Talk:Arvanites/Archive 8

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

→

Archive 12

George Gordon, Lord Byron and the Arnaouts

"It is to be observed that the Arnaout is not a 'written' language; the words of this song, therefore, as well as the one which follow, are spelt according to their pronunciation. They are copied by one who speaks and understands the dialect perfectly, and who is a native of Athens.

Ndë sevda tënde u lavosa,

Vetëmë u prëvëlofsha.

Ah vaizëzo më prëvëlofshe,

Zëmërënë ma lavose.

U të thashë roba s'dua,

Sitë e vetullatë dua.

Roba 'ς την οργή u s'i dua,

Kurmëthinë vetë dua.

Kurmëthë dua çë vëljen

Robatë ziarmi t'i dielnjë.

U t' agapisa vaizëzo me zëmërën të haptë

E ti më bëre bishtë si një dendroj i thatë.

U të vura dorënë [te] gjiri, çë çova, çël' të mora,

U dorënë talti[?] holnja u edhe kaimonë mora." (p.73) [1]

I took the liberty of transcripting the song in the Albanian alphabet. Guildenrich (talk) 09:39, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Christoforides

φάρα: 3) φυλή, γένος. Christoforides' Dictionary: [2] Comp. for example the Albanian 'farë e fis' kith and kin. Guildenrich (talk) 09:39, 12 September 2009 (UTC) 22:48, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

ΛΕΞΙΚΟΝ ΤΗΣ ΙΤΑΛΙΚΗΣ ΓΛΩΣΣΗΣ ΣΥΝΤΕΘΕΝ ΠΑΡΑ ΣΠΥΡΙΔΩΝΟΣ ΒΛΑΝΤΗ.

At the beginning of the 19th century, Albania and Arvanitia were interchangeable terms; for example, in a Greek Dictionary of the Italian language:

ΛΕΞΙΚΟΝ ΤΗΣ ΙΤΑΛΙΚΗΣ ΓΛΩΣΣΗΣ ΣΥΝΤΕΘΕΝ ΠΑΡΑ ΣΠΥΡΙΔΩΝΟΣ ΒΛΑΝΤΗ. Καὶ παρ' αὐτοῦ πλουτισθὲν τῆ προσθήκῃ περίπου δεκακισχιλίων Λέξεων. ΕΚΔΟΣΙΣ ΤΕΤΑΡΤΗ. ΕΝ ΒΕΝΕΤΙᾼ. ΠΑΡΑ ΝΙΚΟΛΑῼ ΓΛΥΚΕΙ Τῼ ΕΞ ΙΩΑΝΝΙΝΩΝ· 1819

ΛΕΞΙΚΟΝ ΓΕΩΓΡΑΦΙΚΟΝ ΙΤΑΛΙΚΟ ΓΡΑΙΚΙΚΟΝ. σελ. 5

Albania: Ἐπαρ. τῆς Εὐρωπ. Τουρκίας. Ἀλβανία, κοιν. Ἀρβανιτία. [[3]] Guildenrich (talk) 01:00, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

The Albanians -- the so-called Albanites -- in XVth century Morea

Ἔτι δὲ καὶ τὸ κάκιστον καὶ ἀφελέστατον γένος τῶν Ἀλβανιτῶν, καιροῦ λαβόμενον τῆς ὑπολήψεως καὶ ἁρπακτικῆς αὐτῶν γνώμης ἁρμοδίου, τί οὐκ ἔπραξαν ᾒ τί οὐκ εἰργάσαντο κακόν; Ἀπιστοῦντες γὰρ δὶς τοῦ σαββάτου, ἀπὸ τὸν ἕνα τῶν αὐθεντῶν εἰς τὸν ἄλλον ἀπήρχοντο· καὶ κάστρα, ὡς ἡ ἐκείνων γλῶσσα, εἰς κεφαλατίκια ἀπῄτουν, εἰ δ' οὖν, εἰς τὸν ἄλλον ἀπήρχοντο καὶ οἱ ἄλλοι πρὸς τὸν ἕτερον τῶν δεσποτῶν ὁμοίως. Διὰ μέσου οὖν, εἴ τι ἆρα καὶ εὕρισκον τῶν ἀθλίων τάχα Ῥωμαίων, ἀλλὰ δὴ καὶ τῶν Ἀλβανιτῶν καὶ συγγενῶν πολλάκις καὶ οἰκείων αὐτῶν, πάντα διηρπάζοντο καὶ ἠφάνιζον. Ἐγένοντο δὲ τοιαῦτα καὶ τοσαῦτα, ὅτι τὶς ἀξίως αὐτὰ θρηνήσειεν; (ΟΙΚΤΡΟΣ ΓΕΩΡΓΙΟΣ ΣΦΡΑΝΤΖΗΣ)

Translation: Then the base and most useless race of the Albanians took advantage of the present situation, which was suitable to their reputation and thievish disposition. What did they neglect to do, what crime did they not commit? For they broke faith twice on the same Sabbath and were always deserting one lord for the other. They demanded, in their own tongue, castles for their estates; if they were denied by one lord they would run to the other despot, while the rest would then approach the first despot in a similar way. In the meantime, if they found anything belonging to the unfortunate Romans [Greeks] and even to the Albanians, to their relatives and dependents, they would plunder and destroy it. Who could provide an adequate lamentation over such great misfortunes?

The Late Medieval Balkans: A Critical Survey from the Late Twelvth Century to the Ottoman Conquest; by John. V. A. Fine, Jr. [[4]]

What's the meaning with all these stuff here? I wonder why dont you put them in wikisource...Alexikoua (talk) 21:57, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

It's nice that he put them here, no one can "play blind" if they are mentioned.--Kreshnik25 (talk) 22:08, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

This is the talk page for duhhh... discussing improvements to the Arvanites article. Welcome to the discussion. Guildenrich 23:17, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Nice poet views but I dont see any arguments.Alexikoua (talk) 15:11, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

I'll let you have the last word! Guildenrich (talk) 12:07, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Arvanites self-identify as what???

"Arvanites self-identify as Greeks". That's what the first paragraph says. I suggest that sentence is removed.

