________ >List-Info: https://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/mgsa-l > From aleka at eden.rutgers.edu Thu Jul 18 07:32:38 2002 From: aleka at eden.rutgers.edu (Alexandra Filindra) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:55 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Historic constuctions..contraditions In-Reply-To: <3D36AA5D.D4FBDA59@caratzas.com> Message-ID: I think that the "legacy" that was discussed was not that of identity cards, but rather that of using them to target and destroy a minority population, i.e. the Holocaust. Identity cards or their equivalent (pistopioitiko ethnikofrosinis that Maniadakis came up with) have a long history in Greece. Fromthe late 1920s when Venizelos started to target the Communist Left, such devises have been used to help identify and persecute Communists. Alexandra On Thu, 18 Jul 2002, Philobiblos 315 wrote: > Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2002 14:46:06 +0300 > From: Philobiblos 315 > To: Simeon Magliveras , MGSA-L@uci.edu > Subject: [MGSA-L] Historic constuctions..contraditions > > While there is time to take part in your historiographic discussion, I > would like to correct an error of fact; identity cards preexisted the > German occupation of Greece and were not its "legacy." A number of > governments issued these (with pretty much the same range of information > included), certainly since the teens of the last century. > > Indeed, if identity played a role during the occupation, it was often > the deliberate issuance of these by the police, with false information > in order to protect the holders from the Germas (i.e. Evert's issuance > of identification cards to Jews with the false religious designation of > "Christian Orthodox"). This is not to suggest that there were not all > manner of other forgeries of this kind of document. > > Aristide Caratzas > > > > Simeon Magliveras wrote: > > > I would beg to argue that Othodoxy a major part of the Modern Greek > > Identity. Why did over 3 mill. People sing a petition so as to keep > > religious affiliation on the national identity cards, even if it was a > > legacy of German Nazi occupation? > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > List-Info: https://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/mgsa-l > *=====*=====*=====*=====*=====*=====*=====*=====*=====*========* Alexandra Filindra | Department of Political Science | Rutgers-The State University of New Jersey | ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ School Address: | Home Address: | Department of Political Science | 51A Phelps Avenue | Hickman Hall | New Brunswick NJ 08901 | New Brunswick NJ 08903 | | fax: (908) 932-7170 | tel: (908) 296-0043 | _______________________________________________________________| From dgw1 at nyu.edu Thu Jul 18 09:38:09 2002 From: dgw1 at nyu.edu (Diana Wright) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:55 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Turks & Byzantium Message-ID: Someone asked recently about when the Turks first appeared in the Byzantine Empire. During the reign of Justinian [depending on whether you consider him Roman or Byzantine; as a Byzantine historian, I see him as Roman]. The Turks at that point extended into the northern Caucasas & had much to do with controlling the silk trade. Justin II made a treaty with them against the Persians. [If you consider Attila the Hun of Turkoman persuasion, then they were coming through in the late 4th/early 5th C.] The Seljuk Turks appear in Byzantine records in the mid-11th century, as the Arabs were less of a problem, & seemed to deflect some of the Persian energy. The Seljuks were eventually defeated by the Ottoman Turks. The Turks are & were many peoples. Assumptions about Ottoman rule [& oppression] have to be examined by date and area to know what was enforced where & when. For most of the time in power, the Ottomans were extremely flexible in rule which was primarily by meritocracy. My research at present focuses on Venetian-Ottoman diplomatics concerning Greece in the later 15thC & this quality is very much to the fore in my documents. List members may be amused by some excerpts fromDe Administrando Imperio written by Constantine VII Porphyrogenitus ca. 950 AD [Moravcsik/Jenkins ed.] Hear now, my son, those things of which I think you should not be ignorant . . . I conceive that it is greatly to the advantage of the emperor of the Romans to be minded to keep the peace with the nation of the Pechenegs. . . .The nation of the Pechenegs is neighbor to the district ofg Cherson and if they are not friendly disposed toward us, they may make excursions and plundering raids against Cherson . . . . The Pechenegs are neighbors to and march with the Russians and when the two are not at peace, raid Russia and do her condierable harm and outrage. . . . The tribe of the Turks, too, trembles greatly at and fears the Pechnegs because they have often been defeated by them and brought to the verge of complete annihilation. . . . So long as the emperor of the Romans is at peace with the Pechenegs neither Russians nor Turks can come upon the Romans. . . .For the Pechenegs can easily come upon the country of the Russians and the Turks and enslave their women and children. . . .Once when the cleric Gabriel was dispatched by imperial mandate to the Turks and said to them, "The emperor declares that you are to go and expel the Pechenegs from their place and settle yourselves there so that you may be near to my imperial majesty," . . . then all the chief men of the Turks cried aloud with one voice, "We are not putting ourselves on the track of the Pechenegs for we cannot fight them because their country is great and their people numerous and they are the devil's brats; and do not say this to us again; for we do not like it." From dkatseto at bellatlantic.net Fri Jul 19 11:18:17 2002 From: dkatseto at bellatlantic.net (Christos D. Katsetos) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:55 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Historic constuctions..contraditions References: <001601c22dd6$0d8645f0$cb23f9d5@simoswmtjisc08> <3D36A209.F01E1558@bellatlantic.net> <001301c22e41$81914b50$e723f9d5@simoswmtjisc08> Message-ID: <3D3857E8.CEBA2D76@bellatlantic.net> As Professor Clifton Fox eloquently asserts in his article "What, if anything, is a Byzantine?" [http://wwwtc.nhmccd.cc.tx.us/people/crf01/romaion/] "The names by which things are called are important in shaping our interpretation of reality. People are often surprised to discover that historical labels which define the past are inventions of later scholarship and ideology, not parts of the past itself. Men and women of the Middle Ages did not know that they lived in the Middle Ages: people who lived in Classical Athens or Renaissance Italy suffered the same disability. The people of the "Byzantine Empire" had no idea that they were Byzantine. They regarded themselves as the authentic continuators of the Roman world: the Romans [viz. Romaioi (RWMAIOI)] living in Romania [viz. Rwmania (RWMANIA)]." [vide infra]. "Modern Greeks call themselves "Hellenes," like the ancient Greeks did. The switch from "Romaioi" back to "Hellene," like the switch from "Vlach" to "Romanian," came from the politics of nationalism in modern times. Greeks needed Western European help to become independent in the early nineteenth century. The Greeks were not likely to attract assistance if the Western peoples thought of Greeks as Byzantines. However, if the Greeks were imagined as the children of Plato and Pericles, then the sympathies of educated Westerners, steeped in the Classical tradition, would be with Greece. In the Greek Revolution of 1832, the "Philhellenic"[Greek loving] sympathies of Britain and other European governments were deeply engaged. Intervention on behalf of Greek independence proved decisive. The name of "Hellene" was revived in order to create a national image which rejected the "Byzantine" past. " Fox?s thesis echoes the words of Ecumenical Patriarch Vartholomaios I -- "The Renaissance was supposed to be a "rebirth" of classical civilization - and to some degree, it was. Western scholars created a different name for the New Rome that had not only survived, but flourished another millennium in the East - thus was born the term "Byzantine Empire" [Excerpt from the address by His Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch Vartholomaios I, entitled "MNEMOSYNE AND THE CHILDREN OF MEMORY" (British Museum, London, 12.XI.1993)] With all due respect, ?Romiosini? (Rwmiosunh) is not a ?construct? but a legacy of culture and tradition of the Eastern Christendom that did not seize to exist after the Fall of Constantinople thus enduring centuries of Ottoman rule. Not only has Romiosini survived, but flourished through difficult times lending credence to the view expressed by the late Sir Steven Runciman that "The Greeks have never lived a Dark Age, as History shows." The inclusive spirit and totality of Romiosini ?embodied in the metaphore "To Genos"- is at the very core of Ecumenical Orthodoxy and defy ipso facto ethno-linguistic barriers and tribal mentality. The so-called ?national cleavages? and ?awakenings? of the 19th century represent foreign imports to the region. Let it be known in no uncertain terms that ?nationalism? is inherently antithetical to the teachings and tradition of the Mother Church. [After all, the Ecumenical Patriarchate was the ?quintessential? victim of nationalism] Once again, quoting the Ecumenical Patriarch [Excerpts from the address by His Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch Vartholomaios I, entitled "MNEMOSYNE AND THE CHILDREN OF MEMORY" (British Museum, London, 12.XI.1993) ]-- "We must also decry the simplification of Byzantium as "Greek [viz. Hellenic]". The Roman Empire was ecumenical. Whether Latin of Greek predominated in Constantinople, ours was a multiethnic empire, with the church willing to use the local language to convey the world of God. Thus were the Slavs and others converted to Orthodoxy and brought into the orbit of our Roman civilization. And the ecumenical idea, the notion that held together the diverse Christian communities under the rubric of New Rome, was reinforced under the Ottomans ? whose own empire, let us remember, was also multiethnic and often tolerant. It was Mehmet II, the Conqueror of Constantinople, who sought out the greatest ecclesiastical personality of the time, George Scholarios, and enthroned him as Ecumenical Patriarch Gennadios - head of the Rum Millet and spiritual leader of the entire Orthodox world. The Mother Church was the repository of memory - our Mnemosyne, if you will - during those difficult centuries, and we who continue that tradition today are her children. But let us be clear about this: the memory preserved by the church during the Ottoman years was not of a single ethnic group, whether Greek [viz. Hellenic] or otherwise. As shown in Dr. Runciman's great books, the memory preserved by the Mother Church throughout the centuries was the memory of an Orthodox ecumenical civilization. ??. The emphasis on national or ethnic heritage has had the effect of fragmenting the family of our ecumenical civilizations - from Russians and Georgians to Albanians and Romanians. This is particularly disturbing because nationalism is a phenomenon, with disastrous consequences. The holy Orthodox Church searched long for a language with which to address nationalism, amid the strife and havoc this new idiology created in the Orthodox lands of Eastern Europe and for much of the 19th century. In 1972, the Holy Synod issued a definitive condemnation of the sin of phyletism, saying, "We renounce, censure and condemn racism, that is, racial discrimination, ethnic feuds, hatreds, and dissensions within the Church of Christ..." Today, more than a century later, nationalism remains the bane of our ecumenical church?." Turning now to the question of ?national constructs? and ?ethno-nomenclature?, one should look primarily to the west. The paradigm of the present-day nation called Romania is particularly compelling in this regard. According to Clifton Fox [vide supra], "One might wonder why the name "Romania" became applied to the present nation called Romania. The association of the name "Romania" with the present nation "Romania" stems from the nineteenth century. In their first appearances in the historical record of the Middle Ages, the Romanians were called "Vlachs" [viz. Wallachs] by chroniclers from Hungary and Constantinople. A principality called "Wallachia" emerged among the Vlachs before [c.]1300. Separate Vlach principalities of Moldavia and Transylvania followed. Later, scholars realized that the Vlach language derived from Latin; Vlach was a sister language to Italian, French and Spanish. How did Latin speakers find their way to this remote part of Europe north of the Danube River? Scholars developed the theory that the Vlachs were descended from Roman colonists and Latinized natives who lived in the area north of the Danube River during the second and third centuries AD. In the period, the region constituted the Roman province of Dacia. Whether the theory is right or not, it became the basis of Romanian nationalist feeling in the nineteenth century. The idea of a Roman [viz. in the western ?non-byzantine? context] descent gave Vlachs new pride in themselves. After Wallachia and Moldavia coalesced into a single entity in 1859, the name "Romania" was selected in 1862 to describe the combined state. At the time, Romanian unity and independence required the support of France under Emperor Napoleon III [1852-1870]. The "Latin connection" with France aided the Romanian cause by inspiring French interest in their "sister nation" of Romania. In light of the late date at which modern Romania acquired its name, it appears clear that earlier, the term "Romania [RWMANIA ]" referred to the territory where the Greek speaking "Romaioi [RWMAIOI]" lived. For more than a millennium, the state that we call, inaccurately, the Byzantine Empire was "Romania.[RWMANIA]" After the end of the Empire, Greek speaking inhabitants of the Ottoman Empire continued to call themselves "Romaioi." [By the same token, the loyalty of the Vlachs to the Patriarchate of Constantinople and their notable contributions to the building of the modern Greek State stand as a living testiment to the long endurance of Romiosini] Christos D. Katsetos, MD PhD MRCPath Drexel University College of Medicine and St. Christopher?s Hospital for Children Simeon Magliveras wrote: > An academic question is.....Is our constuction of Greece, Othodoxy, > Romiosini, or what have you, the same as it was for people 70, 170 > ,270 or 1270 years ago? I would beg to argue that our reality is not, > and therefore our interpretation of culture is not. Sure there is a > common thread between our past and our present but what we choose to > remember and what we or past generations choose to forget alters our > perseption of the present and the future. > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/public/mgsa-l/attachments/20020720/c415494c/attachment.html From KKasantsidi at NA2.US.ML.com Fri Jul 19 08:45:42 2002 From: KKasantsidi at NA2.US.ML.com (Kasantsidis, Kiriakos (USPC.PCT.Hopewell)) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:55 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Historic constuctions..contraditions Message-ID: > Greeks needed Western European help to become independent in the early nineteenth century. The Greeks were not likely to attract assistance if the Western peoples thought of Greeks as Byzantines. However, if the Greeks were imagined as the children of Plato and Pericles, then the sympathies of educated Westerners, steeped in the Classical tradition, would be with Greece. In the Greek Revolution of 1832 ?????? , the "Philhellenic"[Greek loving] sympathies of Britain and other European governments were deeply engaged. Intervention on behalf of Greek independence proved decisive. The name of "Hellene" was revived in order to create a national image which rejected the "Byzantine" past. " Pr Fox's argument strikes me as sophomoric. It seems to me that the overriding priority of the "artists" - to use Bartholomeo's expression - state-builders was not the rejection of the Byzantine past, but the rejection of the Ottoman past. The Ottoman legacy had to be asserted as utterly alien, its physical traces obliterated - how many minarets can you count in salonica today ? - and any ottoman heritage - cultural, ideological or symbolic - eradicated. To the state-builders, the nationalist ideologues and the warriors of the early 19th century, the "byzantine past" was not the symbol of an "oecumenical orthodoxy", but an ever-shrinking and vanquished little medieval state, utterly tainted by the ottoman presence. So, they threw the baby out with the water. It would also seem to me that those who seek today to re-integrate in the national ideology that "byzantine past" are also engaging in a similar "post-modernist" reconstruction, equally artistic, creative and selective. kiriakos -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/public/mgsa-l/attachments/20020719/442d9fe9/attachment.html From dkatseto at bellatlantic.net Sat Jul 20 18:39:37 2002 From: dkatseto at bellatlantic.net (Christos D. Katsetos) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:55 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Historic constuctions..contraditions References: Message-ID: <3D3A10D8.6A4936DE@bellatlantic.net> "Kasantsidis, Kiriakos (USPC.PCT.Hopewell)" wrote: > The Ottoman legacy had to be asserted as utterly alien, its physical traces obliterated - how many minarets can you count in salonica today ? I am afraid that the above remark leaves out an important facet in the minaret saga: In many instances, the removal of the towering minarets restored the original use of the buildings. "A tall minaret still towered over Saint Sophia, one of seventeen minarets in the city that I counted one day from the window of my room. St. Sophia in Thessaloniki was older than St. Sophia in Constantinople. Before long the government removed the tall minaret and placed over the doorway of the old Christian sanctuary two dates: 1430 in black figures, marking the establishment of Moslem worship in the building and government of the country; and 1912 in figures of gold marking the restoration of Christianity within the sanctuary and throughout Macedonia. By this time, most of the Turks had gone and the rest were expecting to go soon, on their way back to Turkey and Asia from which their forefathers had come." [Excerpt from the book by George E. White titled "Adventuring With Anatolia College" [passage #38 ?Thessaloniki, Greek Again (1923)?], Herald-Register Publishing Company: Grinnell, Iowa, 1940] http://www.oswego.edu/~baloglou/anatolia/anat-38.html On the other hand, the minarets in the Roman edifice Rotonda (in Thessaloniki) were never removed but ?fell victims? of the 1978 earthquake [it is my understanding that a crumbling portion of the tower still remains in place]. Rotonda was a Christian Church for at least a millenium before becoming a mosque, i.e. from some point between the late fourth century and the early sixth century A.D. until 1591 A.D.. Between the 10th and the 12th centuries, and again between 1525 and 1591 the Rotonda served as the Mitropolis of Thessaloniki. Some 161 years after the conquering of the city by the Ottomans the church was converted to a camii (mosque) by a janissary, named Georgios Khortatsis [in fact the tomb of Khortats Imam is still preserved in the environs of the Rotonda]. > It would also seem to me that those who seek today to re-integrate in the national ideology that "byzantine past" are also engaging in a similar "post-modernist" reconstruction, equally artistic, creative and selective. There is no need to ?re-integrate? the ?Byzantine past? in the modern Greek identity because the former constitutes an integral part of the Greek psyche and experience. It is noteworthy that the two present-day champions of Orthodox Ecumenism, notably Patriarch Vartholomaios and Archibishop Anastasios (of Albania), enjoy an unprecedented popularity among the mainstream democratic majority in Greece. C.D.K. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/public/mgsa-l/attachments/20020721/837973e8/attachment.html From JUNESAM at aol.com Sat Jul 20 10:34:22 2002 From: JUNESAM at aol.com (JUNESAM@aol.com) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:55 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Historic constuctions..contraditions Message-ID: <103.1885f0ef.2a6af91e@aol.com> > Some 161 years after the conquering of the > city by the Ottomans the church was converted to a camii (mosque) by a > janissary, named Georgios Khortatsis [in fact the tomb of Khortats Imam > is still preserved in the environs of the Rotonda]. Very interesting that the CHRISTIAN saint's name should still be attached to what was, obviously, in this context, a Muslim convert. Was this common, as opposed to adopting a more Islamic or Turkish name ? Was Khortats one of the children "co-opted" into the Jannissaries ? How often did such converts (voluntary or coerced by circumstances) retain their baptismal names or any contact with their birth families ? This example of the ecumenism of Islam - where profession of faith was the criterion of belonging, and NOT racial origin/ethnicity - and the present discussion where the concept of a"Greek" race is being so closely identified adherence to Orthodoxy is also striking. June Samaras KALAMOS BOOKS 725 Vermouth Ave. (# 1) Mississauga, Ontario Canada. L5A 3X5 Tel : 905-272-4841 E-mail : kalamosbks@aol.com http://www.kalamosbooks.com http://www.abebooks.com/home/SAMARAS/ From dkatseto at bellatlantic.net Sun Jul 21 01:13:38 2002 From: dkatseto at bellatlantic.net (Christos D. Katsetos) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:56 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Historic constuctions..contraditions References: <103.1885f0ef.2a6af91e@aol.com> Message-ID: <3D3A6D31.12FF6570@bellatlantic.net> JUNESAM@aol.com wrote: > > > This example of the ecumenism of Islam - where profession of > faith was the criterion of belonging, and NOT racial origin/ethnicity - > and the present discussion where the concept of a"Greek" race is > being so closely identified adherence to Orthodoxy is also striking. > "Race" and "ethno-phyletism" are pejorative words in the Christian Orthodox lexicon. The Greek word "Genos" (which is literally -albeit erroneously - translated as race) has a metaphorical connotation in this context. The Ecumenical Patriarch often addresses his multiethnic/multiracial flock as "TO GENOS" (TO GENOS) - viz. the Ecumenical Orthodoxy. "We must also decry the simplification of Byzantium as "Greek [viz. Hellenic]". The Roman Empire was ecumenical. Whether Latin of Greek predominated in Constantinople, ours was a multiethnic empire, with the church willing to use the local language to convey the world of God. Thus were the Slavs and others converted to Orthodoxy and brought into the orbit of our Roman civilization. And the ecumenical idea, the notion that held together the diverse Christian communities under the rubric of New Rome, was reinforced under the Ottomans whose own empire, let us remember, was also multiethnic and often tolerant. It was Mehmet II, the Conqueror of Constantinople, who sought out the greatest ecclesiastical personality of the time, George Scholarios, and enthroned him as Ecumenical Patriarch Gennadios - head of the Rum Millet and spiritual leader of the entire Orthodox world. ??. The emphasis on national or ethnic heritage has had the effect of fragmenting the family of our ecumenical civilizations - from Russians and Georgians to Albanians and Romanians. This is particularly disturbing because nationalism is a phenomenon, with disastrous consequences. The holy Orthodox Church searched long for a language with which to address nationalism, amid the strife and havoc this new ideology created in the Orthodox lands of Eastern Europe and for much of the 19th century. In 1972, the Holy Synod issued a definitive condemnation of the sin of phyletism, saying, "We renounce, censure and condemn racism, that is, racial discrimination, ethnic feuds, hatreds, and dissensions within the Church of Christ..." Today, more than a century later, nationalism remains the bane of our ecumenical church?." [Excerpts from the address by His Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch Vartholomaios I, entitled "MNEMOSYNE AND THE CHILDREN OF MEMORY" (British Museum, London, 12.XI.1993) ] C.D.K. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/public/mgsa-l/attachments/20020721/29b960bf/attachment.html From baloglou at Oswego.EDU Sat Jul 20 14:41:41 2002 From: baloglou at Oswego.EDU (George Baloglou) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:56 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] "GENOS" In-Reply-To: <3D3A6D31.12FF6570@bellatlantic.net> Message-ID: On Sun, 21 Jul 2002, Christos D. Katsetos wrote: > "Race" and "ethno-phyletism" are pejorative words in the Christian Orthodox > lexicon. The Greek word "Genos" (which is literally -albeit erroneously - > translated as race) has a metaphorical connotation in this context. The > Ecumenical Patriarch often addresses his multiethnic/multiracial flock as "TO > GENOS" (TO GENOS) - viz. the Ecumenical Orthodoxy. This usage is news to me -- good news, as I am always in favor of alliance among the Orthodox states :-) But if one looks at this word historically, there are problems. For example, in Axion Esti it clearly stands for the Greek nation ("tou Genous tov allo sikomo"/"the other revolt of [our] Genos"). Moreover, late Byzantine usage that I am familiar with does have a 'racial' connotation: "to genos ton romaion"/"the genos of the Romans" in Velissarios, "to genos ton gaidaron"/"the genos of the donkeys" in the Entertaining Tale of Quadrupeds. My feeling is that the Ecumenical meaning you are alluding to was born during the Ottoman Era and was limited to Orthodox Ottoman subjects, as "to genos ton Romaion" became "to Genos". Still, I am puzzled by the last line in Manuel Philes' Exposition of the Elephant: "autokrator megiste, tou genous leon" -- is the "greatest emperor" called "lion by breed" or "lion of the people"? Please help :-) G. B. From info at caratzas.com Sun Jul 21 07:23:48 2002 From: info at caratzas.com (J S Philobiblos, Sr.) