Genetics of the Greek Peleponessus

Ok, I understand that it is difficult to let go when one obviously has an axe to grind, but I will try one last time based on simple logic: Fallmerayer argued that Peloponnesean Greeks had been replaced by Slavs. Had this indeed happened, the study we discuss here would have produced completely different results. It didn't. Furthermore, at least some elements of slavic folklore and customs would have survived. None did.
I believe Fallmerayer's problem was the lack of knowledge on Dark Age Balkans and Slavs in general. There were indeed replacement in Peloponnese and everywhere else in the Balkans, which is normal for any region during war and instability. Historically the Balkans experienced North to South population movements so those replacement were definitely comprised of mostly non-Slavic people from the Balkans like Greeks, Vlachs, Albanians, etc.
 
there is discussion among 2 high level politicians ( I think one is Kapodistrias (Capo d' Istria was alternative name for the Greek community hiden company like the Philiki of Trieste -Tergest after 1720's)
and it is said that none Turk left in that time modern Greece, by the term Turk or προσκυνημενοι (those who kneel) Greeks mean muslims and that include not only Turks but other Muslim nationalities also, like Albanians,

None ? I don't think, I understood. You said there wasn't any Turk migrant before Population Exchange Agreement?

Adsız.jpg


the
the exchange of 1922 has 3 rules

Rule 1 the Greeks who arrive will occupy each Turkish property of those who left as exchanged population to Turkey,
the Turk who stay will might keep max 100 000 m2 or 10 % of their property according the qitap (land register) with min the house or 8-10 000 m2
That is about 80% of Pontic people who stayed at the villages or at the tsiflik of the Turks who left 1 year before, and about 30 % of minor Asian (Smyrna) at what was called Nees ktiseis or New Greece (Greek expansion after 1860, Makedonia Epirus some islands and a part of Thessaly the ones called Vakuf (Ottoman properties like camps or forests who stayed as common property before, etc etc)

rule 2 Those who will go to old Greece (before 1860) will accept some British sauvereign or some other currency as help but not land to cultivate, since the land is given and is registered
alternative the state kept the money and bought land (απαλοτριωσις) and share a small piece of land able enough to build a typical poor home of tha era.
that is major part of minor Asians (Smyrna) about 50% and 10 % of Pontic, most them are those who raise the industrial effort of the big cities.of 30's till late 70's,
that was the major labour dynamic of the time, they mostly become working class for 2 generations. and is focused in certain areas, like Pireus Athens Volos Herakleion Mytiline Thessaloniki
and mostly have names of the area they come, like Nea Smyrne (New Izmir) Kordellio (karsiyaka) Nea Ionia (Yunan= Ιων=Ιοnian) etc

Rule 3
where the church has property big land area (do not remember the size), or areas that were in progress to dry for farming 50% will pass to refuggees (new land),
At peloponese there are 2 villages of minor Asians (Smyrna) at Heleia preferacture, but since they are after 1920's surely excluded from the search.
BUT Peloponese took the lowest almost zero of exchange population, since there was no Turkish property or exchangable population.

You are talking like none Turk or Greek. Just from the book data but not reality.

Do you think Turk Merchants from Thesseloniki, lived happily in Greeks ex vine yard. No they were not farmer.

Do you think Turk tabocco farmers, could care Greeks ex-Olive trees. Answer is No. Trees died.

People sold what they had after population exchange and looked a new job as other guys said in the cities.

So searching just based on Turkish properties won't give you the fact.

From Wiki page Greek Refugees

"The core of the refugee population settled in Attica and Macedonia. The official refugee population per region in 1928 was as follows (number of refugees and percent of the refugee population):[9]Macedonia: 638,253 52.2% (with 270,000 in Thessaloniki alone[10])Central Greece and Attica: 306,193 25.1%Thrace: 107,607 8.8%North Aegean Islands: 56,613 4.6%Thessaly: 34,659 2.8%Crete: 33,900 2.8%Peloponnese: 28,362 2.3%Epirus: 8,179 0.7%Cyclades: 4,782 0.4%Ionian Islands: 3,301 0.3%Total: 1,221,849 100%


Nea Kios, Argolis (Cius)Patras*, Achaia

Obviously Asian Greek migrants weren't much as in Greek Macedonia, I told it before. But They lived or are living in Morea peninsula as well. If you check the percent, it is more than Central Attika in 1928. But today I am sure that it is more than 1%. and Nearly as much as Thessaly in 1928.