Please look at this source http://www.mlahanas.de/Greece/History/Arvanites.html the following paragraph

"There is some disagreement to what extent the term "Arvanites" legitimately also includes the small remaining Christian Albanophone population groups in Northwest Greece (Epirus). Unlike the southern Arvanites, these speakers are reported to use the name Shqiptarë both for themselves and for Albanian nationals (Banfi 1996). Kollias (1983) reports that some Arvanites of the northwestern Greek region of Epirus traditionally also use the word Shqiptár (Σ̈κ̇ιπτάρ) to identify themselves, without claiming an Albanian national consciousness. The word Shqiptár is used as well in a few villages of Thrace, where Arvanites migrated from the mountains of Pindos during the 19th century. On the other hand, this word is totally unknown among the main body of the Arvanites in southern Greece. Moraitis (2002) reports that some Arvanites of Epirus use the term Shqiptar in Arvanitika and Arvanitis in Greek. Botsi (2003: 21) reports that the term "Arvanites" in its narrow sense includes only the populations of the compact Arvanitic settlement areas in southern Greece, according to the self-identification of those groups. The Ethnologue ([5]) identifies the present-day Albanian/Arvanitic dialects of Northwestern Greece (in Epirus and Lechovo) with those of the Chams. They are therefore classified linguistically together with standard Tosk Albanian, as opposed to "Arvanitika Albanian proper" (i.e. southern Greek Arvanitic). Nevertheless it reports that in Greek the Epirus varieties are also often subsumed under "Arvanitika" in a wider sense. It puts the estimated number of Epirus Albanophones at 10,000. "Arvanitic proper" ([6]) is said to include the outlying dialects spoken in Thrace. Other sources (e.g. GHM 1995) subsume the Epirote Albanophones under the term Arvanites, although they note the different linguistic self-designation. According to the Euromosaic (1996) report, the designation Chams is today rejected by the group."

Saying that "arvanites self-identify as greeks" is to say the least controversial and the same Botsi is misquoted.user:sulmues--Sulmues 16:50, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

There is also the lead (same source): "Arvanites are predominantly Greek Orthodox Christians and identify themselves ethnically and nationally as Greeks."Alexikoua (talk) 17:48, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

I don't think we are on the same page. Generalizing that "Arvanites identify with Greeks" does not conform with the reference that I just added. See bolded letters. The Sourthern Epirus Arvanites clearly identify themselves as Albanians.user:sulmues (talk)--Sulmues 19:24, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Even if they do self-identify as Shqiptarë in their own language, that, in itself, does not necessarily imply an Albanian national identity.--Ptolion (talk) 20:28, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

For everyone who has the slightest knowledge about the modern Greek political history, now and of the past, Arvanites traditionally were among the most patriotic, even Greek-nationalistic elements of the Greek state right from the start of its existence. Notoriously politically motivated and closely related with extremely right political entities (such as royalist or junta) with their ultra nationalistic agendas. Often well beyond most of their other Greek co-citizens, and thus routinely used by such political entities traditionally in key positions in army, police and the rest state mechanisms to enforce their policies. For everyone who thinks it odd, a look at the voting results of the last century in the main Arvanites' areas of Attica (western & eastern), Korinth and Argolida I believe will be enough illuminating of their self identity. They are traditionally among the most nationalistic Greeks; everyone in Greece knows that, and the more leftist of them are only rightist, something that has caused an open hostility against them from the part of the traditionally anti-nationalistic left or even centrist parties in the past. --Factuarius (talk) 15:08, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Orthodox Christianity is a Religion

Adding the ethnicity in front of the words "Orthodox Christianity" does not deliver a subset of the religion. It only identifies the language that the services are held in. The Orthodox Christians of Albania, Armenians, Bulgaria, Ethiopia, FYRoM, Greece, Hungary, India, Korea, Romania, Russia, Serbia and the rest of the world are all Orthodox Christians and all have roots in the New Testament which was originally written in the Greek language. Personally I do not care what language the services are conducted in. Orthodox Christianity is Orthodox Christianity and that is all that matters. Nipsonanomhmata 18:03, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Can there be a more ambiguous dis-ambiguation

I have never read a more ambiguous dis-ambiguation. Although I am sure that I will in future. For starters there is no such country as "Southern Greece". If you would like to refer to the southern part of Greece, for example the Peloponnese, then call it "southern Greece". Don't start inventing country names. Greece is already surrounded by pseudo-countries full of various ethnic groups that genuinely have no idea where they have come from and spend all their time stealing Greek history to substitute as their own. Nipsonanomhmata 18:05, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

ok I agree. Disambiguation not required. Nipsonanomhmata 19:03, 6 March 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nipsonanomhmata (talk • contribs)

Albanian did not exist before Arvanitika

Arvanites and Arvanitika existed before Albanians and Albanian. Do not attempt to pass-off the word Albanian as the ancient source of Arvanitika. Unless ofcourse you can find a single worthwhile scholarly resource to say otherwise. That excludes all Albanian sponsored sources. Nipsonanomhmata 18:16, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

You seem to confuse the question of whether the words "Arvanites" and "Alvani" existed, with the question of whether the groups and languages denoted by them existed. As to the first issue, in Greek at least, the two variants (with -l- and -r-) are both attested from pretty early on, and both meant precisely the same thing until the 20th century. As to the second, every academic source ever written on the topic agrees that today's Arvanites in Greece descended from settlers who came from what is today Albania and were ethnically and linguistically precisely as Albanian as their contemporary fellow countrymen who stayed behind, and who, at that time, may already be called "Albanians" in modern terminology. Please read at least a few of the works cited in the article before you make big claims here. Fut.Perf. ☼ 18:36, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Then you should know that the words were used to describe the people. They were not used to identify them as ethnically distinct since they were a hotch-potch of ethnically diverse tribes in ancient times whose only common link was the Greek language and local Arvanite talk (they couldn't even write it). Nipsonanomhmata 18:59, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Once more: read the literature. Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:01, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

From what "is today Albania" and what used to be Ottoman-occupied north-western Greece and called Epirus. The word Albania is unimportant. The region was part of Byzantine Greece and it was a part of ancient Greece. It doesn't matter that it is called "Albania" today. What matters is what it was when they migrated from there. The reason they migrated from there with such ease was because the Orthodox Church and the Greek language made it easy for them. Nipsonanomhmata 19:08, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Why did you delete Gjirokaster from the regions? There are many Greek Arvanites in the Gjirokaster region. That's a fact. Are you denying it? Nipsonanomhmata 19:13, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Source? All the modern literature I've seen uses "Arvanites" to refer exclusively either to all Albanophones of Greece, or more specifically only those in the south of Greece. I've never seen it used to include people in modern Albania. Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:16, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

In fact, Gjirokaster is derived from the Greek name Argyrokastro ("silver castle"). It's part of what is called Albania today. The Greek Arvanites who live there consider themselves to be Greek-Arvanites. The people of Greece consider them to be Greek-Arvanites too. I will have to do some research to come up with a scholarly reference for you. Nipsonanomhmata 19:22, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

[Moving the text tabs to the left to save space] Nipsonanomhmata 19:51, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

I've found you a wingdinger of a reference. This book cost me a small fortune and it's been sitting in my library doing not very much for years.