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:56 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Historic constuctions..contraditions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: There is an epistemological problem with this discussion. The term ?genos? has a metaphorical connotation, as Dr. Katsetos points out. There was little by way of national charge and no racialist one in this term. This is amplified by historical reality: The Genos ton Rhomaion included all Orthodox Christians in the Ottoman Empire, Greeks, Slavs, Albanians, Moldo-Wallachians etc. On the other hand, members of this genos were defined as second class by the dominant Turco-Muslim culture. This issue of racialism or racism as pertains to Greek attitudes has been raised by those with distinctly western terms of reference: racism (the notion of linking national superiority or inferiority to biological traits) spins out of nineteenth century European scientific ideas. Indeed European racialist ideas were used also in an effort to justify the European powers? intervention in internal Greek affairs: the views of a number of scholars (cf. Fallmereyer etc) were enlisted to prove that those inhabiting Greece were not direct ?racial? descendants of the ancient Greeks, but Slavs, Albanians and other ?inferior? peoples. The suggestion was that the western Europeans, as racially ?superior? were justified in interfering not only in Greek, but also in Balkan affairs more generally. In my humble sense, we have witnessed a recent transmutation of these attitudes in an effort to justify western intervention in the Yugoslav civil wars; thus, the demonization of the Serbs (as opposed to the westernized Croats or Bosnian Muslims) derives from European racist stereotypes that have been given the cover of rhetoric of ideas about civil society etc. Interestingly biologists studying relationships between peoples by focusing on DNA markers and related methodologies appear to be concluding that there is little change in the biological substrate of the southern Balkans over the last 6,000-8,000 years, at least (see the work of Cavalli-Sforza et al.) The Greek reaction to this form of nineteenth century European racism in part fell into the trap of attempting to respond in terms set by the Europeans. The idea of and expression an ?Hellenike phyle? crept into the Greek parlance, though its impact actually was quite limited (this is a subject worthy of study). The response by Paparrhegopoulos et al, on the other hand, can be seen as signaling the effort to create the sense of cultural continuity between the ancient, mediaeval and modern periods. As for Orthodox Christianity?s approach toward ethnological realities: it is simply a fact that there exist differences of language and culture among people. This is probably one of the main universals. It is difficult to see how attempting to communicate the Word taking this reality into account is in any way deleterious. I see it as the opposite: it respects the identity of different peoples. The Holy Synod?s condemnation of racism is in a way superfluous: misanthropy in any form is condemned by Jesus and by the entire weight of Holy Tradition. Maybe it is too much to hope for, but Patriarch Bartholomew?s words can be read as a couched condemnation of the racist Kemalist regime, that until recently included the fascist Grey Wolves in the government of Turkey and that has been responsible for the extermination of religious and ethnic groups it has defined un-Turkish throughout its existence. Aristide Caratzas On 7/21/02 11:13 AM, "Christos D. Katsetos" wrote: > JUNESAM@aol.com wrote: > This example of the ecumenism of Islam - where profession of >> faith was the criterion of belonging, and NOT racial origin/ethnicity - >> and the present discussion where the concept of a"Greek" race is >> being so closely identified adherence to Orthodoxy is also striking. >> > "Race" and "ethno-phyletism" are pejorative words in the Christian Orthodox > lexicon. The Greek word "Genos" (which is literally -albeit erroneously - > translated as race) has a metaphorical connotation in this context. The > Ecumenical Patriarch often addresses his multiethnic/multiracial flock as "TO > GENOS" (TO GENOS) - viz. the Ecumenical Orthodoxy. > . . . > . > The emphasis on national or ethnic heritage has had the effect of fragmenting > the family of our ecumenical civilizations - from Russians and Georgians to > Albanians and Romanians. This is particularly disturbing because nationalism > is a phenomenon, with disastrous consequences. > The holy Orthodox Church searched long for a language with which to address > nationalism, amid the strife and havoc this new ideology created in the > Orthodox lands of Eastern Europe and for much of the 19th century. In 1872, > the Holy Synod issued a definitive condemnation of the sin of phyletism, > saying, "We renounce, censure and condemn racism, that is, racial > discrimination, ethnic feuds, hatreds, and dissensions within the Church of > Christ..." > Today, more than a century later, nationalism remains the bane of our > ecumenical church ." > [Excerpts from the address by His Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch Vartholomaios > I, entitled "MNEMOSYNE AND THE CHILDREN OF MEMORY" (British Museum, London, > 12.XI.1993) ] > C.D.K. > > > > ------ End of Forwarded Message -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/public/mgsa-l/attachments/20020721/d070eec5/attachment.html From dkatseto at bellatlantic.net Mon Jul 22 08:17:52 2002 From: dkatseto at bellatlantic.net (Christos D. Katsetos) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:56 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] "GENOS" References: Message-ID: <3D3C2220.64B0FF6@bellatlantic.net> George Baloglou wrote: > ..... But if one looks at this word historically, > there are problems. For example, in Axion Esti it clearly stands for the > Greek nation ("tou Genous tov allo sikomo"/"the other revolt of [our] Genos"). First, my applause to Aristide Caratzas for his eloquent analysis in an earlier posting. The Patriarchal definition of ?GENOS? embodies both Greek-speaking and non-Greek-speaking loyal followers of the Mother Church irrespective of ?phyletic? attributes or geographical boundaries. You are quite right insofar as ?TO GENOS TON ROMAION? refers to Orthodox Christians living in the Ottoman occupied territories. Traditionally, ?TO GENOS? has embraced Greek-speaking Romaioi/ Rum?Romioi?Greki (and later) Hellenes but also equally, non-Greek speaking groups loyal to the Patriarchate. The latter include the Slavonic-speaking ?Grecomans? as well as speakers of Latin-based dialects, viz. Vlachs, Arvanites, and Arvanito-Vlachi [N.B. The turkophone Rum (such as the ?Karamanlides?) and the Arabic-speaking Rum are also part of the "GENOS"]. When the Ecumenical Patriarch Vartholomaios addresses nowadays ?To GENOS? he does so with the entire flock in mind. How could the Mother Church vehemently condemn ?racialism? and in the same breath, attach the connotation of ?phyle? (race) to the word ?GENOS?? Again, in the Patriarchal definition "TO GENOS" represents if you will- an extension of the Rum Millet in?spirit. The national ?cleavages? and ?awakenings? of the 19th century Balkans have imparted a devastating fragmentation to the totality of Romiosyni. One of the key factors in the molding of the ?national identity? narrative in the emerging Balkan nations was language. However, in my view, language per se should be not be construed as an a priori criterion of national or ethnic differentiation in the prenationalistic period [vide infra]. [Below are excerpts from Basil C. Gounaris. Social cleavages and national "awakening" in Ottoman Macedonia. East European Quarterly 1995; 29:409-426] "The existence of parties with national affiliations instead of ethnic groups within the Christians of Macedonia and the undeniable fact that around 1900 national loyalties as a rule were not to be taken for granted puts the following vital question: whether in the years preceding nationalism or under the thin layer of nationalism the various Christian linguistic groups (Greek-, Vlach-, Albanian- and Slav-speakers) corresponded to different ethnic groups. In 1903 Noel Brailsford, a British journalist, met in Ochrid (medieval Achris), near the Byzantine ruins, a group of Slav-speaking village boys. When he asked them whether they knew who had built those ancient constructions they replied: `The free men, our ancestors'. `Were they Serbs, Bulgarians, Greeks or Turks?' asked the journalist. The boys responded: `No they were not Turks, they were Christians'. If the boys' answer represents an impartial or prenationalistic view, then it is most likely that some illiterate, non Greek-speaking peasant members of the Rumi-imillet in Macedonia (certainly not many amongst the fighting bandsmen), had treasured their previous cultural loyalties as late as the early twentieth century. In spite of all the ill digested national ideologies, they had been and some still were Romii (Romans) or Rum (terms which had a strong religious connotation), followers of the Ecumenical Patriarch, members of the Genos. This was a notion, which in many parts (some Macedonian regions included) had not yet developed into that of a modern national identity. They seemed to draw from an Eastern-Orthodox Byzantine cultural tradition, which had amalgamated a variety of regional and social subcultures, myths and memories, symbols and values. A tradition, which had always disregarded linguistic differences and had created a common mentality based on shared attitudes towards time, space, Muslim oppressors (i.e. the Turks), and `civilized' Europeans." As Aristide Caratzas points out, the ethno-linguistic diversity of the "GENOS" is indisputable. To this end, I should like to use the paradigm of the Vlachs in order to illustrate the very important contribution of this 'ethno-culturally' and ?ethno-linguistically? distinctive group to the shaping of Romiosyni and the creation of modern Greece and the modern Greek identity. [Below are excerpts from the Academy of Athens Award-winning book by Asterios Koukoudis ?Studies on the Vlachs. 2nd Vol. (Greek edition)- The Vlachs: Metropolis and Diaspora.? Zitros Publications: Thessaloniki, 2000] "A great deal of fiction also permeates the Vlachs? nomenclature. We mustn?t overlook the fact that the vast majority of the Vlachs, both within and beyond the borders of Greece, refer to themselves as Arm?n, pl. Arm?ni (Aroumanians), a term which has the same root as Romios pl. Romii, which is what the Greek-speaking populations called themselves until the term Ellinas pl. Ellines (Greeks or Hellenes) reasserted itself. It?s a fact that a number of historians and students of the Vlachs have ignored the historical background out of which the modern Greek nation emerged. Since they ignored or overlooked the Roman and Byzantine periods, it?s no wonder that they disregarded the Vlachs too. And it was only to be expected that a variety of self-appointed saviours and patrons should seek to claim the Vlachs out of this limbo. But in the end, despite indifference and often rejection, the Vlachs have emerged by their own efforts as a valuable component of modern Greek history and the modern Greek identity. The history of the Vlach populations is an inseparable part of the modern Greek experience and at the same time an important chapter in Balkan history. Without a doubt, the Vlachs are one of the fundamental vehicles of the Balkan dimension of modern Greece, a dimension which is sometimes disregarded and sometimes extolled. But when Vlach-related issues come to be regarded as taboo, then the most serious risk is that the Vlachs will start to feel alienated from their own space and their own homeland. Yet this sense of alienation conflicts with their collective memory, which has always identified them with Romiosyni. The Vlachs? journey from the Ottoman millet-i-r?m to the re-establishment of the Greek nation was essentially no different from that of other groups, whether Greek-speaking or not, who in the same period (19th?20th century) found themselves taking part in the nation-building ferment and changes which helped to shape the modern Greek identity." "Even after a millet-i-ullah (a Vlach (not ?Romanian?) administrative division), was recognised in 1905 [viz. by the Sultan], the Vlachs didn?t hasten to make the most of the opportunity the Ottoman authorities had offered them, as the Bulgarians had exploited similar opportunities in the past. This was because most of the leaders of the local Vlach communities traditionally embraced the ?Hellenic idea? and identified their own progress with that of the still tiny Greece. Romanian propaganda failed to gain a foothold among the Vlachs of Eastern Macedonia, for instance, whether settled or nomadic, the reason being that the local communities all recognised the Vlachs as fundamentally modern Greeks. The movement failed likewise in the Vlach villages on Olympos, where neither the notables nor the ordinary folk felt themselves to be any different from the Greki in terms of their modern Greek identity. Particularly in the areas of the Pindos (Aspropotamos, Metsovo, Vlahodzoumerko, Vlahozagoro, Konitsa, Grevena, Grammos), Olympos, and Askio, the identical modern history of the Greki and the Vlachs, their joint participation in the armatoliks, the Greek War of Independence in 1821 and later rebellions (1854, 1878), the Vlachs? prominent role in the local economy and culture, their shared evolution, and their shared political sentiments meant that the propaganda fell on stony ground indeed. There?s no clearer illustration of this identification than the fate of the village of Koutsoufliani after the Greek?Turkish War of 1897, when the inhabitants elected to burn their houses down and cross over into Greek territory. " The Vlachs and the Greki may be two separate linguistic groups, but the rest of their cultural differences, at least in the areas where they?ve been in constant contact for centuries, have probably never been of great significance, indeed have been a negligible factor in their cohabitation and their shared history." The joint struggle of ?Greki? and ?Vlachs? in the Greek War of Independence in 1821 and thereafter would be most consistent with the powerful words "tou Genous tov allo sikomo"/"the other revolt of [our] Genos" ?in the ?Axion Esti? Lastly, I thought that the definition of the word "GENOS" could not have been best articulated but in the words of wisdom by an ordinary elderly Vlach. Here again is a quote from Asterios Koukoudis? book: "I shall never forget what I heard from the simple people who gave the wisest, clearest answers to my questions, drawn from their own profound experience. Barba-Kostas Ziogas in Perithori near Kato Nevrokopi was one, and he told me: ?Look, lad, the Greki aren?t more Greek than we are. We may be Vlachs, they may be Greki, but all together we make up the Greeks.? " Christos D. Katsetos From baloglou at Oswego.EDU Sun Jul 21 20:58:55 2002 From: baloglou at Oswego.EDU (George Baloglou) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:56 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] "GENOS" In-Reply-To: <3D3C11F1.BF601AEA@bellatlantic.net> Message-ID: On Mon, 22 Jul 2002, Christos D. Katsetos wrote: > The Patriarchal definition of ëGENOSí embodies the totality of Romiosyni. > Historically, it embraces both Greek-speaking and non-Greek-speaking loyal > followers of the Mother Church irrespective of ëphyleticí attributes or > geographical boundaries. > > You are quite right insofar as the usage of the expression ëTO GENOS TON > ROMAIONí is traceable to the Ottoman period and has been historically > applied to Orthodox Christians living in the Ottoman occupied territories. I actually claimed that it was "to genos ton Romaion" before the Ottomans took over and "to Genos" afterwards: the former term did *not* include non-Byzantine subjects, the latter term referred to all Orthodox Ottoman subjects. And I thought you claimed that present-day Patriarchical "Genos" includes *all* Orthodox Christians all over the world, including for example Russians and Ukranians -- obviously I misunderstood. As for those Balkan Christians that are not Greek citizens, including them in Romiosini today may be historically proper, but rather outdated. In any case, I would rather not delve into issues pertaining to our Patriarchate and its complicated relations with various Orthodox churches and their leaders... G. B. From baloglou at Oswego.EDU Mon Jul 22 02:26:28 2002 From: baloglou at Oswego.EDU (George Baloglou) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:56 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] "Kissinger on Cyprus" footnote Message-ID: "The division of Cyprus was one of a handful of potential solutions for the island proposed by Henry Kissinger in his role as US secretary of state, before the Turkish invasion of 1974, Kissinger's then-deputy told Cypriot television, according to reports yesterday. Kissinger did nothing to stop the Greek junta's plans to overthrow President Makarios as he did not take seriously the threat of military intervention by Turkey, Arthur Hartman told RIK channel. Kissinger regarded Makarios as president of the Greek-Cypriots only and considered him part of the problem, Hartman added." http://www.ekathimerini.com/4dcgi/_w_articles_politics_100016_20/07/2002_18975 From shoffman at rmi.net Mon Jul 22 13:44:32 2002 From: shoffman at rmi.net (Susanna Hoffman) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:56 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Turks & Byzantium In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Attila the Hun and his hords spoke a language of the Ural branch of the Ural-Altaic language family, i.e. Hungarian. The Turks who arrived later in the Byzantine Empire, from the Seljuks on, spoke/speak a language of the Altaic branch of the Ural-Altaic language family, a very different and distinct branch, in which all the languages (and peoples) called Turkic fall. Other speakers of the Ural branch of the family poured through what was to become the Byzantine area just before the founding of the empire: those that settled in the Karelian Penninsula, the Finns, and the Estonians (from about 100-300 a.d. in several separate waves). The Huns then followed the route the other Ural speakers had used once passing through, up the Danube river, but settled in Central Europe, on the rich Danube plain, rather than Northern Europe. Susanna Hofman -----Original Message----- From: Susanna Hoffman [mailto:shoffman@rmi.net] Sent: Monday, July 22, 2002 1:00 PM To: Diana Wright Subject: RE: [MGSA-L] Turks & Byzantium Attila the Hun and his hords spoke a language of the Ural branch of the Ural-Altaic language family, i.e. Hungarian. The Turks who arrived later in the Byzantine Empire, from the Seljuks on, spoke/speak a language of the Altaic branch of the Ural-Altaic language family, a very different and distinct branch, in which all the languages (and peoples) called Turkic fall. Other speakers of the Ural branch of the family poured through what was to become the Byzantine area just before the founding of the empire: those that settled in the Karelian Penninsula, the Finns, and the Estonians (from about 100-300 a.d. in several separate waves). The Huns then followed the route the other Ural speakers had used once passing through, up the Danube river, but settled in Central Europe, on the rich Danube plain, rather than Northern Europe. Susanna Hofman -----Original Message----- From: mgsa-l-admin@uci.edu [mailto:mgsa-l-admin@uci.edu]On Behalf Of Diana Wright Sent: Thursday, July 18, 2002 10:38 AM To: mgsa-l@uci.edu Subject: [MGSA-L] Turks & Byzantium Someone asked recently about when the Turks first appeared in the Byzantine Empire. During the reign of Justinian [depending on whether you consider him Roman or Byzantine; as a Byzantine historian, I see him as Roman]. The Turks at that point extended into the northern Caucasas & had much to do with controlling the silk trade. Justin II made a treaty with them against the Persians. [If you consider Attila the Hun of Turkoman persuasion, then they were coming through in the late 4th/early 5th C.] The Seljuk Turks appear in Byzantine records in the mid-11th century, as the Arabs were less of a problem, & seemed to deflect some of the Persian energy. The Seljuks were eventually defeated by the Ottoman Turks. The Turks are & were many peoples. Assumptions about Ottoman rule [& oppression] have to be examined by date and area to know what was enforced where & when. For most of the time in power, the Ottomans were extremely flexible in rule which was primarily by meritocracy. My research at present focuses on Venetian-Ottoman diplomatics concerning Greece in the later 15thC & this quality is very much to the fore in my documents. List members may be amused by some excerpts fromDe Administrando Imperio written by Constantine VII Porphyrogenitus ca. 950 AD [Moravcsik/Jenkins ed.] Hear now, my son, those things of which I think you should not be ignorant . . . I conceive that it is greatly to the advantage of the emperor of the Romans to be minded to keep the peace with the nation of the Pechenegs. . . .The nation of the Pechenegs is neighbor to the district ofg Cherson and if they are not friendly disposed toward us, they may make excursions and plundering raids against Cherson . . . . The Pechenegs are neighbors to and march with the Russians and when the two are not at peace, raid Russia and do her condierable harm and outrage. . . . The tribe of the Turks, too, trembles greatly at and fears the Pechnegs because they have often been defeated by them and brought to the verge of complete annihilation. . . . So long as the emperor of the Romans is at peace with the Pechenegs neither Russians nor Turks can come upon the Romans. . . .For the Pechenegs can easily come upon the country of the Russians and the Turks and enslave their women and children. . . .Once when the cleric Gabriel was dispatched by imperial mandate to the Turks and said to them, "The emperor declares that you are to go and expel the Pechenegs from their place and settle yourselves there so that you may be near to my imperial majesty," . . . then all the chief men of the Turks cried aloud with one voice, "We are not putting ourselves on the track of the Pechenegs for we cannot fight them because their country is great and their people numerous and they are the devil's brats; and do not say this to us again; for we do not like it." _______________________________________________ List-Info: https://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/mgsa-l From gr247 at ams.odn.ne.jp Mon Jul 22 16:15:44 2002 From: gr247 at ams.odn.ne.jp (G.R.) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:56 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] "GENOS" In-Reply-To: <3D3C2220.64B0FF6@bellatlantic.net> Message-ID: > on 23/7/02 00:17, Christos D. Katsetos at dkatseto@bellatlantic.net wrote: > ... >> include the Slavonic-speaking ?Grecomans? as well as speakers of Latin-based >> dialects, viz. Vlachs, Arvanites, and Arvanito-Vlachi [N.B. The turkophone >> Rum >> (such as the ?Karamanlides?) and the Arabic-speaking Rum are also part of the >> "GENOS"]. > ... > Huh? Do Arvanites speak Latin-based dialects, or is Arvanitika or Albanian a > Latin-based dialect? > > > Regards > ----------- > Kostas Mour. > I resend as instead of posting to the list I send it personal to Christos D. Katsetos. Mea culpa... My apologies. From bjoseph at ling.ohio-state.edu Mon Jul 22 21:55:33 2002 From: bjoseph at ling.ohio-state.edu (Brian Joseph) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:56 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Clarification re Albanian and Arvanitika In-Reply-To: from "G.R." at Jul 23, 2002 08:15:44 AM Message-ID: <200207230455.g6N4tXn02929@julius.ling.ohio-state.edu> FOR POSTING TO MGSA-L: I wondered too about the statement about Albanian in Katsetos's posting. The truth of the matter is that Albanian is NOT "Latin-based", at least not in the same sense that Vlach (= Aroumanian) is. Vlach is a direct development out of Latin, in the same way that languages like French or Spanish are, whereas Albanian was *influenced* by Latin, mainly in the realm of vocabulary (and quite extensively, though some of the statements that have been made in the literature about the extent of Latinate vocabulary in Albanian may be exaggerated), but constitutes its own branch within the Indo-European family "tree". This is quite parallel to the situation with English vis-a`-vis Latin, since English was influenced in its vocabulary by (i.e., has borrowed from) Latin but is a Germanic language in terms of its direct development and its branch (affiliation) within Indo-European. Arvanitika is to be considered a dialect of Albanian, part of the sub-group of Albanian dialects known as the "Tosk" dielcts (essentially southern Albanian -- the present-day standard Albanian language (so-called gjuha e njesuar 'the unified language') is based on a Tosk dialect). Brian D. Joseph Professor of Linguistics The Ohio State University > > > on 23/7/02 00:17, Christos D. Katsetos at dkatseto@bellatlantic.net wrote: > > ... > >> include the Slavonic-speaking Grecomans as well as speakers of Latin-based > >> dialects, viz. Vlachs, Arvanites, and Arvanito-Vlachi [N.B. The turkophone > >> Rum (such as the Karamanlides) and the Arabic-speaking Rum are also part > >> of the > >> "GENOS"]. > > > ... > > Huh? Do Arvanites speak Latin-based dialects, or is Arvanitika or Albanian > > a Latin-based dialect? > > > > > > Regards > > ----------- > > Kostas Mour. > > > From np255 at columbia.edu Mon Jul 22 22:58:50 2002 From: np255 at columbia.edu (Neni Panourgia) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:56 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Clarification re Albanian and Arvanitika References: <200207230455.g6N4tXn02929@julius.ling.ohio-state.edu> Message-ID: <3D3CF09A.7070308@columbia.edu> in addition to the excellent scientific explanation given by Brian i would also like to turn the attention of those interested in Arvanitika to the excellent work done by Lukas Tsitsipis (his book was published by Oxford U Press a couple of years ago, and he has also published in Anthropological Linguistics among other disciplinary journals). np/ From dkatseto at bellatlantic.net Tue Jul 23 18:40:29 2002 From: dkatseto at bellatlantic.net (Christos D. Katsetos) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:56 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Clarification re Albanian and Arvanitika References: <200207230455.g6N4tXn02929@julius.ling.ohio-state.edu> Message-ID: <3D3E058C.61E8105C@bellatlantic.net> Brian Joseph wrote: > FOR POSTING TO MGSA-L: > > I wondered too about the statement about Albanian in Katsetos's > posting. The truth of the matter is that Albanian is NOT > "Latin-based", at least not in the same sense that Vlach (= > Aroumanian) is. Vlach is a direct development out of Latin, in the > same way that languages like French or Spanish are, whereas Albanian > was *influenced* by Latin, mainly in the realm of vocabulary (and > quite extensively, though some of the statements that have been made > in the literature about the extent of Latinate vocabulary in Albanian > may be exaggerated), but constitutes its own branch within the > Indo-European family "tree". I stand corrected insofar as ?Arvanitica? is a dialect (or even perhaps a group of dialects) of a ?Latin-influenced? as opposed to a ?Latin-based? language. However, I should like to point out that the context in which inference to the term ?Arvanitica? came about in my posting had nothing to do with linguistics, but rather with the fact that non-Greek-speaking Christian Orthodox groups such as the Vlachs, Arvanites and Arvanito-Vlachs have been inseparable parts of the ?Genos? and ?Romiosyni? [as well as the shaping of the Modern Greek experience and identity]. I am not a linguist and as such, cannot address the extent to which the Latinate vocabulary in Albanian has been exaggerated in the literature. By the same token, I wonder whether -in reality- one can draw a line between ?Latin-based? and ?Latin-influenced? dialects or idioms in ?mixed? groups such as the Arvanito-Vlachs. Also, to what degree has ?Rhomeika? (Modern Greek) influenced these dialects through the years? After all, these groups did not exist in isolation. C.D.K. From ssm at panafonet.gr Tue Jul 23 09:38:49 2002 From: ssm at panafonet.gr (Simeon Magliveras) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:56 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Clarification re Albanian and Arvanitika References: <200207230455.g6N4tXn02929@julius.ling.ohio-state.edu> <3D3CF09A.7070308@columbia.edu> Message-ID: <000f01c23267$6d88b010$6b21f9d5@simoswmtjisc08> There is also a good book, in Greek, about the Arvanites. by Titos Giochalas Andros, Arvanites kai Arvanitika Ekdosis, Pataki, 2000 Very well done! ----- Original Message ----- From: "Neni Panourgia" To: "Brian Joseph" Cc: ; Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2002 8:58 AM Subject: Re: [MGSA-L] Clarification re Albanian and Arvanitika > in addition to the excellent scientific explanation given by Brian i > would also like to turn the attention of those interested in Arvanitika > to the excellent work done by Lukas Tsitsipis (his book was published by > Oxford U Press a couple of years ago, and he has also published in > Anthropological Linguistics among other disciplinary journals). > > np/ > > _______________________________________________ > List-Info: https://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/mgsa-l From AKarpathak at aol.com Thu Jul 25 04:59:10 2002 From: AKarpathak at aol.com (AKarpathak@aol.com) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:56 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] "Kissinger on Cyprus" footnote Message-ID: <5DAAE269.1DC0269F.09E588BC@aol.com> Goodmorning all: It was discussed on the list that the identities Greeks had during the Ottoman occupation were more based on religion and language than national, i.e., they did not consider themselves Greeks??? The Ottomans were considered Mulsims and Ottomans??? Greeks considered themselves as Greek speaking Christians? Yesterday I was going over Makrigiannis' Memoirs and he uses the term "Turks" to refer to the occupying/conquering forces and armies, and "Ellines" to refer to... ??? presumably these people we presently consider "Ellines." So, when and how do the Ottomans become Turks? Clearly it's before Attaturk (something like 100 years before.) This is NOT my area at all and so I am asking these quite basic questions which some of you may find a bit annoying. But please, do bear with me. Thanks, Anna K. From baloglou at Oswego.EDU Fri Jul 26 01:18:08 2002 From: baloglou at Oswego.EDU (George Baloglou) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:56 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] "Turks" In-Reply-To: <5DAAE269.1DC0269F.09E588BC@aol.