Simon wrote:
Firstly, do you believe that what this man has written is the only way you can define ethnicity? Who gave him the monopoly? There are several ways you can define ethnicity, here is one of them:
•an ethnic quality or affiliation resulting from racial or cultural ties; "ethnicity has a strong influence on community status relations"
Omer Seyhan wrote:
Even by this definition you cannot prove to be ethnically 'Greek'. Cypriot racial characteristics are more like the Semitic people of the Middle East, while large parts of our culture is closer to Egypt and Lebanon than it is to either Greece or Turkey.
What utter rubbish! This is your personal opinion. I have saw Cypriots that look just like Cretans, Rhodians etc. The culture of GCs is obviously closer to other Greeks than any other group of people. It also refers to community status, which is exactly what the GCs are!
Simon wrote:
Here is another one:
'Designating a social group within a cultural and social system, often with common traits including religious, linguistic, ancestral or physical characteristics.'
Universal Dictionary.
Omer Seyhan wrote:
This is not a good definition since Greek Cypriots share a religion with people who are not Greeks. Ever heard of the Greek Orthodox Church of Alexandria in Egypt where there are 1.2 million Greek Orthodox Christians?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_Orth ... Alexandria
Religion is germane to culture. What the quote is saying is, if you share the same cultural characteristics, including religion, and identify as a certain way, you can belong to an ethnic group. My point is there is not one strict definition of "ethnicity".
Simon wrote:
Omer Seyhan wrote:
That was for!
I know its a myth but did you? Was it not you who claimed the Greek Cypriots descended solely from the Mycaeneans?
Again you have trouble reading!
You got made to look silly with this one, so now you are claiming that I agree with you that Mycenaean colonisation was a myth. No, I don't believe it was a myth, but I'm saying that if you do, it fits your definition!
Show me one quote I have made where I have said the GCs descended solely from Mycenaeans?! In fact I have said the exact opposite more than once. If you're not going to read what I write, then what is the point in us debating?
Moreover, what would you consider proof of common ancestry? Bearing in mind we're talking about so long ago. We can't go back in time, so all we can go by is what we have found in Cyprus. It appears that the world's historians believe they have found enough proof about Mycenaean and other Greek colonisation of Cyprus, so that is enough for me. Forgive me if I decide to believe the world's experts and museums over you and GR.
Omer Seyhan wrote:
So...you still believe in your myth? Apparently the museums now hold the evidence....
If you are going to disagree with almost every respected historian that states there is evidence of Mycenaean colonisation in Cyprus, then you need to post some proof, otherwise, don't speak!
Simon wrote:
We have had a common name ("Greeks") for thousands of years and ever since the word was used. That makes us as Greek as anyone else. Just because the Mycenaeans never used the actual word "Greek" it doesn't mean they weren't. "Greek" is only a label or description. Does an idiot have to be called an idiot, before he is one?
Further, it was not only the Mycenaeans that colonised Cyprus, but other Greeks as well from the Dorian invasions onwards.
Omer Seyhan wrote:
But you cannot give them a name that they never used to identify themselves. Like the Anglo-Saxons etc you must call them by their original name, which is Mycaeneans. It is questionable whether they became Greeks. Certainly it can be argued that their language survived and became Cypriot-Greek but to assume the Greek Cypriots descend from these people alone is baseless.
Let me ask you, if the Greek Cypriots all become Turkish in 2000 years time, would you like it if 'experts' starting calling you Turkish because you became one?
Mycenaeans were Greeks according to any book I have read, or any expert I have listened to. So who are you to contradict them? Are you an expert? What proof do you have? Who said that GCs descend from these people alone? These people were apparently the first Greek speakers to colonise Cyprus, but as I said before, many other Greeks also did. You are inventing your own arguments so that you can defeat them, because you certainly are not considering mine.
And your paragraph about being Turkish doesn't even make sense.
It sounds like your arguments are becoming increasingly desperate.
I think you need a good sleep.