It's called "Brigands with a cause, Brigandage and Irredentism in Modern Greece 1821-1912" by John S. Koliopoulos published by Clarendon Press, Oxford,in 1987.

What is particularly notable is how the Albanians are referred to and how the Greeks are referred to in the region of what is today called Gjirokaster (and used to be called Argyrokastro). This particular page is focussed on the leading despot personality of the time "Ali Pasha". Ofcourse today "Albania" is considered to be a multi-ethnic, multi-religions country.

p39 Chapter 3 - Military Enterprises 1821-1828

"Nor did the Albanian despot attempt to replace Christian Armatoles with Muslim Albanians, although many loyal Albanians were appointed in the security system; because as has been pointed out, his fundamental objective in domestic affairs was 'to establish and maintain a close, working alliance of Christian Greeks and Muslim Albanians to neutralize the centuries-old entrenched authority of the purely Turkish element' in the region."

There you have it. In this reference the Albanians are Muslims. There are only two main ethnic groups categorised by this scholar: Albanian Muslims (who were Ottoman Turks) and Greek Christians (who comprised an array of Hellenes or Greek-speaking peoples.

In today's Albania this looks like an over-simplification. But it wasn't an oversimplification when Ali Pasha was the ruling despot. Nipsonanomhmata 19:51, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

And where in all that does it say that any of these groups in Gjirokaster are or were specifically "Arvanites"? Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:55, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

By default any Greek Christians in the region were locals and Arvanites were grouped in. Am still reading the reference for more useful tidbits. Meanwhile, I should also say that the Muslim Albanian population also comprised Greek Christian converts. They didn't have much choice in the conversion. If they could not afford to pay their taxes to Ottomans. Christians were by default beheaded (Muslims were not). So to save their heads they became Muslims. Hence the name "beheading tax". Nipsonanomhmata 20:17, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Interestingly enough I just did a search for "Arvanites Gjirokaster" without the quotation marks on Google. Over "40,000" results appeared (not that the number means very much). On the first page there are some Albanian references including one that is not complimentary to Arvanites. Clearly the Albania of today acknowledges that there is an Arvanite population in Gjirokaster. But am still reading for a scholarly reference for you. Nipsonanomhmata 20:25, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

The Arvanites of the Gjirokaster Region

[This section continues from the above discussion concerning the Arvanites of Gjirokaster aka Northern Epirus]

ok. I've found a reference but I don't have access to the text. The reference is "Greek Minority in Albania" by Theofanis Malkidis.

The description that I have found on Google is "This study looks into the social position of the Arvanites, the Albanian-speaking Greeks." Their population is concentrated in the southern part of Albania in a region called Gjirokaster (to "Albania") and Northern Epirus to Greece. The region is named after what was originalled called Argyrokastro which was ruled by the despot Ali Pasha. Just the description of the reference is notable enough to add Gjirokaster to the regions that have concentrated Arvanite populations. Is there a way of looking up the text of this book on WP? Nipsonanomhmata 20:59, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

I get access to the Malkidis book on scribd.com [5]. I cannot verify that he calls any inhabitants of Gjirokaster "Arvanites" though. Also, the sentence you quote, "This study looks into the social position of the Arvanites, the Albanian-speaking Greeks" seems to be from a different context, the description of the article by Bintliff ("The ethnoarchaeology of a 'passive' ethnicity"), which is also mirrored on scribd. It deals only with the Arvanites of central Greece [6]. I'm still not seeing any source referring to any population group in Argyrokastron as "Arvanites". Fut.Perf. ☼ 21:33, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

And yet Scribd.com summarises the book as:

"The ethnoarchaeology of a 'passive' ethnicity: The Arvanites of ...This study looks into the social position of the Arvanites, Albanian speaking Greek's who live dispersed around the country and particularly their passive ... www.scribd.com" Nipsonanomhmata 22:07, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

You must be misreading something. That is not the description of the Malkidis book, but of the Bintliff article (which happens to be already cited in the article). It definitely doesn't deal with Northern Epirus. Fut.Perf. ☼ 22:11, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

According to some definitions (i.e. almost every Greek dictionary metions it), Arvanitis can be a synonym of Alvanos. That said the chances are when you find reference to "Arvanites of Argyrokastron" in older texts, it probably refers to ethnic Albanians whereas whereas "Arvanites of Elefsina" probably refers to the Arvanites this article is about.--Ptolion (talk) 21:44, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

These aren't Cham Albanians. These are Arvanites. Nipsonanomhmata 22:09, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Who on earth was speaking of Cham Albanians? You have entirely missed Ptolion's point. Fut.Perf. ☼ 22:11, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

I was not addressing Ptolion. I was making a comment to you. btw why don't you link those "attrition" references to the sentence in the first paragraph. Do you have some kind of immunity to referencing sentences. Or is it only foot-soldiers that do the work? Nipsonanomhmata (talk) 01:04, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Now I want your opinion on the following. Currently the section called "Arvanites of Epirus" re-directs to "Cham Albanians". Do you consider that to be acceptable? Now before you start having a go at me (I know that is something that you are good at) I know that section is not this section. I just want your opinion on that redirect if it isn't too much trouble? Nipsonanomhmata (talk) 01:16, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Ditto with the redirect on "Arvanites of thrace" (noting that the "t" should be a big "T) and which directs to almost identical content about "Cham Albanians". What's your opinion on that redirect? Nipsonanomhmata (talk) 01:30, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Arvanites of Epirus redirects to Cham Albanians: seems unobjectionable to me, because that article is indeed where those people, whoever they are, are treated.

Arvanites of thrace: redirects to Albanian-speakers of Western Thrace. I see that article for the first time now. If you want to discuss its merits, this page isn't the best place to do so.

BTW, do I take your silence regarding the links I asked about above as an acknowledgment that you were indeed wrong? Fut.Perf. ☼ 06:24, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

My silence is related to the extensive time it takes to find a reference that might be acceptable to you. I am not wrong. But until I find a reference that proves otherwise you can think what you like. You've already proved to me that you're not objective in any of the areas that we've clashed and we appear to clash on everything. Nipsonanomhmata (talk) 07:50, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

I asked you to provide one specific link (in the section below, actually), which shouldn't be difficult to paste here. Just to see if you were simply misreading something, or making things up. Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:25, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Unacceptable edits

The latest sequence of edits by Nipsonanonhmata [7] is unacceptable and will be reverted:

• "Arvanites in Gjirokaster": see above, still no valid source
• removal of passage about language shift: the references about language shift and attrition are Sasse (1985, 1991), Trudgill/Tzavaras (1977), Tsitsipis (1981, 1983, 1995, 1998) and many others.
• removal of "Albanian settlers": this is heavily sourced; every academic treatment of the settlement history calls the medieval settlers Albanians; your WP:OR speculations about why you find that appellation inappropriate carries no weight. This was discussed extensively several years ago.
• "manifold", not "manyfold", is in fact the correct English spelling.

