Byzantinologue, A. A.

Vasiliev would remark that In the first half of the fourtee nth century, the Albanians for the first time began to play a considerable part in the history of the Balkan peninsula p. 613 At this time a strong movement of t he Albanians toward the south began, at first into Thessaly, but extended later, in the second half of the fourteenth and in the fifteenth century, all over mid dle Greece, the Peloponnesus, and many islands of th Agean Sea. This powerful st ream of Albanian colonization is felt even today. A German scholar in nineteenth century, Fallmerayerjournied through Greece and found in Attica, Boeotia, and th e major part of the Peloponnesus a very great number of Albanian settlers, who s ometimes did not even understand Greek. If one calls this country a new Albania, wrote the same author, one gives it its real name. (pp. 613-615, History of the Byzantine Empire, 1964) But as western philhellenes, followed by Greek nationalist historians, propagate d an idealized Greek past to its very diverse, primarily religious community for t he purpose of molding a Hellenic ethnicity, Fallmerayers view was lost in historica l archives. Albanians population fell victim of this Hellenic vision and became on ly a footnote in the Greek history. The Albanians were seen in the role of peas ants who poured down from Albanias mountains during the 14th and 15th centuries, a role that perfectly fits with their idealistic view of Greeks. To be fair, the re have been individuals historians who have touched the issue and diverged from this view and have seen the Albanian presence in Greece as going far in the pas t, but promptly rejected by protectors of Hellenism. Here is what the Greek histo rian Tito Jochalas indicated on the subject (On Albanian Migration to Greece, 19 71): According to Sathas, the Albanians, as allies of the Avars, had already penetra ted the country in the 6th century. The invaders from the north, who devastated all the land around them on their advance down to the Peleponnese, were not Slav s, but Albanians. Sathas based his theory not only on toponomastic and onomastic evidence in the Peleponnese that had shown ties between the Greek and Albanian languages, but a lso on the relationship between Albanian and the Greek dialect of Tsakonia. He a lso noted that Byzantine historians had gotten things mixed up and instead of Alb anians had written about Slavs. He pointed to a text by Chalcocondyles who had clai med that the Albanians arrived in the Peloponnese much earlier. In furtherance o f his theory, Sathas even claimed that there was already an Albanian colony on C yprus in the 4th century. It is evident that such a theory, not supported by med iaeval source material, was easy to contradict. On the one hand, place names in the Peloponnese cannot only be explained from Greek or Albanian, and on the othe r hand, it cannot be said that all Byzantine historians were completely ignorant and confused historical events. The passage in Chalcocondyles does not refer to Albanians in the 6th century, but to Albanians in general who settled in the Pe loponnese in the early 15th century. Although research has shown that Sathas theory was wrong, it was nevertheless re vived a few years later by S. G. Panayotopoulos and P. Kanelidis. Both of them r elied on place names on the Mani (Maina) peninsula which they took as Albanian a nd on parallels between the customs of the Albanians and the Maniots, and conclu ded that the Albanians must have settled in the Peleponnese long before the 15th century. In two of his articles, D.Kambouroglous regarded this position as unfo unded. Sathass theory, that seemed to have been completely forgotten, arose again in 1928, but from a different aspect. It was Petros Fourikis who derived the wo rd Mani from the Alb. man (mulberry tree) and held the view that the Albanians mus t have been in the Peleponnese from the 10th century onwards since the word Mani was mentioned by K.Porphyrogennetos. Fourikis work was, however, rejected by bot h linguists and historians. The old theory was brought up again by Kostas Mbiris (Arvanites, the Dorians of modern Greece: History of the Greek Arvanites"]. Ath ens. (3rd ed. 1998) 1960 by writer of this article), which shows just how deeply

ingrained the idea of an early arrival of the Albanians was among some Greeks. Later he adds: It is also possible that the Albanians had already begun to spread peacefully s outhwards in the second half of the 13th century, taking advantage of the rivalr y between the Despot of Epirus, Michael II, and the imperial dynasties of Nicaea and Constantinople. The southward spread of the Albanians, as Dionysios Zakythi nos noted, was also facilitated by the Fourth Crusade that sowed confusion in Al bania and elsewhere in the Byzantine Empire. Leaving aside the subject of dating the Albanian presence in Greece, I will ref er to information relating to the size of Albanian population in Greece: -The Arvanites are approximated to have been half of the Greek population before the exchange of Asia Minor Greeks in 1922, according to estimates by several am ateur historians (Magliveras, Simeon, Spyros, the ontology of difference: Nation alism, localism and ethnicity in a Greek Village, Durham University, 2009, p.22) -According to some estimates, the Christian Albanian population in Greece reache d up to 45% by the 15th century, and they were then supplemented by an additiona l wave of Muslim Albanians in the 18th century (Trudgill). (1975: 6) -An Albanian historian, e Sphrantzes, indicates onnesus numbered 290000 et ne Luften Clirimtare -N. L. by the people nd New, Dhimiter Grillo, referring to Byzantine chronicler Georg that during the middle of XV century, Albanians in Pelop and could provide 30000 fighters.(Arvanitet dhe Shqiptar te Popullit Grek, 1985)

G. Hammond, a historian who is sympathetic to the Greek view, said that middle of the fourteenth and early fifteenth century the majority of the of the Peloponnese were Albanian speaker. (N.L.G. Hammond, Greece Old a p. 44).

