Talk:Arvanites

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Greece; If you would like to join us, please visit the project page; if you have any questions, please consult the FAQ.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
Additional information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked

This is a controversial topic, which may be under dispute. Please read this talk page and discuss substantial changes here before making them. Make sure you supply full citations when adding information to highly controversial articles.

Editors who are interested in improving this article are encouraged to read this talk page discussion and the previous discussion at the Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5.

This discussion page may contain trolling. Before you post any reply, consider how you might minimize the effects of trollish comments. Simply ignoring certain comments may be the best option. If you must respond, a temperate response is always best, whether trolling is suspected or not.

Contents 1 Women 2 Arvanites/Albanians in Athens 3 Pelasgians 4 "Arv."/"Alb", and exactness of quotes 5 category removal

[edit] Women

If you want to remove the phrase "the only female member of Filiki Etairia" go ahead and remove it - I don't really care about it (btw she is either not listed or I couldn't find her in the member list by Βαλέριος Μέξας). Melina (and Spyridon and Stamatis Merkouris) were Arvanites but I wont insert them. talk to +MATIA 15:48, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Arvanites/Albanians in Athens

Macrakis I have a Greek language-related source which states that Arvanites inhabited around the city of Athens, which explains the language of Athens, Pireus, Megara etc was isolated and developed into a separate dialect called "Old Athenian". There's even a map about it. Are you sure your source doesn't refer to Arvanite and Greek migrations to Athens after it became the capital of the Greek Kingdom? Or maybe is not being very specific about the borders of Athens? Miskin 18:02, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

The footnoted sentence says "until the "late 19th century", so, yes, this is after Athens became capital. As for whether the area is within "the borders of Athens", are you saying that Plaka was not within Athens?

Another source: Eyre Evans Crowe, The Greek and the Turk; or, Powers and prospects in the Levant, 1853: "The cultivators of the plain live at the foot of the Acropolis, occupying what is called the Albanian quarter..." (p. 99)

Poulton (got to chase down the ref) also claims that there was an Albanian-language law court in the Plaka in the early 20th century. But this needs checking. --Macrakis 19:32, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

As for the period before the War of Independence, Hobhouse, writing in 1810, says:

The number of houses in Ahtens is supposed to be between twelve and thirteen hundred; of which about four hundred are inhabited by the Turks, the remainder by the Greeks and Albanians, the latter of whom occupy above three hundred houses.

quoted in John Freely, Strolling through Athens, p. 247

Seems pretty clear. --Macrakis 20:02, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

If Plaka became an Arvanite district after independence then what on earth was/is the Anafiotika? Concerning the Ottoman period, I have another source which provides unarguably a more accurate account: "Population of Attica: 22,000, Greeks and Turks in the city, Albanians in the villages. " (History of the Greek revolution, Thomas Gordon 1832). Miskin 00:17, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Why do you think it is indisputable (I assume that's what you mean by "unarguable") that it is a "more accurate account" than the three other accounts I've cited? --Macrakis 19:53, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Poulton is probably right, I just read somewhere else that certain laws were applied in order to protect Arvanitika in that district. Miskin 00:19, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

The distinction between Greeks and Arvanites is not clear, while the Turkish population sometime is referred to the Arvanites which had Muslim religion. Dodona

You should put the photo of Aristidh Kola for his academic work particularly "Arvanitas and origin of Greeks" between distinguished Arvanites. Dodona

Can't find a public domain image of him.--Domitius 18:32, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

I can not find a proper one either, may be somebody could help or you may ask the permission of Arvanitas league of Greece or his honorable family kindly for a photo of him. Dodona

Either that or the issue could be dropped altogether, he's not that important.--Domitius 18:55, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Does the others share the same view with you?! Dodona

Well, if you want a photo, you're welcome to go and get one. Would be the first productive contribution you made to this article in all these weeks. Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:01, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for the honor, please find a photo of him in the link www.traboini.com/foto/index.html Dodona

[edit] Pelasgians

I don't like the way the article presents these theories on the Pelasgians, it presents them as if it's because of their plausibility. It's sourced that the only reason they are propagating such theories is to as to claim indigenous status, so it's ultimately only for a political purpose.--Domitius 19:10, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

A procedural question: Since Macedonian Slavs are officially seen as a different ethnic group to Bulgarians, and they are even considered to speak a separate language to Bulgarian, then how come it has to be stated here that Arvanitika is a dialect of Albanian? In post WW2 sources Slavophones of Macedonia and their language were considered Bulgarian speaking "Western Bulgarian", just like Arvanitika used to be referred as Tosk Albanian. The only difference between the two is that the Macedonian Slavs consider themselves distinct while the Arvanites consider themselves Greek. So how come the latter's personal self-identification is ignored in wikipedia? Miskin 13:54, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh please. Not again. Man, read the old discussions. We do what the literature does, period. The Mac./Bul. situation is not the same as the Arv./Alb. situation, because that's how the literature treats it. End of discussion. Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:13, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