Fut.Perf. ☼ 21:42, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

I have provided a valid source reference for the Arvanites in Gjirokaster. Why are you doing this? Nipsonanomhmata 21:57, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

You have provided no reference concerning attrition. Nipsonanomhmata 21:57, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

How can they be Albanian settlers when Arvanites are considered to be Greek? Nipsonanomhmata 21:57, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Strange way to spell manyfold but I'll let you have that one. But none of the above reversions are acceptable to me. Nipsonanomhmata 22:00, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

• You have provided no valid reference for "Arvanites in Gjirokaster". The sentence you quoted isn't from where you claimed it was, isn't about what you claimed it was about, and the book you mentioned doesn't say what you claimed it says.

• I just gave you seven reliable sources describing language shift and language attrition. Go to a library and read them, before you go on arguing. I did.
• The world doesn't care about what you think about the impossibility of 15th century "Albanian settlers" later becoming Greeks. That's what the literature says. All of it. Go to a library and read at least some part of it.

Fut.Perf. ☼ 22:03, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Oh yes it is. And I didn't claim anything. I just cut and paste it straight off the Google summary. Nipsonanomhmata (talk) 22:26, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Please provide a link to the exact Google page you were seeing, that made you think the sentence you cited referred to the Malkidis book. It might have been an honest mistake on your part; however, I wonder if that page really so conveniently left out the phrase "of Central Greece", which follows the phrase "a 'passive' ethnicity: The Arvanites ..." in the title you quoted. Which, to repeat, is the title of the Bintliff paper. How could you think a phrase that is the literal title of a paper by a different author could be meant to be the description of that book of yours? BTW, did I mention it, the Malkidis book is also not a reliable source anyway. Fut.Perf. ☼ 07:36, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

What I think is that you are touting Ottomans as Albanians. The Arvanites are Greeks. The Arvanites in Gjirokaster are Greeks and Orthodox Christians and despite having already proved that they exist you chose to ignore me. No wonder this WP article was downgraded. Nipsonanomhmata (talk) 22:28, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Now that I know I have to ask Fut Perf before I do anything. Is it ok with you if I spell Boeotia correctly in this section? Nipsonanomhmata (talk) 01:20, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Whatabout Arbanite minority in Albanian..:) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.107.212.215 (talk) 14:49, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

19th cent demographics estimates

I don't see a problem with citing a (serious academic) 19th-century source as a ref for a 19th-century population estimate. We just need the precise original reference to the supposed von Hahn source, which the latest insertions were lacking. Anybody has the exact info? Fut.Perf. ☼ 21:14, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

BTW, Hahn is apparently cited in very much the same way in modern academic literature, e.g. this very relevant chapter on the linguistic situation of Greece. Fut.Perf. ☼ 21:19, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

What bothers me is that not a single verifiable citation has been provided. All we have to go on is the say-so of Albanian nationalist SPAs. Athenean (talk) 21:25, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Now I see ZjarriRrethues is citing the great Chekrezi. This is rapidly turning into a circus. Athenean (talk) 21:26, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Anything wrong with Chekrezi quoting Hahn? Hahn is the source, Chekrezi is just quoting him and I don't see anything wrong in that.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 21:29, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Chekrezi is utter drivel. We have no reason to believe anything he says. He could be making it up for all we know, same way he makes up everything else. If Hahn actually said something like that, it shouldn't be hard to find the real thing. If Chekrezi is all we have to go on, I think the matter is already resolved. Athenean (talk) 21:34, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

I see no need to go through the Chekrezi book second-hand. We can quote Hahn directly, if we finally get a page number that we can verify (the full text of Hahn 1854 is online on scribd.com), and use the Hering chapter in the de Gruyter Contact Linguistics handbook I linked to as a modern secondary-source backup if necessary; except that I haven't been able to see the full page of that yet and only got a relevant snippet from Google so far. Fut.Perf. ☼ 21:35, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Also added this reference [8]. Vasiliev's work on the history of the Byzantine Empire, a very reliable work.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 21:36, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Please provide proper bibliographic references for such citations, with page numbers and years of publication etc., not just google search links. Fut.Perf. ☼ 21:41, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

[9] already did that in this edit. There's a footnote on that page with the exact page and chapter of Hahn's population estimations.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 21:43, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

@ Alexikoua: Re. this edit, "according to" which author would we have to speak of "Arvanites", not "Albanians" here? Fut.Perf. ☼ 21:50, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Actually, to get the quotation right: Hahn (1854: 14) says that, according to his own estimate, "close to 200,000" Albanians may live in Greece ("Nach beiläufigem Überschlage möchten nahe an 200.000 Albanesen in Griechenland wohnen"). In a footnote to that sentence (n.53, on p.32), he then refers to an estimate by (unnamed) experts, which contains separate figures for various parts of the country, adding up to the 173,000 figure. So, a summary of "between 173,000 and 200,000" seems okay. Fut.Perf. ☼ 21:56, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

If a number of 19th century authors termed the specific community as Albanians this doesn't mean we need to create the same confusion of terminology inside the article. The article deals with a community of Albanian descent, named Arvanites, that was sometime in 19th or 20th century assimilated, naming it Albanian instead of Arvanite during this period creates only confusion to the reader.Alexikoua (talk) 22:07, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Older sources use "Albanians" instead of "Arvanites", but that usage is outdated, and switching back and forth will only serve to confuse our readers. We should stick to "Arvanites". Athenean (talk) 05:15, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

I disagree. In Wikipedia it is explained how the Arvanites are "Albanians that have been Hellenized". Now if you incorrectly say "Arvanites", you have to explain when those Arvanites were hellenized. Was it on 1854? I doubt it. If it was said "Albanians" it should be stated "Albanians". No confusions. --_Sulmues ^{Let's talk} 05:30, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Older sources use "Albanians", because that's what they actually were, at that time. If you disagree, find a source to support your view. One that says explicitly: "it is wrong to call these people Albanians in the 19th century". Nothing less explicit than that will count. Happy searching. Fut.Perf. ☼ 05:45, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

I was disagreeing with calling them Arvanites and I agree with calling them Albanians as the source says. Sorry for not having been more clear. This version is fine with me. --_Sulmues ^{Let's talk} 05:50, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

I understood that; my response was directed at Athenean. Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:23, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Chaning the term to reflect modern beliefs is a typical form of historical anachronism and if it was peer-reviewed by academics it would be removed.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 06:01, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

THE ALBANIAN MIGRATION IN EPIR ?!