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 25 Jul 2002 AKarpathak@aol.com wrote: > So, when and how do the Ottomans become Turks? The reverse question is probably far more important :-) In any case, based on my exposure to 14th century texts, I would say that the Turks were still being referred to by the Byzantines as "Persians" (Cantakouzinos' History), "Agarinoi" (Velissarios), etc; "Turks" (for Turks ... rather than Hungarians) begins to appear in the 15th century, in Ducas' and Chalcokondyles' Histories, for example. Further elaboration, someone? G. B. From e.sigalos at rulpre.leidenuniv.nl Fri Jul 26 03:10:44 2002 From: e.sigalos at rulpre.leidenuniv.nl (e.sigalos@rulpre.leidenuniv.nl) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:56 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] "Turks" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000001c2348c$b522d5a0$3df1e584@LeidenUniv.nl> I have the feeling that the Ottoman elite would not appreciate it very much to be called Turkish at any stage of te Ottoman history. I think that Turks were only the Turkish speaking Muslim peasantry. The term may have been used so as to differentiate the Turkish speaking Muslim peasantry from the r'aya (i.e. non-Muslim population). As far as the term Greek is concerned, especially during the Ottoman period, it seems to me relatively blurred (see for one instance Stoianovich's "Conquering Balkan Orthodox Merchant"). National identity most likely developed early on in the upper and merchant social groups, but the Greek, Albanian or Slavic speaking peasantry most likely developed a "Greek" national identity during the 18th century, mainly as part of a social reaction against the oppression of the ciftlik owners and high taxation. Of course this is just an opinion, or even an interpretative option. In any case, I was wondering whether anybody knows of a current publication of the complete Constitution of Rigas Velestinlis. I have been looking for one everywhere in Greece, but I had no luck. Thanks. Lefteris Sigalos -----Original Message----- From: mgsa-l-admin@uci.edu [mailto:mgsa-l-admin@uci.edu]On Behalf Of George Baloglou Sent: Friday, July 26, 2002 10:18 AM To: AKarpathak@aol.com Cc: mgsa-l@uci.edu Subject: [MGSA-L] "Turks" On Thu, 25 Jul 2002 AKarpathak@aol.com wrote: > So, when and how do the Ottomans become Turks? The reverse question is probably far more important :-) In any case, based on my exposure to 14th century texts, I would say that the Turks were still being referred to by the Byzantines as "Persians" (Cantakouzinos' History), "Agarinoi" (Velissarios), etc; "Turks" (for Turks ... rather than Hungarians) begins to appear in the 15th century, in Ducas' and Chalcokondyles' Histories, for example. Further elaboration, someone? G. B. _______________________________________________ List-Info: https://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/mgsa-l From ssm at panafonet.gr Fri Jul 26 04:24:14 2002 From: ssm at panafonet.gr (Simeon Magliveras) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:56 2005 Subject: Fw: [MGSA-L] "Turks" Message-ID: <001401c23496$fa0d9c90$dc22f9d5@simoswmtjisc08> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Simeon Magliveras" To: Sent: Friday, July 26, 2002 2:21 PM Subject: Re: [MGSA-L] "Turks" > Interestingly enough in present day Greece.... Muslim is "almost synonymous" > with Turk. I here Albanians and Gypsies who are Muslim referred to as > "Turko-Alvani' and Turkogyfti" where as Orthodox Albanians regardless of > their 'ethnicity'; i.e.. vlachs or non-Greek Albanians as Vorioepirotes and > therefore Greek > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: "'George Baloglou'" > Cc: > Sent: Friday, July 26, 2002 1:10 PM > Subject: RE: [MGSA-L] "Turks" > > > > I have the feeling that the Ottoman elite would not appreciate it very > much > > to be called Turkish at any stage of te Ottoman history. I think that > Turks > > were only the Turkish speaking Muslim peasantry. The term may have been > used > > so as to differentiate the Turkish speaking Muslim peasantry from the > r'aya > > (i.e. non-Muslim population). As far as the term Greek is concerned, > > especially during the Ottoman period, it seems to me relatively blurred > (see > > for one instance Stoianovich's "Conquering Balkan Orthodox Merchant"). > > National identity most likely developed early on in the upper and merchant > > social groups, but the Greek, Albanian or Slavic speaking peasantry most > > likely developed a "Greek" national identity during the 18th century, > > mainly as part of a social reaction against the oppression of the ciftlik > > owners and high taxation. Of course this is just an opinion, or even an > > interpretative option. > > > > In any case, I was wondering whether anybody knows of a current > publication > > of the complete Constitution of Rigas Velestinlis. I have been looking for > > one everywhere in Greece, but I had no luck. > > > > Thanks. > > > > Lefteris Sigalos > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: mgsa-l-admin@uci.edu [mailto:mgsa-l-admin@uci.edu]On Behalf Of > > George Baloglou > > Sent: Friday, July 26, 2002 10:18 AM > > To: AKarpathak@aol.com > > Cc: mgsa-l@uci.edu > > Subject: [MGSA-L] "Turks" > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, 25 Jul 2002 AKarpathak@aol.com wrote: > > > > > So, when and how do the Ottomans become Turks? > > > > The reverse question is probably far more important :-) In any case, based > > on my exposure to 14th century texts, I would say that the Turks were > still > > being referred to by the Byzantines as "Persians" (Cantakouzinos' > History), > > "Agarinoi" (Velissarios), etc; "Turks" (for Turks ... rather than > > Hungarians) > > begins to appear in the 15th century, in Ducas' and Chalcokondyles' > > Histories, > > for example. Further elaboration, someone? > > > > G. B. > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > List-Info: https://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/mgsa-l > > > > _______________________________________________ > > List-Info: https://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/mgsa-l > From dkatseto at bellatlantic.net Fri Jul 26 19:32:54 2002 From: dkatseto at bellatlantic.net (Christos D. Katsetos) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:56 2005 Subject: Fw: [MGSA-L] "Turks" References: <001401c23496$fa0d9c90$dc22f9d5@simoswmtjisc08> Message-ID: <3D420655.61DF7161@bellatlantic.net> Simeon Magliveras wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Simeon Magliveras" > To: > Sent: Friday, July 26, 2002 2:21 PM > Subject: Re: [MGSA-L] "Turks" > > > Interestingly enough in present day Greece.... Muslim is "almost > synonymous" > > with Turk. I here Albanians and Gypsies who are Muslim referred to as > > "Turko-Alvani' and Turkogyfti" where as Orthodox Albanians regardless of > > their 'ethnicity'; i.e.. vlachs or non-Greek Albanians as Vorioepirotes > and > > therefore Greek And in the final analysis these references are not far from the truth. In fact, they indicate that the *inclusive* spirit of Romiosyni ?based on the Eastern Orthodox tradition- is still very much alive amongst ordinary Greeks nowadays. Non-Greek speaking members of the ?Rum Millet?, living or ?travelling? through Ottoman occupied territories of ?Rumelia?, such as the Vlachs, Arvanites and Arvanitovlachs (?Karagkounhdes?) constitute an inseparable part of Romiosyni. Let us not forget that these groups played a *prominent* role in shaping the Modern Greek identity. The long list of Vlach benefactors who contributed to the building of the Modern Greek State is a prime example in this regard. An objection to the people?s acceptance of ?Orthodox Albanians regardless of their 'ethnicity'; i.e. Vlachs or non-Greek Albanians as Vorioepirotes and therefore Greek? is in itself racialist and thus inherently antithetical to the Greek experience. C.D.K. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/public/mgsa-l/attachments/20020727/53757e38/attachment.html From ssm at panafonet.gr Fri Jul 26 12:12:45 2002 From: ssm at panafonet.gr (Simeon Magliveras) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:56 2005 Subject: Fw: [MGSA-L] "Turks" References: <001401c23496$fa0d9c90$dc22f9d5@simoswmtjisc08> <3D420655.61DF7161@bellatlantic.net> Message-ID: <000d01c234d8$6d4628d0$7e02f9d5@simoswmtjisc08> Is not ethnicity also defined by an individual or a groups definition of itself as members of the group. Not to exclude the majorities view of a group as a minority. I took this previous example from a discussion on one of the Greek tv stations. They all agreed that Othodox = Greekness. The reality maybe very different. From my experience in the field, there are Orthodox Albanians who feel they have nothing to do with the modern Greek state. Likewise their lineage is very far removed if they have any relationship to Greece at all. I would suspect Albanian Vlachs might feel the same. Then there are some Catholic Vlachs in Albania too. Where would they fit in the mix. I was show a book a while back about Catholic Vlachs and there role in WW2. Unfortunately, I don't have the reference. It illustates that were other voices and other identies. No one can deny that both Vlachs and Arvanites played an most essential role in the formation of the modern Greek state. But elsewhere things maybe different. And in the final analysis these references are not far from the truth. In fact, they indicate that the *inclusive* spirit of Romiosyni ?based on the Eastern Orthodox tradition- is still very much alive amongst ordinary Greeks nowadays. Non-Greek speaking members of the 'Rum Millet', living or 'travelling' through Ottoman occupied territories of 'Rumelia', such as the Vlachs, Arvanites and Arvanitovlachs ('Karagkounhdes') constitute an inseparable part of Romiosyni. Let us not forget that these groups played a *prominent* role in shaping the Modern Greek identity. The long list of Vlach benefactors who contributed to the building of the Modern Greek State is a prime example in this regard. An objection to the people's acceptance of 'Orthodox Albanians regardless of their 'ethnicity'; i.e. Vlachs or non-Greek Albanians as Vorioepirotes and therefore Greek' is in itself racialist and thus inherently antithetical to the Greek experience. C.D.K. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/public/mgsa-l/attachments/20020726/1daf42a0/attachment.html From baloglou at Oswego.EDU Fri Jul 26 21:26:29 2002 From: baloglou at Oswego.EDU (George Baloglou) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:57 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Re: "Greeks" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Fri, 26 Jul 2002, George Baloglou wrote: > > > On Thu, 25 Jul 2002 AKarpathak@aol.com wrote: > > > So, when and how do the Ottomans become Turks? > > The reverse question is probably far more important :-) In any case, based > on my exposure to 14th century texts, I would say that the Turks were still > being referred to by the Byzantines as "Persians" (Cantakouzinos' History), > "Agarinoi" (Velissarios), etc; "Turks" (for Turks ... rather than Hungarians) > begins to appear in the 15th century, in Ducas' and Chalcokondyles' Histories, I just ran into an earlier example, letter #297 of Demetrios Kydones (1383): kai ws eoikev eimapto kai toutov vuv Toupkois douleucai, iva mhdeis Ellhvwv kav nalai te8vhkws h thv twv ka8apmatwv toutwv ubpiv ekfugh. Of course "Ellhvwv" above refers to Ancient Greeks (who were also going to be insulted by the scummy Turks). Speaking of which, and referring to my reading of "Garden of Graces" earlier today, Kaisarios Dapontes (1713-1784) consistently uses "Pwmaika" for "Greek", except at the very beginning (A (from Skopelos to Vlachia) 35-36), where he praises his father for having hired a tutor in order to educate his offspring in Greek/Pwmaika: K' egupeue didackalov dia va mas cnouda3h, kai gpammata Ellhvika autos va mas dida3h This made me think that "Ellhvika" could be preserved for the written word and "Pwmaika" for the spoken one; but in his Epimetro (B (More on Krimaia) 53-56), Dapontes is startled by the Czar Paul's learning of Greek/Pwmaika (and his dining, along with Empress Aikaterini, together with his Athonite tutor Ioannites): npagma avhkouctov auto, Pwmaika va cnoudazh o twv Mocxobwv bacileus -- noios va mh 8aumazh! -- kai va cuvtpwgh me autov Pwmaios kai va nivh, cuv th Imnepatpitch de xpuch Aikatepivh Quite possibly the Czar was learning contemporary, not classical, Greek :-) G. B. From baloglou at Oswego.EDU Fri Jul 26 21:38:52 2002 From: baloglou at Oswego.EDU (George Baloglou) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:57 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Re: "Greeks" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > (from Skopelos to Vlachia) 35-36), where he praises his father for having > hired a tutor in order to educate his offspring in Greek/Pwmaika: ^^^^^^^ Ellhvika :-) From gr247 at ams.odn.ne.jp Fri Jul 26 22:27:18 2002 From: gr247 at ams.odn.ne.jp (G.R.) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:57 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Clarification re Albanian and Arvanitika In-Reply-To: <3D3CF09A.7070308@columbia.edu> Message-ID: on 23/7/02 14:58, Neni Panourgia at np255@columbia.edu wrote: > in addition to the excellent scientific explanation given by Brian i > would also like to turn the attention of those interested in Arvanitika > to the excellent work done by Lukas Tsitsipis (his book was published by > Oxford U Press a couple of years ago, and he has also published in > Anthropological Linguistics among other disciplinary journals). > > np/ > ... Sorry Neni but been away from the old continent from some years now, do not know how the research goes nor have any contact with Educational establishments so if you have any addiational info please forward even in private. ... From gr247 at ams.odn.ne.jp Fri Jul 26 22:27:18 2002 From: gr247 at ams.odn.ne.jp (G.R.) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:57 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Re: Clarification re Albanian and Arvanitika In-Reply-To: <200207230455.g6N4tXn02929@julius.ling.ohio-state.edu> Message-ID: on 23/7/02 13:55, Brian Joseph at bjoseph@ling.ohio-state.edu wrote: > FOR POSTING TO MGSA-L: > > I wondered too about the statement about Albanian in Katsetos's > posting. The truth of the matter is that Albanian is NOT > "Latin-based", at least not in the same sense that Vlach (= > Aroumanian) is. Vlach is a direct development out of Latin, in the > same way that languages like French or Spanish are, whereas Albanian > was *influenced* by Latin, mainly in the realm of vocabulary (and Well said, but if I am not wrong, Illyrian which became later what is Albanian precedes Latin. Would you be as kind as point to some references concerning the Latinization of Albanian? TIA ... > quite extensively, though some of the statements that have been made > in the literature about the extent of Latinate vocabulary in Albanian > may be exaggerated), but constitutes its own branch within the > Indo-European family "tree". This is quite parallel to the situation BTW What language these Indo-Europeans were speaking, and where was their dwelling lands? Is it supported by artefacts? > with English vis-a`-vis Latin, since English was influenced in its > vocabulary by (i.e., has borrowed from) Latin but is a Germanic > language in terms of its direct development and its branch > (affiliation) within Indo-European. Arvanitika is to be considered a > dialect of Albanian, part of the sub-group of Albanian dialects known > as the "Tosk" dielcts (essentially southern Albanian -- the > present-day standard Albanian language (so-called gjuha e njesuar 'the > unified language') is based on a Tosk dialect). > And then again if I am not wrong Arvanitika, Albanian etc is the way Greeks called the people as Albanians call themselves Squipitar, and Albania is Squiperia. > Brian D. Joseph > Professor of Linguistics > The Ohio State University ... From gr247 at ams.odn.ne.jp Fri Jul 26 22:27:18 2002 From: gr247 at ams.odn.ne.jp (G.R.) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:57 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Clarification re Albanian and Arvanitika In-Reply-To: <000f01c23267$6d88b010$6b21f9d5@simoswmtjisc08> Message-ID: on 24/7/02 01:38, Simeon Magliveras at ssm@panafonet.gr wrote: > There is also a good book, in Greek, about the Arvanites. > by Titos Giochalas > Andros, Arvanites kai Arvanitika > Ekdosis, Pataki, 2000 > > Very well done! Thanks! I have heard in the past about Yohalas as he was involved with some research with people around the late Ar. Kollias (Arvanites, kai h katagwgh twn Ellhnwn, H glwssa twn thewn) but after some time seems there was a rift among them. That was before Kollias become advocate for KLA and Greater Albania in Greece. In reply (?) to the otherwise original book of Kollias, S. Kargakos historian writer by profession printed his own good book entitled Ellhnes, Arvanites kai Alvanoi, Estia, which was dealing also with the troubles of the "selective" bibliography used or allegedly used by Kollias. > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Neni Panourgia" > To: "Brian Joseph" > Cc: ; > Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2002 8:58 AM > Subject: Re: [MGSA-L] Clarification re Albanian and Arvanitika > > >> in addition to the excellent scientific explanation given by Brian i >> would also like to turn the attention of those interested in Arvanitika ... BTW I have got these posts twice. Is this because I was also a CC recipient? From gr247 at ams.odn.ne.jp Fri Jul 26 22:27:18 2002 From: gr247 at ams.odn.ne.jp (G.R.) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:57 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] "Turks" In-Reply-To: <000d01c234d8$6d4628d0$7e02f9d5@simoswmtjisc08> Message-ID: on 27/7/02 04:12, Simeon Magliveras at ssm@panafonet.gr wrote: ... > No one can deny that both Vlachs and Arvanites played an most essential role > in the formation of the modern Greek state. But elsewhere things maybe > different. ... Sorry, but in what way? From baloglou at Oswego.EDU Fri Jul 26 22:31:55 2002 From: baloglou at Oswego.EDU (George Baloglou) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:57 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] "Turks" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Sat, 27 Jul 2002, G.R. wrote: > on 27/7/02 04:12, Simeon Magliveras at ssm@panafonet.gr wrote: > ... > > No one can deny that both Vlachs and Arvanites played an most essential role > > in the formation of the modern Greek state. But elsewhere things maybe > > different. > ... > Sorry, but in what way? I will let Simeon (and/or others) handle this, but here is a quick comment based on private correspondence with a list member some time ago: as he was ready to bid farewell to his Vlach relatives in Thessaloniki in order to visit other (common) Vlach relatives in Krousovo, they warned him that "regardless of what they tell you there [in Krousovo], they are Greeks!" G. B. From ssm at panafonet.gr Sat Jul 27 00:50:41 2002 From: ssm at panafonet.gr (Simeon Magliveras) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:57 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] "Turks" References: Message-ID: <001501c23542$4f3b1160$cb00f9d5@simoswmtjisc08> First of all please excuse me if I don't give a full bibliography because I only have a select number of books and articles away from school but I will get them to you later in the fall if people requst them. I will give the example of American Albanians who being Orthodox had a major role in forming the Albanian State (Peacock 1914). In addition, there were Arvanites or Arbresh educated in Europe from Hydra, Sicily and Alexandria who were key in the formation of the Albanian identity as a nation (Sugarman 1999). Presumably they were all but were separeate Orthodox but were interested in an Albanian homeland not a Greek one. ----- Original Message ----- From: "G.R." To: Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2002 8:27 AM Subject: Re: [MGSA-L] "Turks" > on 27/7/02 04:12, Simeon Magliveras at ssm@panafonet.gr wrote: > ... > > No one can deny that both Vlachs and Arvanites played an most essential role > > in the formation of the modern Greek state. But elsewhere things maybe > > different. > ... > Sorry, but in what way? > > > _______________________________________________ > List-Info: https://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/mgsa-l From gr247 at ams.odn.ne.jp Sat Jul 27 03:21:16 2002 From: gr247 at ams.odn.ne.jp (G.R.) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:57 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Clarification re Albanian and Arvanitika In-Reply-To: <3D3E058C.61E8105C@bellatlantic.net> Message-ID: on 24/7/02 10:40, Christos D. Katsetos at dkatseto@bellatlantic.net wrote: > > > Brian Joseph wrote: > >> FOR POSTING TO MGSA-L: >> >> I wondered too about the statement about Albanian in Katsetos's ... > > I stand corrected insofar as ?Arvanitica? is a dialect (or even perhaps a > group of > dialects) of a ?Latin-influenced? as opposed to a ?Latin-based? language. Mmmm! Is Arvanitika a dialect? Is then Corsican a dialect and why? Is Catalan a language and why? What makes the difference between them? > However, I should like to point out that the context in which inference to the > term ?Arvanitica? came about in my posting had nothing to do with linguistics, > but > rather with the fact that non-Greek-speaking Christian Orthodox groups such as > the > Vlachs, Arvanites and Arvanito-Vlachs have been inseparable parts of the > ?Genos? > and ?Romiosyni? [as well as the shaping of the Modern Greek experience and > identity]. > There were Muslims Arvanites though (Ciamides-Thyamides) that were transferred in Turkey though in 1923... > I am not a linguist and as such, cannot address the extent to which the > Latinate > vocabulary in Albanian has been exaggerated in the literature. By the same > token, Fine so far! Bear with me, as myself also I am neither a linguist, nor have even a B.A ;-) My intention has been just to point a mistake, that opened this interesting thread. ... Cheers ------ G. R. From info at caratzas.com Sat Jul 27 04:52:36 2002 From: info at caratzas.com (Philobiblos 315) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:57 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Clarification re Albanian and Arvanitika References: Message-ID: <3D428975.6D5853B5@caratzas.com> Kindly note a mistake, below: "G.R." wrote: > on 24/7/02 10:40, Christos D. Katsetos at dkatseto@bellatlantic.net wrote: > > > > > > > Brian Joseph wrote: > > > > However, I should like to point out that the context in which inference to the > > term ?Arvanitica? came about in my posting had nothing to do with linguistics, > > but > > rather with the fact that non-Greek-speaking Christian Orthodox groups such as > > the > > Vlachs, Arvanites and Arvanito-Vlachs have been inseparable parts of the > > ?Genos? > > and ?Romiosyni? [as well as the shaping of the Modern Greek experience and > > identity]. > > > There were Muslims Arvanites though (Ciamides-Thyamides) that were > transferred in Turkey though in 1923... The Tsamides ("Chams") were specifically excluded from the exchange of population provisions of the Lausanne Treaty. Indeed, they continued to inhabit their villages largely in Thesprotia, Epirus. In the mid-1920s their leadership decided to throw its lot with the Italians and eagerly became agent provocateurs for Musolini's regime. With the outbreak of the war, most of the Cham families/clans sided with the Italian invaders and then German occupiers, inflicting persecutions and terror on the Greek Christian population and engaging in murder, looting of livestock and seizures of land. It is interesting to note that whereas most pro-Axis Albanians, i.e. the fascist Balli Kombetar, also maintained contacts with the Allies, the Chams (and the Kosovars) were decidedly pro German. (The Kosovars were prime movers in the formation of the Nazi SS Gebirgsdivision "Skenderbeg," a unit more frightening in name than in terms of actual fighting prowess however). As the German fortunes began to change, some of the Chams explored contacts with the ELAS (the leftist resistance in Greece) and with the Albanian communists. After German withdrawal, the Greek Christian population turned on their Cham persecutors; the peoples reaction was such that there was a danger of a generalized massacre. Napoleon Zervas, head of EDES (actually the first major organization formed to resist the Germans) intervened and had much of the Cham leadership arrested and tried, executing many on war crime charges (often on sites where they had committed mass murders and other crimes). Most of the rest of the Muslim Chams then were forced to flee to Hoxha's Albania, and their properties were seized and redistributed by the Greek state. Recently, some Chams, supported by various Albanian irredentist nationalists, have raised the issue of claims of "Cameria" (Tsamouria, Thesprotia); they also have been supported in this endeavor by a corrupt former congressman who is one of the leaders of the KLA (=Kosovo Liberation Army) lobby in Washington and the Turkish Foreign Ministry (which may still feature the Cam "issue" in its web site). Furthermore, according to a Greek journalist and Albanian friends from the region, American and British mercenaries were training Chams (in the wider context of training Albanian Muslim KLA nationalist militants) until September 11 of last year. (The American enthusiastic support of Muslim "human rights" in the Balkans has understandably waned since). More by way of documentation and information in a forthcoming study we are preparing for publication. Best, Aristide Caratzas From gr247 at ams.odn.ne.jp Sat Jul 27 06:06:08 2002 From: gr247 at ams.odn.ne.jp (G.R.) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:57 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Clarification re Albanian and Arvanitika In-Reply-To: <3D428975.6D5853B5@caratzas.com> Message-ID: on 27/7/02 20:52, Philobiblos 315 at info@caratzas.com wrote: > Kindly note a mistake, below: > > "G.R." wrote: > >> on 24/7/02 10:40, Christos D. Katsetos at dkatseto@bellatlantic.net wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> Brian Joseph wrote: >>> >> >>> However, I should like to point out that the context in which inference to >>> the term ?Arvanitica? came about in my posting had nothing to do with >>> linguistics, but rather with the fact that non-Greek-speaking Christian >>> Orthodox groups such as the Vlachs, Arvanites and Arvanito-Vlachs have been >>> inseparable parts of the ?Genos? and ?Romiosyni? [as well as the shaping of >>> the Modern Greek experience and identity]. >>> >> There were Muslims Arvanites though (Ciamides-Thyamides) that were >> transferred in Turkey though in 1923... >> > The Tsamides ("Chams") were specifically excluded from the exchange of > population provisions of the Lausanne Treaty. Indeed, they continued to > inhabit their villages ... Mea culpa! Thanks indeed for the eloquent explanation. That was my understanding based on information I have got from the previously mentioned Kollias' book. ... > redistributed by the Greek state. Recently, some > Chams, supported by various Albanian irredentist nationalists, have raised the > issue of claims of "Cameria" (Tsamouria, Thesprotia); they also have been > supported in this endeavor by a corrupt former congressman who is one of the > leaders of the KLA (=Kosovo Liberation Army) lobby in Washington and the > Turkish Foreign Ministry (which may still feature the Cam "issue" in its web > site). Furthermore, according to a Greek journalist and Albanian friends from Let me hazard a guess here! By any accident a journalist related to Greek Helsinki Watch circles? > the region, American and British mercenaries were training Chams (in the wider > context of training Albanian Muslim KLA nationalist militants) until September > 11 of last year. (The American enthusiastic support of Muslim "human rights" Names, names please ;-) > in the Balkans has understandably waned since). More by way of documentation > and information in a forthcoming study we are preparing for publication. Please do. And if you could point to relevant sources preferably on the web that would be better. Thanks a lot. > Best, > Aristide Caratzas > Regards ----------- Kostas Mour. From info at caratzas.com Sat Jul 27 07:03:06 2002 From: info at caratzas.com (Philobiblos 315) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:57 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Clarification re Albanian and Arvanitika References: Message-ID: <3D42A817.5B196AA3@caratzas.com> "G.R." wrote: > on 27/7/02 20:52, Philobiblos 315 at info@caratzas.com wrote: > > > redistributed by the Greek state. Recently, some > > Chams, supported by various Albanian irredentist nationalists, have raised the > > issue of claims of "Cameria" (Tsamouria, Thesprotia); they also have been > > supported in this endeavor by a corrupt former congressman who is one of the > > leaders of the KLA (=Kosovo Liberation Army) lobby in Washington and the > > Turkish Foreign Ministry (which may still feature the Cam "issue" in its web > > site). Furthermore, according to a Greek journalist and Albanian friends from > > Let me hazard a guess here! > By any accident a journalist related to Greek Helsinki Watch circles? No actually (the one you may be thinking of keeps an impeccable double standard, consequently he doesn't concern himself with Muslim malfeasance in the Balkans most of the time. The one who reported it is a person both of integrity and knoldge of the terrain (he can handle both Albanian and Serbo-Croatian, for example). > > the region, American and British mercenaries were training Chams (in the wider > > context of training Albanian Muslim KLA nationalist militants) until September > > 11 of last year. (The American enthusiastic support of Muslim "human rights" > > Names, names please ;-) I am afraid we have no names, hard as we tried; we have the independent reports of said Greek journalist and at least two Albanians from the region where the trainign camp was. Both are people I have known for years and their credibility has been tested. We have not given up on getting these names, since as you may know, Albania (like Greece) is not a country that can keep many secrets. ADCaratzas From dkatseto at bellatlantic.net Sat Jul 27 19:52:12 2002 From: dkatseto at bellatlantic.net (Christos D. Katsetos) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:57 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Clarification re Albanian and Arvanitika References: Message-ID: <3D435C5B.93C5280@bellatlantic.net> "G.R." wrote: > on 24/7/02 10:40, Christos D. Katsetos at dkatseto@bellatlantic.net wrote: > > > However, I should like to point out that the context in which inference to the > > > term ?Arvanitica? came about in my posting had nothing to do with linguistics, > > but > > rather with the fact that non-Greek-speaking Christian Orthodox groups such as > > the > > Vlachs, Arvanites and Arvanito-Vlachs have been inseparable parts of the > > ?Genos? > > and ?Romiosyni? [as well as the shaping of the Modern Greek experience and > > identity]. > > > There were Muslims Arvanites though (Ciamides-Thyamides) that were > transferred in Turkey though in 1923... In addition to the obvious error pointed out in the posting of Aristide Caratzas, viz. that Muslim Albanians were *not transferred* but excluded from the exchange of population provisions of the Lausanne Treaty, I should like to address a semantic problem pertaining to the usage of the term ?Arvanites?. The designation ?Arvanites? refers to Albanian-speaking subjects of Christian Orthodox persuasion and Greek consciousness. This is to be distinguished from Albanian-speaking Muslim subjects and loyal followers of the Ottomans (?Arnaut? in Turkish). The latter have been traditionally referred to (in Greek) as ?Tourkalvanoi?. For all intensive purposes, the Chams may be viewed as a regional division of ?Tourkalvanoi?. C.D.K. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/public/mgsa-l/attachments/20020728/fcc7e576/attachment.html From ssm at panafonet.gr Sat Jul 27 05:47:27 2002 From: ssm at panafonet.gr (Simeon Magliveras) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:57 2005 Subject: Fw: [MGSA-L] Clarification re Albanian and Arvanitika Message-ID: <001801c2356b$c4373380$1a03f9d5@simoswmtjisc08> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Simeon Magliveras" To: "G.R." ; <> Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2002 3:05 PM Subject: Re: [MGSA-L] Clarification re Albanian and Arvanitika > Languages and dielects differ in "real" terms according to Grammar really is > its foundation. Pontic Greek for instance sounds nothing like demotic > Greek but it is in the same family according to linguists. Albanian/ > Arvaitic and Arbresh are all in the same language. Influences from contact > with different cultures may effect vocabulaty but the grammar changes very > slowly. > > Of course Dilects can be labled this way for political reasons too. > Defining particular 'languages' as dielects demeans those languages and the > people who speak it so as a result cerntalized powers can control > minorities. This happend in South America and the Spanich collonialism. > There is a very good article by Stravenhagen in "Talking about people" > edited by Haviland which describes this process. I think the process is > common in the formation of nation-states too. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "G.R." > To: > Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2002 1:21 PM > Subject: Re: [MGSA-L] Clarification re Albanian and Arvanitika > > > > on 24/7/02 10:40, Christos D. Katsetos at dkatseto@bellatlantic.net wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Brian Joseph wrote: > > > > > >> FOR POSTING TO MGSA-L: > > >> > > >> I wondered too about the statement about Albanian in Katsetos's > > ... > > > > > > I stand corrected insofar as 'Arvanitica' is a dialect (or even perhaps > a > > > group of > > > dialects) of a 'Latin-influenced' as opposed to a 'Latin-based' > language. > > > > Mmmm! Is Arvanitika a dialect? Is then Corsican a dialect and why? Is > > Catalan a language and why? What makes the difference between them? > > > > > However, I should like to point out that the context in which inference > to the > > > term 'Arvanitica' came about in my posting had nothing to do with > linguistics, > > > but > > > rather with the fact that non-Greek-speaking Christian Orthodox groups > such as > > > the > > > Vlachs, Arvanites and Arvanito-Vlachs have been inseparable parts of the > > > 'Genos' > > > and 'Romiosyni' [as well as the shaping of the Modern Greek experience > and > > > identity]. > > > > > There were Muslims Arvanites though (Ciamides-Thyamides) that were > > transferred in Turkey though in 1923... > > > > > I am not a linguist and as such, cannot address the extent to which the > > > Latinate > > > vocabulary in Albanian has been exaggerated in the literature. By the > same > > > token, > > > > Fine so far! Bear with me, as myself also I am neither a linguist, nor > have > > even a B.A ;-) > > > > My intention has been just to point a mistake, that opened this > interesting > > thread. > > ... > > > > > > Cheers > > ------ > > G. R. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > List-Info: https://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/mgsa-l > From ssm at panafonet.gr Sat Jul 27 05:05:41 2002 From: ssm at panafonet.gr (Simeon Magliveras) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:57 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Clarification re Albanian and Arvanitika References: Message-ID: <000501c23565$eefca920$1a03f9d5@simoswmtjisc08> Languages and dielects differ in "real" terms according to Grammar really is its foundation. Pontic Greek for instance sounds nothing like demotic Greek but it is in the same family according to linguists. Albanian/ Arvaitic and Arbresh are all in the same language. Influences from contact with different cultures may effect vocabulaty but the grammar changes very slowly. Of course Dilects can be labled this way for political reasons too. Defining particular 'languages' as dielects demeans those languages and the people who speak it so as a result cerntalized powers can control minorities. This happend in South America and the Spanich collonialism. There is a very good article by Stravenhagen in "Talking about people" edited by Haviland which describes this process. I think the process is common in the formation of nation-states too. ----- Original Message ----- From: "G.R." To: Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2002 1:21 PM Subject: Re: [MGSA-L] Clarification re Albanian and Arvanitika > on 24/7/02 10:40, Christos D. Katsetos at dkatseto@bellatlantic.net wrote: > > > > > > > Brian Joseph wrote: > > > >> FOR POSTING TO MGSA-L: > >> > >> I wondered too about the statement about Albanian in Katsetos's > ... > > > > I stand corrected insofar as 'Arvanitica' is a dialect (or even perhaps a > > group of > > dialects) of a 'Latin-influenced' as opposed to a 'Latin-based' language. > > Mmmm! Is Arvanitika a dialect? Is then Corsican a dialect and why? Is > Catalan a language and why? What makes the difference between them? > > > However, I should like to point out that the context in which inference to the > > term 'Arvanitica' came about in my posting had nothing to do with linguistics, > > but > > rather with the fact that non-Greek-speaking Christian Orthodox groups such as > > the > > Vlachs, Arvanites and Arvanito-Vlachs have been inseparable parts of the > > 'Genos' > > and 'Romiosyni' [as well as the shaping of the Modern Greek experience and > > identity]. > > > There were Muslims Arvanites though (Ciamides-Thyamides) that were > transferred in Turkey though in 1923... > > > I am not a linguist and as such, cannot address the extent to which the > > Latinate > > vocabulary in Albanian has been exaggerated in the literature. By the same > > token, > > Fine so far! Bear with me, as myself also I am neither a linguist, nor have > even a B.A ;-) > > My intention has been just to point a mistake, that opened this interesting > thread. > ... > > > Cheers > ------ > G. R. > > > _______________________________________________ > List-Info: https://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/mgsa-l From bjoseph at ling.ohio-state.edu Sat Jul 27 08:03:18 2002 From: bjoseph at ling.ohio-state.edu (Brian Joseph) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:57 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] More re Clarification about Albanian In-Reply-To: <001801c2356b$c4373380$1a03f9d5@simoswmtjisc08> from "Simeon Magliveras" at Jul 27, 2002 03:47:27 PM Message-ID: <200207271503.g6RF3Iv16289@julius.ling.ohio-state.edu> To the list: Since my clarification about Albanian seems to have sparked some further questions and comment, here is some follow-up to, in particlar, G.R.'s questions about Albanian and Arvanitika and related issues. 1. The book by Lukas Tsitsipis that Neni Panourgia referred to is entitled "A Linguistic Anthropology of Praxis and Language Shift: Arvanitika (Albanian) and Greek in Contact", published in 1998 by Oxford University Press. A very positive review of it that I wrote has just appeared in the journal Anthropological Linguistics (vol. 43 (2001), pp. 383-387); I could send an offprint of the review to anyone who is interested if given a mailing address. 2. Regarding terminology, "Albanian" is the standard way of referring to the language in English; "Arvanitika" most technically refers to a dialect of Albanian (see below re dialects vs. languages), or more accurately a cluster of dialects, spoken in Greece for about the past 600 years or more; it is thus to be distinguished by more recent influxes of speakers of Albanian (e.g. in the north of Greece and even more recently in Athens and elsewhere) who speak some non-Arvanitika variety of Albanian (e.g. possibly the standard language or a northern Albanian ("Geg") variety. The Albanians themselves, in Albanian, refer to their language as "Shqip" and their country as "Shiperia" and themselves as "Shqiptar" (note the spelling --- no -u- after the -q-, and the -e- in Shqiperia actually has two dots over it). 3. The question of Illyrian and the origins of the Albanians was raised. This is a vexing issue complicated by nationalist interests on the part of the Albanians and a virtual lack of any substantive knowledge of who the Illyrians were (if indeed they were a unified people at all) and more particularly what their language was like. Some ancient sources refer to the area of the western Balkans as "Illyria" and there are a few words in Latin which the Romans considered to be borrowings from "Illyrian". It is clear that there were some people speaking something like what we might call a "pre-Albanian" language (that is, with features that link it to what we know of attested Albanian) in ancient times in the Balkans (we know that since there are some very old borrowings from ancient Greek into Albanian as well as some words that are shared by Albanian and Romanian that have characteristics that suggest that they too are very old) but what is not clear is that "Illyrian" is t! he ancestor of Albanian. Moreover, it seems that the Romans, for instance, when they referred to "Illyrian" may have simply been using the term to refer to languages spoken by peoples in the Western Balkans, and not a linguistically coherent group in any scientific sense (just as many Americans use the term "Indian language" to refer to any one or more of the hundreds of linguistically quite distinct Native American languages, as if there were a single "Indian" language). It really is safest, in my view, to be agnostic about the Balkan predecessors of the Albanians, and to recognize simply that we can't know everything! What we do know, however, is that Albanian is an Indo-European (IE) language (as is Greek, Latin, Russian, English, etc., each of these being part of separate "branches" or subgroups within the larger IE family), and that therefore some IE-speaking peoples entered the Balkans and transmitted what ultimately became the Albanian language as we know it (simil! ar things could be said about the linguistic predecessors of the Greeks, etc.). Note that I am trying to be careful in my use of terms here and am not saying that the early speakers of a language that was the predecessor, linguistically speaking, of a later language are to be equated with the labels we give to the peoples themselves --- as the Tsitsipis book indicates, language shift can occur and people who are "racially" (I use the term advisedly) quite different can end up speaking the same language --- so the group of pre-Albanian speakers, whoever they may have been, need not be ethnically/racially/whatever the same as the people currently speaking Albanian. 4. My mention of the Indo-Europeans leads to G.R.'s question about who the Indo-Europeans were, what they spoke, where they came from, and so on. Here we are on safer ground but there are still a lot of unanswered questions. "Indo-European" refers, as I suggested above, to the language family that takes in Albanian, Greek, Latin, Russian, English, Irish, Armenian, Hittite (now extinct), Tocharian (now extinct), and Sanskrit, to name just one key representative of each of the 10 major branches of the family. A "language family" means a group of languages that have sprung from the same linguistic ancestor, much as the Romance languages all emerged out of Latin or, for that matter, much as the modern Greek dialects emerged (for the most part) out of the Hellenistic koine (more on dialect vs. language below). Given the linguistic diversity in the family and the fact that records of some of the branches date back as far as c. 1800 BC (in the case of Hittite) or 1400 BC (in t! he case of Mycenaean Greek), most linguists assume that the ancestor language for Indo-European, which is usually referred to as "Proto-Indo-European" was spoken some 6500 years ago. Where it was spoken is less clear, since there are no written records to work from --- rather our knowledge of Proto-Indo-European comes from a comparison of the characteristics found in all of the languages in the family (just as you can get an idea of what the parents of siblings looked like by comparing the common features found in the siblings' appearance; it is not a complete picture and it involves some speculation but the methods are well-enough developed now to allow for some relatively sophisticated hypotheses about the nature of the linguistic ancestor). Most linguists assume, based on where the various branches of IE come to be located in ancient times and other evidence (e.g. about common vocabulary for various natural events, such as 'snow', or flora and fauna) somewhere in the re! gion north of the Black Sea stretching towards Central Asia (lots of people have more specific hypotheses to be sure, but most guesses fall somewhere in that region). Just who spoke Proto-Indo-European in that area is also just a matter of speculation, so it is hard to say, in response to another of G.R.'s questions, what artefacts they left behind --- there are lots of artefacts in that region, and **some** of them may have been left by speakers of Proto-Indo-European, but it is very hard to tell for sure (though that has not stopped people from making some very interesting and quite possibly correct hypotheses). We do have literary monuments, in the form of such works as the Iliad and the Odyssey, the Rig Veda (in archaic Sanskrit), Hittite laws and ritual texts, Beowulf, and so on, and themes and diction that are common to them (and other comparisons that can be made across the vocabulary of the different branches of the family) give us an idea of things that the Indo-E! uropeans talked about, the metaphors they used, even aspects of their legal structure, family organization, and so on. A very useful source for all this is the book edited by J. P. Mallory and Douglas Q. Adams entitled "Encyclopedia of Indo-European culture", published by Fitzroy Dearborn in 1997. 5. Regarding the "dialect" vs. "language" issue that I have referred to a few times myself and which someone asked about on the list: >Mmmm! Is Arvanitika a dialect? Is then Corsican a dialect and >why? Is Catalan a language and why? What makes the difference >between them? The easy answer is that the difference between a language and a dialect is a matter of degree --- the closer the two speech varieties seem, the more likely we are to classify them as dialects of a larger entity which we call a language. One measure of "sameness" that is often used is "mutual intelligibility", i.e. if speakers of each variety can communicate with speakers of the other without too much trouble, then the speech forms are close enough to be called dialects. If not, then they are distinct languages. Thus Northern Greek and Peloponnesian Greek would both be dialects of the "Greek" language (it is harder to say with regard to Pontic Greek versus other varieties or Tsakonian Greek versus other varieties; note that Georges Drettas in his recent book on Pontic argues that it should be considered a separate language on linguistic grounds); note that in this sense, it is not that one variety is a dialect of (i.e. derived from) the Standard language --- in this sense! , the standard language is just another dialect of the language as a whole that happens to enjoy prestige, be associated with political and economic power, etc. The equating of a standard language with the "language" is what leads some people to think of "dialect" as a pejorative term (as in "X is just a dialect of Y") as if a "dialect" were somehow a degenerated form of the language. Linguists resist such usage and there is generally no scientific basis for such a view, but it is a popular one. Back to language vs. dialect: the tricky thing about labelling two speech varieties as "dialects" or separate "languages" is that there are other factors that play a role besides just some measure (which often cannot be quantified in any reasonable way anyway) of "sameness", factors of a social, political, economic, etc. nature. Thus, to take an example close to Greece, Serbian and Croatian are quite similar in most respects to the extent that they pass the mutual intelligibilit! y test for being dialects of the same language, but for political reasons now, they are largely being promoted as separate languages. So also with Hindi and Urdu in another part of the world. And there are speech forms that are generally considered dialects of the same language that are not really mutually intelligible, e.g. Yorkshire English and Texan English! Thus Arvanitika is considered a dialect of Albanian (in the broad sense, not a dialect of the gjuha e njesuar, the standard language I referred to) because it is roughly mutually intelligible with other varieties of Albanian. As for Catalan and Corsican, I don't know the facts well enough but there are legitimate linguistic differences between these speech forms and other neighboring Romance languages but at the same time different political (external) situations seem to have prevailed, leading to different results in terms of conventional classification (which can change of course, as external factors change, wit! ness Serbian and Croatian now, as well as the emergence of Bosnian as a "separate language" instead of being considered a dialect of Serbian (in the broad sense). Linguists are fond of saying that "a language is a dialect with an army and a navy" (echoing something that Uriel Weinreich may have first said, or possibly Otto Jespersen --- no one is quite sure), a way of emphasizing that external factors play a large role in how speech forms are classified. I have gone on at some length, way too long no doubt, but I wanted to get some of these issues clarified, especially since so many of the contributors to this interesting discussion were willing to admit that they were not linguists. I hope that this has not simply raised more questions than it has answered, or if it has, that it at least has clarified some of the earlier issues. --Brian Brian D. Joseph Professor of Linguistics The Ohio State University From dkatseto at bellatlantic.net Sat Jul 27 21:42:47 2002 From: dkatseto at bellatlantic.net (Christos D. Katsetos) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:57 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Clarification re Albanian and Arvanitika References: <000501c23565$eefca920$1a03f9d5@simoswmtjisc08> Message-ID: <3D437647.69A83E2B@bellatlantic.net> Simeon Magliveras wrote: > Of course Dilects can be labled this way for political reasons too. > Defining particular 'languages' as dielects demeans those languages and the > people who speak it so as a result cerntalized powers can control > minorities. And conversely defining 'dialects' as bona fide 'languages' may be equally exploited by political agendas promoting 'ethno-linguistic minority issues' in the broader context of 'minority awakenings and reconstructions' ... C.D.K. From baloglou at Oswego.EDU Sat Jul 27 13:09:24 2002 From: baloglou at Oswego.EDU (George Baloglou) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:57 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Clarification re Albanian and Arvanitika In-Reply-To: <3D435C5B.93C5280@bellatlantic.net> Message-ID: On Sun, 28 Jul 2002, Christos D. Katsetos wrote: > The designation ëArvanitesí refers to Albanian-speaking subjects of Christian > Orthodox persuasion and Greek consciousness. This is to be distinguished from > Albanian-speaking Muslim subjects and loyal followers of the Ottomans (ëArnautí in > Turkish). The latter have been traditionally referred to (in Greek) as > ëTourkalvanoií. For all intensive purposes, the Chams may be viewed as a regional > division of ëTourkalvanoií. The term "Arvanites" seems to have a rather complex history! Bypassing a friend's claim (based on solid personal experience) that it may even refer to Christian, *Greek-speaking* people with roots in geographical Albania, I would like to point out that the present-day usage appears to be 'novel'. Indeed Fotakos uses "Albanoi" in his "Memoirs of the Greek Revolution" for *Muslim* Albanian speakers (typically fighting along the Turks), while, half a century earlier, Afthonides uses "Arvanitai" for the same people in "After the Fall" (1453-1789), specifically stating that most of the inhabitants of 'Arnaoutlouk' have converted to Islam. My sample is way too small -- I can't even find my own copy of Makrygiannis right now -- but I strongly suspect that, two centuries ago, both "Albanos" (extended to "Tourkalbanos" when appropriate) and "Arvanitis" meant "Albanian speaking Muslim" and there was no term for Albanian-speaking *Christians* ... because there was 'no need' to differentiate between them and their Greek-speaking coreligionists. If I am right, some time after the War of Independence was over, language started to attract attention and the term "Arvanites" began to be applied, *within the newly founded Greek state*, to Albanian-speaking Christians (whose Albanian dialects began to be called "Arvanitika"). I hope someone can provise more information... From dgw1 at nyu.edu Sat Jul 27 13:57:25 2002 From: dgw1 at nyu.edu (Diana Wright) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:57 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Clarification re Albanian and Arvanitika Message-ID: <1344af31344a1f.1344a1f1344af3@homemail.nyu.edu> ----- Original Message ----- From: George Baloglou >I strongly > suspectthat, two centuries ago, both "Albanos" (extended to > "Tourkalbanos" when > appropriate) and "Arvanitis" meant "Albanian speaking Muslim" and > there was > no term for Albanian-speaking *Christians* ... because there was > 'no need' > to differentiate between them and their Greek-speaking coreligionists. In the 15th-16th C Venetian documents with which I am familiar, Islamic & Orthodox Albanians are both called "Albanesi. Since Ottoman occupation of Albanian areas was recent, Islamic Albanians were most likely to be converts, & such a person was called "renegado." DW From baloglou at Oswego.EDU Sat Jul 27 17:11:11 2002 From: baloglou at Oswego.EDU (George Baloglou) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:57 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Clarification re Albanian and Arvanitika In-Reply-To: <1344af31344a1f.1344a1f1344af3@homemail.nyu.edu> Message-ID: On Sat, 27 Jul 2002, Diana Wright wrote: > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: George Baloglou > >I strongly > > suspectthat, two centuries ago, both "Albanos" (extended to > > "Tourkalbanos" when > > appropriate) and "Arvanitis" meant "Albanian speaking Muslim" and > > there was > > no term for Albanian-speaking *Christians* ... because there was > > 'no need' > > to differentiate between them and their Greek-speaking coreligionists. > > In the 15th-16th C Venetian documents with which I am familiar, Islamic > & Orthodox Albanians are both called "Albanesi. Since Ottoman > occupation of Albanian areas was recent, Islamic Albanians were most > likely to be converts, & such a person was called "renegado." Of course I was referring to *Greek* sources before the establishment of the Greek state. Still, looking again at Dapontes' "Garden of Graces", and just a few lines before his reference to the Czar's 'Roman' tutor, I read that, after their victory at Krimaia, the Russians brought in "Pwmaious, Albavitas, cuv tekvois kai cuv guvai3i, vhciwtas, Mopa.i.tas" (Romans, Albanians, including women and children, islanders, Moraites): one would think that the Russians settled Krimaia only with Christians! [And yet even closer to the Czar's Greek lessons, Dapontes refers to 'man-eating' "Apbavitades" ruling now the Morea, after the murder of 60,000 - 70,000 Christians -- in this case the Arvanites *are* Muslim.] By the way, here is a bonus (in Greenglish) that just surfaced on hellas list and refers to the rapid assimilation of Albanians in 21st century Hellas: Mia pou to' fere h koubenta peri Albanwn. Emeina fetos ekplagos. Oi geroi, meta dekaetia, koimounntai pali me akleidwtes tis portes. Albanoi proskeklhmenoi se gamous kai baptisia. Psilotsantizontai mono giati apo tous prwtous pou exoun parei ellhnikh uphkoothta einai oi blaxofwnoi ths Albanias. Plhrh enswmatwsh,- me thn Albania ws to oneiro tous ths patrikhs ghs,- kati san tous Krhtikous ths Aqhnas. From dkatseto at bellatlantic.net Sun Jul 28 07:17:00 2002 From: dkatseto at bellatlantic.net (Christos D. Katsetos) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:57 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Clarification re Albanian and Arvanitika References: Message-ID: <3D43FCDC.60E8138E@bellatlantic.net> George Baloglou wrote: > On Sun, 28 Jul 2002, Christos D. Katsetos wrote: > > > The designation ?Arvanites? refers to Albanian-speaking subjects of Christian > > Orthodox persuasion and Greek consciousness. This is to be distinguished from > > Albanian-speaking Muslim subjects and loyal followers of the Ottomans (?Arnaut? in > > Turkish). The latter have been traditionally referred to (in Greek) as > > ?Tourkalvanoi?. For all intensive purposes, the Chams may be viewed as a regional > > division of ?Tourkalvanoi?. > > The term "Arvanites" seems to have a rather complex history! Bypassing a > friend's claim (based on solid personal experience) that it may even refer > to Christian, *Greek-speaking* people with roots in geographical Albania, > I would like to point out that the present-day usage appears to be 'novel'. > Indeed Fotakos uses "Albanoi" in his "Memoirs of the Greek Revolution" for > *Muslim* Albanian speakers (typically fighting along the Turks), while, half > a century earlier, Afthonides uses "Arvanitai" for the same people in "After > the Fall" (1453-1789), specifically stating that most of the inhabitants of > 'Arnaoutlouk' have converted to Islam. My sample is way too small -- I can't > even find my own copy of Makrygiannis right now -- but I strongly suspect > that, two centuries ago, both "Albanos" (extended to "Tourkalbanos" when > appropriate) and "Arvanitis" meant "Albanian speaking Muslim" and there was > no term for Albanian-speaking *Christians* ... because there was 'no need' > to differentiate between them and their Greek-speaking coreligionists. > > If I am right, some time after the War of Independence was over, language > started to attract attention and the term "Arvanites" began to be applied, > *within the newly founded Greek state*, to Albanian-speaking Christians > (whose Albanian dialects began to be called "Arvanitika"). I hope someone > can provise more information... Thank you for your scholarly inquiry and for deciphering the ?ontology? of the word 'Arvanites'. As you point out, the usage of the term would appear to be 'undifferentiated' or 'generic' at least from the 15th through the 18th centuries, but it eventually acquires a more specific connotation in favour of a Christian Orthodox subject of Albanian origin during at least ~ the past 150-200 years. Also, I agree that the term should apply to both Greek ? and/or Albanian-speaking subjects of Christian Orthodox persuasion (although it should also noted the former were often bilingual ?such as in the case of my great grandmother). With this in mind, may I reiterate that in the Modern Greek context the term 'Arvanites' denotes **unequivocally** Greek consciousness and identity [to this example, it would be erroneous to refer to the Chams as 'Muslim Arvanites']. According to Asteris Koukoudis "The Vlachs always had clear names for the other inhabitants of the Balkans. In accordance with the same political perception based on experience, they referred to all the Balkan Moslems as 'Turks'; though they did distinguish certain non-Turkish-speaking groups among the Moslems, such as the **Albanian-speaking Tourkalvani or Arnauts**, the Slavonic-speaking Pomaks and Karagovalis, the Greek-speaking Valaades, and the Moslem Vlach-speaking inhabitants of Notia in Moglena. Regarding their Slavonic-speaking Orthodox Christian neighbours, they recognised the existence of Bulgarians and Serbs, but also that of the Slavonic-speaking 'Grecomans?. The Vlach inhabitants of Krusevo in Fyrom still use the term Virgari (Bulgarians) of their fellow townsfolk who are descended from Slavonic-speaking families. **The Vlachs call the Albanian-speaking Orthodox Christians Arbinesi, and it was under this name that the ancestors of the modern Albanians first appeared in the Middle Ages.**" Excerpt from the 'Introduction, Assessment and Conclusion' of the Academy of Athens Award-winning book by Asterios Koukoudis 'MELETES GIA TOUS BLACOUS ? DEUTEROS TOMOS ? OI MHTROPOLEIS KAI H DIASPORA TWN BLACWN. EKDOSEIS ZHTROS, QESSALONIKH, 2000 / Studies on the Vlachs. 2nd Vol. (Greek edition)- The Vlachs: Metropolis and Diaspora.? Zitros Publications: Thessaloniki, 2000'] C.D.K. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/public/mgsa-l/attachments/20020728/776c0095/attachment.html From baloglou at Oswego.EDU Sat Jul 27 20:44:13 2002 From: baloglou at Oswego.EDU (George Baloglou) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:57 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Clarification re Albanian and Arvanitika In-Reply-To: <3D43FCDC.60E8138E@bellatlantic.net> Message-ID: On Sun, 28 Jul 2002, Christos D. Katsetos wrote: > mind, may I reiterate that in the Modern Greek context the term 'Arvanites' > denotes **unequivocally** Greek consciousness and identity Certainly. What I would like to see is how the term has evolved over the last two centuries. > [to this example, it would be erroneous to refer to the Chams as 'Muslim > Arvanites']. Indeed. In fact, turning things around, the very term "Cham" could in the past denote a *Christian* inhabitant of that region, including a Greek speaker: if you visit http://www.oswego.edu/~baloglou/chameria.html, for example, you will see there the term "Albanotsamides" (*Albanian* Chams). [For an analogy, an Israeli Jew could still be a "Palestinian" in 1950.] G. B. From dkatseto at bellatlantic.net Sun Jul 28 11:24:32 2002 From: dkatseto at bellatlantic.net (Christos D. Katsetos) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:57 2005 Subject: Fw: [MGSA-L] Orthodox Albanians and Albanian Vlachs References: <001401c23496$fa0d9c90$dc22f9d5@simoswmtjisc08> <3D420655.61DF7161@bellatlantic.net> <000d01c234d8$6d4628d0$7e02f9d5@simoswmtjisc08> Message-ID: <3D4436DF.E71BEF33@bellatlantic.net> Simeon Magliveras wrote: > I took this previous example from a discussion on one of > the Greek tv stations. They all agreed that Othodox = > Greekness. The reality maybe very different. From my > experience in the field, there are Orthodox Albanians who > feel they have nothing to do with the modern Greek state. > Likewise their lineage is very far removed if they have any > relationship to Greece at all. I would suspect Albanian > Vlachs might feel the same. > I do not contest the existence of a segment of Albanian Orthodox population, which does not subscribe to a Greek orientation or identity (and this may be particularly exaggerated among members the American Albanian Orthodox community). By the same token, do bear in mind that there are many Albanian citizens in the flock of Archibishop Anastasios who chose to declare a Greek identity. I am troubled by your choice of the word 'lineage' to characterize 'ethnic' differences between 'Albanians' and 'Greeks'. From your statement one can only deduce that 'lineage' denotes 'race', which as stated before, has no place in the lexicon of Romiosyni and the Patriarchal tradition. In my view, an Orthodox Albanian (an individual either residing in Albania, Greece, or elsewhere) who willfully and resolutely subscribes to a Greek identity should be accepted without qualification as a Greek subject (that is, irrespective of presumptive ?genealogical? precursors or related ?racialist? considerations). Nor is usage of Greek language an a priori proviso for Greek identity. And this is no better illustrated than in the paradigm of the Vlachophone population residing today in Albanian territory. There is no doubt that the historical preferences of Albanian Vlachs mirror their deep intra-communal divisions since the mid-19th century. The only difference is that today these divisions have become ?tripartite? comprising not only the traditional pro-Roumanian and pro-Greek camps, but also an amalgam of ostensibly 'undifferentiated' or 'independent' groups. Some of the latter are moderate whilst others are patently irredentist. A prime example in this regard is the 'Aromanian' nationalist movement in the tradition of Prof. Vasile Barba and the ULCA organization in Freiburg (Germany). An indication of ULCA?s orientation is the abhorrent rhetoric against the Ecumenical Patriarch Vartholomaios that has recently appeared in the organization?s official publication Zborlu a Nostru. In this, His Holiness is described as a ?wolf? ? an appalling insult indeed that was promptly denounced by moderate ?independent? Vlach members abroad. Yet another, albeit lesser offshoot of the ?non allied? group of Albanian Vlachs appears to exist maintaining an Albanian national consciousness. Without credible demographics or even 'opinion polls' it is impossible to assess the percentages of each constituency although historically, the evidence of an Albanian Vlach orientation toward a Greek identity is indeed staggering. From ssm at panafonet.gr Sun Jul 28 01:33:41 2002 From: ssm at panafonet.gr (Simeon Magliveras) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:58 2005 Subject: Fw: [MGSA-L] Orthodox Albanians and Albanian Vlachs References: <001401c23496$fa0d9c90$dc22f9d5@simoswmtjisc08> <3D420655.61DF7161@bellatlantic.net> <000d01c234d8$6d4628d0$7e02f9d5@simoswmtjisc08> <3D4436DF.E71BEF33@bellatlantic.net> Message-ID: <001701c23611$7b488790$9102f9d5@simoswmtjisc08> It i is clear the Balkan minorities is a complex mix and has been used consistantly thru history in different power struggles. The identity of these poeples thus becomes very complex. Presently, as Christo suggested, Albanian Vlachs are indeed applying as Greek diaspora in Greece. Regardless to what these people feel they are, the Greek government has given them the opportunity to work in Greece and a doorway to the EU which under the present circumstances in Albania is a great opportunity. I do not suggest either that these people do or do not feel Greek. The question is what is the result on ethnic minorities in the Balkans. One further note: The term lineage, anthropologically does not infer race but a geneological past where marriage, kinship and social relations can be determined. ----- Original Message ----- From: Christos D. Katsetos To: Simeon Magliveras Cc: MGSA-L@uci.edu Sent: Sunday, July 28, 2002 9:24 PM Subject: Re: Fw: [MGSA-L] Orthodox Albanians and Albanian Vlachs Simeon Magliveras wrote: I took this previous example from a discussion on one of the Greek tv stations. They all agreed that Othodox = Greekness. The reality maybe very different. From my experience in the field, there are Orthodox Albanians who feel they have nothing to do with the modern Greek state. Likewise their lineage is very far removed if they have any relationship to Greece at all. I would suspect Albanian Vlachs might feel the same. I do not contest the existence of a segment of Albanian Orthodox population, which does not subscribe to a Greek orientation or identity (and this may be particularly exaggerated among members the American Albanian Orthodox community). By the same token, do bear in mind that there are many Albanian citizens in the flock of Archibishop Anastasios who chose to declare a Greek identity. I am troubled by your choice of the word 'lineage' to characterize 'ethnic' differences between 'Albanians' and 'Greeks'. From your statement one can only deduce that 'lineage' denotes 'race', which as stated before, has no place in the lexicon of Romiosyni and the Patriarchal tradition. In my view, an Orthodox Albanian (an individual either residing in Albania, Greece, or elsewhere) who willfully and resolutely subscribes to a Greek identity should be accepted without qualification as a Greek subject (that is, irrespective of presumptive 'genealogical' precursors or related 'racialist' considerations). Nor is usage of Greek language an a priori proviso for Greek identity. And this is no better illustrated than in the paradigm of the Vlachophone population residing today in Albanian territory. There is no doubt that the historical preferences of Albanian Vlachs mirror their deep intra-communal divisions since the mid-19th century. The only difference is that today these divisions have become 'tripartite' comprising not only the traditional pro-Roumanian and pro-Greek camps, but also an amalgam of ostensibly 'undifferentiated' or 'independent' groups. Some of the latter are moderate whilst others are patently irredentist. A prime example in this regard is the 'Aromanian' nationalist movement in the tradition of Prof. Vasile Barba and the ULCA organization in Freiburg (Germany). An indication of ULCA's orientation is the abhorrent rhetoric against the Ecumenical Patriarch Vartholomaios that has recently appeared in the organization's official publication Zborlu a Nostru. In this, His Holiness is described as a 'wolf' ? an appalling insult indeed that was promptly denounced by moderate 'independent' Vlach members abroad. Yet another, albeit lesser offshoot of the 'non allied' group of Albanian Vlachs appears to exist maintaining an Albanian national consciousness. Without credible demographics or even 'opinion polls' it is impossible to assess the percentages of each constituency although historically, the evidence of an Albanian Vlach orientation toward a Greek identity is indeed staggering. From a Greek viewpoint, the affiliation of Albanian Vlachs is central to the question of Northern Epirus in light of the fact that the Vlachs constitute the predominant element of the Greek minority in present-day Albania. Rejection of a Greek identity by the Vlachs [a wishful thinking by many] will further shrivel the critical mass of the Greek minority in southern Albania. Thus, the 'ethnic' separation of the Vlachs from Greeks is a high stake in the realm of Albanian nationalism: the break of the Vlachs from the Greek camp in the South will effectively silence Greek 'claims' or grievances as regards to their 'perceived' sizable minority in Albania. According to a recent article in the moderate ('independent') 'Aromanian' organization 'Society Farsarotul', which is based in the U.S: "By counting the Vlachs as Greeks, Greece ends up with a sizable minority in Albania, so the strategy of Albanian nationalists is first to pretend that the Vlachs do not exist (i.e., that they are regular ethnic Albanians). But Orthodoxy tends to make us resist assimilation in Muslim-majority Albania and opens the door to our claiming we are Greek. The Albanians would much rather we identify ourselves as anything but Greek, and so they have at times treated us as a Vlach minority, at other times as a "Romanian" population on Albanian soil. Indeed, the Albanian Vlachs can determine the direction the "Greek question" will take; if they declare themselves Greek, the Albanians have a real headache, but if they say they are Vlach or Romanian, Greek claims will be undermined. . .. There have been many signs lately that the Vlachs of Albania are aligning themselves with the Greeks. The attractions are nearly irresistible -- almost the only way out of Albania's economic misery is to obtain a visa to work in Greece, and our people can do so simply by declaring themselves "Greek." And every time Albania strengthens its ties with the Islamic world -- an astute political move, considering Europe's abandonment of the Bosnian Muslims -- the Vlachs, Greeks, and Orthodox Albanians are brought closer together by their fear of Islam." In view of the above one wonders whether the Evangelos Averoff-Tosizza's 'Political Aspect of the Kutzovlach Affair' is indeed revisited nowadays among Vlachs in Albania? The answer can only come from one source: the Vlachs themselves who, as in the past, will be called upon to delineate the direction of their national orientation. But as Asteris Koukoudis asserts in the 'Introduction, Assessment and Conclusions' section of his book 'Studies on the Vlachs. 2nd Vol. (Greek edition)- The Vlachs: Metropolis and Diaspora.' Zitros Publications: Thessaloniki, 2000]: "Even so, the most unfair and unrealistic attitude towards, and treatment of, the Vlachs comes not from these weak and declining circles abroad, but from the wariness, the frequently negative attitude, and the often tragic ignorance of Greek policy makers, whether of Vlach or non-Vlach origin. As long as the international community regards the 'irredentists' abroad as the only source of information about Vlach-related issues, any problems that exist will be perpetuated. The [Greek] state is no less responsible for the current role of these 'irredentist circles', and ignorance doesn't justify its attitude, especially in the eyes of the simple, ordinary Vlachs. For simple people, simple things might be enough." C.D.K. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/public/mgsa-l/attachments/20020728/6b011dd2/attachment.html From ssm at panafonet.gr Sat Jul 27 15:48:26 2002 From: ssm at panafonet.gr (Simeon Magliveras) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:58 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Poniak Greek Message-ID: <002c01c235bf$b8d99c90$ae21f9d5@simoswmtjisc08> Thank you, Brian, for the detail information conserning dilects and languages. My specializtion is not in linguistic anthropology. I also found it interesting to find that Pontiac Greek is still not clearly defined. Popular culture in Greece mythologises otherwise. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/public/mgsa-l/attachments/20020728/e44c38ac/attachment.html From AKarpathak at aol.com Sun Jul 28 09:14:32 2002 From: AKarpathak at aol.com (AKarpathak@aol.com) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:58 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] "Turks" Message-ID: <0FC39B92.686DD314.09E588BC@aol.com> So who are the Ottomans compared to the Turks? And how did the Turks come to have a monopoly on the Ottoman Empire? Sorry, if this is discussed in a later posting, my email is kinda slow and it's nearly impossible to flow back and forth between later and earlier postings!!! If already discussed, please disregard, I will eventually get to it!!! Anna K. In a message dated Fri, 26 Jul 2002 12:10:44 +0200, e.sigalos@rulpre.leidenuniv.nl writes: >I have the feeling that the Ottoman elite would not appreciate it very much >to be called Turkish at any stage of te Ottoman history. I think that Turks >were only the Turkish speaking Muslim peasantry. The term may have been used >so as to differentiate the Turkish speaking Muslim peasantry from the r'aya >(i.e. non-Muslim population). As far as the term Greek is concerned, >especially during the Ottoman period, it seems to me relatively blurred (see >for one instance Stoianovich's "Conquering Balkan Orthodox Merchant"). >National identity most likely developed early on in the upper and merchant >social groups, but the Greek, Albanian or Slavic speaking peasantry most >likely developed a ?"Greek" national identity during the 18th century, >mainly as part of a social reaction against the oppression of the ciftlik >owners and high taxation. Of course this is just an opinion, or even an >interpretative option. > >In any case, I was wondering whether anybody knows of a current publication >of the complete Constitution of Rigas Velestinlis. I have been looking for >one everywhere in Greece, but I had no luck. > >Thanks. > >Lefteris Sigalos > >-----Original Message----- >From: mgsa-l-admin@uci.edu [mailto:mgsa-l-admin@uci.edu]On Behalf Of >George Baloglou >Sent: Friday, July 26, 2002 10:18 AM >To: AKarpathak@aol.com >Cc: mgsa-l@uci.edu >Subject: [MGSA-L] "Turks" > > > > >On Thu, 25 Jul 2002 AKarpathak@aol.com wrote: > >> So, when and how do the Ottomans become Turks? > >The reverse question is probably far more important :-) In any case, based >on my exposure to 14th century texts, I would say that the Turks were still >being referred to by the Byzantines as "Persians" (Cantakouzinos' History), >"Agarinoi" (Velissarios), etc; "Turks" (for Turks ... rather than >Hungarians) >begins to appear in the 15th century, in Ducas' and Chalcokondyles' >Histories, >for example. Further elaboration, someone? > > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?G. B. > > > >_______________________________________________ >List-Info: https://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/mgsa-l > >_______________________________________________ >List-Info: https://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/mgsa-l > From AKarpathak at aol.com Sun Jul 28 09:44:29 2002 From: AKarpathak at aol.com (AKarpathak@aol.com) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:58 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Clarification re Albanian and Arvanitika Message-ID: <7A3A5922.7B825C9B.09E588BC@aol.com> In a message dated Sat, 27 Jul 2002 22:06:08 +0900, "G.R." writes: >on 27/7/02 20:52, Philobiblos 315 at info@caratzas.com wrote: >>they also have been >> supported in this endeavor by a corrupt former congressman who is one of the >> leaders of the KLA (=Kosovo Liberation Army) lobby in Washington **** AK: What is the name of this congressman? I had come across his web site a few years ago in which he included current Greek northern Epirus as part of Greater Albania but have since lost the link (too too many computer crashes). Is the site still up? Anna K. From np255 at columbia.edu Sun Jul 28 09:52:32 2002 From: np255 at columbia.edu (Neni Panourgia) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:58 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Clarification re Albanian and Arvanitika References: <3D43FCDC.60E8138E@bellatlantic.net> Message-ID: <3D442150.4000000@columbia.edu> i don't have my files here with me at the time but the two sources that should be checked on Arvanites are Anna Komnini who appears to be the second or third source to use the term (referring, herself, to a couple of sources that preceded her in usage) in the 11th c., and Eri Vranousi who, writing in the 70s gives the most exhaustive history of the term. also extremely informative is the work that has been done by Biris. none of the above sources deals with the language but rather with the group that was denoted by the term. again i apologize for not being more specific but i am away at research with no access to my files (the ref., however, are in the bibliography of my book for those who would like to check further). np/ From baloglou at Oswego.EDU Sun Jul 28 13:49:42 2002 From: baloglou at Oswego.EDU (George Baloglou) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:58 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Poniak Greek In-Reply-To: <002c01c235bf$b8d99c90$ae21f9d5@simoswmtjisc08> Message-ID: On Sun, 28 Jul 2002, Simeon Magliveras wrote: > Thank you, Brian, for the detail information conserning dilects and > languages. My specializtion is not in linguistic anthropology. I also > found it interesting to find that Pontiac Greek is still not clearly > defined. Popular culture in Greece mythologises otherwise. ^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^ Perhaps you meant 'not clearly classified'? For Pontic Greek needs no definition: it clearly has the same roots as every other Greek dialect, the question is whether or not it should *still* be classified as one (in view of distancing caused by both its isolation and Turkish influence). Linguists consider two dialects to be distinct (languages) when two randomly chosen, 'unsuspecting' speakers of each cannot understand each other in *verbal* communication. Under this definition, Pontic Greek certainly fails the test: I heard enough of it as I growing up to know this :-) In fact, many other Greeks have noticed, too: where do you think that Pontic jokes come from? [Not much 'mythology' at street level...] Now let's look at a specific Pontic word I heard this summer, ANOUNIOS. Do you understand what it means? Most likely not, even now that you are *reading* it in an one-word sentence. And yet it is so close to Ancient Greek ANOUS and Modern/Ancient Greek ANOHTOS = moron :-) Pontic Greek is full of such words that have every right to be considered 100% Greek! [If you would like to see something more complicated, consider the Pontic proverb "o pardon epegneut' ta kakala t'" = "the tomcat was proud of his testicles": now that you have a translation, you would surely guess that "epegneut" comes from Greek "epaino", right? Wrong, according to Papadopoulos' Pontic lexicon, which offers a *Turkish* derivation ... bypassing a nice opportunity to 'mythologise' a bit, I would submit :-) ] Next, a parable... A few years ago, a Northern European gentleman full of sensitivities and curiosities -- especially keen ... on Macedonia, you do know the type -- asked me, in private correspondence, about Pontic Greek. I gave him a simple response, that it is as difficult for me to *read*, and as close (IMHO) to contemporary Greek, as Homeric Greek (which I could not 'get' in high school but do get now with *less formal training and more 'cunning'*) ... and never heard from him again :-)) Finally, what is the conclusion? I offer no conclusion, you will have to fetch for yourself, talk to Greeks of Pontic and non-Pontic descent alike, try to *read* some Pontic Greek, listen to some Pontic music, and so on. But do not forget that this is an issue where Politics and Linguistics may and do disagree: *if* you are looking for another 'linguistic minority' in Greece you will be disappointed :-) [To wit: Pontians suffered a lot both before and after Greece's 1922 'humiliation' -- another 'code word' popular with 'Greek watchers' -- in Anatolia, and have every right to feel bitter (to this day) about their treatment by the mainland Greeks (under extraordinarily difficult circumstances, any fair-minded observer would admit); but at the same time they know 'where' they come from, and how much history has forced them to share with non-Pontic Greeks...] G. B. From baloglou at Oswego.EDU Sun Jul 28 13:58:44 2002 From: baloglou at Oswego.EDU (George Baloglou) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:58 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] "Turks" In-Reply-To: <0FC39B92.686DD314.09E588BC@aol.