Map of Slavic expansion during the VI and VIIth century

[olvios]

Cadmus is right on the money

[Cadmus]

Thanks Olvios, Ohrid is an ancient part of Hellas, all the ancient former Macedonian regions in Fyrom should be reunified with Greece for my part, instead of Bulgarised and remain in anonimity.

So what if the region once was Bulgarian from Samuils empire , before that it was Desaret land and its culture was Greek, so the oldest culture should be reinstated because the area belonged for a much longer time to Macedonia then it did ever belong to Bulgaria, it's the only fair solution, who came and inhabited it first should have all the credit.

[slavicwolf]

and before the greeks there was someone else and somone else, majority rules thats it and for the last 1400yrs slavs are a majority

[Demetrius Doukas]

Originally Posted by slavicwolf

and before the greeks there was someone else and somone else, majority rules thats it and for the last 1400yrs slavs are a majority

Greece is the biggest economic power in the Balkans slavboy rules those who has the money, then the biggest army and Hellenic culture the most important you can boast whatever but in reality the things are different for you.................

No The Greek civilization (the Hellenic tribes) were the first Europeans there was no one else..............

[Demetrius Doukas]

Originally Posted by Cadmus

Thanks Olvios, Ohrid is an ancient part of Hellas, all the ancient former Macedonian regions in Fyrom should be reunified with Greece for my part, instead of Bulgarised and remain in anonimity.

So what if the region once was Bulgarian from Samuils empire , before that it was Desaret land and its culture was Greek, so the oldest culture should be reinstated because the area belonged for a much longer time to Macedonia then it did ever belong to Bulgaria, it's the only fair solution, who came and inhabited it first should have all the credit.

Quite True)))))))

[ΒΗΣΣΑΡΙΩΝ]

Originally Posted by Cadmus

Bessarion, to what extent do you believe the southern Fyromians especially from the Monastiri, Ohrid, Pelagonia areas have maintained their ancient roots or bloodlines?

It is possible that some remote living ancient inhabitants of those areas in not easy accessible places like mountain villages , did not mix to a great extend with the Slavic populace but forgot their language (same as ancient Greek macedonian had been forgotten)and adopted the slavic language in al the upcoming centuries till today..

From what i know is that there were some Slavis settlements in the Ohrid , Monastir area in the 7/8th c.A.D. but those small tribes to totally assimilate the indigiounous population seems rathe far fetched, i think the inhabitants of that area still carry some original signs of their ancient predecessors..

PS did the Byzantines relocate and reconquered the Monastiri Ohrid , Pelagonia areas as well as in the rest of Greece?

All the best,

First of all, XRONIA POLLA, and sorry for being late, I was lost in the Forum !

On your main part, there is a possibility that what you say actually happened. But there is no historical proof, so it remains a guess, however it looks feasible.

On your PS : The Byzantine reconquista is NOT deswcribed in detail by the contemporary sources. So we do not know to what extent it had gone. Judging from the results, few people were relocated in these northern areas you mention.
Byzantines had the habit to relocate whole populations, and they did it when reconquering Greece after the Persian danger had gone, in order to eliminate the Slavic danger. Chasing away, killing or assimilating the Slavs lasted for a century or so. The few Slavic words surviving in Greek vernacular of pre 1821 era show that. No doubt, Greeks of Greek mainland have a small percentage of Slavic blood due to these old assimilations.

But the fact is that most Greeks of the "Old Greece" have distant roots in Asia Minor, allthough they do not know it !

I wish to you and all people of the Forum, Greeks or foreigners, Peace, Health and a Happy New Year !

[Cadmus]

XRONIA POLLA! Thanks very much Bessarion for your answer,what amazes me is that indeed few Slavic words seem to have survived in the old Greek language, is that due to the Byzantine relocations and chasing away of the Slavs..?

Judging from the results, few people were relocated in these northern areas you mention.

Yes , but where should the "border" line be in the Northern areas ? in the south of Fyrom or perhaps the North of Greece ?(Kastoria, Florina areas perhaps Vergina or Pella areas) and to what extent should we ascribe the assimilition of the Slavs in these northern Greek areas due to the dominant factor of the Greek language and Byzantine control..so there might be a much larger Slavic genepool with the northern Greeks compared with the southerners due to those effective assimilations such as dominant Greek language and Byzantine integrational directions, please correct me if i'm wrong..

Nonetheless i believe that the overall Slavic genepool in southern Fyrom and more apparantly ofcourse in northern Greece is the lowest of all other Slavic countries.

So if i get it right the more southern areas of Greece were repopulated with Greeks from Asia Minor?

[Mygdonia]

It's a theory...a very strange one..southern Greece has a heavy lace of Latin blood...[Genoan, Venetian & French]

North East Greece i.e Thrace & East Macedonia has laces of Gothic [Germanic] and Spanish [Knights of Aragon blood.] as they conquered these ares laid it to waste and settled there for centuries that were later assimilated.

Modern Greeks are mixed.. Anatolians are of course pro-Anatolia in everything... we are them and vice versa..The Greeks of continental Greece is as complex as the Anatolians - due to its history.

There were loads of Goths that settled in Adrianople that were the main cavalry unit of the Byzantine for centuries...and of course there are also the 10,000 Scandinavians [Vangarian Guard] that settled in Constantinople and Macedonia as they were involved [they were the main infantry unit] with King Basil on the extermination of Samuil and his Bulgars.

[ΒΗΣΣΑΡΙΩΝ]

Originally Posted by Cadmus

XRONIA POLLA!
what amazes me is that indeed few Slavic words seem to have survived in the old Greek language, is that due to the Byzantine relocations and chasing away of the Slavs..?