I FIND THE MAP IN HISTORY SECTION AS VERY PROVOCATIVE AND NEED TO BE VERIFY ..!!

Maybe we would need to review all the articull too .. Great Greek Encyclopedia

(Volume XIX, page 878)

Forefather of today's Albanian, Pelazgians, have lived in prehistoric periods in the majority of the world, known to such time, conducting a very important civilizations and established acts with extraordinary value. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.107.222.133 (talk) 13:50, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

can olahus tell me why i was reverted (blindly)?

see title87.202.12.122 (talk) 02:02, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

I partially undid the blanket revert by Olahus. The edits, though done by an IP, had nothing wrong with them. The stuff about the Pelasgians, while potentially relevant, is not properly sourced. I am reluctant to re-add Biris though, because I do not consider him reliable and he is moreover redundant for the demographics. Also not sure if we need 4 ethnographic maps. As always, input from intelligent and neutral users is always welcome. Athenean (talk) 04:13, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

POV-pushing and OR by Zjarri

Undid this edit by ZjarriRrethues [10], which he did without any basis in the literature or any discussion whatsoever. Classic OR and quite weasel-ish as well. Arvanites today universally identify as Greeks. I have yet to know of any that don't. Athenean (talk) 00:56, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Well, the Arvanitic League of Greece members don't really feel as Greeks in the absolute sense of the meaning and all those ethnographic researches show that a large number identify as Greeks but not all.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 09:13, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

I am not aware of any study that shows Greek self-identification to be anything less than virtually universal. Fut.Perf. ☼ 09:59, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

[11] A large number identify as Greeks but there are exceptions(Btw nice picture).--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 10:26, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

I don't see anything in that chapter supporting your claim. In fact, I don't see anything in that chapter discussing their ethnic identification at all. Fut.Perf. ☼ 10:36, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Maybe it is an issue of deduction the majority-minority identification in the chapter, but this source(it is snippet but the source can be evaluated) [12] makes a much more clear distinction. This other source states 97% of the Arvanites consider themselves Greek i.e a large part has been assimilated but not all [13] This source puts the number of the those who haven't been assimilated much higher [14]--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 10:53, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

• here I can read only until "Although not all Arvanites are yet one hundred …" – what does it say after that?
• this (quoting Trudgill/Tzavaras 1977) has the 97% number – in sociology, a result of 97% in an opinion survey is, for all practical purposes, tantamount to "virtually all".
• this (also discussing the same Trudgill/Tzavaras study) makes no claim even remotely similar to what you are claiming it says. Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:10, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

1. It says although "Although not all Arvanites are yet one hundred percent linguistically assimilated, the Arvanitika dialects of Albanian are in trouble." The part related to the issue is before that "The Eastern Orthodox religion of these early migrants and the neglect(nay discouragement) of the Albanian language on the part of the Greek state have contributed to the almost total assimilation of the Arvanites into the Greek nation.
2. 97% means that the remaining 3%(4000-6000) have not been assimilated i.e a large part but not all self-identify as Greeks. Including these people as assimilated even if they don't consider themselves part of the dominant ethnic group is a deductive fallacy.
3. The third source states that "the older age-groups realize that Arvanitika is dying out, but hope that their ethnic identity can be preserved none the less." Most older members hope their ethnic identity can be preserved i.e not all Arvanites have been assimilated.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 11:25, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

None of these sources say, or even imply, that any noteworthy number do not identify as Greeks. And your interpretation of the 97% figure is, to put it mildly, naïve. Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:36, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

3% is noteworthy enough I think and in similar cases like the Slavophones in Macedonia of which much less consider themselves part of another ethnic group that fact is stated. Btw this source states that their attitude towards their identity has been changing [15], while this source states that in recent years a movement promoting a distinct Arvanitic identity has developed [16]--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 12:12, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

3% is within the margin of error when it comes to how people responded to a specific question in a questionnaire in a specific sociological study. To draw the conclusion that there is an actual, identifiable subgroup of a different persuasion corresponding to the 3% in the questionnaire returns, is dubious at best (and, as long as it's only you who proposes this, WP:OR anyway). Levels of ethnic dissension among the Macedonian Slavic speakers are doubtless much higher. (After ec:) and the last source you quoted actually confirms the exact opposite of what you claim: it says that "These people have regarded themselves as Greek for at least the last few centuries, and there are presently no significant differences between them and other Greeks", with no speculation about any 3% or however many dissenters. Fut.Perf. ☼ 12:52, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Ok I won't change it back then and I'll just add the Arvanitic minority movement whose effect is unknown.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 13:49, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

A passing remark in a footnote in a festschrift paper on the ethnography of rural cemeteries? Hardly substantial enough, especially since it doesn't even describe how that "movement" manifests itself, and who promotes it. Also, note that it's worded in the passive voice, implying that this is mainly about perception from the outside (but then, by whom?). It isn't just saying that it's unknown how strong such a movement among the Arvanites themselves is; it doesn't actually even mention such a movement at all. Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:05, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

"Well, the Arvanitic League of Greece members don't really feel as Greeks in the absolute sense of the meaning"???? the league fell out of favor with ITS OWN members because some of its 'leaders' didn't 'really feel as greeks' are you joking??87.202.23.90 (talk) 00:27, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Duplicates

Athenean added a duplicate copied from Arvanitika of how some Arvanites don't like being called Albanians so I removed it.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 21:10, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

It's obvious that the assimilation should be mentioned on lead. However, we have a variety of reasons that led to this assimilation.Alexikoua (talk) 21:17, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Do you know what WP:UNDUE is? That Arvanites identify as Greeks is not undue, it is a majority opinion. An overwhelming majority opinion. And it is certainly important enough to be mentioned in the lead. As is perhaps the fact that they resent being called Albanians. Athenean (talk) 21:15, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

I removed a duplicate i.e the sentence was included twice. You moved the cause as undue weight but the lead is a summary of the article so at least the major reasons should be in the lead.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 21:22, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

What the Arvanites identify as is one of the main points of the article and should therefore be summarized in the lead. About half the article deals with identity, so it is essential to the lead. The reasons for this, which are many (orthodox christianity is but one of them) are best discussed in the body text. There are many reasons the Arvanites assimilated. Placing one of them in the lead is indeed WP:UNDUE. Athenean (talk) 21:26, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

And since you brought it up, the fact that the Arvanites resent being called Albanians is also important and interesting, and therefore should also be mentioned in the lead. Athenean (talk) 21:31, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