Simon wrote:
Greek migration happened thousands of years ago, so of course there is no memory! What a silly comment. What we have is archeological evidence, which is all we can have, unless you have a time machine? And the archeological evidence matches the written records and the cultural identity of Cyprus. Where is your proof that Mycenaeans did not settle? We have plenty of proof showing their existence. We also have the evidence that Cyprus emerged as a culturally Greek island, that was speaking Greek and shared all the same religious and cultural beliefs and customs as other Greeks, so how did all that happen? What about the accounts following the apparent Dorian invasions of other Greeks fleeing to Cyprus? They speak English in Jamaica because the British ruled the island, so there is still obviously a connection. But the Greeks didn't rule Cyprus as such, but colonised it instead, and founded various city-states. This is all historically accepted.
Omer Seyhan wrote:
I am not arguing that they settled or that they didnt settle. I dont know. Since racial purity is not our goal it doesnt matter. What matters is that even if they did settle, since it was such a long time ago it does not and cannot possibly make you Greek. You are forgetting all the other influences linguistic, cultural, religious etc etc on the Cypriots in between their arrival and now. That is a huge amount of time you are dismissing!
Omer, you are contradicting yourself dozens of times over!
You're saying that racial purity doesn't matter, when basically all you have been going on about is how Cyprus is a racial mixture. Right, I am glad that you have now conceded race has little relevance, and now you're on to culture, religion etc. OK, firstly, the fact that the original Greek migration happened a long time ago is not relevant. All that shows is just how long there has been a Greek influence on the island. That does not at all mean we can't be Greek. If anything, it shows the opposite. Secondly, you mention linguistic, cultural and religious influences. Now this is where you must admit that linguistically - GCs speak Greek, religion - GCs are Greek Orthodox, and culturally - GCs share a very similar culture to other Greeks, albeit with slight variations that all the Greek islands have. Now I am not dismissing the other influences on Cyprus, but my point is the overwhelming influence is Greek, and it always has been. Further, it is not for you to tell people how to identify. If GCs self-identify as Greeks, who are you to tell them otherwise?
Simon wrote:
The Anglo-Saxons became known as the English, the Franks, French etc, just like the Mycenaeans became known as Greeks. You actually again shoot yourself in the foot here, because if you're saying that the GCs are not Greek because the Mycenaeans were not called Greeks, then by your own example, the English can't be English, because Anglo-Saxons never heard the term 'English', or the French can't be Franks, because 'French' was not a recognised term to the original Franks etc etc. Do you now see how stupid your argument is? Again I ask you, do you have to call an idiot an idiot before they actually are?
Omer Seyhan wrote:
Not really. DNA research reveals that the Anglo Saxons mixed with the local Celts in England and many English are a mixture. Surprisingly though, a great number of English also showed signs of having no Anglo-Saxon connection at all, indicating that there was only limited Anglo-Saxon input and that the Celts had simply assimilated. This destroys past expert theories that the Celts were massacred or pushed towards Wales and Scotland.
To prove my point again on why you can never claim a single ancestry, not all French descend from the Gauls. Many have Germanic and Latin origins as well as Basque. The majority of French are mixture of all of these with the exception of those living in the most remote areas like Finistere in Brittany.
Omer, you are proving my point. You are saying what I did. The English, French and others are a mixture just like GCs are. This was my point. Yet they still call themselves English, which is from the term "Angles" from the Anglo-Saxons. England means "land of the Angles". That doesn't mean the whole country is full of just Angles. There is no racially pure ethnicity with most ethnic groups. This is why your argument is nonsense. I'm glad you've destroyed your own argument.
Again, I have never claimed a single descendant. I said the exact opposite. You are trying to wiggle your way out of the fact that you are wrong, by defeating a claim I never made. Too bad I'm onto you.
Simon wrote:
Yes, all these people did come to Cyprus, but what is your point? Are you again having reading difficulties as previously when you thought I said that all TCs were GC converts? I stated previously that there is no such thing as being racially pure, the GCs are a mixture of different peoples like every other ethnicity. But regardless of how many people settled on Cyprus, GCs maintained their Greek language, culture and identity. It is actually a miracle when you think about it, considering all the invasions Cyprus has had. But it is a testament to Hellenism.