Those lands can belongs non Turk-muslims or as I said big city migrantion as an example Patra, I guess.

About before 1860-1870 I don't know, I will search it too, but it doesn't seem logical for me. It should be at less a few percent.
 
I will not expand to this why Fallmayer took wrong vision of Greece.
400 years of raya, what he expected to see? Greek man philosophizing? or naked man make gymnastics? maybe symposiums with Sokrates?
That's exactly what he expected, when he came to Peloponnese. Fallmerayer was a child of the Romantic epoch - arcadian shepherds making love with nymphs, philosophers discussing at the agorá, Myrons carving hero statues etc.

His disappointment was obvious in the novel-like texts he wrote. He didn't understand their language, which has changed considerably. Add to this that he learned there, that centuries ago many people fled from the Slavic raids. This together with his Slavophobia he imagined the nightmare of an extinguished Greek population, replaced by hated Slavs and some Albanese. Checking facts or getting closer to the population of Morea for in depth information wasn't his thing. He just gathered material which supported his theory, leaving anything else neglected behind, which might correct his view.

In the end - other people visited Greece as well and I don't know of any other person who came to the same conclusions as him - his view found almost no supporters at home. After his publications he lost his teacher job and lived as private lecturer and independent feuilletonist for newspapers. Although he studied oriental languages, he never was anything like a scientist, travel reporter and political agitator - that's what you would call him today.

And all this sh... is totally offtopic, right?
 
That's exactly what he expected, when he came to Peloponnese. Fallmerayer was a child of the Romantic epoch - arcadian shepherds making love with nymphs, philosophers discussing at the agorá, Myrons carving hero statues etc.

His disappointment was obvious in the novel-like texts he wrote. He didn't understand their language, which has changed considerably. Add to this that he learned there, that centuries ago many people fled from the Slavic raids. This together with his Slavophobia he imagined the nightmare of an extinguished Greek population, replaced by hated Slavs and some Albanese. Checking facts or getting closer to the population of Morea for in depth information wasn't his thing. He just gathered material which supported his theory, leaving anything else neglected behind, which might correct his view.

In the end - other people visited Greece as well and I don't know of any other person who came to the same conclusions as him - his view found almost no supporters at home. After his publications he lost his teacher job and lived as private lecturer and independent feuilletonist for newspapers. Although he studied oriental languages, he never was anything like a scientist, travel reporter and political agitator - that's what you would call him today.

And all this sh... is totally offtopic, right?

I'm sorry to disappoint you but it's totally the opposite. Fallmerayer was not a child of Romantic epoch. He contradicted in a scientific way the opinion of this "childrens", also called philhellenes. This is the reason of so much hate from the modern Greeks:
Contributions[edit]
Fallmerayer is considered one of the great 19th-century intellectuals in the German-speaking world.[40] He is remembered as "a co-founder of Byzantine studies, as discoverer of the divisive Greek theory, as a prophet of the world-historical opposition between Occident and Orient, and finally as a brilliant essayist."[41] Fallmerayer has been described as "one of the greatest German stylists,"[42] and the Fragmente aus dem Orient is a classic of German travel literature.[43]
Fallmerayer was one of three scholars (together with Gottlieb Lukas Friedrich Tafel and Georg Martin Thomas) who laid the foundation for Byzantinistik (Byzantine studies) as a self-sufficient academic discipline in Germany. Their achievements were crowned in the following generation by the establishment of the first German Lehrstuhl for Byzantinstik at Munich, whose first occupant was Karl Krumbacher.[44]

