Cyprus-Forum.com

[barouti]

But it is you who want to ethnically cleanse(euphemistically "resettle") legal citizens of the ROC who are probably more native than you who I understand to be be half Greek half Cypriot, based upon your own racist perceptions of their ancestry. I have never called for anyone to be displaced but the post 74 settlers and the carpet b*ggers.

Trying to deprive people of their national identity, like some are doing in regrad to GREEK Cypriots, is an ethnic cleansing practice. And bloody racist too.

Re Kimon, you shouldn't let Mr Limey get under your skin. Whateve evidence is shown to him he will just dismiss it. His views on the subject are clearly dogmatic. Whatever is presented he will dismiss and continue to ramble away "Cyprus was never Greeks". I've been around on a quite a few forums and I know his type very well. Have you tried to debate with the Skopianoi on Macedonia, omg, whatever is presented to them is a "Greek lie" and that we bribed all the historians to write these lies blah, blah. The Turks are the best. Officially on their government sites, the old Greek cities on Asia Minor weren't even Greek but Roman. They even have this theory that the Greeks settled in Asia Minor in small numbers and who intermarried with the locals and thus should be considered "Ancient Turks". I shit you not lol. The best one was when a Turk was pretending to be a Swede. He claimed to be a genetics expert and through his research he could "prove" Greeks have the same genetic make-up as Sub-Saharan Africans, his argument being we therefore shouldn't be considered a European people. He even posted charts. Then he posted another genetics chart that showed Turks have a similar genetic make-up as the Scandinavians. LOL, hence how he was discovered to be a Turk. Anyway, I wonder if Mr Limey will be honest and admit his dislike towards Greeks and especially his refusal to accept Cypriots as such. If he were a Turk or a Skopiano, that would be expected. But seriously, a Brit to be so dogmatic. But as long as he posts in this forum you should expect that any opportunity he will deny the Greek ethnicity of the Cypriots without ever providing any evidence. He has a problem with, really then bad luck to him, by why as a Brit is he so obsessed about it. Seriously, he needs to get over it.

[kimon07]

Re Kimon, you shouldn't let Mr Limey get under your skin. Whateve evidence is shown to him he will just dismiss it. His views on the subject are clearly dogmatic. Whatever is presented he will dismiss and continue to ramble away "Cyprus was never Greeks".

I don't really care if a Brit is disputing my greekness. After all, disputing the greekness of Greek Cypriots was and is a British invention wasn't it? Besides, historical truth can be dismissed but can not be altered. Therefore, his denial of my greekness offers me the opportunity to produce evidence which proves the contrary and which anyone who visits this forum (you know what I mean) can observe.

[supporttheunderdog]

A link to a quite informative item

http://www.albany.edu/Jennings_thesis.doc

comments GR?

[bigOz]

Were Myceans = Hellens ???

[kimon07]

Were Myceans = Hellens ???

They definitely were not Mongols (Seljuks and Ottomans) appeared after 1000 AD in Anatolia and came to Cyprus 600 years later.

[kimon07]

A link to a quite informative item

http://www.albany.edu/Jennings_thesis.doc

Eteocypriot was a pre-Indo-European language spoken in Iron Age Cyprus. The name means "true" or "original Cyprian" parallel to Eteocretan, both of which names are used by modern scholarship to mean the pre-Greek languages of those places.[1] Eteocypriot was written in the Cypriot syllabary, a syllabic script derived from Linear A (via the Cypro-Minoan variant Linear C).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eteocypriot_language

The Minoan language was spoken in ancient Crete before it was replaced with the language of the mainland; the relationship between Minoan and Greek is unknown. While attempts have been made to connect it to other languages, Minoan must be considered unclassified until a linguistic affiliation can be ascertained. The Minoan language was written in Linear A, a syllabary that was used extensively up to 1420 BC, primarily for the purposes of religious inscriptions and administrative records in the Minoan civilization.
The Eteocretan (i.e. True Cretan) language is likely descended from Minoan, and is largely written in a Euboean-derived alphabetic script that was the norm after the Hellenic Dark Ages (ca. 1200 BC–800 BC),

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eteocretan

But isn't that known? What's new about this essay? That Cyprus was not totally Hellenized until after around 1100 BC (according to it)? So? The are are other essays supporting the same since long aren't there? So What's the issue here? Give or take 100 years in 3000 (if we accept his theory as correct, that is)?

P.S. 1. Which syllabary were the mainland Greeks using around 1400 BC and during the Trojan war?
2. Does different syllabary indicate different ethnicity?
3. Should we also examine the relation of the eteocretan and the eteocypriot syllabaries to the incription found in Dispilio of
Northern Greece? And the one on the disc of Phaistos?

[supporttheunderdog]

Iacovou made the point thwat the whoever was responsible for initiating the hellenisation of Cyprus it was proabaly not the Mycenaeans with linear B and a palace culture but a later group and that Cyprus was not in fact fully Hellenised until the time of the Ptolomies with the abolition of the Kingdoms and laws making Greek the official language in about 300BC or so: the process had probabaly otherwise been a gradual one involving an elitist supremacy (warriors as posited by Jennings).

re your questions:
1) LInear B which died out in about 1200 BC. the point is that from about 1200 BC to about 800BC there was evidently no writing sytem in use in Greece/Aegean until the adoption and adaption of the Phonecian Alphabet: Why otherwise did not Linear B continue to be in use in Greece Crete etc and why was a new script adopted?
2)it might. Why would people of the same ethnos use different scripts?
3) The Dispilio fragments probbaly contain non alphabetic marks that look like letters. There is too big a gap without the marks being in use as script until the first Greek writings appeared in Linear B which looks different to the scratches on the shards and if had been a script why was it necassary for the Greeks to adopt and adapt Linear B from Crete in 1450BC and The Minoan-Cypriot Syllabry in Cyprus in about 1100 BC where it survived as the main written version of Greek until displaced by the Ptolomies in 300BC. In anyevent it would not have been Greek as Greek probbaly only appeared as a language in about 2000 BC when it was introduced in a proto-form by invaders and developed with the incoroporation of loan words from the existing indigionous Non-greek language. Whatever the Phaistos disc shows it is almost certainly not in the Greek language but if anything would be in the (non-Greek) Minoan language. (Crete was Hellenised in about 1450 BC and the disc is between 200 and 400 years or so older than that). It is not therefore relevent to the Hellenisation of Cyprus but to the pre-hellenic History of Crete.

[supporttheunderdog]

Were Myceans = Hellens ???

Possibly. The original Hellenes were probably a group of indo european invaders who came to Greece over 1000 year period or so from about 2000BC. and who took over the area probbaly by force.