I know. I was asking out of personal interest why English literature treats it like that, because Arvanite literature certainly does not. This is a question Arvanite editors in the Greek wikipedia had, and I didn't know what to say. Miskin 15:01, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Ah, okay. Well, the main factor is the near-total absence of ausbau status of Arvanitika with respect to Albanian. There is, despite loud assertions on Wikipedia, apparently very little systematic awareness of linguistic separateness of Arv. among Arvanites in the real world (I, at least, have never yet seen an Arvanite author outside Wikipedia actually claim their language was distinct); and, more importantly, there is no attempt in actual practice to treat it as distinct. Macedonian has developed its own standard form, Arvanitika hasn't. As a friend explained to me, even the few attempts at Arvanitic writing apparently consist largely in just writing Standard Albanian with Greek letters; they do not even attempt to form their own written language on the basis of their local dialects. Fut.Perf. ☼ 15:17, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

The absence of a standardised form and literary work makes sense. Thanks Lucas. Miskin 15:36, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

That said, you'd be hard-pressed to find an Arvanite who would accept Albanian as the name of the language, linguistic classification notwithstanding. ·ΚέκρωΨ· 15:43, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Arvanitika wish it or not is not distinct from Albanian is just a dialect understandable very well from a Gege Albanian , is just that it is in original form and not allowed to be developed . Dodona

Why you deny the pellasgian origin of Arvanites , even not mention at all in the article? Dodona

Because it is an unscientific politically motivated theory that no one takes seriously.--Domitius 21:10, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

“unscientific politically motivated” and “no one takes seriously” I understand you very well it is just that does not interest you, even if it is true you will ignore, but it will come back again and again more strongly because it is a message from our grandfathers not just scientific evidence . Dodona

You say "even if it is true you will ignore" - no, if it wasn't an unscientific politically motivated fringe theory, then it would be in the article. The reason it is not is because it's unreferenced from reliable sources written by people who actually know what they're talking about, hardly surprising considering the fact that we don't know enough about the Pelasgians to ascertain such a connection. It's nationalist speculation, nothing more...--Domitius 21:27, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Why you judge then that it is nationalist idea, who is interested now day for a connection between Greek and Albanians , was Aristidh Kola nationalist and more.. Are you Arvanitas ? Why the Arvanitas tried to build a join state continuously ?The evidence that exist I am certain that it is well known here but being ignored. Dodona

The only possible connection between Greeks and Albanians is that they are both Indo-European-speaking peoples (likely unlike the Pelasgians, which throws the theory out of the window). History cannot be reconstructed based on what is convenient politically (this is the mistake Macedonian Slavs make). There is no proof for these theories, it is not supported by any reliable sources, why can't you understand that? You've also misunderstood what exactly Kollias's theory was - most significantly he did not say that the Arvanites are Albanians (nor did he ever declare as one). His Pelasgian theory had one purpose: to "prove" that the Arvanites are indigenous to Greece and that arvanitika is the language of the "old Greeks". If you understood his theory, you'd be vehemently rejecting it as Greek nationalism.--Domitius 21:52, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Read Dhimiter Pilika an albanian ortodox who wrote “Pellasget origjina jone e mohuar “(pellasgic our ignored origin) in Albanian , is a life long academic work on the subject. I understood Kola very well he certainly did know his Albanian origin and he had many Albanian friends abroad like the one who did his photo referred above, sorry but you know nothing about Kola , he played a substantial role during the war in Kosova clarifying Greeks that was not a religion war. Dodona

Dodona, I understand this. And he also had an ulterior political purpose though, didn't he? You said so yourself, to explain to Greeks that the Kosovo War wasn't a religious war.--Domitius 22:15, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

I do not believe that Kolia was politically motivated please do not play with facts, either was Kola theory of indigenous origin of Arvanites , Kola was academic and everything he wrote is based on academic prove and evidence his books are recently republished as bests seller in Greece.. His opinions during Kosova war were of an intellectual who respect his identity and origin seeing that s.th very wrong is going on…. Dimiter Pilika writes on “ Pellasget origjina jone e mohuar “ again based on extensive academic references a work he dedicated more then 20 years of his life. So you see that they are many evidences, and what is the substrate after your opinion for political purpose behind all this. Dodona

Pilika gets a dozen or so google hits, all from nationalist web forums. He's a nobody in scholarship. Dodona, if you have any concrete data to be added to the article based on reliable scholarly sources, then bring them on. If not, just go away and stop wasting our time. Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:25, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Prof.Dhimiter Pilika the “nobody in your opinion” was Chief of Cathedra of Albanology University of Prague, this is just for clarification, although you are being rude. See at www.tanmarket.com/php/modules.php?name=News&file=print&sid=1240 still in Albanian language although…...Dodona

Where does it say that? I thought it just says that he has a doctorate in history and the Albanian language from Prague Uni and taught a few seminars there.--Domitius 18:09, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

No it says: “Themelon dhe drejton "Seminarin shqiptar", qender e nderuar studimesh dhe kerkimesh albanologjike pranл Universitetit te Karlit ne Prage, ku ngarkohet si profesor me ligjerimin e mbare disiplinave albanistike “ and “Bretkosat e ugarit se з’vrane drene e malit”.Dodona