Fallmerayer's name eventually became "a symbol for hatred of the Greeks", and Nikos Dimou wrote (only partly in jest) that he had been raised to imagine Fallmerayer as a "blood-dripping Greek-eater" (αιμοσταγή ελληνοφάγο).[53] In the twentieth century the charge of "neo-Fallmerayerism" was occasionally used by Greek scholars in an attempt to discredit the work of certain Western European scholars, including Cyril Mango, whose work bore no actual relation to Fallmerayer's.[54] (The charge was also heard outside of Greece, for example, in the course of a debate between Kenneth Setton and Peter Charanis.[55]) The first modern Greek translation of Fallmerayer's work appeared in 1984.[56]
 
None ? I don't think, I understood. You said there wasn't any Turk migrant before Population Exchange Agreement?

View attachment 8557



You are talking like none Turk or Greek. Just from the book data but not reality.

Do you think Turk Merchants from Thesseloniki, lived happily in Greeks ex vine yard. No they were not farmer.

Do you think Turk tabocco farmers, could care Greeks ex-Olive trees. Answer is No. Trees died.

People sold what they had after population exchange and looked a new job as other guys said in the cities.

So searching just based on Turkish properties won't give you the fact.

From Wiki page Greek Refugees

"The core of the refugee population settled in Attica and Macedonia. The official refugee population per region in 1928 was as follows (number of refugees and percent of the refugee population):[9]Macedonia: 638,253 52.2% (with 270,000 in Thessaloniki alone[10])Central Greece and Attica: 306,193 25.1%Thrace: 107,607 8.8%North Aegean Islands: 56,613 4.6%Thessaly: 34,659 2.8%Crete: 33,900 2.8%Peloponnese: 28,362 2.3%Epirus: 8,179 0.7%Cyclades: 4,782 0.4%Ionian Islands: 3,301 0.3%Total: 1,221,849 100%


Nea Kios, Argolis (Cius)Patras*, Achaia

Obviously Asian Greek migrants weren't much as in Greek Macedonia, I told it before. But They lived or are living in Morea peninsula as well. If you check the percent, it is more than Central Attika in 1928. But today I am sure that it is more than 1%. and Nearly as much as Thessaly in 1928.

Those lands can belongs non Turk-muslims or as I said big city migrantion as an example Patra, I guess.

About before 1860-1870 I don't know, I will search it too, but it doesn't seem logical for me. It should be at less a few percent.
Peloponneso received indeed one of the minor percentage of Anatolian refugees.
 
How are the population exchanges which took place in the 20th century between Turkey and Greece relevant to the ancestry of people dating back to 1860-1880?

That's a rhetorical question. The answer is that they're not.

How are Falmarayer's ideas relevant any longer when we can now see through genetics that there was no "replacement" of the people of the Peloponnesus by "Slavic" tribes or "Levantine" tribes?

That's also a rhetorical question. The answer is that they're not.

It's also irrelevant whether Greeks hated his ideas or Albanians loved them. Science, in this case genetics, doesn't care which group espoused which ideas for which reason.

@Nik,
You're speaking very loosely of "replacement" in the Balkans. Migration movements don't equal replacement. If the migration movement was of very similar people it's going to be difficult to untangle.
 
None ? I don't think, I understood. You said there wasn't any Turk migrant before Population Exchange Agreement?

View attachment 8557



You are talking like none Turk or Greek. Just from the book data but not reality.

Do you think Turk Merchants from Thesseloniki, lived happily in Greeks ex vine yard. No they were not farmer.

Do you think Turk tabocco farmers, could care Greeks ex-Olive trees. Answer is No. Trees died.

People sold what they had after population exchange and looked a new job as other guys said in the cities.

So searching just based on Turkish properties won't give you the fact.

