Cyprus-Forum.com

[supporttheunderdog]

I have posted this before but I will post it again.

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

Two quotes
"Rather, the Greek migrants seem to have taken control of most of the Cypriot cities as a warrior elite, with their language gradually coming to predominate throughout the island while the material culture remained predominantly native."

And
"Overall, the Aegean penetration of Cyprus can best be characterized as a series of movements by Aegean freebooters to a known region where they established themselves a warrior aristocracy."

Reads to me like a conquest event.

I can anticipate the dismissive responses from the apologists for Ancient Greek imperialists, with their usual abusive shoot the messenger reaction, rather than dealing in an objective and reasoned manner with the well argued thesis.

[Paphitis]

So you support the idea of an "ethnically far more pure" minority wanting 40% of Cyprus?

I support the idea of the ethnically pure Cypriots controlling all of Cyprus which is exactly the way it should be, rather than dividing the island on ethnic lines and even having a Constitution based on ethnic lines.

This is the biggest disaster for us.

A new way of thinking is required, otherwise future generations of Cypriots are going to suffer tremendously.

[supporttheunderdog]

yes: Greek was not invented in Cyprus, but imposed on Cyprus by conquest ...

Do you have any supporting evidence for this "conquest"? Any battles? Any historical records of natives struggling against an "invasion"?

And kindly stop assuming you can paraphrase what I have said either on languages or dinosaurs as your self-inflated opinion of your abilities to comprehend English seems to be directly inherited from your dinosaur relatives.

He should also tell us how it was with the English in Britain.

Until now, the so-called Minimalists have set the tone in British archeology. They believe in what they call an "elite transfer", in which a small caste of Germanic noble warriors, perhaps a few thousand, placed themselves at the top of society in a coup of sorts, and eventually even displaced the Celtic language with their own. Many contemporary Britons, not overly keen on having such a close kinship with the Continent, like this scenario.

In truth, however, the army of the Britons was usually in retreat. Many fell into captivity. According to Härke, the captured Britons lived a miserable existence as "servants and maids" in the villages of the Anglo-Saxons.

There were two types of grave in the cemeteries of the time: those containing swords and other weapons, and those with none. The local inhabitants, deprived of their rights, were apparently buried in the latter type of grave.

The London geneticist Mark Thomas is convinced that the conquerors from the continent maintained "social structures similar to apartheid," a view supported by the laws of King Ine of Wessex (around 695). They specify six social levels for the Britons, five of which refer to slaves.

As a result of the brutal subjugation, the reproduction rate of the losing Britons was apparently curbed, while the winners had many children. The consequences are still evident today in the British gene pool. "People from rural England are more closely related to the northern Germans than to their countrymen from Wales or Scotland," Härke explains.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/eur ... 68706.html

Either way we have more than enough evidence of how the English imposed themselves and their language on Britain.

i will come back on this one but there is an increasing well argued body of thought that the languages thought to be Anglo Saxon were being widely spoken in Eastern Britain before the Roman occupation and the so called nAnglo Saxon invasion is vastly overstated in terms of the numbers.

[supporttheunderdog]

So you support the idea of an "ethnically far more pure" minority wanting 40% of Cyprus?

I support the idea of the ethnically pure Cypriots controlling all of Cyprus which is exactly the way it should be, rather than dividing the island on ethnic lines and even having a Constitution based on ethnic lines.

This is the biggest disaster for us.

A new way of thinking is required, otherwise future generations of Cypriots are going to suffer tremendously.

now you will end having a fight about who is an ethnically pure Cypriot and if that includes the Turkish speaking Cypriots.

Expect to find some highly specious mendacities trotted out.

The point is that the best research get ends to suggest that the Tsc and Gsc are probably rather more closely related to each other than to either Mainland Greeks or Turks., but that is offensive to the preconceived blinkered views of some.

Ooh I can hear the howls.

[Paphitis]

So you support the idea of an "ethnically far more pure" minority wanting 40% of Cyprus?

I support the idea of the ethnically pure Cypriots controlling all of Cyprus which is exactly the way it should be, rather than dividing the island on ethnic lines and even having a Constitution based on ethnic lines.

This is the biggest disaster for us.

A new way of thinking is required, otherwise future generations of Cypriots are going to suffer tremendously.

now you will end having a fight about who is an ethnically pure Cypriot and if that includes the Turkish speaking Cypriots.

Expect to find some highly specious mendacities trotted out.

The point is that the best research get ends to suggest that the Tsc and Gsc are probably rather more closely related to each other than to either Mainland Greeks or Turks., but that is offensive to the preconceived blinkered views of some.

Ooh I can hear the howls.

That includes all those who identify themselves as Cypriots. It exclludes the invaders.

[GreekIslandGirl]

I have posted this before but I will post it again.

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

Two quotes
"Rather, the Greek migrants seem to have taken control of most of the Cypriot cities as a warrior elite, with their language gradually coming to predominate throughout the island while the material culture remained predominantly native."

And
"Overall, the Aegean penetration of Cyprus can best be characterized as a series of movements by Aegean freebooters to a known region where they established themselves a warrior aristocracy."

Reads to me like a conquest event.