Les Balkans, l'Egée et l'Asie Mineure étaient peuplés, avant l'arrivée des Grecs au VIIIe s, de Pélasges (Cariens, Lyciens, Troyens, Phrygiens, Lydiens, Thraces, Illyriens, etc.) dont les Albanais sont les seuls descendants actuels. Mathieu Aref dans ses deux livres ("Albanie -histoire et langue-..." Paris 2003 et "Grèce -mycéniens = Pélasges-..." Paris 2004).Dodona

[edit] "Arv."/"Alb", and exactness of quotes

Re. this exchange [1] - I obviously agree with Macrakis that the the distinction between "Alb." and "Arv." didn't exist back then (and I'm slightly amused that Matia seems to be still insisting on it - hey everybody, isn't it nice we are all again reunited here in the same dicussion? Where's Albanau when you need him? ;-)) -- But anyway, I don't mind having it say "Arv." in our editorial text there. Especially because the two terms mean the same in that period. We're free as editors to choose whichever term fits better in the context of our article, and arguably "Arv." fits the bill there. As long as we leave the actual quotes intact. And the very fact that we juxtapose our editorial "Arv." usage with the "Alb." usage in the source, without further commentary, very neatly illustrates exactly that the terms were identical. Which is correct. Fut.Perf. ☼ 16:13, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

And I obviously disagree with Macrakis. The point however is that the Alb/Arv is dealt in other parts of the articles. Greek people who are from Mikra Asia can't be called Turks, Cretans won't be called Saracens, and the confusing of Arvanites with Albanians (because of the language) is a matter that needs (and already has plenty) citations by authors who dealt specificaly with the subject and not just with travelers. Of course the Arvanites and the Albanians have similarities (I called them cousins in past talk pages - they could have been brothers but they were not), yet by 1821 Arvanites from Suli, Euboea, Hydra, Spetses and others were identifying themselves as Greeks. You may check the lives of Botsaraioi, Tzavelaioi, Krieziotis, Miaoulis, Bouboulina etc. Biris 1966 about the city of Athens, deals exactly with those few Athenians of Arvanitic inheritance (and we know Biris serious work about Arvanites, Roma people, and other, unrelated yet very good, works about architecture - hell his book about Athens was considered so good that the city of Athens funded its first publication). talk to +MATIA 06:30, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] category removal

Re. this removal of the Category:Ethnic groups in Greece ([2]): I'd rather like to revert that and get the category back in. While it's generally true that supercategories shouldn't be included when a more specific subcategory is already present, I think inclusion of both makes very good sense here. Category:Greek people by ethnic or national origin is predominantly for articles about individual people, and so is its subcategory Category:Arvanites - it focus is on individual biographies and it only includes the main article Arvanites additionally. The category Ethnic groups in Greece, on the other hand, is for articles about the groups as such, and it conveniently places the Arvanites article side by side with Aromanians, Karamanlides, Vlachs etc. Fut.Perf. ☼ 22:48, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Go ahead (those categories need a bit of cleaning/sorting up though). 85.73.64.144 23:04, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. Agree that the categorisation scheme could be streamlined a bit. Fut.Perf. ☼ 23:07, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

The problem lies in the Greeks' distinct perception of ethnicity, which coincides with nationality almost entirely. The exception would be those Greeks of much more recent immigrant origins. The Arvanites and Vlachs certainly do not consider themselves any less ethnically Greek than other Greeks. ·ΚέκρωΨ· 01:26, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

The category implies no such thing. It doesn't say how Greek they are. Arvanites, Vlachs, Karamanlides etc. are certainly groups that in some way stand out within the population and should be categorised together. What cover term would you use to describe what these groups are? In English, "ethnic" is exactly what describes it, I for one can see nothing more appropriate. And of course the English meaning of the term is what counts, this being the English Wikipedia. Fut.Perf. ☼ 06:50, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

The Maniots and Cretans also stand out. Are they separate ethnic groups too? ·ΚέκρωΨ· 19:41, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Read the literature and you might find out. Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:51, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Νευράκια, νευράκια; ·ΚέκρωΨ· 20:04, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Οχι ρε, φιλικά μιλάμε. Fut.Perf. ☼ 20:22, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Πράγματι όμως, οι Αρβανιτόβλαχοι δεν ανήκουν στην ίδια κατηγορία με τους Εβραίους ή τους Αρμένιους ας πούμε, που επίσης κατοικούν εδώ και αιώνες στον ελλαδικό χώρο. ·ΚέκρωΨ· 20:26, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

(un-indenting) - Nice semantics problem. I'd agree that they "don't belong in the same category", in terms of real-world semantics. But that doesn't necessarily mean they "don't belong in the same category", in terms of Wiki organisation. Not every fine nuance of real-world categorisations can be mirrored in its own scheme of Wiki cats, which are by necessity less fine-grained than our concepts in real life. Fut.Perf. ☼ 20:57, 23 March 2007 (UTC)