From Wiki page Greek Refugees

"The core of the refugee population settled in Attica and Macedonia. The official refugee population per region in 1928 was as follows (number of refugees and percent of the refugee population):[9]Macedonia: 638,253 52.2% (with 270,000 in Thessaloniki alone[10])Central Greece and Attica: 306,193 25.1%Thrace: 107,607 8.8%North Aegean Islands: 56,613 4.6%Thessaly: 34,659 2.8%Crete: 33,900 2.8%Peloponnese: 28,362 2.3%Epirus: 8,179 0.7%Cyclades: 4,782 0.4%Ionian Islands: 3,301 0.3%Total: 1,221,849 100%


Nea Kios, Argolis (Cius)Patras*, Achaia

Obviously Asian Greek migrants weren't much as in Greek Macedonia, I told it before. But They lived or are living in Morea peninsula as well. If you check the percent, it is more than Central Attika in 1928. But today I am sure that it is more than 1%. and Nearly as much as Thessaly in 1928.

Those lands can belongs non Turk-muslims or as I said big city migrantion as an example Patra, I guess.

About before 1860-1870 I don't know, I will search it too, but it doesn't seem logical for me. It should be at less a few percent.

ok First lets understand something,

At Peloponese mainly and Rumeli after 1828 not a Muslim existed, since all killed or left
and majority of Greeks who came to fight at 1821 went back to Ottoman empire or moved to West to other European countries,
all searches in Greece about DNA origin are before 1860, so the devastation and exchange of population is excluded,
besides where Asian Greeks settled is known and if not is obvious.
Among Greek and Turks there are 6 phases if we exclude the old before Suleiman the magnificent.
1 The Orlov's
2 1821
3 1860-1870 Thessaly (not Thessaloniki)
4 1905-1914
5 1920-1923
6 the 1950's progrom (Con/polis)

about Thessaloniki or Patra after 1860 is out of Thread,
but anyway Tobacco at Makedonia started after 1923 by the Pontic Greeks cultivating variety of Samsun plant,
before no Tobacco plantation existed,
Turks were not mainly Farmers at least in my area,
Turks mainly were public issue officers, military and police services, Engineers Doctors Advocats and Notorius, and Metalurgy production, not much as Farmers,
and generally Urban area works.
specially at Thessaloniki Urban area Jews controled everything, 48% of inside the city walls were Jews before 1860, and they controled the merchant of the city until 1860 when they moved to NY 5th Avenue,
Sold of big Property at Makedonia is not a considerable action since most were not recognised even back to 1908 among Turks and Greeks or other Turk and non Turk,
for example at my area there was a rich Known Turkish family owning huge land, which after the exchange kept the 1/10 as they stayed, and at the rest 5 villages created, about 6000 people,
at military camp and dwellings also another block of squares -mahala- founded etc etc

the rules I wrote above are the rules that Greek goverment set to the exchanged,
many families divided due to that, since either you enter a program and wait till 1932-3 to get land at the country, or you took the money as help and wait at Urban areas,
so if you came Thessaloniki your choices were 1)stay, 2 move to countryside of New Greece, 3)move to old Greece
the sold properties problem was created at 1870 at Thessaly known as the revolt of Killeler (goleler)
 
I'm sorry to disappoint you but it's totally the opposite. Fallmerayer was not a child of Romantic epoch. He contradicted in a scientific way the opinion of this "childrens", also called philhellenes. This is the reason of so much hate from the modern Greeks:

1. "He contradicted in a scientific way". You seem to lack a grasp of what the scientific method includes.
2. "This is the reason of so much hate from the modern Greeks". Most modern Greeks haven't even heard his name. Those who have pay little attention as his theories have been discredited time and time again. In short, no one cares in Greece. I am sorry to say this, but every time someone digs up his name, it is usually someone from north of our border, two specific countries in particular.