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 28 Jul 2002 AKarpathak@aol.com wrote: > So who are the Ottomans compared to the Turks? And how did the Turks come > to have a monopoly on the Ottoman Empire? ^^^^^^^^ Did they? If you discuss this with contemporary Turks, they will complain, with considerable justification, that the Ottoman elite was non-Turkish ... conveniently forgetting how, thanks to the Ottomans and their Turkish progenitors, Christian Anatolia turned Muslim and, eventually, Turkish. But, of course, in the end they have to cherish their Ottoman heritage ... for the same reasons that the Russians (will have to eventually) cherish the Soviet era :-) [This is a simplistic answer. For details you should read books like Vryonis' "Decline of Medieval Hellenism in Asia Minor" and Kafadar's "Between Two Worlds: The Construction of the Ottoman State".] G. B. From KKasantsidi at NA2.US.ML.com Sun Jul 28 15:22:17 2002 From: KKasantsidi at NA2.US.ML.com (Kasantsidis, Kiriakos (USPC.PCT.Hopewell)) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:58 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Poniak Greek Message-ID: On Sun, 28 Jul 2002, Simeon Magliveras wrote: > Thank you, Brian, for the detail information conserning dilects and > languages. My specializtion is not in linguistic anthropology. I also > found it interesting to find that Pontiac Greek is still not clearly > defined. Popular culture in Greece mythologises otherwise. ^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^ > Perhaps you meant 'not clearly classified'? For Pontic Greek needs no > definition: it clearly has the same roots as every other Greek dialect, > the question is whether or not it should *still* be classified as one (in > view of distancing caused by both its isolation and Turkish influence). Pontic greek like the other modern greek dialects descends from the hellenistic koinoi. Though, unlike the other modern greek dialects that branched out at later time - 10th or 11th century - from the byzantine koinoi, pontic greek might be a direct branch of the hellenistic koinoi. Pontic greek and the related kapadocian greek was probably spoken once through out the eastern and northern anatolia and was probably down to the 10th century a diverging dialect with the byzantine koinoi. Turkish influence did cause an vocabulary erosion. Pontic greek borrowed turkish nouns, adjectives and verbs and usually adapted them to greek - e.g. adding to verbs the suffix (evw) But to my knowledge - as someone who grew up with unilingual pontic grandparents - turkish influence did not alter the syntax or the grammar of the language. Even if considered as a language and not a dialect - still got to be called pontiaka or romeika - which is what pontians always called it anyway. I dont believe that linguistic classifications can have or should have any bearing to popular culture, its myths or politics. kiriakos From JUNESAM at aol.com Sun Jul 28 16:39:37 2002 From: JUNESAM at aol.com (JUNESAM@aol.com) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:59 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] "Nous" & "Anous" Message-ID: <174.c07bcf0.2a75dab9@aol.com> > Now let's look at a specific Pontic word I heard this summer, ANOUNIOS. > Do you understand what it means? Most likely not, even now that you are > *reading* it in an one-word sentence. And yet it is so close to Ancient > Greek ANOUS and Modern/Ancient Greek ANOHTOS = moron :-) ----------------------------- George, On popular usage and Greek vocabulary. Where I come from in N. England there is a common local expression used of people not exhibiting any capacity for simple common sense : "He hasn't got the nous he was born with" Used commonly by people who have never knowingly used a Greek word in their lives, and considered generally, by those using it,as being part of their rather local English dialect, since it is not always understood by outsiders (Classical scholars possibly excepted ... but then they are rather thin on the ground in my home village) It always cracks me up when I go home to hear it spoken quite naturally in the local accent Interesting that they use the term in the same correct context that even Plato (or the Pontiacs) might have used. Greek Rules !!! June Samaras KALAMOS BOOKS 725 Vermouth Ave. (# 1) Mississauga, Ontario Canada. L5A 3X5 Tel : 905-272-4841 E-mail : kalamosbks@aol.com http://www.kalamosbooks.com http://www.abebooks.com/home/SAMARAS/ From baloglou at Oswego.EDU Sun Jul 28 17:17:31 2002 From: baloglou at Oswego.EDU (George Baloglou) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:59 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] "Nous" & "Anous" In-Reply-To: <174.c07bcf0.2a75dab9@aol.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 28 Jul 2002 JUNESAM@aol.com wrote: > > Now let's look at a specific Pontic word I heard this summer, ANOUNIOS. > > Do you understand what it means? Most likely not, even now that you are > > *reading* it in an one-word sentence. And yet it is so close to Ancient > > Greek ANOUS and Modern/Ancient Greek ANOHTOS = moron :-) > ----------------------------- > George, > > On popular usage and Greek vocabulary. > > Where I come from in N. England there is a common > local expression used of people not exhibiting any > capacity for simple common sense : > "He hasn't got the nous he was born with" > > Used commonly by people who have never knowingly > used a Greek word in their lives, and considered generally, > by those using it,as being part of their rather local English > dialect, since it is not always understood by outsiders > (Classical scholars possibly excepted ... but then they are > rather thin on the ground in my home village) > > It always cracks me up when I go home to hear it spoken > quite naturally in the local accent Interesting that > they use the term in the same correct context that even > Plato (or the Pontiacs) might have used. Well, I am surprised! I fed it into my spellchecker who rejected it -- same for "noumenon", by the way. [For those unfamiliar with the latter term, it stands for "something independent of our physical intuition" (opposite of "phenomenon"); when I heard some local friends bring it up in a philosophical discussion, I missed the connection with "nous" even after they explained it to me :-)) ] In any case, I see now that "nous", just like "no(o)umenon", does appear in Webster's ... so I begin to believe you :-) > Greek Rules !!! ANOUS, much worse than its literal translation ("mindless"), has not made it into English, and has probably missed its chance; but there is a very modern (as well as very ancient) Greek near-equivalent that is on its way to glorified international usage, and that is no other than MALAKAS :-) [A feminine half-way equivalent, KATINA, has still a long way to go...] G. B. From gr247 at ams.odn.ne.jp Sun Jul 28 18:15:31 2002 From: gr247 at ams.odn.ne.jp (G.R.) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:59 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Clarification re Albanian and Arvanitika In-Reply-To: Message-ID: on 28/7/02 05:09, George Baloglou at baloglou@Oswego.EDU wrote: ... > *Muslim* Albanian speakers (typically fighting along the Turks), while, half > a century earlier, Afthonides uses "Arvanitai" for the same people in "After ... Indeed! Albanians were fighting along the Turks...and not only. In fact Albanians were mercenaries along the centuries. And several heroes of '21 were also in fact mercenaries before and during the revolution. From gr247 at ams.odn.ne.jp Sun Jul 28 18:15:31 2002 From: gr247 at ams.odn.ne.jp (G.R.) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:59 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Clarification re Albanian and Arvanitika In-Reply-To: <1344af31344a1f.1344a1f1344af3@homemail.nyu.edu> Message-ID: on 28/7/02 05:57, Diana Wright at dgw1@nyu.edu wrote: > In the 15th-16th C Venetian documents with which I am familiar, Islamic > & Orthodox Albanians are both called "Albanesi. Since Ottoman > occupation of Albanian areas was recent, Islamic Albanians were most > likely to be converts, & such a person was called "renegado." > > DW Any references please? I have in mind already the French edition of F. Lane-Venice. Cheers ------ G. R. From gr247 at ams.odn.ne.jp Sun Jul 28 18:15:31 2002 From: gr247 at ams.odn.ne.jp (G.R.) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:59 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Clarification re Albanian and Arvanitika In-Reply-To: <3D435C5B.93C5280@bellatlantic.net> Message-ID: on 28/7/02 11:52, Christos D. Katsetos at dkatseto@bellatlantic.net wrote: ... > The designation ?Arvanites? refers to Albanian-speaking subjects of Christian > Orthodox persuasion and Greek consciousness. Sorry again, I have some trouble to define this Greek consciousness. If it pertains to common origins them contemporary Albanians claim lineage to to ancient Greece cf. Is. Kadare etc. Who defines it and who is recipient? > This is to be distinguished from > Albanian-speaking Muslim subjects and loyal followers of the Ottomans > (?Arnaut? in Turkish). My understanding is that "Arnaut (Arnaout?)" describes an Albanian, Arvanitis etc. Consequently the family name Arnaoutis refers to such an origin in Greek. I have in mind at least an Arnaoutis (besides the general derogative term in football or elsewhere lol) who was the chamberlain of the ex-king. I wonder if the above speculation is true how such a thing would have happened given the fact that church was probably much stronger in the past? Cheers ------ G. R. From gr247 at ams.odn.ne.jp Sun Jul 28 18:15:30 2002 From: gr247 at ams.odn.ne.jp (G.R.) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:59 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] More re Clarification about Albanian In-Reply-To: <200207271503.g6RF3Iv16289@julius.ling.ohio-state.edu> Message-ID: on 28/7/02 00:03, Brian Joseph at bjoseph@ling.ohio-state.edu wrote: > To the list: Since my clarification about Albanian seems to have sparked some > further questions and comment, here is some follow-up to, in particlar, G.R.'s > questions about Albanian and Arvanitika and related issues. Thanks indeed! > the north of Greece and even more recently in Athens and elsewhere) who speak > some non-Arvanitika variety of Albanian (e.g. possibly the standard language > or a northern Albanian ("Geg") variety. The Albanians themselves, in Any ideas why "Geg" has become the standard language? > Albanian, refer to their language as "Shqip" and their country as "Shiperia" > and themselves as "Shqiptar" (note the spelling --- no -u- after the -q-, and > the -e- in Shqiperia actually has two dots over it). Sorry again, that's my mistake. ... > 4. My mention of the Indo-Europeans leads to G.R.'s question about who the > Indo-Europeans were, what they spoke, where they came from, and so on. Here > we are on safer ground but there are still a lot of unanswered questions. > "Indo-European" refers, as I suggested above, to the language family that > takes in Albanian, Greek, Latin, Russian, English, Irish, Armenian, Hittite > (now extinct), Tocharian (now extinct), and Sanskrit, to name just one key > representative of each of the 10 major branches of the family. A "language > family" means a group of languages that have sprung from the same linguistic > ancestor, much as the Romance languages all emerged out of Latin or, for that > matter, much as the modern Greek dialects emerged (for the most part) out of > the Hellenistic koine (more on dialect vs. language below). Given the > linguistic diversity in the family and the fact that records of some of the > branches date back as far as c. 1800 BC (in the case of Hittite) or 1400 BC > (in t! > he case of Mycenaean Greek), Mmmmm! I wonder! Linear A and B are proven by Ventris and Chaldwick to be a script of Greek and they date, as Linear A is concerned back to 9,000 Bc (Cyprus). Besides this I happen to have in mind some local theories (Japan) dealing with script and language that suggest affiliation between Tamil and Japanese, Irish and Greek, Tamil and Greek etc. of which I would like to test the veracity. ... > vocabulary for various natural events, such as 'snow', or flora and fauna) What about movement of population due to lack of water? Please allow me a speculation. In the case of the place of my actual residence, origin appears in toponymy (places' names). The official "hagiography" though, as it has its own national agenda for political reasons is trying to obscure the fact that actual occupants of the land have been immigrants from the continent that gradually chased and took the place of indigenous people since the 3rd BC century to our era. As she wants to legitimate and present herself as a long time established community doesn't acknowledge the fact. Also the transcription of the toponymy with a new script to hides this truth. But after all this is the less offending trick as widespread falsification and lies are common. > somewhere in the region north of the Black Sea stretching towards Central Asia > (lots of people have more specific hypotheses to be sure, but most guesses > fall somewhere in that region). Just who spoke Proto-Indo-European in that > area is also just a matter of speculation, so it is hard to say, in response > to another of G.R.'s questions, what artefacts they left behind --- there are > lots of artefacts in that region, and **some** of them may have been left by > speakers of Proto-Indo-European, but it is very hard to tell for sure (though > that has not stopped people from making some very interesting and quite My information is that artefacts either can't be classified as they appear to be common in all places and for the case of Black Sea most of them seem to be of Greek origin. Any ideas on this? ... > The easy answer is that the difference between a language and a dialect is a > matter of degree --- the closer the two speech varieties seem, the more likely > we are to classify them as dialects of a larger entity which we call a > language. One measure of "sameness" that is often used is "mutual > intelligibility", i.e. if speakers of each variety can communicate with > speakers of the other without too much trouble, then the speech forms are > close enough to be called dialects. Then consider this ;-). An Spaniard and an Italian can understand each other by speaking their native tongues respectively. Spanish and Italian are not considered as dialects. A French and a Catalan (Corsican, Occitan) if they speak to each other they won't. Despite this Occitan, Catalan etc. are considered as dialects. Or consider the case of the dialects (?) in Italy or elsewhere. To me it sound like a case of political correctness but I might be wrong. ... > , the standard language is just another dialect of the language as a whole > that happens to enjoy prestige, be associated with political and economic > power, etc. The equating of a standard language with the "language" is what > leads some people to think of "dialect" as a pejorative term (as in "X is just > a dialect of Y") as if a "dialect" were somehow a degenerated form of the > language. Linguists resist such usage and there is generally no scientific > basis for such a view, but it is a popular one. Very well said!!! Cheers ------ G. R. From gr247 at ams.odn.ne.jp Sun Jul 28 18:15:31 2002 From: gr247 at ams.odn.ne.jp (G.R.) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:59 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Poniak Greek In-Reply-To: Message-ID: on 29/7/02 05:49, George Baloglou at baloglou@Oswego.EDU wrote: ... > Do you understand what it means? Most likely not, even now that you are > *reading* it in an one-word sentence. And yet it is so close to Ancient > Greek ANOUS and Modern/Ancient Greek ANOHTOS = moron :-) Pontic Greek is ... And this reminds me my childhood when, we...Greeks, were laughing at the Greek of an old grandmother who came from Euxeinos and was saying "kopanizousi" to naughty kids. Later in high school I learned that it was the ending of 3rd person plural of the verb "kopanizw' ;-) From AKarpathak at aol.com Sun Jul 28 18:15:12 2002 From: AKarpathak at aol.com (AKarpathak@aol.com) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:59 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] "Turks" Message-ID: <799B3DBE.5D8167D0.09E588BC@aol.com> George, please scroll down to your suggestion that I read Vryonis, etc. Now let me remind you: if I HAD TIME TO DO ALL THIS READING, I WOULDN'T BE PICKING PEOPLE'S BRAINS ON THIS LIST,LOL, for these answers. Ok, got partial answer:and I of course thank you :::))) The other question still remains unanswered however: Who were the Ottomans compared to Turks? Modern day Turks I assume are either an amalgamation (?) of different groups under Ottoman rule or one of the diverse groups under Ottoman rule? Which of the two? And then, to bring this forward to the 20th century, (a different question yet again,) who was Attaturk thinking when he talked about Turks? And to get back to the original question, who were the Ottomans? Sorry, but I REALLY don't have time to do this reading, I'm bogged down enough with my own work, lol. Thanks, Anna K. In a message dated Sun, 28 Jul 2002 3:58:44 PM Eastern Standard Time, George Baloglou writes: > > >On Sun, 28 Jul 2002 AKarpathak@aol.com wrote: > >> So who are the Ottomans compared to the Turks? ?And how did the Turks come >> to have a monopoly on the Ottoman Empire? > ? ? ? ?^^^^^^^^ >Did they? If you discuss this with contemporary Turks, they will complain, >with considerable justification, that the Ottoman elite was non-Turkish >... conveniently forgetting how, thanks to the Ottomans and their Turkish >progenitors, Christian Anatolia turned Muslim and, eventually, Turkish. >But, of course, in the end they have to cherish their Ottoman heritage ... >for the same reasons that the Russians (will have to eventually) cherish >the Soviet era :-) > >[This is a simplistic answer. For details you should read books like >Vryonis' "Decline of Medieval Hellenism in Asia Minor" and Kafadar's >"Between Two Worlds: The Construction of the Ottoman State".] > > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?G. B. > > From AKarpathak at aol.com Sun Jul 28 18:29:17 2002 From: AKarpathak at aol.com (AKarpathak@aol.com) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:59 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] "Nous" & "Anous" Message-ID: <639588A2.0E02961B.09E588BC@aol.com> A little humorous story here regarding the nearly universal Greek word: One of my students a few years ago came running into my office quite pleased with herself: she had recognized the origins of the word "malarchy" bcz her bio prof. told the class it was a Greek derived term. she of course, had heard me using th Greek version to refer to someone in the dept, and she said,"now I know what you mean!" Definitely not one of my proud moments as a teacher, lol. Anna K. In a message dated Sun, 28 Jul 2002 7:17:31 PM Eastern Standard Time, George Baloglou writes: > > >On Sun, 28 Jul 2002 JUNESAM@aol.com wrote: > >> > Now let's look at a specific Pontic word I heard this summer, ANOUNIOS. >> > ?Do you understand what it means? Most likely not, even now that you are >> > ?*reading* it in an one-word sentence. And yet it is so close to Ancient >> > ?Greek ANOUS and Modern/Ancient Greek ANOHTOS = moron :-) >> ----------------------------- >> George, >> >> On popular usage and Greek vocabulary. >> >> Where I come from in N. England there is a common >> local expression used of people not exhibiting any >> capacity for simple common sense : >> "He hasn't got the nous he was born with" >> >> Used commonly by people who have never knowingly >> used a Greek word in their lives, and considered generally, >> by those using it,as being part of their rather local English >> dialect, since it is not always understood by outsiders >> (Classical scholars possibly excepted ... but then they are >> rather thin on the ground in my home village) >> >> It always cracks me up when I go home to hear it spoken >> quite naturally in the local accent Interesting that >> they use the term in the same correct context that even >> Plato (or the Pontiacs) might have used. > >Well, I am surprised! I fed it into my spellchecker who rejected it -- same >for "noumenon", by the way. [For those unfamiliar with the latter term, it >stands for "something independent of our physical intuition" (opposite of >"phenomenon"); when I heard some local friends bring it up in a philosophical >discussion, I missed the connection with "nous" even after they explained it >to me :-)) ] In any case, I see now that "nous", just like "no(o)umenon", >does appear in Webster's ... so I begin to believe you :-) > >> Greek Rules !!! > >ANOUS, much worse than its literal translation ("mindless"), has not made >it into English, and has probably missed its chance; but there is a very >modern (as well as very ancient) Greek near-equivalent that is on its way >to glorified international usage, and that is no other than MALAKAS :-) >[A feminine half-way equivalent, KATINA, has still a long way to go...] > > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?G. B. > >_______________________________________________ >List-Info: https://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/mgsa-l > From dgw1 at nyu.edu Sun Jul 28 18:46:44 2002 From: dgw1 at nyu.edu (Diana Wright) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:59 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] More re Clarification about Albanian Message-ID: <14835111486b46.1486b461483511@homemail.nyu.edu> > > > Albanian, refer to their language as "Shqip" and their country > as "Shiperia" > > and themselves as "Shqiptar" (note the spelling --- no -u- after > the -q-, and > > the -e- in Shqiperia actually has two dots over it). HOW do you pronounce SHQIPTAR? >Mmmmm! I wonder! Linear A and B are proven by Ventris and Chaldwick to >be a From AKarpathak at aol.com Sun Jul 28 19:05:02 2002 From: AKarpathak at aol.com (AKarpathak@aol.com) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:59 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] "Turks" Message-ID: <5310E449.3A5E32FF.09E588BC@aol.com> Diane, I was not intending to insult George. My words were spoken with "tharos" rather than "thrassos", acknowledging my own shortcomings in the areas being discussed and asking for further help/clarification. George, my apologies to you if my email appears/reads insulting. These were not my intentions. Anna K. In a message dated Sun, 28 Jul 2002 8:39:36 PM Eastern Standard Time, Diana Wright writes: >I answered this several days ago on the list. ?George is extremely well- >read & need not be insulted for his help. ?Possibly none of us who have >the reading have the time to do your research for you. > >DW > >----- Original Message ----- >From: AKarpathak@aol.com >Date: Sunday, July 28, 2002 9:15 pm >Subject: RE: [MGSA-L] "Turks" > >> George, please scroll down to your suggestion that I read Vryonis, >> etc. ?Now let me remind you: if I HAD TIME TO DO ALL THIS READING, >> I WOULDN'T BE PICKING PEOPLE'S BRAINS ON THIS LIST,LOL, for these >> answers. >> Ok, got partial answer:and I of course thank you :::))) >> >> The other question still remains unanswered however: >> Who were the Ottomans compared to Turks? ?Modern day Turks I >> assume are either an amalgamation (?) of different groups under >> Ottoman rule or one of the diverse groups under Ottoman rule? >> Which of the two? ?And then, to bring this forward to the 20th >> century, (a different question yet again,) who was Attaturk >> thinking when he talked about Turks? >> And to get back to the original question, who were the Ottomans? >> >> Sorry, but I REALLY don't have time to do this reading, I'm bogged >> down enough with my own work, lol. >> >> Thanks, >> Anna K. >> >> In a message dated Sun, 28 Jul 2002 3:58:44 PM Eastern Standard >> Time, George Baloglou writes: >> >> > >> > >> >On Sun, 28 Jul 2002 AKarpathak@aol.com wrote: >> > >> >> So who are the Ottomans compared to the Turks? ?And how did the >> Turks come >> >> to have a monopoly on the Ottoman Empire? >> > ? ? ? ?^^^^^^^^ >> >Did they? If you discuss this with contemporary Turks, they will >> complain,>with considerable justification, that the Ottoman elite >> was non-Turkish >> >... conveniently forgetting how, thanks to the Ottomans and their >> Turkish>progenitors, Christian Anatolia turned Muslim and, >> eventually, Turkish. >> >But, of course, in the end they have to cherish their Ottoman >> heritage ... >> >for the same reasons that the Russians (will have to eventually) >> cherish>the Soviet era :-) >> > >> >[This is a simplistic answer. For details you should read books like >> >Vryonis' "Decline of Medieval Hellenism in Asia Minor" and Kafadar's >> >"Between Two Worlds: The Construction of the Ottoman State".] >> > >> > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?G. B. >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ >> List-Info: https://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/mgsa-l >> > > From AKarpathak at aol.com Sun Jul 28 19:42:03 2002 From: AKarpathak at aol.com (AKarpathak@aol.com) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:59 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] "Turks" Message-ID: <59B6741D.2CFB5B7A.09E588BC@aol.com> To the list: My apologies if my questions are becoming cumbersome and annoying. This is clearly not my intention. Much of the discussion over the last few days has been extremely informative, interesting... and unfamiliar territory for me since I am neither a historian nor a linguist. Much of it is so new and soooo much that I find myself printing it out so I can digest it at more appropriate moments. My own area is sociology, specifically Greek immigrants in the U.S. And yes, while one or two points discussed over the last couple of days pertain to my own work (specifically the postings on Bartholomew and the concept of the Genos since these came up in a couple of the interviews I carried out with Greek immigrants--on the other hand I did mention Makrygiannis whom I do work with somewhere,hm...)