And what are these many other reasons because since you haven't added any sources to cite that so it's an or deduction.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 21:30, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

You know the many reasons Arvanites assimilated as well as I do. The article has plenty of sources. Read them. Athenean (talk) 21:33, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Re-added the passage, on second thought, if the statement that Arvanites identify as Greeks "as a result of a process of assimilation" is sufficiently important for the lede, so is the fact that they resent being called Albanians, which is moreover well-sourced. Athenean (talk) 04:45, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

POV by Athenean

[17] Athenean without even trying to continue the discussion created and even more pov lead. The lead is a summary of the article not article space where users can add sentences they like that are duplicates from the articles and not summaries of it and apart from that having such a sentence in the lead is pov.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 21:30, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

I think the fact that Arvanites resent being called Albanians is very interesting and warrants mention in the lead. What's POV is you trying to hide that from our readers. Athenean (talk) 21:32, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

The lead is a summary of the article not article space for sentences users like. Implying that I'm trying to hide from the readers something that I haven't even removed from the article is a wp:npa violation.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 21:35, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

You moved the mention that Arvanites resent being called Albanians to the very end of the article, so what am I supposed to conclude? I find that very important, and think it should be mentioned not at the end of the article, but rather at the beginning of the article. And please read WP:NPA again, I think you got it wrong. Starting a section called "POV by Athenean", now that might be an NPA violation. Athenean (talk) 21:38, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

That the Arvanites self identify as Greeks should be part of the lead. We should avoid hiding info of such importance from lead and moving it to the bottom.Alexikoua (talk) 21:45, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

A previous discussion on this talkpage started by you is titled POV-pushing and OR by Zjarri so the verdict is on that. The minority status section is where the sentence belongs and what you consider important doesn't override wp:lead. I agree with Alexikoua but the main reasons per wp:lead should be mentioned and not removed, but Athenean's edit is pov.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 21:47, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

We should also avoid to mention one fact (religion) among many on lead. A more detailed explanation (and not one sided) like this should be dealt on the related section and off course not on lead.Alexikoua (talk) 21:54, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

I'll proceed then and add a general statement without reasons and also remove the pov of Athenean from the lead since it isn't even a summary.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 18:36, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

The Ethnoarchaelogy of a "Passive" Ethnicity: The Arvanites of Central Greece by John Bintliff

http://books.google.com/books?id=2NIBVfBX99oC&pg=PA9&dq=Arvanites&hl=en&ei=OXtWTZPAJpO7hAedl6GbDA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=10&ved=0CFQQ6AEwCQ#v=onepage&q=Arvanites&f=false

--GjinBuaSpata (talk) 12:18, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Irakli Kocollari

I will ask my fellow editors if they would be willing to accept Irakli Kocollari as a source. He has written a book in 1995 called "Arvanitet". A review by Arben Kallamata has been published in Frosina. He is already in the bibliography, I just don't see him anywhere referenced. I would like to buy the book and reference from that book into this article.--Sulmues ^(talk) 17:47, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

The Frosina description sounds pure propaganda, if we have some online stuff directly from the book would be better to judge.Alexikoua (talk) 18:20, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Why do you qualify that review that way? --Sulmues ^(talk) 18:31, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

The review is clearly written from a perspective that sees historiography in the service of national identity-building. That marks it as inherently crap. Fut.Perf. ☼ 18:36, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Hm, strong words. I will save my money then. However can you cite from the review, why you have such an opinion? --Sulmues ^(talk) 18:41, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

"It is only now [...] that Albanian historians are free to fill the void, to accomplish a duty to the motherland by providing the world with the truth". Any historiography that sees its own raison d'etre as "accomplishing a duty to the motherland" is dog poo. Of course, as I said, I cannot judge the book itself, it may well be reasonable; I'm just judging the stance of the review. Fut.Perf. ☼ 18:54, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

He is explaining how older writers such as Fan Noli were nationalists, because they were living at a time when Albania's existance was at risk, and historians of the totalitarian regime had to comply with the dictatorship requirements, whereas now the historians are free to tell it as it is with proper citations without being bond by any nationalistic or government tolls. Each historian has its own purpose of writing: some do it for passion, some for money, some for both. Why is Mr. Forrest McDonald writing about the history of the United States? Isn't he probably accomplishing a duty to his motherland besides pocketing some royalties? Probably yes! And I bet you he is very happy to do that. That's not a reason to not read him. Heinrich August Winkler is also doing the same thing and so are Georges Duby, or Giorgio Ruffolo. They're historians. It's their job. Irakli Kocollari is a good historian, but the book itself will tell... --Sulmues ^(talk) 19:23, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

rofl...karaiskakis and kolokotronis were arvanites87.202.37.55 (talk) 11:38, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Arvanites are greeks. In fact they are the greeks. They didn't settle during the 14 century as some want to show. The others are just a mixed thing that learned a fake language because the europeans told them that they are greeks, so they should start to learn the new greek language. After all didn't the greeks came from north? Well, in north we have only the albanians ... There was a reason why the arvanites spoke that language. There might had been a stronger reason why they made up 45% of the population of greece(not including Epirus and Macedonia) when the turks came —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.60.19.210 (talk) 18:01, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

“All Greek soldiers are required to be able to read and write, and if a conscript on joining has not acquired those rudiments of education, he is put to school. Not withstanding, the educational efforts of the government, as many as 30 percent proven fifteen years or so ago to be completely illiterate, while not more than 25 per cent had advanced beyond the ´three R´s´. This may be partly accounted for by the fact that these conscripts included both Albanians from the settlements in Attica and other parts of the Kingdom and pastoral Koutso-Vlachs, all of whom habitually speak their own dialects and learn Greek only as a foreign tongue.” (”Greece of the Hellenes”, by Lucy M. J. Garnett, 1914, pages 33 and 34.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.107.214.93 (talk) 20:52, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Karaiskakis

Since it's been established that Karaiskakis was Sarakatsan rather than Arvanite, I have removed him from the list. Athenean (talk) 19:33, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

of course that is what are you doing removing them one by one .. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.107.214.102 (talk) 22:57, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Karaiskaqi, Albanians ...and the church.... what happen in Agios Spiridon 1827....

http://books.google.com/books?id=Rk1iVvOr6RUC&pg=PA210&dq=Karaiskakis+albanian%5C&hl=en&ei=SMijTMzgHsKUswbE7LiqCA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=book-thumbnail&resnum=2&ved=0CCsQ6wEwAQ#v=onepage&q=Karaiskakis%20albanian%5C&f=false —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.107.214.102 (talk) 23:30, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

This magazine treat him as Arbanite : "I read that Karaiskakis, Botsaris, Bouboulina and Makryiannis (9) had all been Arvanites.." The London magazine Chatto & Windus, 2004 Pelasgon (talk) 14:05, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

An old song of More..!