As someone mentioned, Fallmerayer was a typical romanticist of his generation of German scholars, expecting the Greeks to look like the idealised figures of their statues, and desparate to "prove" some genetic relationship between them and the Germans. This "nordic ancient Greek" crap has been repeatedly shot down by physical anthropology, genetics, even traces of colour on statues.
In his grudge against King Otto, he was so eager to support his theory that he forgot the fact that even in the most violent invasions in history, the local native element has never been totally wiped out to the extend that he claims, without the newcomers becoming the dominant culture, something that we all know that did not happen in Greece...
 
ok First lets understand something,

At Peloponese mainly and Rumeli after 1828 not a Muslim existed,
and majority of Greeks who came to fight at 1821 went back to Ottoman empire or moved to West to other European countries,
all searches in Greece about DNA origin are before 1860, so the devastation and exchange of population is excluded,
besides were Asian Greeks settled is known and if not is obvious.

about Thessaloniki or Patra after 1860 is out of Thread,
but anyway Tobacco at Makedonia started after 1923 by the Pontic Greeks variety of Samsun plant,
before no Tobacco plantation existed,
Turks were not Farmers at least in my area,
Turks mainly were public issue officers, military and police services, Engineers Doctors Advocats and Notorius, and Metalurgy production, not much as Farmers,
and generally Urban area works.
specially at Thessaloniki Urban area Jews controled everything, 48% of inside the city were Jews, and they controled the merchant of the city until 1860 when they moved to NY 5th Avenue,



I just read one of your posts upthread and you insulted another member. I've warned you about this in the past. Don't do it again. No more warnings.
 
Last edited:
There always has to be an anti-semitic angle to everything for you, doesn't there?

I also just read one of your posts upthread and you insulted another member. I've warned you about this in the past. Don't do it again. No more warnings.

plz can you explain the anti-semitic of my post?
or not in public but in private if you want?
 
when capodistria said that none turk left he meant in south greece.
the war of greek indipendence it was a terrible war that lasted for 8 years and during that time both armies tried to do ethnic cleansing.
so most of the turks and albanian muslims left before having to deal with winning the rebels.
the study confirms that too
 
1. "He contradicted in a scientific way". You seem to lack a grasp of what the scientific method includes.
Since according to you, i don't understand, it's you who have to explain what you intend with scientific way for a scholar of XIX century.
2. "This is the reason of so much hate from the modern Greeks". Most modern Greeks haven't even heard his name. Those who have pay little attention as his theories have been discredited time and time again. In short, no one cares in Greece.
A famous greek, Seferis, the first to receive the Nobel Prize for Literature, exactly in his speech during the ceremony, dedicated a part of his speech exactly to the debate of the continuity of greeks.

I am sorry to say this, but every time someone digs up his name, it is usually someone from north of our border, two specific countries in particular.
Fallmerayer is mentioned in this study 15 times.
I do not support the pan-Slav theory, according to which all the inhabitants of the Balkan Peninsula are simply Slavs. This is a chauvinist theory that serves the expansion of Russian imperialism. And obviously, i do not support the dreams of glory of the Slavs inhabitants of FYROM.
Here in the forum there is a greek member who for many years considered to be his favorite pass time the attack against the Albanians. At the beginning i tried to install a normal conversation with this individual, but it was impossible,so i have simply decided to ignore him.
I did not intended to participate in this thread, because I consider and i also explained why this study, is a pseudo-science. But if you return to the first page and follow the chronology of the posts, you will see that this pure Macedonian blood, amid the euphoria created after reading this study, says that even this small amount of DNA Slavic among the modern inhabitants of the Peloponnese Peninsula, is result of the migration of Albanians, he is not the only one in this thread among the greek members to support that theory. At this point i said, hey, here i have to explain a couple of things.

As someone mentioned, Fallmerayer was a typical romanticist of his generation of German scholars, expecting the Greeks to look like the idealised figures of their statues, and desparate to "prove" some genetic relationship between them and the Germans. This "nordic ancient Greek" crap has been repeatedly shot down by physical anthropology, genetics, even traces of colour on statues.
In his grudge against King Otto, he was so eager to support his theory that he forgot the fact that even in the most violent invasions in history, the local native element has never been totally wiped out to the extend that he claims, without the newcomers becoming the dominant culture, something that we all know that did not happen in Greece...
When Fallmerayer visited Greece, King Otto was a teenager.
I expect that one day i will read in the newspapers that Fallmerayer is condemned after his death by a greek court on charges of pedophilia.
 