... these are precisely the topics I tried to avoid asking questions about bcz it would be unethical to have others do "my research." And clearly, while some on the list are more versed on issues of Grekoi vs. Greeks (as suggested in one posting re: Vlachs,) Romioi and Romiosini and all the identity labels used for the Ellines, my questions were more related to issues of Turkish and Ottoman lineages, etc., so that I could try to make sense of what one of my students asked a couple of weeks ago. This is not related to my own work. My "frustrating" questions are more related to the fact that I am self-educated in Greek history and as such, it is of course an extremely limited education. Again, my apologies if I am asking too many questions or perhaps even failing to digest information in a speedy manner, as this info pertains to areas I am not familiar with. Anna K. From JUNESAM at aol.com Sun Jul 28 19:59:02 2002 From: JUNESAM at aol.com (JUNESAM@aol.com) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:59 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Poniak Greek Message-ID: <109.16212a71.2a760976@aol.com> I have no knowledge of Pontic Greek - though I remember my late husband saying that his father's eldest brother (born in Trebizond c. 1890) spoke the most grammatically precise and correct Greek had ever heard. (He probably sounded even MORE precise & correct when living in rural Thessaly, where word endings seem in short supply !) And for confirmation of that assertion >>And this reminds me my childhood when, we...Greeks, were laughing at the Greek of an old grandmother who came from Euxeinos and was saying "kopanizousi" to naughty kids. Later in high school I learned that it was the ending of 3rd person plural of the verb "kopanizw' ;-) <<< However it occcurs to me that there is one factor that might need to be considered when trying to assess the differences between Pontic Greek and the language now spoken in Greece - that the promotion of Katharevousa, and the persistence of local Demotiki in "Old Greece" might have just as much affected the language since 1820 (but in different directions) as the isolation of Pontic Greeks in a sea of Turkish for a further 100 years or more - not that one is more right or wrong, just divergent because of the very different circumstances and developments. So my questions would be : 1] How different was the Greek spoken c.1800 in Trebizond from that in (say) Thessaly at the time? I presume the discussions and correspondence of members of the Philiki Hetairia in the Crimea, in Constantinople and elsewhere WAS mutually understandable (though conceding that this might only reflect the usages of a more literate and educated class than the mass of people at the time ) How variable were the regional dialects and usages in Greece and Asia Minor before the War of Independence ? Did the vocabulary and grammar of Makryiannis differ much from the language spoken in Asia Minor in 1820 ? And as a follow up - 2] How different was THAT from the Greek spoken by Pontiac refugees in Greece in 1920,or in S.Russia, or Greece in 2002 ? Trying to clarify how far the linguistic differences are caused by these different social, political,educational & geographic developments, rather than assuming that "Pontic Greek" is some debased peasant survival brought in by refugees from Turkey. Even conceding the research into the oral traditions of the Homeric Bards it is quite interesting to speculate how much these country dialects in non-literate communities could preserve of original archaic speech into recent generations, as in that story of the Grammatical Grandma above. (At least before radio & TV homogenized vocabulary and speech patterns) In the same English village I mentioned in a previous posting I can remember, as a bumptious child, correcting my own grandfather when he referred to a neighbouring village as "Yen" - when everybody knew the proper name on all the maps was "Endon". Then later in High School, when doing a local history project, I had occasion to look at the transcript of the Domesday Book - and found it had been called Yendon in 1086. A good corrective for that bumptious child (still assertive, but now just a little less assured about being correct ALL the time ) June Samaras KALAMOS BOOKS 725 Vermouth Ave. (# 1) Mississauga, Ontario Canada. L5A 3X5 Tel : 905-272-4841 E-mail : kalamosbks@aol.com http://www.kalamosbooks.com http://www.abebooks.com/home/SAMARAS/ From ssm at panafonet.gr Sun Jul 28 22:25:43 2002 From: ssm at panafonet.gr (Simeon Magliveras) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:59 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Clarification re Albanian and Arvanitika References: Message-ID: <001c01c236c0$638cfc80$4003f9d5@simoswmtjisc08> Albanians, Albanese, Arvaites how ever you want to call them fought for the great empires. But the question I pose is..... Does "mercenary" have the same meaning it did then as we give it today and are the social stigmatisms associated with it the same too? ----- Original Message ----- From: "G.R." To: Sent: Monday, July 29, 2002 4:15 AM Subject: Re: [MGSA-L] Clarification re Albanian and Arvanitika > on 28/7/02 05:09, George Baloglou at baloglou@Oswego.EDU wrote: > ... > > *Muslim* Albanian speakers (typically fighting along the Turks), while, half > > a century earlier, Afthonides uses "Arvanitai" for the same people in "After > ... > Indeed! Albanians were fighting along the Turks...and not only. In fact > Albanians were mercenaries along the centuries. > > And several heroes of '21 were also in fact mercenaries before and during > the revolution. > > > _______________________________________________ > List-Info: https://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/mgsa-l From baloglou at Oswego.EDU Sun Jul 28 22:34:25 2002 From: baloglou at Oswego.EDU (George Baloglou) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:59 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Poniak Greek In-Reply-To: <109.16212a71.2a760976@aol.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 28 Jul 2002 JUNESAM@aol.com wrote: > I have no knowledge of Pontic Greek - though I remember > my late husband saying that his father's eldest brother > (born in Trebizond c. 1890) spoke the most grammatically > precise and correct Greek had ever heard. (He probably > sounded even MORE precise & correct when living in > rural Thessaly, where word endings seem in short supply !) Trebizond, c. 1890? Sounds like my maternal grandmother: your uncle-in-law was probably educated in a nice, 'urban' school in Trebizond; he could certainly converse in Pontic Greek, but he didn't have to do that in Thessaly :-) > However it occcurs to me that there is one factor that might > need to be considered when trying to assess the differences > between Pontic Greek and the language now spoken in Greece > - that the promotion of Katharevousa, and the persistence of local > Demotiki in "Old Greece" might have just as much affected the > language since 1820 (but in different directions) as the isolation of > Pontic Greeks in a sea of Turkish for a further 100 years or more - > not that one is more right or wrong, just divergent because of the > very different circumstances and developments. Katharevousa was also being promoted in the Greek schools of the Anatolian urban centers -- see above. The difference you are alluding to is simply due to Pontic's relative isolation, I think. > So my questions would be : > > 1] How different was the Greek spoken c.1800 in Trebizond > from that in (say) Thessaly at the time? Quite different, more or less to the point of mutual unintelligibility. > I presume the discussions and correspondence of members > of the Philiki Hetairia in the Crimea, in Constantinople and > elsewhere WAS mutually understandable (though conceding > that this might only reflect the usages of a more literate and > educated class than the mass of people at the time ) Exactly -- members of that class certainly knew the Greek koine of the time, if not some classical Greek (and certainly Bible Greek) as well. > How variable were the regional dialects and usages in Greece > and Asia Minor before the War of Independence ? Due to continuing immigration from/to the mainland and the Aegean islands, Western Asia Minor does not present major 'surprises'. Pontus was another story, and if you are looking for more drama you should look at the various Cappadocian and other inland dialects (one of which (Sille) I have also heard at home). ["Babylon(ia)" the 183X (?) play dealing with the problems arising out of the mutual (near) unintelligibility of the various Greek dialects, also included a Cappadocian Greek; and about a century later, old Cappadocians resettled in Greece were calling their interviewers at the Historical Lexicon of Greek at night to report on additional words they had forgotten to report, knowing all too well that their dialects, unlike Pontic Greek, would not survive -- an act of ultimate patriotism, I would say!] > Did the vocabulary and grammar of Makryiannis differ much > from the language spoken in Asia Minor in 1820 ? Western Asia Minor no, rest of Anatolia yes. > And as a follow up - > > 2] How different was THAT from the Greek spoken by Pontiac > refugees in Greece in 1920,or in S.Russia, or Greece in 2002 ? Quite different, as suggested above; see also end of this message :-) > Trying to clarify how far the linguistic differences are caused by > these different social, political,educational & geographic > developments, rather than assuming that "Pontic Greek" is some > debased peasant survival brought in by refugees from Turkey. Pontic is a rather sophisticated (and archaic) form of Greek. To offer a funny, as well as dramatic, example, some Thessalonicans of Pontic descent were misunderstood by their Pontic-speaking Turkish hosts in Pontus when they told them that they were ready to leave: "feugw" retains its ancient meaning ("flee") in Pontus, while in the Pontic Greek spoken in Greece that meaning gradually gave way to the 'Greek koine' meaning ("depart")! :-) [More on the Muslim/Turkish speakers of Pontic Greek in northeasternmost Turkey in http://www.oswego.edu/~baloglou/anatolia/pontos.html .] G. B. From baloglou at Oswego.EDU Sun Jul 28 22:51:05 2002 From: baloglou at Oswego.EDU (George Baloglou) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:59 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] "Turks" In-Reply-To: <799B3DBE.5D8167D0.09E588BC@aol.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 28 Jul 2002 AKarpathak@aol.com wrote: > George, please scroll down to your suggestion that I read Vryonis, etc. Now let me remind you: if I HAD TIME TO DO ALL THIS READING, I WOULDN'T BE PICKING PEOPLE'S BRAINS ON THIS LIST,LOL, for these answers. > Ok, got partial answer:and I of course thank you :::))) > > The other question still remains unanswered however: > Who were the Ottomans compared to Turks? Modern day Turks I assume are either an amalgamation (?) of different groups under Ottoman rule or one of the diverse groups under Ottoman rule? Which of the two? And then, to bring this forward to the 20th century, (a different question yet again,) who was Attaturk thinking when he talked about Turks? > And to get back to the original question, who were the Ottomans? Well, Ataturk was basically thinking of 'reformed' Anatolian Muslims, Kurds included -- except that he wanted a state based on (Turkish) language rather than religion. At first the Ottomans were a small Turkish emirate in Western Anatolia; as they grew into an empire, however, they absorbed people from many other groups, such as Greeks, Armenians, Slavs, Jews ... you name it. [And in that empire much/most of the elite was not 'ethnically' Turkish, as I already pointed out.] So, present-day Turks have all kinds of ancestors, and they do not mind that at all :-) > Sorry, but I REALLY don't have time to do this reading, I'm bogged down > enough with my own work, lol. Neither do I: in fact I have not even read the books I recommended to you, and I am not as well read as Diana thinks -- not even close :-) [No hard feelings of any kind, by the way: I returned to the office from an extended dinner only to have to find out exactly how I had been 'insulted' :-)) ] G. B. From AKarpathak at aol.com Mon Jul 29 05:14:51 2002 From: AKarpathak at aol.com (AKarpathak@aol.com) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:59 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] "Turks" Message-ID: <37A1C8BD.5BB6239A.09E588BC@aol.com> George, thanks!!!! Anna K. In a message dated Mon, 29 Jul 2002 12:51:05 AM Eastern Standard Time, George Baloglou writes: > > >On Sun, 28 Jul 2002 AKarpathak@aol.com wrote: > >> George, please scroll down to your suggestion that I read Vryonis, etc. ?Now let me remind you: if I HAD TIME TO DO ALL THIS READING, I WOULDN'T BE PICKING PEOPLE'S BRAINS ON THIS LIST,LOL, for these answers. >> Ok, got partial answer:and I of course thank you :::))) >> >> The other question still remains unanswered however: >> Who were the Ottomans compared to Turks? ?Modern day Turks I assume are either an amalgamation (?) of different groups under Ottoman rule or one of the diverse groups under Ottoman rule? ?Which of the two? ?And then, to bring this forward to the 20th century, (a different question yet again,) who was Attaturk thinking when he talked about Turks? >> And to get back to the original question, who were the Ottomans? > >Well, Ataturk was basically thinking of 'reformed' Anatolian Muslims, Kurds >included -- except that he wanted a state based on (Turkish) language rather >than religion. At first the Ottomans were a small Turkish emirate in Western >Anatolia; as they grew into an empire, however, they absorbed people from >many other groups, such as Greeks, Armenians, Slavs, Jews ... you name it. >[And in that empire much/most of the elite was not 'ethnically' Turkish, as >I already pointed out.] So, present-day Turks have all kinds of ancestors, >and they do not mind that at all :-) > >> Sorry, but I REALLY don't have time to do this reading, I'm bogged down >> enough with my own work, lol. > >Neither do I: in fact I have not even read the books I recommended to you, >and I am not as well read as Diana thinks -- not even close :-) [No hard >feelings of any kind, by the way: I returned to the office from an extended >dinner only to have to find out exactly how I had been 'insulted' :-)) ] > > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?G. B. > > From AKarpathak at aol.com Mon Jul 29 07:22:03 2002 From: AKarpathak at aol.com (AKarpathak@aol.com) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:59 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Clarification re Albanian and Arvanitika Message-ID: <32EC9185.135150C2.09E588BC@aol.com> Christo, a question/clarification here: I have heard the terms "Albanoi/albanoites" being used differently from "Arbanoi/Arbanoites". Initially I thought it was an issue of individual pronunciation or local dialect differences, but I found this in two different regions of Greece. I had gotten the impression that in the popular current use of the terms, Albanoi refers to "Albanians of Greek Orthodox descent", i.e., those whose villages/homes happened to be in Northern Epirus and "Arbanites" to be the Muslim Albanians. I asked a couple of people who used both terms and this was the distinctions they made between the terms. Needless to say of course that the latter also carried with it greater stigma/national prejudice, etc. Has anyone else come along these differences in pronunciation? Did I make too much of a distinction when none should be? Anna K. In a message dated Mon, 29 Jul 2002 10:15:31 +0900, "G.R." writes: >on 28/7/02 11:52, Christos D. Katsetos at dkatseto@bellatlantic.net wrote: > >... >> The designation ?Arvanites? refers to Albanian-speaking subjects of Christian >> Orthodox persuasion and Greek consciousness. > >Sorry again, I have some trouble to define this Greek consciousness. If it >pertains to common origins them contemporary Albanians claim lineage to to >ancient Greece cf. Is. Kadare etc. Who defines it and who is recipient? > >> This is to be distinguished from >> Albanian-speaking Muslim subjects and loyal followers of the Ottomans >> (?Arnaut? in Turkish). > >My understanding is that "Arnaut (Arnaout?)" describes an Albanian, >Arvanitis etc. Consequently the family name Arnaoutis refers to such an >origin in Greek. I have in mind at least an Arnaoutis (besides the general >derogative term in football or elsewhere lol) who was the chamberlain of the >ex-king. I wonder if the above speculation is true how such a thing would >have happened given the fact that church was probably much stronger in the >past? > > >Cheers >------ >G. R. > > > >_______________________________________________ >List-Info: https://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/mgsa-l > From dkatseto at bellatlantic.net Mon Jul 29 19:48:16 2002 From: dkatseto at bellatlantic.net (Christos D. Katsetos) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:59 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Clarification re Albanian and Arvanitika References: Message-ID: <3D45FE70.8FF8ABBD@bellatlantic.net> "G.R." wrote: > on 28/7/02 11:52, Christos D. Katsetos at dkatseto@bellatlantic.net wrote: > > ... > > The designation ?Arvanites? refers to Albanian-speaking subjects of Christian > > Orthodox persuasion and Greek consciousness. > > Sorry again, I have some trouble to define this Greek consciousness. If it > pertains to common origins them contemporary Albanians claim lineage to to > ancient Greece cf. Is. Kadare etc. Who defines it and who is recipient? *The people* (on both accounts) > > > > This is to be distinguished from > > Albanian-speaking Muslim subjects and loyal followers of the Ottomans > > (?Arnaut? in Turkish). > > My understanding is that "Arnaut (Arnaout?)" describes an Albanian, > Arvanitis etc. Consequently the family name Arnaoutis refers to such an > origin in Greek. I have in mind at least an Arnaoutis (besides the general > derogative term in football or elsewhere lol) who was the chamberlain of the > ex-king. I wonder if the above speculation is true how such a thing would > have happened given the fact that church was probably much stronger in the > past? I am afraid that a recurring quandary here has to do with a manifest obsession with semantics that lends itself to differential interpretations and speculations. To this end, I would be particularly cautious in attaching a major significance (if in fact, any significance at all) to 'anthroponyms', the same way that I would downplay toponyms in Greece. The surname 'Arnaoutis' is no less Greek as say, the surname ?Tourkodimitris? or ?Voulgaris? and so forth. (Also, to my knowledge, the Church has never been keen on such matters). In previous postings I stated that for at least the past 150-200 years the term ?Arvanitis pl. Arvanites? has acquired a distinctive connotation in the Modern Greek lexicon, i.e., denoting a Christian Orthodox, Albanian-speaking subject with an overt Greek identity. It is my position that there was a clear distinction between the Muslim, Albanian-speaking, loyal Ottoman followers referred to as ?Tourkalvanoi?, and those Christian Orthodox, Albanian-speaking subjects, which dates back to at least the early to mid-19th c. The latter group includes those instances of Muslim Albanians who converted to Orthodox Christianity (say, around the time of the Greek War of Independence). According to Koukoudis, other travellers in the neighbourhood such as the Vlachs did in fact, distinguish their fellow Albanian-speaking Orthodox Christians (whom they called as *Arbinesi*) from the Muslim Albanian-speaking subjects whom they called ?Tourkalvanoi or Arnauts?. Indeed, the best way to find out about the consciousness of Arvanites is to carry out a field study in present-day Greece :-) [With this in mind, there is an ongoing effort on the part of the Albanian irredenta to ?re-invent? the word ?Arvanites? as an all-encompassing or 'blanket' term. Language and 'genealogy' are instruments of this narrative aiming at the creation of an 'ethno-linguistic' minority in Greece and also, the resurgence (or rather 'resuscitation') of the so-called Chams question. However, the latter has political ramifications and is in my view, beyond the scope of this discussion.] C.D.K. From gr247 at ams.odn.ne.jp Mon Jul 29 08:06:01 2002 From: gr247 at ams.odn.ne.jp (G.R.) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:59 2005 Subject: Request (was Re: [MGSA-L] "Turks") In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > on 29/7/02 14:51, George Baloglou at baloglou@Oswego.EDU wrote: > ... >> Neither do I: in fact I have not even read the books I recommended to you, >> and I am not as well read as Diana thinks -- not even close :-) [No hard > ... > Kopse kati, re Giorgo, twra ;-) > > > > Cheers > ------ > G. R. This was a message intended to the list that has gone as personal. My apologies. The reason is that nearly most of the mails are sent twice once to the list as Cc: and once to the correspondent that appears in the To: field. I am not exactly a newbie on Internet but I don't really understand the reason of this policy (?) as it creates extra traffic for the receivers and adds nothing important. Personally I prefer to post primarily to the list and if there is any extra reason in personal. And it's a drag to stop my mail in the middle of a broadcast as I realise suddenly that my reply to any post instead of going to the list goes as a personal answer which is not exactly in my intentions, at least for the time being. Is there any special reason for this practice? If not I would like to ask to put the list as the To: recipient so as any reply goes to the list instead of going to the originator of the thread. TIA. Regards ----------- Kostas Mour. From gr247 at ams.odn.ne.jp Mon Jul 29 08:57:16 2002 From: gr247 at ams.odn.ne.jp (G.R.) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:59 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Clarification re Albanian and Arvanitika In-Reply-To: <3D45FE70.8FF8ABBD@bellatlantic.net> Message-ID: on 30/7/02 11:48, Christos D. Katsetos at dkatseto@bellatlantic.net wrote: > > > "G.R." wrote: > >> on 28/7/02 11:52, Christos D. Katsetos at dkatseto@bellatlantic.net wrote: >> >> ... >>> The designation ?Arvanites? refers to Albanian-speaking subjects of >>> Christian >>> Orthodox persuasion and Greek consciousness. >> >> Sorry again, I have some trouble to define this Greek consciousness. >>If it >> pertains to common origins them contemporary Albanians claim lineage to to >> ancient Greece cf. Is. Kadare etc. ???? >> Who defines it and who is recipient? > > *The people* (on both accounts) > Eloquent!;-) >> >>> This is to be distinguished from >>> Albanian-speaking Muslim subjects and loyal followers of the Ottomans >>> (?Arnaut? in Turkish). >> >> My understanding is that "Arnaut (Arnaout?)" describes an Albanian, >> Arvanitis etc. Consequently the family name Arnaoutis refers to such an >> origin in Greek. I have in mind at least an Arnaoutis (besides the general >> derogative term in football or elsewhere lol) who was the chamberlain of the >> ex-king. I wonder if the above speculation is true how such a thing would >> have happened given the fact that church was probably much stronger in the >> past? > > I am afraid that a recurring quandary here has to do with a manifest obsession > with semantics that lends itself to differential Be it, but what is well conceived can be said with clarity.. > interpretations and speculations. To this end, I would be particularly > cautious > in attaching a major significance (if in fact, any significance at all) to > 'anthroponyms', the same way that I would downplay toponyms in Greece. > You'll be probably wrong as 'anthroponyms', the same way as toponyms are very rich in history denoting several stratifications of the language that go unnoticed. E.g. the city of Ampurias in Spain is the word Emporion- Emporium in Greek (a commercial post) giving a concrete example of the origin of the city. The city of Nabluz in both Palestina or Tunisia is not different from the word Napoli ;-) meaning that there was built a new Greek city... > The surname 'Arnaoutis' is no less Greek as say, the surname ?Tourkodimitris? > or > ?Voulgaris? and so forth. I make myself more clear here as it seems the meaning of the question was not understood. In my post I never said that Arnaoutis or even Gyftodhmos is less Greek than me and you. I pointed to an evidence and tested some hypothesis. Anything wrong so far? But as Voulgaris means somebody that came from Bulgaria be it Bulgarian or Greek, no importance, the same as Boulgarakis would denote a person who originaly came from Bulgaria and was established in Crete. And this is another way to lead a research. >(Also, to my knowledge, the Church has never been > keen > on such matters). So to speak Church would never apply some pressure to keep away a Muslim from such a public post! Fine! But if my memory serves me well there has been always pressures from church to stop what are considered as pagan practises (Anastenaria for instance) or all the new born are given Christian names instead of ancient Greek names. > In previous postings I stated that for at least the past 150-200 years the > term > ?Arvanitis pl. Arvanites? has acquired a distinctive connotation in the Modern > Greek lexicon, i.e., denoting a Christian Orthodox, Albanian-speaking subject > with > an overt Greek identity. > Given the fact that Greeks used to be at 99% Orthodox from their birth, yes. > It is my position that there was a clear distinction between the Muslim, > Albanian-speaking, loyal Ottoman followers referred to as ?Tourkalvanoi?, and Here I disagree as espousing the Islamic religion was a mean to avoid taxation and/or persecution (documented) and as for the loyalty I wonder how much a mercenary can be loyal. And don't take my words for granted just check the history of '21 (Karaiskakis for instance) to see how the allegiance and "loyalty" has changed according to who was paying "loufedes" ;-) ... > neighbourhood such as the Vlachs did in fact, distinguish their fellow > Albanian-speaking Orthodox Christians (whom they called as *Arbinesi*) from > the and again, concerning these Vlachs my understanding (based to seminars in EHESS in 83-85) is that they were Romanians from Valachie - Vlahia ;-) > Muslim Albanian-speaking subjects whom they called ?Tourkalvanoi or Arnauts?. > > Indeed, the best way to find out about the consciousness of Arvanites is to > carry > out a field study in present-day Greece :-) So dividing them in Muslims and Christians we solve all problems. > [With this in mind, there is an > ongoing effort on the part of the Albanian irredenta to ?re-invent? the word > ?Arvanites? as an all-encompassing or 'blanket' term. Language and > 'genealogy' > are instruments of this narrative aiming at the creation of an > 'ethno-linguistic' > minority in Greece and also, the resurgence (or rather 'resuscitation') of the > so-called Chams question. However, the latter has political ramifications and > is > in my view, beyond the scope of this discussion.] > These are some lame personalities around circles of the Greek HWR (call me Soros) whose positions have been debunked eloquently in the past by Giwrgos B. But this is not my agenda. I am seeking for the truth. > C.D.K. From AKarpathak at aol.com Mon Jul 29 10:16:14 2002 From: AKarpathak at aol.com (AKarpathak@aol.com) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:59 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Clarification re Albanian and Arvanitika Message-ID: <138E0B71.69B5CF07.09E588BC@aol.com> The question I should have asked, but I guess was trying to articulate in my head in an earlier posting of the day: are there distinctive terms used today in popular demotic language spoken by the average Greek as to the Muslim compared to the Greek Christian Albanians, and specifically, for the immigrants? Anna K. In a message dated Tue, 30 Jul 2002 10:48:16 +0800, "Christos D. Katsetos" writes: > > >"G.R." wrote: > >> on 28/7/02 11:52, Christos D. Katsetos at dkatseto@bellatlantic.net wrote: >> >> ... >> > The designation ?Arvanites? refers to Albanian-speaking subjects of Christian >> > Orthodox persuasion and Greek consciousness. >> >> Sorry again, I have some trouble to define this Greek consciousness. If it >> pertains to common origins them contemporary Albanians claim lineage to to >> ancient Greece cf. Is. Kadare etc. Who defines it and who is recipient? > >*The people* (on both accounts) > >> >> >> > This is to be distinguished from >> > Albanian-speaking Muslim subjects and loyal followers of the Ottomans >> > (?Arnaut? in Turkish). >> >> My understanding is that "Arnaut (Arnaout?)" describes an Albanian, >> Arvanitis etc. Consequently the family name Arnaoutis refers to such an >> origin in Greek. I have in mind at least an Arnaoutis (besides the general >> derogative term in football or elsewhere lol) who was the chamberlain of the >> ex-king. I wonder if the above speculation is true how such a thing would >> have happened given the fact that church was probably much stronger in the >> past? > >I am afraid that a recurring quandary here has to do with a manifest obsession >with semantics that lends itself to differential >interpretations and speculations. ?To this end, I would be particularly cautious >in attaching a major significance (if in fact, any significance at all) to >'anthroponyms', the same way that I would downplay toponyms in Greece. > >The surname 'Arnaoutis' is no less Greek as say, the surname ?Tourkodimitris? or >?Voulgaris? and so forth. ?