Omer Seyhan wrote:
My point is and I cant believe you haven't got it, is that you cannot rely on a single ancestry! So your claim to be Greek is utter rubbish.
I have never claimed that GCs only came from Mycenaeans! Mycanaeans were only the first colonisers, but many others came afterwards. Our claim to be Greek comes not just from the Mycenaeans, but from all the other Greeks that settled on Cyprus, and the fact that ever since ancient times, Cyprus has been a predominantly Greek island, especially culturally. If GCs are not Greek, then neither are the Greeks living in Greece Greek! Because they have had a similar amount of different influences and settlements of different peoples! And neither is Turkey Turkish, because look at all the different influences and people in Turkey! In fact you could say the same about almost any country.
Simon wrote:
See above, you still seem caught up on this racial pure thing.
Omer Seyhan wrote:
Its not a racial thing. You cannot claim to be Greek because of the Mycaeneans but then turn around and say, but mind you I have so many other ingredients too. Its a bit like a road sweeper saying: "I've had this broom for 25 years, but I've changed the brush 47 times and the stick 51 times since then!"
Of course you can, because predominantly we are Greeks, despite other influences! In that case, nobody can say they belong to any ethnicity, because in reality we are all a mixture of different people! Your arguments are stupid I'm afraid!
Simon wrote:
Look how many immigrants/those born of mixed marriages in England, does this mean the English are not English? Again, you're just talking about racial purity, which is not relevant.
Omer Seyhan wrote:
This is a different issue as the land is called England and it has an official status. You're claiming that Greek Cypriots (who are Cypriots) are ethnically Greek (another country), which is baloney.
Using your own argument one can claim with justification that there are many origins and immigrants in Cyprus and people of mixed marriages, does this mean we are not all Cypriots?
You are wrong! England does not have official status. On the other hand, Greek Cypriots do have official status, because we are recognised as ethnic Greeks in the Cypriot constitution! So that trashes your argument there, if all you are worried about is official status to tell you who you are.
Secondly, you state that GCs claiming ethnicity of a different country is baloney, but again you are showing your lack of knowledge here. Greece is only a different country because of politics. If GCs would have got their wish, they would have joined Greece. So according to your logic, if Cyprus would have joined Greece, suddenly GCs would become ethnic Greeks? What nonsense. Greece does not have the monopoly on being ethnically Greek, there are ethnic Greeks all over the world that have not been born in Greece.
Your second paragraph again doesn't make sense, because it was you who was claiming that there are mixed marriages, immigrants etc, and now you're asking me if that means they're not Cypriot? What are you talking about? I'm talking about ethnicity primarily as a cultural belonging and identity, which also contains some ancestral roots. GCs have all these things. Of course there are immigrants and mixed marriages, like there are in all ethnic groups.
Simon wrote:
I don't dismiss anybody. It seems you struggle to read and understand basic English. Further, there was never a mass colonisation of Cyprus, which supplanted the overwhelming majority of GCs, but just small additions, the largest being Turkish Ottomans, now known as TCs. This is why genetic evidence does in fact show a similarity with all Greeks including GCs as I pointed out to you earlier but you ignored.
Omer Seyhan wrote:
How did you measure that? Nobody knows, even historians and experts claim they do not fully know but you do...
Because there is no evidence for it. You see, normally to assert something, you need evidence. As Cyprus has always maintained a largely Greek culture, language and religion, there is no evidence of any outside huge colonisation. Plus, there is genetic evidence showing similarities between Greeks around the Mediterranean, including GCs. I'm sure if you ask Oracle nicely, she will explain it to you, as she has posted the evidence a few times before.
You cannot deny the reality on the ground today, which is that the majority of Cypriots identify as Greek Cypriots no matter what you say, and have done for a long time, ok?
Omer Seyhan wrote:
Once the majority of the word thought the world was flat.
Irrelevant. We are not talking about certainties here.
OMG, The Cyps are dangerously close to the Lebs - closer to anyone else. Are you sure this is accurate.