I can anticipate the dismissive responses from the apologists for Ancient Greek imperialists, with their usual abusive shoot the messenger reaction, rather than dealing in an objective and reasoned manner with the well argued thesis.

You can at least anticipate it will be dismissed because since this is the best you can come up with, you already know the racism you peddle is based on rubbish opinions.

I'm not interested in some student's interpretation and must less so to your second-hand, further misrepresentation of this student's opinions.

These are not facts nor evidence from archaeological or historical findings. They are opinions!

So if you have any interest in being a truthful person, you will accept that this island is Greek by virtue of its native population and has been Greek for > 3,500 years and just as the population in mainland Greece can be called Greek in ethnicity by virtue of their communal and cultural history, so too can the natives of Cyprus. Those who deny this simply seek to allow Turkey to extend its borders in subsuming Cyprus.

[GreekIslandGirl]

So you support the idea of an "ethnically far more pure" minority wanting 40% of Cyprus?

I support the idea of the ethnically pure Cypriots controlling all of Cyprus which is exactly the way it should be, rather than dividing the island on ethnic lines and even having a Constitution based on ethnic lines.

This is the biggest disaster for us.

A new way of thinking is required, otherwise future generations of Cypriots are going to suffer tremendously.

Then you are onto a loser. By going against history and genealogy, you will forever perpetuate division on this island. Allowing foreigners to force us to accept their new political interpretation of what we are, our 'being', forces us to abandon our identity - and then we are just puppets.

We cannot have both. Be our own people and free, but also allow foreigners to tell us we can only have "freedom" if we accept a new "ethnicity".

Our biggest disaster was not continuing for full enosis with Greece when we had men with guts and vision. But Greece (including Cyprus) has not been allowed to raise its head because they must be punished and destroyed so that the west can revise history as it wishes and secure its shaky foundations.

Now we know isolating Cyprus was all done to prevent control of the eastern Mediterranean from the mainland all the way down to Cyprus and halfway to Egypt by one unified nation!

The gaping gap in the seas between Crete etc and Cyprus will cost the Greeks a lot; a lot more in the near future!

[Paphitis]

So you support the idea of an "ethnically far more pure" minority wanting 40% of Cyprus?

I support the idea of the ethnically pure Cypriots controlling all of Cyprus which is exactly the way it should be, rather than dividing the island on ethnic lines and even having a Constitution based on ethnic lines.

This is the biggest disaster for us.

A new way of thinking is required, otherwise future generations of Cypriots are going to suffer tremendously.

Then you are onto a loser. By going against history and genealogy, you will forever perpetuate division on this island. Allowing foreigners to force us to accept their new political interpretation of what we are, our 'being', forces us to abandon our identity - and then we are just puppets.

We cannot have both. Be our own people and free, but also allow foreigners to tell us we can only have "freedom" if we accept a new "ethnicity".

Our biggest disaster was not continuing for full enosis with Greece when we had men with guts and vision. But Greece (including Cyprus) has not been allowed to raise its head because they must be punished and destroyed so that the west can revise history as it wishes and secure its shaky foundations.

Now we know isolating Cyprus was all done to prevent control of the eastern Mediterranean from the mainland all the way down to Cyprus and halfway to Egypt by one unified nation!

The gaping gap in the seas between Crete etc and Cyprus will cost the Greeks a lot; a lot more in the near future!

It is pretty clear who is onto a loser.

The Pharlap I talk of is inevitable!

[Sotos]

I have posted this before but I will post it again.

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

Two quotes
"Rather, the Greek migrants seem to have taken control of most of the Cypriot cities as a warrior elite, with their language gradually coming to predominate throughout the island while the material culture remained predominantly native."

And
"Overall, the Aegean penetration of Cyprus can best be characterized as a series of movements by Aegean freebooters to a known region where they established themselves a warrior aristocracy."

Reads to me like a conquest event.

I can anticipate the dismissive responses from the apologists for Ancient Greek imperialists, with their usual abusive shoot the messenger reaction, rather than dealing in an objective and reasoned manner with the well argued thesis.

If you use the thesis of some student to support your claims then it means you have nothing better to support your nonsense. You are not a "messenger". You are an anti-Greek colonialist scum who wants Hellenism destroyed in Cyprus. You didn't seek the truth. What you did is try to find something to support your anti-Greek bullshit. But all you found are some worthless crap by absolute nobodies ... like the draft thesis of some student

[Sotos]

... not to mention that even from this draft student thesis you only select the parts that suit you. For example at another parts he writes: "The earliest penetration of Aegean culture into Cyprus appears to precede any invasions and likely included the presence of merchants on the island." and "The fact that Cyprus seems to have been the destination of wave after wave of Aegean migrants is consistent with the fact that migrants tend to be attracted to areas with which they already have extensive contacts" or "The events of c.1200 BC thus represent as much an upheaval in Cyprus itself as they do a foreign invasion; some of the destructions on the island may even be the result of intraregional strife or Hittite intervention rather than Aegean newcomers." And he closes with the phrase "the identity of the island was primarily Greek." When is the earliest time that the same thing can be said about the English and London (previously known as Londinium)? About 1500 years later!