Old song of More

Getting together Turks and raja and the place to clean from arvanitas.

Retrieved from "Lambrinidhis Nafplia Page 306"Pelasgon (talk) 12:20, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Northern Greece

I see that Zjarri still insist on trolling. The "fact" that "arvanites in nothern greece consider themselves to belong to albania or to albanian nation" is a ridicoulus claim.Please provide a name ,just a name of one village where the people feel like that.Wikipedia needs accuracy and not propaganda. Lysus.K (talk) 14:08, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

That's really werid about the southern Arvanites vs northern Arvanites situation. We have a number of academic secondary sources that are specific about the identification of the Arvanites of nortwestern Greece: [["Speaking Albanian, for example, is not a predictor with respect to other matters of identity [[18]] There are also long standing Christian Albanian (or Arvanitika speaking) communities both in Epirus and the Florina district of Macedonia with unquestioned identification with the Greek nation]]..There are also long standing Christian Albanian (or Arvanitika speaking) communities both in Epirus and the Florina district of Macedonia with unquestioned identification with the Greek nation, even M. Vickers, who is a clearly pro-Albanian author, claims in her 2004 paper that Albanian/Arvanitika speaking populations of this region are assimilated today.Alexikoua (talk) 20:24, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

In addition there is this sourced statement: they (all Arvanites) have distanced themselves from the Albanians to the extent that most consider today offending to be called Albanians. I added it but was reverted. I think it should go back to clarify things. A Macedonian, a Greek. (talk) 22:12, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Serbians in old Yugoslavia used to say the same about kosovar Albanians that they are offendet to be kalled Albanians, but that was only shameless propaganda. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.209.156.131 (talk) 22:07, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi Alexikoua. If they are assimilated they are pretty much no longer Arvanites but an extinct group of people. Those who still consider themselves as Arvanites have an clear Albanian identity. Do you consider the Greeks in America who are assimilated of Greek origin? Also to be assimilated doesn't mean hate against your own origin and Miranda Vickers doesn't confirm this self-Albanian hate of the Arvanite people. There should be a strong clarification of the whole article through massive engagement by knowledgeable Wikipedia users with the goal to erase this kind of Greek natonalist segments and interpretations. --Albanau (talk) 15:51, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Hi, this isent false, the problem is that mostly people do not understand arvanitika, their songs, poems, letters, newspeper, books, their mind, their live. A part of the northern greece "Arvanites" consider herself belong the albanian nation, you guys had not see ethnic "Arvanites" from northern Greece who demonstrated outside the Greek consulate in Tirana last month ? http://www.botasot.info/shqiperia/200674/camet-protestojne-para-ambasades-greke-ne-tirane/ . — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.218.232.221 (talk) 23:43, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Bull

"a term strongly disliked by all the other Arvanites, who also resent being called Albanians." why are you trying to speak for a whole group of people? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bronxguy (talk • contribs) 03:06, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Unfortunately the article is hijacked by Greek nationalist users. The sources which provided the facts doesn't confirm this disputed statement and is hard to verify because it's a strange expression with Greek nationalist segements. We all know why the article is far from neutral; because today's Greeks consider this Albanian population as the main contributors to Greek freedom and independence and thus they try to hide the truth of their non-Greek ethnicity. It is probably true that they are assimilated now and for that reason they are an extinct population. Besides if they keept their identity they would consider themselves as Albanians because they spoke Albanian and practised Albanian traditions. There are a number of sources which use the term Arvanites synonymously with Albanians and the very word also mean Albanian. This prevailing environment surrounding the article is a tragic example of hijacking and undermines the trustworthiness of Wikipedia as a good encyclopedia. --Albanau (talk) 15:31, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

I debate that the refered famous persons from Greece were Arvanites

There is not solid evidence for this, at least for most of them. Please give me their family trees. Arvanites are actually Albanian language speaking people that lived in Greece. They seem to have Albanian origin, as many Albanians descended in Greece during the occupation of Greece from Turkey688dim (talk) 10:35, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

It was one Million Arvanites. not 200.00

By an very older book have write that was in the year 1810 over one million Arvanites in greece. Why is that not write in this article ? This is a very big reliable soruces.

http://books.google.de/books?id=lvNUUPMlCfQC&pg=PA2316&dq=Arvaniten+eine+million&hl=de&sa=X&ei=6XTwUIHmBMbIswahtYCABA&ved=0CC8Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=Arvaniten%20eine%20million&f=false--Albanianp (talk) 21:06, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

The source says there were an estimated one million Albanians all in all, not Arvanites in Greece. Fut.Perf. ☼ 07:43, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

origin

when an albanian comes and lives in a greek village, marries a greek woman,has kids, his kids are half albanian half greek, then his kids marry greeks, so their children are 1/4 albanians 3/4 greeks so in 3 and 4 generations they're no longer albanians, they are greeks because the greek dna wins the albanian dna in terms of quantity. so when a population of albanians come and live in greece after a thousand years they are greeks,not albanians. same goes for slavs and other minorities as for the greek origin. so there's the answer for arvanites, of course they are greeks, we greeks tend to identify someone by his homeplace for example "mavrovouniwtis"(montenegrin) but it doensn't mean that he is montenegrin... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.130.80.35 (talk) 08:45, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

What we have to realize before start talking about the origin etc. is that the older "states" (or empires like the byzantine), did not base their structure on one ethnic group. Of course, in many cases there was a dominant ethnic group (byzantine empire - Greeks, Ottoman empire - Ottoman turks etc). Moreover, (even in the ancient times), different population were moving around in the greater region and they were having interactions with other populations. (E.g. In some cases Illyrians with Greeks, Greeks with Thracians, One Greek tribe with another). Based on that we can easily see that in some regions the population was mixed (or at least had several infuelnces). So, lets take the arvanites as an example. These people, had influences from Greek people living at south albania, moreover due to different reasons theses people moved to Greek regions (invited or not). So imagine, that you have an albanian tribe that already has some greek influence, comming to greece for centuries. In addition they change religion, use/learn the Greek language(also modify/extent their own) and they also marry and have children with Greeks. So, how is it possible to claim that ALL this people are for instance "albanian". And especially during the last century their community became widely open (so you cannot claim that it is a closed group with minor influences). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.155.68.126 (talk) 12:55, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Map on "Albanian migration" is fake and self made