Scholars as OSTROGORSKY have exactly this opinion.

Originally Posted by Cadmus

Yes , but where should the "border" line be in the Northern areas ? in the south of Fyrom or perhaps the North of Greece ?(Kastoria, Florina areas perhaps Vergina or Pella areas) and to what extent should we ascribe the assimilition of the Slavs in these northern Greek areas due to the dominant factor of the Greek language and Byzantine control..so there might be a much larger Slavic genepool with the northern Greeks compared with the southerners due to those effective assimilations such as dominant Greek language and Byzantine integrational directions, please correct me if i'm wrong..

Generally speaking, I agree with you, but I am not a Historian, I am a civil engineer interested in History : So my opinion is just the resume of what I have read.
What we have to keep in mind is this : All scholars, even those holding the ancient Macedonians as not Greeks, do agree that there was little racial difference between Greeks and Thracians, Illyrians and Macedonians, if the latter were not Greeks [ Recent discoveries proved ancient Macedonians as Greeks, as we know].
The reasons that ancient Greeks developed the extraordinary character that led to the miracle of Greek civilization is to be found in the influence of the difficult environment on the Greeks of Southern Greece. It is very characteristic that in Boiotea (Thebes etc), the rich land had made the people less agile than the people in adjacent Attica, to the extent that the expression "Boitian" (Βοιωτός) was equivalent to "backward".
According to Arnold Toynbee, a very difficult enviroment is a challenge that humans face by just surviving, e.g. the Inuit (Eskimos).
A very easy environment leads people to an easy life with few, if any, cultural evolution (Some fruit eaters in S. America).
A difficult but not terrible enviroment makes people agile and leads to the development of civilizations (M. East, China, Mediterranean).

Coming back in Macedonia, it is clear that the population east of Axiow were Thracians, and north of Kaimaktchalan were Dardanians = Thraco-Illyrian tribe.
After the Philippian conquest, these people were quickly assimilated and during the Hellenistic times were almost completely Hellenized [Not all : Some Paeonians chose to keep their city archives in Latin instead of Koine Greek, according to Hammond].
When the Slavs came, they mixed with the indigenous population, but they were just a relative majority : Bulgarian and Skopian [the latter actually a Bulgarian dialect] are simplifies Slavic languages compared to Serbian and Slovenian, the other South Slavic languages. They also have a characteristic that is unique : They put the article BEHIND the name. This is to be found ONLY in two other labguages : Romanian and Albanian.
This fact shows that there had been a strong substratum below the Slavic, Latin or Albanian langauges, indicating a common source : The Thraco-Illyrian influence on these languages.

So, in my opinion, there is a difference in gene pool of Northern Greeks compared to the Southern ones, but it can't be significant : The Slavic part is not that big. The same holds for Fyromians, they are the descendants of the mix of the Hellenized indigenous Macedonian population [consisting mainly of Dardanians in the FYROM area] and Slavs, only the Slavic part is bigger in them.

Originally Posted by Cadmus

Nonetheless i believe that the overall Slavic genepool in southern Fyrom and more apparantly ofcourse in northern Greece is the lowest of all other Slavic countries.

I agree, as seen above.

Originally Posted by Cadmus

So if i get it right the more southern areas of Greece were repopulated with Greeks from Asia Minor?

Yes, that is what Ostrogorsky and others say. But we have to remember that Thessaloniki, Athens and Attica were not conquered by the Slavs. Corinth was sacked but recaptured by the Byzantines. In Patras, on the other hand, the people fled to S.Italy to save themselves from the barbarian Slavs. The exact historical events are not known due to poor sources.

KALH XRONIA !

[ΒΗΣΣΑΡΙΩΝ]

Originally Posted by Mygdonia

It's a theory...a very strange one..southern Greece has a heavy lace of Latin blood...[Genoan, Venetian & French]

North East Greece i.e Thrace & East Macedonia has laces of Gothic [Germanic] and Spanish [Knights of Aragon blood.] as they conquered these ares laid it to waste and settled there for centuries that were later assimilated.

Modern Greeks are mixed.. Anatolians are of course pro-Anatolia in everything... we are them and vice versa..The Greeks of continental Greece is as complex as the Anatolians - due to its history.

There were loads of Goths that settled in Adrianople that were the main cavalry unit of the Byzantine for centuries...and of course there are also the 10,000 Scandinavians [Vangarian Guard] that settled in Constantinople and Macedonia as they were involved [they were the main infantry unit] with King Basil on the extermination of Samuil and his Bulgars.

What I do agree is that we modern Greeks are a mixed race, as everybody else in the Balkans.

But I disagree on the contribution of Latin blood. These people were conquerors but not migrators. They stayed in Greece in an interrupted and difficult life for -2- centuries. We have very few toponyms of Latin origin in Greece. This is very significant, if we take into account that from 150 b.C. to 550 A.D. [roughly] when Justinian opted for the Greek language as the official language of the East Roman Empire we have the huge span of -7- centuries. If we add the two centuries of Francokratia we have -9- centuries !
Compared to the -4- centuries of Ottoman domination, that left a lot of Turkish toponyms in Greece, it is obvious that the Latin influence was minimal.

I have to add, also, that modern Greek has an equal amount of Turkish and Italian loanwords (about 1000 from each according to BRITANNICA). Contacts with westerners, especially the neighbouring Italians, explain this.

As for the several other tribes that contributed to the Greek blood, I estimate a continuation of no more than 35-50% from ancient Greeks. What is significant is that the culture survived. despite the -4- dark Ottoman ages.

Systematic DNA researches will reveal the reality on blood continuation, on the other hand.

KALH XRONIA !