LABERIA: Since according to you, i don't understand, it's you who have to explain what you intend with scientific way for a scholar of XIX century.

How about Charles Darwin?

Definition of "scientific method":
a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

A famous greek, Seferis, the first to receive the Nobel Prize for Literature, exactly in his speech during the ceremony, dedicated a part of his speech exactly to the debate of the continuity of greeks.

Irrelevant to the topic


Fallmerayer is mentioned in this study 15 times.
I do not support the pan-Slav theory, according to which all the inhabitants of the Balkan Peninsula are simply Slavs. This is a chauvinist theory that serves the expansion of Russian imperialism. And obviously, i do not support the dreams of glory of the Slavs inhabitants of FYROM.
Here in the forum there is a greek member who for many years considered to be his favorite pass time the attack against the Albanians. At the beginning i tried to install a normal conversation with this individual, but it was impossible,so i have simply decided to ignore him.
I did not intended to participate in this thread, because I consider and i also explained why this study, is a pseudo-science. But if you return to the first page and follow the chronology of the posts, you will see that this pure Macedonian blood, amid the euphoria created after reading this study, says that even this small amount of DNA Slavic among the modern inhabitants of the Peloponnese Peninsula, is result of the migration of Albanians, he is not the only one in this thread among the greek members to support that theory. At this point i said, hey, here i have to explain a couple of things.

Before you can call something pseudo-science, you have to know what science is...

That's not to say that this study is necessarily the last one on the subject. If someone can point to flaws in the methodology etc., I'm all ears.

When Fallmerayer visited Greece, King Otto was a teenager.
I expect that one day i will read in the newspapers that Fallmerayer is condemned after his death by a greek court on charges of pedophilia.

@Yetos,

OK, Yetos, the first part was an over-reaction on my part, and I'll remove it. For your information, though, 5th Avenue is not the exclusive domain of rich Jews. For one thing, that's where Trump lives, and a more ostentatious display of wealth you could never hope (or dread) to see.

Stop with the insults, however. I'm serious.
 
How about Charles Darwin?

Definition of "scientific method":
a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.
1)Starting to read all the medieval chronicles. Here you have some of this sources:
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...-Viking-armies?p=484177&viewfull=1#post484177
There are others, just start to search.

2)Using the archeology, for example, to prove that these chronicles can be considered credible:
http://www.ascsa.edu.gr/pdf/uploads/hesperia/147272.pdf

"(...) There is clear evidence from the excavations of the Athenian Agora that the late sixth century witnessed some interruption in the peaceful course of town life in Athens. Certain buildings, for example, are known to have been burnt and temporarily or permanently deserted at that time. Finds of coinage, evidently concealed in haste or abandoned in emergency and never recovered, allow a date to be assigned to events, for which, although they are well attested by archaeological discovery, it would otherwise be very difficult to demonstrate a particular historical context. Byzantine chroniclers tell of a Slavonic invasion of Greece which took place apparently at the end of the year 578 or early in 579, as a result of which large numbers of Slavs settled in Greece... It is virtually certain that some of the destruction in the Athenian Agora, for which a date in the years immediately following the invasion is here proposed, was the work of the Slavs... Menander Protector, in his work chronicling the period ca. 560-580, writes as follows (...)"




Irrelevant to the topic
Excuse me, people here are discussing even about pizza.




Before you can call something pseudo-science, you have to know what science is...

That's not to say that this study is necessarily the last one on the subject. If someone can point to flaws in the methodology etc., I'm all ears.
Per l'ultima volta. There are among historians two different opinions. Fallmerayer and others who support that after the slavic invasion the ancient Greeks are to be considered a dead nation like many others in human history.
There are other important scholars, the famous philhellenes, friends of the greeks, who are against this theory.
This study, in few words, consider all the history as we know it, Fallmerayer and philhellenes, a BS. Do you understand this? This study is the Holy Gral of greek ultranationalism and chauvinism.
I explained more that once that this authors of this study, tell us half truth. Because it's true that Fallmerayer declared that the ancient Greeks were wiped by the Slavs. But he didn't said that the inhabitants of Peloponnesus in XIX were just hellenised slavs. And the samples of this study are from the descendants of the inhabitants of Peloponnesus of XIX century, not from the people who lived in VII century. And from the moment that this authors intentionally decide to quote not correctly this scholar, they have lost the credibility. And the credibility in science is very important.
 