The map which pretends that Albanians moved south from a region which today corresponds with Northern Albania, is a fake one, built on nationalistic agenda from the person who prepared it. In this map, the author claims that Albanians moved in the years 1300-1360, however, all historical evidence shows that the areas of Durrës, Berat, Vlora, today's southern Albania, the western part of today's northern Greece, were inhabited by Albanians since a long time. Therefore, it is fake to assume that they migrated from Northern Albania, to today's Southern Albania. Wikipedia is not a place to advance Megali Ideas. Here is a source, among hundreds, which contradicts the map of the author. (Edvin (talk) 17:16, 9 December 2013 (UTC))

The specific source is 100% in accordance with the map. For example in p. 14-16, it describes that they entered for the first time modern s. Albania in ca. 1330.Alexikoua (talk) 21:11, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

"a term strongly disliked by all the other Arvanites, who also resent being called Albanians"

This sentence is fairly exaggerated and mostly promoted by nationalist Greeks who consider the Arvanites as one of the pillars of Greek independence. The sentence is created out of nationalist Greeks prejudice towards ethnic Albanians and partly because nationalist Greeks consider people of orthodox faith as Greeks. The sentence that assimilated Arvanites consider themselves Greeks doesn't change the fact that the Arvanites as a population group have an ethnic origin and mother tongue completely different from the Greeks. Complete assimilation often means extinction. I ask for a objective source which doesn't stem from Wikipedia or Greek circles to further confirm this theory that the Arvanites object being called Albanians. It's strange for a non-extinct people who speak a own language to feel dislike of their origin that they still keep alive. Silence on this question will be answered with deletion of the sentence. --Albanau (talk) 16:41, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

It's sourced to GHM, in case you hadn't already noticed. Athenean (talk) 17:25, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

I would like to read the exact sentence of the writing statement (no copy from Wikipedia!) and know more about the source. Any link? --Albanau (talk) 17:37, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

The ref is in the article for crying out loud, in the "Minority" section. Just click on the ref and and you will get the pdf. Your insistence on "no copy from Wikipedia!" (not even sure what that means) is bizarre, but it seems that no one will be able to help you with that. Athenean (talk) 17:43, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

With no copy from Wikipedia I mean't no writing statement taken from texts in the Wikipedia but from the original source (with other words GHM). Are the authors of the writing statement Greeks since GHM is a Greek section of the organization? We should be careful citing Greek sources on this matter since Greeks do not recognize the cultural rights of the Arvanites. --Albanau (talk) 17:53, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

I would give you an example although it is mostly anecdotal evidence. I have personally spoken with a family of Arvanites and they told me themselves how they disliked being labeled as Albanians. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.58.227.63 (talk) 11:50, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Proposed Additions

As there is not much within the article about Arvanites and their relationship/views (past or present) regarding Greek and Albanian speakers these proposed additions fill that important gap within the article (they are all based on academic material and referenced and do a thorough overview regarding grammar or sentence fixup, expansion etc). I have also placed inline citations within the references. Regarding small references so there won’t be some error message I have made them appear in the talk page as (e.g. <;ref name=Pipa./.>). I have done this way because when a similar process was embarked upon in the Cham Albanians page, it got very messy with proposed additions and hard to get through. Anyway, here are the proposals:

This bit to go under this sentence (my additions in bold).

Arvanites were regarded as ethnically distinct from the Greeks in the 19th century.

Amongst the Arvanites, this difference was expressed in words such as shkljira for a Greek person and shkljerishtë for the Greek language that had until recent decades negative overtones. These words in Arvanitika have their related counterpart in the pejorative term shqa used by Northern Albanians for Slavs.<;ref name=Pipa./.> Ultimately these terms used amongst Albanian speakers originate from the Latin word sclavus which contained the traditional meaning of “the neighbouring foreigner”.

Fix up of this sentence due to my proposed additions (in bold):

With participation in the Greek War of Independence and the Greek Civil War, this has led to increasing assimilation amongst the Arvanites.

This bit to go under this sentence (my additions in bold).

Many Arvanites find the designation "Albanians" offensive as they identify nationally and ethnically as Greeks and not Albanians.

Relations between Arvanites and other Albanian speaking populations have varied over time. During the onset of the Greek war of Independence, Arvanites fought alongside Greek revolutionaries and against Muslim Albanians.<;ref name=Heraclides/.><;ref name=Andromedas.> For example Arvanites participated in the Tripolitsa Massacre of Muslim Albanians, while some Muslim Albanian speakers in the region of Bardounia remained after the war by converting to Orthodoxy and becoming part of the local population. In recent times, Arvanites have expressed mixed views towards Albanian immigrants within Greece. Negative views are perceptions that Albanian immigrants are “communists” arriving from a “backward country”. or an opportune people with questionable morals, behaviors and a disrespect for religion. Whereas other Arvanites during the late 1980s and early 1990s expressed solidarity with Albanian immigrants, due to linguistic similarities and being politically leftist. Relations too between Arvanites and other Orthodox Albanian speaking communities such as those of Greek Epirus are mixed, as they are distrusted regarding religious matters due to a past Albanian Muslim population living amongst them.

Amongst the wider Greek speaking population however, the Arvanites and their language Arvanitika were viewed in past times in a derogatory manner. These views contributed toward shaping negative attitudes held by Arvanites regarding their language and increasing assimilation. In post-dictatorial Greece, the Arvanites have rehabilitated themselves within Greek society through for example the propagation of the Pelasgian theory regarding Arvanite origins.<;ref name=De Rapper/.> The theory created a counter discourse that aimed to give the Arvanites a positive image in Greek history by claiming the Arvanites as the ancestors and relations of contemporary Greeks and their culture.<;ref name=De Rapper/.> The Arvanite revival of the Pelasgian theory has also been recently borrowed by other Albanian speaking populations within and from Albania in Greece to counter the negative image of their communities.

Resnjari (talk) 11:19, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Well i waited and no one bothered to reply regarding these proposals, so i have now i gone strictly by the policy (e.g. Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle). The additions i made are needed in the article to clarify certain matters. One, past and eventual views of the Greek speaking population by the Arvanites, which ties into the process of assimilation/integration in Greek society and explanation of those terms used. The second bit is needed regarding Arvanites and their relationship/views/perceptions and so on regarding other Albanian speaking populations in a historical and contemporary sense (they are after all a historically Albanian speaking population and its important to have that in order to clarify matters.) Also added in bit about Pelasgian theory and how Arvanites have used that to rehabilitate themselves in wider Greek society (important as it was a big thing for them, especially for them is furthering the process of becoming part of Greek society. All sources used are peer reviewed and where possible i have placed online web links for all to check and read themselves.

Resnjari (talk) 09:50, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

References