(Also, to my knowledge, the Church has never been keen >on such matters). > >In previous postings I stated that for at least the past 150-200 years the term >?Arvanitis pl. Arvanites? has acquired a distinctive connotation in the Modern >Greek lexicon, i.e., denoting a Christian Orthodox, Albanian-speaking subject with >an overt Greek identity. > >It is my position that there was a clear distinction between the Muslim, >Albanian-speaking, loyal Ottoman followers referred to as ?Tourkalvanoi?, and >those Christian Orthodox, Albanian-speaking subjects, which dates back to at least >the early to mid-19th c. The latter group includes those instances of Muslim >Albanians who converted to Orthodox Christianity (say, around the time of the >Greek War of Independence). ?According to Koukoudis, other travellers in the >neighbourhood such as the Vlachs did in fact, distinguish their fellow >Albanian-speaking Orthodox Christians (whom they called as *Arbinesi*) from the >Muslim Albanian-speaking subjects whom they called ?Tourkalvanoi or Arnauts?. > >Indeed, the best way to find out about the consciousness of Arvanites is to carry >out a field study in present-day Greece ?:-) ?[With this in mind, there is an >ongoing effort on the part of the Albanian irredenta to ?re-invent? the word >?Arvanites? as an all-encompassing or 'blanket' term. ?Language and 'genealogy' >are instruments of this narrative aiming at the creation of an 'ethno-linguistic' >minority in Greece and also, the resurgence (or rather 'resuscitation') of the >so-called Chams question. However, the latter has political ramifications and is >in my view, beyond the scope of this discussion.] > >C.D.K. > > > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ >List-Info: https://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/mgsa-l > From AKarpathak at aol.com Mon Jul 29 11:22:53 2002 From: AKarpathak at aol.com (AKarpathak@aol.com) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:59 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] off line for a month Message-ID: <3EDFCBCA.3DD71E23.09E588BC@aol.com> I'm not sure how to send this message to the list- administrator, so, please bear with me and my apologies for clogging up your mail boxes. I will be travelling for a month (off to the Aegean Sea and later northern Greece). I will not have email access. So, if I do not respond to someone, please know that I am not ignoring you. Now to the list administrator: is there a way to put my email address "on hold" for 4 weeks??? I'm not quite sure how this works, if I will have to resub upon my return, but... Kalo Kalokairi to all!!! (mine will begin officially on Friday at 12, when the plane lands in Athens!!!) Thanks, Anna K. From georgenakos at mail.clayton.edu Mon Jul 29 12:03:29 2002 From: georgenakos at mail.clayton.edu (George Nakos) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:59 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Clarification re Albanian and Arvanitika Message-ID: <9A2AE7C313D8F14E8498253BB764ED3C01A6F598@Ganymede.ccsunet.clayton.edu> Personally I don't think that the distinction is valid today. Religion is not very important among Albanians and it is hard to tell whether somebody is of Moslem or Christian background. The distinction that you do hear is "voreiohpeirwths" versus "alvanos". Now you probably have a lot of Albanians that claim to be voreiohpeirwtes, but this is a different story!! In the past the distinction of arvanitihs and tourkalvanos probably existed. I am from Corfu and we have always received large numbers of refugees from other parts of Greece. My family came from Himara around 1850. Because they spoke Greek and Albanian, for several generations they used to call us "arvanites". In the village we have some neighbors that their nickname is "Tourkoi." Growing up I always thought that they were of Turkish origin. Only recently I discovered that they were Moslem Albanians and that they came to the village more than 100 years ago. Although they changed their religion and became Christian, people still call them "Turkoi", but never "Arvanites". Now as far as "Alvanoi" versus "Arvanoi", I don't think that there is a difference. I probably use both. I use "Arvanoi" when I am in my village, and "Alvanoi" when I talk to somebody outside my village. Also nowadays even the word "arvanites" may be used for an "Alvano" from Albania, so it has totally changed its meaning. Another interesting observation from my village that I saw this Summer is the transformation of the old part of the village. Some of the houses there are very old, built next to each other. Most of the people that grew up in these houses have built new homes and have abandoned the old traditional homes. In recent years a number of English families in search of a cheap holiday house in Corfu have moved in, accompanied by Albanian immigrants. I think it is definitely a sign of changing times to visit an old village in Corfu and to hear English and Albanian!! However, the positive sign is that both groups seem to have become part of the village in a very short period of time. Last year, they organized a village choir, I was very surprised to see two English women that permanently live in Corfu and one Albanian immigrant singing church hymns during the Good Friday procession!! George Nakos -----Original Message----- From: AKarpathak@aol.com [mailto:AKarpathak@aol.com] Sent: Monday, July 29, 2002 1:16 PM To: "Christos D. Katsetos"; "G.R." Cc: MGSA-L@uci.edu Subject: Re: [MGSA-L] Clarification re Albanian and Arvanitika The question I should have asked, but I guess was trying to articulate in my head in an earlier posting of the day: are there distinctive terms used today in popular demotic language spoken by the average Greek as to the Muslim compared to the Greek Christian Albanians, and specifically, for the immigrants? Anna K. In a message dated Tue, 30 Jul 2002 10:48:16 +0800, "Christos D. Katsetos" writes: > > >"G.R." wrote: > >> on 28/7/02 11:52, Christos D. Katsetos at dkatseto@bellatlantic.net wrote: >> >> ... >> > The designation 'Arvanites' refers to Albanian-speaking subjects of Christian >> > Orthodox persuasion and Greek consciousness. >> >> Sorry again, I have some trouble to define this Greek consciousness. If it >> pertains to common origins them contemporary Albanians claim lineage to to >> ancient Greece cf. Is. Kadare etc. Who defines it and who is recipient? > >*The people* (on both accounts) > >> >> >> > This is to be distinguished from >> > Albanian-speaking Muslim subjects and loyal followers of the Ottomans >> > ('Arnaut' in Turkish). >> >> My understanding is that "Arnaut (Arnaout?)" describes an Albanian, >> Arvanitis etc. Consequently the family name Arnaoutis refers to such an >> origin in Greek. I have in mind at least an Arnaoutis (besides the general >> derogative term in football or elsewhere lol) who was the chamberlain of the >> ex-king. I wonder if the above speculation is true how such a thing would >> have happened given the fact that church was probably much stronger in the >> past? > >I am afraid that a recurring quandary here has to do with a manifest obsession >with semantics that lends itself to differential >interpretations and speculations. ?To this end, I would be particularly cautious >in attaching a major significance (if in fact, any significance at all) to >'anthroponyms', the same way that I would downplay toponyms in Greece. > >The surname 'Arnaoutis' is no less Greek as say, the surname 'Tourkodimitris' or >'Voulgaris' and so forth. ?(Also, to my knowledge, the Church has never been keen >on such matters). > >In previous postings I stated that for at least the past 150-200 years the term >'Arvanitis pl. Arvanites' has acquired a distinctive connotation in the Modern >Greek lexicon, i.e., denoting a Christian Orthodox, Albanian-speaking subject with >an overt Greek identity. > >It is my position that there was a clear distinction between the Muslim, >Albanian-speaking, loyal Ottoman followers referred to as 'Tourkalvanoi', and >those Christian Orthodox, Albanian-speaking subjects, which dates back to at least >the early to mid-19th c. The latter group includes those instances of Muslim >Albanians who converted to Orthodox Christianity (say, around the time of the >Greek War of Independence). ?According to Koukoudis, other travellers in the >neighbourhood such as the Vlachs did in fact, distinguish their fellow >Albanian-speaking Orthodox Christians (whom they called as *Arbinesi*) from the >Muslim Albanian-speaking subjects whom they called 'Tourkalvanoi or Arnauts'. > >Indeed, the best way to find out about the consciousness of Arvanites is to carry >out a field study in present-day Greece ?:-) ?[With this in mind, there is an >ongoing effort on the part of the Albanian irredenta to 're-invent' the word >'Arvanites' as an all-encompassing or 'blanket' term. ?Language and 'genealogy' >are instruments of this narrative aiming at the creation of an 'ethno-linguistic' >minority in Greece and also, the resurgence (or rather 'resuscitation') of the >so-called Chams question. However, the latter has political ramifications and is >in my view, beyond the scope of this discussion.] > >C.D.K. > > > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ >List-Info: https://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/mgsa-l > _______________________________________________ List-Info: https://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/mgsa-l From dkatseto at bellatlantic.net Tue Jul 30 00:50:46 2002 From: dkatseto at bellatlantic.net (Christos D. Katsetos) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:59 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Clarification re Albanian and Arvanitika References: Message-ID: <3D464555.5E953ECE@bellatlantic.net> "G.R." wrote: > > > > You'll be probably wrong as 'anthroponyms', the same way as toponyms are > very rich in history denoting several stratifications of the language that > go unnoticed. I will pass on this question to the anthropologists. However, in my view, 'anthroponyms' and toponyms, particularly in the context of the Modern Greek reality, are liable of giving rise to exaggerated or even outright false interpretations [perhaps ?anthroponyms? even more so than toponyms]. Indeed, they may reflect several 'stratifications' but I would not go too much further than that [not to add the confounding factor related to the widespread use of ?paratsouklia? (nicknames) in Greek surnames]. [BTW, far reaching conclusions and 'extrapolations' derived from toponyms have been exploited in the past in order to justify certain ?racialist? hypotheses (or ideations). To this example, the presumptive Slavonic etymology of toponyms in Peloponnese, e.g. 'Levecova' (Levetsova -Krokees), Lakonias or Vitina, Arkadias, served as part of the Fallmereyer?s narrative.] In short, I am critically questioning the true value of 'anthroponyms' especially in the context of Modern Greece whilst I am also calling for utmost caution in the interpretation of toponyms. > > Here I disagree as espousing the Islamic religion was a mean to avoid > taxation and/or persecution (documented) and as for the loyalty I wonder > how much a mercenary can be loyal. And don't take my words for granted just > check the history of '21 (Karaiskakis for instance) to see how the > allegiance and "loyalty" has changed according to who was paying "loufedes" > ;-) Indeed, espousing Islam as a way of avoiding severe penalties was the case in many instances -- unfortunately (or fortunately?) too many. That said, 'taxation' and 'persecution' did not deter *many other* Christian Orthodox 'rayiades' from remaining loyal to the Patriarchate (Rum Millet) and thus keeping Romiosyni alive through difficult times! I respectfully disagree with your interpretation in which you are referring to Arvanites freedom fighters as 'mercenaries'. > > and again, concerning these Vlachs my understanding (based to seminars in > EHESS in 83-85) is that they were Romanians from Valachie - Vlahia ;-) Please refer to my previous postings regarding my views on the contributions of Vlach Greeks (an inseparable part of the Genos and Romiosyni) to the shaping of Modern Greek identity. C.D.K. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/public/mgsa-l/attachments/20020730/2b8ff112/attachment.html From baloglou at Oswego.EDU Mon Jul 29 14:45:58 2002 From: baloglou at Oswego.EDU (George Baloglou) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:59 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Clarification re Albanian and Arvanitika In-Reply-To: <9A2AE7C313D8F14E8498253BB764ED3C01A6F598@Ganymede.ccsunet.clayton.edu> Message-ID: On Mon, 29 Jul 2002, George Nakos wrote: > In the past the distinction of arvanitihs and tourkalvanos probably existed. > I am from Corfu and we have always received large numbers of refugees from > other parts of Greece. My family came from Himara around 1850. Because > they spoke Greek and Albanian, for several generations they used to call > us "arvanites". In the village we have some neighbors that their nickname > is "Tourkoi." Growing up I always thought that they were of Turkish origin. > Only recently I discovered that they were Moslem Albanians and that they > came to the village more than 100 years ago. Although they changed their > religion and became Christian, people still call them "Turkoi", but never > "Arvanites". And I have probably mentioned here the case of a Muslim Albanian woman who converted to Orthodoxy and whom I met in Preveza ten years ago: *she* insisted on calling her Muslim compatriots (and relatives) 'Turks' ... despite my persistent reference to their *Albanian* language! [I always wondered whether she did that expediently, in order to look so much more Greek than the others :-) ] Well, this is a complex issue, and I/we had enough of it: thanks, George, and best wishes to Anna and other August travelers! G. B. From iatridesj1 at southernct.edu Mon Jul 29 10:42:05 2002 From: iatridesj1 at southernct.edu (John Iatrides) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:04:59 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Fwd: American Greeks Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20020729134014.00a8ef98@mail.southernct.edu> Anyone who can respond with useful information please do so either directly or through me. Thank you. John O. Iatrides >Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2002 08:49:41 +0000 >From: Lisa Matejka >Subject: American Greeks >To: iatridesj1@southernct.edu >X-Mailer: TWIG 2.3.2 >X-Client-IP: 80.121.133.220 >X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-milter (http://amavis.org/) > > >Dear Mr. Iatrides, >I am an Austrian student of English, and I am planning to write my diploma >thesis (MA) on the linguistic situation of American Greeks. I would like to >ask you if you know of anyone who has been doing studies in that field, or >if you can give me any "piece of advise" where to turn to. >Efcharisto para polli ke chairetismata apo tin Afstria >Lisa Matejka From dkatseto at bellatlantic.net Tue Jul 30 18:12:07 2002 From: dkatseto at bellatlantic.net (Christos D. Katsetos) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:05:00 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Clarification re Albanian and Arvanitika References: Message-ID: <3D473966.35CAA6E4@bellatlantic.net> George Baloglou wrote: > On Mon, 29 Jul 2002, George Nakos wrote: > > > In the past the distinction of arvanitihs and tourkalvanos probably existed. > > I am from Corfu and we have always received large numbers of refugees from > > other parts of Greece. My family came from Himara around 1850. Because > > they spoke Greek and Albanian, for several generations they used to call > > us "arvanites". In the village we have some neighbors that their nickname > > is "Tourkoi." Growing up I always thought that they were of Turkish origin. > > Only recently I discovered that they were Moslem Albanians and that they > > came to the village more than 100 years ago. Although they changed their > > religion and became Christian, people still call them "Turkoi", but never > > "Arvanites". > > And I have probably mentioned here the case of a Muslim Albanian woman who > converted to Orthodoxy and whom I met in Preveza ten years ago: *she* > insisted on calling her Muslim compatriots (and relatives) 'Turks' ... > despite my persistent reference to their *Albanian* language! [I always > wondered whether she did that expediently, in order to look so much more > Greek than the others :-) ] > > Well, this is a complex issue, and I/we had enough of it: And complex it is?! Few closing comments, at least on my part. Quoting from the English translation of A.A. Pallis? "The Ballad ? Poetry of Modern Greece" [From Greek Miscellany. A collection of essays on medieval and modern Greece, Athens 1964] " 'Oi Arbanites plakwsan' (The Arnaouts are upon us!) was a common cry in those days, the sound of which spread terror far and wide throughout the countryside." http://www.myriobiblos.gr/texts/english/pallis_The_Ballad2.html Yet, all things said and done there has always been a distinction between Muslim (Tourkalvanoi or Arnout) and Christian Orthodox Albanians in the people?s mind and legend. Indeed, at some early point, it is likely that *all* inhabitants of Albania, were *also* called 'Arvanites' in Greek/Rhomeika [? the word 'Arvanitades' having perhaps even more of a pejorative connotation]. Nowadays, the term 'Arvanites' in Greece has decisively acquired a distinctive meaning and this solely because of the express and unequivocal wish of the people to identify themselves as Greek. Similar feelings and aspirations may equally exist within a segment of Orthodox Albanians (including the Vlachs) despite the appalling prejudice displayed against them by some *BUT NOT ALL* citizens in present-day Greece. And in the final analysis this is what it counts? Best to all, C.D.K. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/public/mgsa-l/attachments/20020731/23a078e0/attachment.html From gr247 at ams.odn.ne.jp Tue Jul 30 06:29:12 2002 From: gr247 at ams.odn.ne.jp (G.R.) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:05:00 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] off line for a month In-Reply-To: <3EDFCBCA.3DD71E23.09E588BC@aol.com> Message-ID: on 30/7/02 03:22, AKarpathak@aol.com at AKarpathak@aol.com wrote: ... > I will be travelling for a month (off to the Aegean Sea and later northern > Greece). I will not have email access. So, if I do not respond to someone, > please know that I am not ignoring you. ... > Kalo Kalokairi to all!!! (mine will begin officially on Friday at 12, when > the plane lands in Athens!!!) > > Thanks, > Anna K. Arama!!!! Yparxoun kai tyxeroi s'auton ton kosmo ;-) Kales diakopes sta patria! From ssm at panafonet.gr Tue Jul 30 23:06:20 2002 From: ssm at panafonet.gr (Simeon Magliveras) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:05:00 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Fw: H-SAE_CFP: Mediterranean Studies: Identies and Tensions Message-ID: <000e01c23858$64ced7f0$fb23f9d5@simoswmtjisc08> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tony Galt" To: Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2002 2:12 AM Subject: H-SAE_CFP: Mediterranean Studies: Identies and Tensions > From: Mia Fuller [mailto:miafull@socrates.Berkeley.EDU] > Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 6:31 PM > > Call for papers > Mediterranean Studies: Identities and Tensions > American University of Beirut > June 19-21, 2003 > Deadline for proposals: October 1, 2002 > > The Mediterranean is a geographic, cultural, and historical construct: a > circuit of states linked by fragments of shared social and cultural history, > and fractured by cultural and political differences. In recent years, a new > academic field has emerged under the designation "Mediterranean Studies," > marked by the appearance of books, conferences, and university programs. > The "Mediterranean Studies" rubric allows scholars to identify their field > of > research and pedagogical interests not in terms of contemporary political or > disciplinary boundaries, but rather to cross those boundaries in order to > produce more dynamic readings of cultural history. By focusing on a region > where borderlands intersect in a littoral zone traversed by shifting > geographic > and political boundaries ? scholars aim to enliven their work on eras and > areas > where imposed political or academic taxonomies collapse: for instance, the > complex pattern of cultural investments evidenced in medieval al-Andalus or > Sicily, or the hybrid cultures emerging as a result of new immigration > patterns, new models of cultural production and consumption, and shifts in > political power in southern Europe and the eastern Mediterranean states. > Mediterranean Studies: Identities and Tensions will bring together scholars > working on diverse aspects of social and cultural history in order to > examine > the assumptions that inform the emerging academic discipline of > Mediterranean > Studies, and to work toward a disciplinary model that can generate solid, > vital, and relevant research and pedagogy. We invite proposals for papers > on > the theory and practice of Mediterranean Studies from scholars whose primary > discipline is literary, cultural, economic, social, or political history. > Given Lebanon?s historical role as a point of contact between populations, > we > are particularly interested in papers focusing on Muslim-Christian > encounters > in the region; but we will consider all approaches to the topic. > > Structure of the conference > During morning panels, scholars will present formal papers on their own > research. Afternoon workshop sessions will allow conference participants to > discuss their research, and developments and emerging trends in the field. > The > conference organizers hope to publish the conference proceedings in an > edited > volume. > > Financial support > Underwriting of the costs of traveling to Beirut and accommodations in > Beirut > will be available for some (or possibly all) conference participants. > Submissions > Send one-page paper abstracts, accompanied by a brief CV, to: > km12@aub.edu.lb > > Conference organizers > Brian Catlos, Department of History, University of California, Santa Cruz > Mia Fuller, Department of Italian Studies, University of California, > Berkeley > Karla Mallette, Civilization Sequence Program, American University of Beirut > -- > > > Mia Fuller > Assistant Professor > Department of Italian Studies > University of California, Berkeley > 6303 Dwinelle Hall - MC 2620 > Berkeley, CA 94720-2620 > USA > telephone: (1) 510 642 6238 > fax: (1) 510 642 6220 From AKarpathak at aol.com Wed Jul 31 18:35:56 2002 From: AKarpathak at aol.com (AKarpathak@aol.com) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:05:00 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] Clarification re Albanian and Arvanitika Message-ID: <17E027D4.0B70D72E.09E588BC@aol.com> Thank you George!!! I'll be thinking of you while sipping my coffee overlooking the Aegean on Nisyros, lol. (yeah, right!!! lol, lol.) Kalo mina, Anna K. In a message dated Mon, 29 Jul 2002 4:45:58 PM Eastern Standard Time, George Baloglou writes: > > >On Mon, 29 Jul 2002, George Nakos wrote: > >> In the past the distinction of arvanitihs and tourkalvanos probably existed. >> I am from Corfu and we have always received large numbers of refugees from >> other parts of Greece. ?My family came from Himara around 1850. ?Because >> they spoke Greek and Albanian, for several generations they used to call >> us "arvanites". ?In the village we have some neighbors that their nickname >> is "Tourkoi." ?Growing up I always thought that they were of Turkish origin. >> Only recently I discovered that they were Moslem Albanians and that they >> came to the village more than 100 years ago. ?Although they changed their >> religion and became Christian, people still call them "Turkoi", but never >> "Arvanites". > >And I have probably mentioned here the case of a Muslim Albanian woman who >converted to Orthodoxy and whom I met in Preveza ten years ago: *she* >insisted on calling her Muslim compatriots (and relatives) 'Turks' ... >despite my persistent reference to their *Albanian* language! [I always >wondered whether she did that expediently, in order to look so much more >Greek than the others :-) ] > >Well, this is a complex issue, and I/we had enough of it: thanks, George, >and best wishes to Anna and other August travelers! > > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?G. B. > > From gfrangos at downstate.edu Tue Jul 30 10:25:18 2002 From: gfrangos at downstate.edu (gfrangos@downstate.edu) Date: Mon Dec 19 08:05:00 2005 Subject: [MGSA-L] No subject given Message-ID: <0207301028.AA1028050246@netmail.hscbklyn.edu> "Greek Consciousness" must be linked to "Hellenophrone", the term used by Greek nationalists during and after the Balkan Wars to claim that "Slavophones", "Albanophones" "Vlachopones", and other non-Greek speaking people, are "Greek" as long as they are also "hellenophronic". The "phronisis" of a person, or a population was determined by having government officials, often in uniform and sometimes armed, interview the subject or subjects to determine their national identity or "consciousness." Not surprisingly, subjects were happy, even eager to declare their "Greek consciousness"-- a confession duly recorded and published in government, and so-called scholarly, reports. Needless-to-say, the same or similar "consciousness raising" was, and perhaps still is, practiced by all sides in many places throughout the world.