1)Starting to read all the medieval chronicles. Here you have some of this sources:
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...-Viking-armies?p=484177&viewfull=1#post484177
There are others, just start to search.

2)Using the archeology, for example, to prove that these chronicles can be considered credible:
http://www.ascsa.edu.gr/pdf/uploads/hesperia/147272.pdf

"(...) There is clear evidence from the excavations of the Athenian Agora that the late sixth century witnessed some interruption in the peaceful course of town life in Athens. Certain buildings, for example, are known to have been burnt and temporarily or permanently deserted at that time. Finds of coinage, evidently concealed in haste or abandoned in emergency and never recovered, allow a date to be assigned to events, for which, although they are well attested by archaeological discovery, it would otherwise be very difficult to demonstrate a particular historical context. Byzantine chroniclers tell of a Slavonic invasion of Greece which took place apparently at the end of the year 578 or early in 579, as a result of which large numbers of Slavs settled in Greece... It is virtually certain that some of the destruction in the Athenian Agora, for which a date in the years immediately following the invasion is here proposed, was the work of the Slavs... Menander Protector, in his work chronicling the period ca. 560-580, writes as follows (...)"





Excuse me, people here are discussing even about pizza.





Per l'ultima volta. There are among historians two different opinions. Fallmerayer and others who support that after the slavic invasion the ancient Greeks are to be considered a dead nation like many others in human history.
There are other important scholars, the famous philhellenes, friends of the greeks, who are against this theory.
This study, in few words, consider all the history as we know it, Fallmerayer and philhellenes, a BS. Do you understand this? This study is the Holy Gral of greek ultranationalism and chauvinism.
I explained more that once that this authors of this study, tell us half truth. Because it's true that Fallmerayer declared that the ancient Greeks were wiped by the Slavs. But he didn't said that the inhabitants of Peloponnesus in XIX were just hellenised slavs. And the samples of this study are from the descendants of the inhabitants of Peloponnesus of XIX century, not from the people who lived in VII century. And from the moment that this authors intentionally decide to quote not correctly this scholar, they have lost the credibility. And the credibility in science is very important.

Indeed, per l'ultima volta.

What aren't you getting here? HISTORY IS NOT SCIENCE. We're discussing a scientific subject here: GENETICS.

Where genetics and historical narrative conflict, genetics wins. PERIOD.

Now, I'm not, on the other hand, saying that this study is without flaws or that it's the end of the story. Once we get a hold of some ancient Greek genomes of the right eras we'll be able to compare them to modern samples. The best results will come from that. If we could get ancient genomes of the migrating "Slavic" tribes that would be even better, although they usually burned their dead apparently.

I'm warning you for the last time to stop spamming the same material over and over again. You're on record as to what you believe and why. Don't keep repeating it.
 
Indeed, per l'ultima volta.

What aren't you getting here? HISTORY IS NOT SCIENCE. We're discussing a scientific subject here: GENETICS.

Where genetics and historical narrative conflict, genetics wins. PERIOD.

Now, I'm not, on the other hand, saying that this study is without flaws or that it's the end of the story. Once we get a hold of some ancient Greek genomes of the right eras we'll be able to compare them to modern samples. The best results will come from that. If we could get ancient genomes of the migrating "Slavic" tribes that would be even better, although they usually burned their dead apparently.

I'm warning you for the last time to stop spamming the same material over and over again. You're on record as to what you believe and why. Don't keep repeating it.

I am not repeating the same material. I have posted few historical evidences, because it seems that you are allergic to these things. In the end since history is not a science and genetics always win, it's good to make an comparison and to understand what is wrong. I am expressing my opinion. From yesterday i was out from this discussion, were other people, including you who quoted me. It's normal that not all the people here share the same opinion, because we are humans. In my opinion, this kinds of ultimatums from your side are not normal, because i am respecting the rules of the forum. Having an different opinion from the moderator of the forum, i think it's not against the rules.
BTW, i really appreciate the fact that you have noticed some flaws in this "study".
 
I'm sorry to disappoint you but it's totally the opposite. Fallmerayer was not a child of Romantic epoch. He contradicted in a scientific way the opinion of this "childrens", also called philhellenes. This is the reason of so much hate from the modern Greeks:
I don't know which wacko wrote this on the english wikipedia page, but I can tell you that you are a lucky one, if you don't read Fallmerayers "scientific paper". I did, and believe me, it's hard to keep reading on and not burst into continued laughter:
...a two-fold layer of earth , out of debris and moldiness of two different human races, covers the graves of this old people.
...But the ground of Hellas sank piece by piece, clod by clod into the abyss of the slow but persistently eroding sea, and heaps of Hellens, ousted by the maces of the Scythes, descended during the deepest night of ghosts down into the chasm of destruction.
...Global incidents finally have given voice to the dark feelings of the Greek Slavs, and brought them the recognition of salvation in their desperation. Already for centuries ,repulsed by orient and occident, they have already given up all hope for salvation by the help o their Christian brothers from the west, they turned their eyes yearningly toward Midnight, to their old homeland, which has become alien to them, toward the great sovereign of Turan.
...The dawn of revenge, freedom and glory finally flashed up in the arc of the sky for these unfortunate, and the dividing wall, mounted up at the summits of Balkan by the children of Mahomet sunk to the ground.
...and these were random quotes just from the first three pages. If you want to try to convince me that this is a serious scientific work, then come on, try harder!
 
I don't know which wacko wrote this on the english wikipedia page, but I can tell you that you are a lucky one, if you don't read Fallmerayers "scientific paper". I did, and believe me, it's hard to keep reading on and not burst into continued laughter:

...and these were random quotes just from the first three pages. If you want to try to convince me that this is a serious scientific work, then come on, try harder!

Good grief!!! I had forgotten quite how bad it is. :)
 
Very interesting paper and thanks for posting. I remember a paper by the author(s) from a few years ago, showing similar graphs and models, but this one deals specifically with the Peloponnese.

It's not surprising of course that there is regional diversity. Greece is a mountainous country and very old, and not all of Greece was affected the same by its population history.

Just looking at Greeks, without genetic studies, it's easy to see that many of them do not look like Slavs. I most certainly believe Slavs settled in Greece. I believe that Y-DNA haplogroup I-Dinaric in Greeks is associated with Slavs, and that's fairly present in Greeks, but some or a lot of that could have been brought by others after the Slavs as well. I just can't envision Slavs displacing an entire region like the Peloponnese. The Byzantines reestablished rule in the Peloponnese after the Slavs settled there in places. Who knows what happened with populations at that time?

As far as Turks, there was ethnic cleansing in the Peloponnese as during the independence war. I doubt many Greeks and Peloponnese populations have much Turkish admixture from central Asia, though they may have at least a little here and there.

I look forward to future studies of the region, especially gender-specific studies like Y-DNA and mtDNA. There should be reasonable agreement between different types of genetic studies.
 
"There is clear evidence from the excavations of the Athenian Agora that the late sixth century witnessed some interruption in the peaceful course of town life in Athens. Certain buildings, for example, are known to have been burnt and temporarily or permanently deserted at that time".

Yeah, and a few centuries earlier there was even greater damage following the Persian raid of Athens. Even the old Acropolis was destroyed. The Parthenon that stands today was built shortly after that and Dorian style was chosen instead of Ionian (which would have been expected in Athens) in order to appear more robust and signal the strength of the recovering Greek city.
Your point?
You keep cherry-picking the same fragmented and irrelevant "historical sources", while ignoring the subject matter of this paper: GENETICS.

Obviously your signature gives your game away, but still, this is rather sad...
 
Last edited:

This thread has been viewed 368028 times.

Back
Top