-George Finlay indicated that Peloponnesus still had a majority Albanian populat ion during mid-nineteenth century. (George Findlay, A History of Greece: The Gre ek Revolution, pt.1, p. 29) -In 1855, Edmond About estimated that 25% of Greece was populated by Albanians. (Edmond About, Greece and Greeks of present day, MDCCCLY, p. 49) -A more conservative number comes from J. G. Hahn who in in 1854 estimated thatof a total of one million inhabitants of Greece, about 173,000 were Albanians. (Vas iliiev, A. A., History of the Byzantine Empire, 1964, Vol. 2, p.615) -Ottoman records indicate that during XV whole regions of Morea are identified a s Albanian. For example, in an area in the northern and central Morea (inclusiv e of Kallandros, Sandameri, Grebenes and Hllamuci) of listed 198 villages, 155 w ere identified as Albanian. ( Anti-Ottoman Albanian Resistance during XV century ) -Aristidh Kolias in his book, quotes an interesting piece of information. When K ing George was handed the Greeces crown (by three Arvanites), the King remarked t hat Arvanites constitute the majority of our population. (p. 31)

In fact there has never been any exact estimate done about the size or history of the Albanian component in the population of Greece. But by above comments, on e can assume that the Albanian presence was substantial.

The Albanians came into limelight of western Europeans during the Greek war of i ndependence, as they were the prime contributors to the war for liberation of Gr eece. This reality did not fit with their idealized vision about the Greeks, the descedants of classical Greeks. The heroes and fighters were Albanian, with a d istinct language and culture. The irony is that the official Greek line has neve r recognized them as such, and the history of this group of people has been misi nterpreted or ignored. I chose Tito Jochalas comments because they typify Greek attitude on the subject of Albanians, full of assumptions, many of them wrong, and always in support of their national aims. The significant element in Titos Jochalas passage is the recurring topic with hi storians on the subject of an early Albanian presence in Greece and Jochalas eff ort to discredit such thought. Instead of elaborating on the subject, he finds i t convenient to cast doubt on Sathas contention that Albanians had followed Avar s, with the intended purpose of rejecting the view of an early Albanian presence in Greece. A more appropriate approach would have been to state that there is n o evidence to connect Albanian presence with the Avar invasion and explain or co ntradict Albanian toponomastic and onomastic presence in Greece, which presence is widespread. Unfortunately Jochalas does not give details as to why Sathas and Fourikis views were rejected. And its not only the word mani which as indicated, a region was calle d and is recorded to have been used in VIII century. This anthroponym has been i n use in other regions of Greece, mainly in mountainous areas. Also should be me ntioned the name Skorta, another region, which is believed to come from the Alba nian word for shkurt=short. Some other researchers have focused on the surnames Bucari, a castle chief in Skorta area, Vranaj from Albanian cloudy, and Zguro who had possessions in Korinth Albanian researcher, Spiro Konda (Albanians and the Pelasgic question, 1997, pp. 59-134) points out that toponymic presence with Albanian root words are found t hroughout Greece. For instance, he has a long list of place names situated throu ghout Greece bearing Albanian root words for gur=stone, mal=mountain, pyll=fores t, shur=cliff, gorge, etc. Konda goes through a pool of additional place names a nd explain their etymology through Albanian language. Thus Sathas observation ab out the presence of the Albanian toponymic and onomastic presence in Maina Penin sula is not an isolated case but one of many. Sathas mistake probably was that h e related the Albanian presence late in time, Albanian linguistic influence should have had a much earlier presence in Greece. Proponents of the view that rejects an early Albanian presence in Greece, find it convenient to relate the Albanian presence to the archived dates of the 14th and 15th century Albanian settlements. In reality it is a nationalist argument t o push through their view that only Greeks can claim a direct continuity with a distant past. In their view Albanians are more recent comers and there is no way for them to have had part in Greek history. But history is not ready to lend su pport to this argument. Autochthony of the Albanians has been supported by many historians and history indicates that there is a commonality in Greek and Alban ian histories. I want to review the available date that indicates quite a bit of Albanian connection with Greece from the earliest times. Some of the references g o early in time, but are necessary to indicate the elements that have impacted t he development of people in southern Balkans. The name by which the Greeks identify themselves, Hellenes, who were not partici pants of Trojan War, appears only once in Homer. These Hellenes were part of the pre-Trojan War barbarian population of Peloponnesus. Dorian invasion subjugated this people and it is indicated that many were uprooted. Dorians were a norther n people and many historians believe had Illyrian affinities. But ironically Dor ians ended up eventually identifying as Hellenes. Thucydides reflecting on this would write:

the Hellenes had not as yet been designated by a common distinctive name opposed to that of the barbarians. The name of the small tribe of Hellenes mentioned in the Iliad, might have been reused much later on to refer to the mighty Hellenes we are all familiar with who were essentially different people from the former. Even archeologically the name Hellenes in the wider sense of the word appears on ly for the first in writing in an inscription, dedicated to Heracles for his vic tory in the Amphictyonic Games, and refers to the 48th Olympiad (584 BC). Before the Trojan war there is no indication of any common action in Hellas, nor indeed of the universal prevalence of the name; on the contrary, before the tim e of Hellen, son of Deucalion, no such appellation existed, but the country went by the names of the different tribes, in particular of the Pelasgian. It was no t till Hellen and his sons grew strong in Phthiotis, and were invited as allies into the other cities, that one by one they gradually acquired from the connecti on the name of Hellenes; though a long time elapsed before that name could faste n itself upon all. The best proof of this is furnished by Homer. Born long after the Trojan War, he nowhere calls all of them by that name, nor indeed any of th em except the followers of Achilles from Phthiotis, who were the original Hellen es: in his poems they are called Danaans, Argives, and Achaeans. - Richard Crawl ey translation of Thucydides Book I Herodotus was more specific as to what had happened to the Hellenes. He would in dicate that they were a branch of the Pelasgic. It should be clear that when Her odotus says since its first origin he has in mind the original Hellenes. The Hellenic race has never, since its first origin, changed its speech. This at least seems evident to me. It was a branch of the Pelasgic, which separated from the main body, and at first was scanty in numbers and of little power; but it g radually spread and increased to a multitude of nations, chiefly by the voluntar y entrance into its ranks of numerous tribes of barbarians. (The Histories, Clio , LVIII) Herodotus is indicating that many other people assimilated into the Hellenic race. Not much can be said about the identity of the numerous tribes, but one is lead t o believe that at least some of the tribes were different from Hellenes and thei r infusing contributed furthering changes to the original "Pelasgic" composition . Herodotus clearly conveys the view that Hellas originally was inhabited by the P elasgians. Of the main Greek tribes, Dorians were never identified as Pelasgic. Ne ibuhr would indicate that (barthold Neibuhr, Lectures on ancient history, p. 203 ) Dorian Hellenes were not Pelasgian (as was the population in southern and west ern MacedoniaIllyria), but they were kinderd races, identity of religion and simi larity of language connected them with each other The Thessalians, as well as the Macedonians, were, as it appears, an Illyrian ra ce, who subdued a native Greek population but most Thessalians resembled the Gree ks more than any of the northern races( Karl Otfried Muller, The history and anti quities of Doric race, p. 4) Neibuhrs contention that Dorians and Pelasgians were kindered races appears to be a logical conclusion. We dont know the changes that Doric language might have gone through, but the language that the Dorians spoke, with any possible variances w ith main Pelasgic dialects, Ionic, Aeolic and Attic, scholars would still identi fy as Greek dialect in classical period. M. I. Finley, talking about the language of the Dorians indicates that some of the peculiar word-formations and phonetics cannot be explained on strictly linguistic grounds presumably it was a dialect w hich emerged separately in the more isolated northwestern region of the Greek pe ninsula, outside the Mycenean sphere, before it was brought into southern Greece

and Crete (Early Greece, 1969, p. 72) I want to summarize the opinion of Konstantin Qeparoi on Dorians: The Acrocceraunian mountain area was settled by Dorians (according to N.G.L. Ha mmond and Frano Prendi)... in their migration south they most likely followed a route parallel to Jonean Sea, as Aristidh Kolias indicated Dorian evidence spanni ng a period of 1800 B.C. to 800 B. C. this strip After the Tojian War there were additional Dorian migrations from north. Linear B tablets found in Knossos and Mycenea consist of heliographic, representing re presenting mono-syllabic words in Albanian During VIII-IV B. C. Dorian, as an Illyrian branch, evolved into a dialect, with characteristics between the antique Hellenic and archaic Illyrian (Stuhi ne Qend er te Perandorise, New York Center for Studies and Research, 2012) Herodotus gives an important detail in relation to state of languages at his tim e. In one passage he expresses his belief that the Hellenic language has never c hanged since it split from its Pelasgic body. But, on another passage he indicat es that the Hellenic language of his time was different from Pelasgic. The Hellenic race has never, since its first origin, changed its speech. This at least seems evident to me. It was a branch of the Pelasgic, which separated from the main body, and at first was scanty in numbers and of little power; but it g radually spread and increased to a multitude of nations, chiefly by the voluntar y entrance into its ranks of numerous tribes of barbarians. (The Histories, Clio , LVIII) Then he gave us this information : judging by those that still remain of the Pelasgians who dwelt in the city of Cr eston above the Tyrsenians, and who were once neighbours of the race now called Dorian, dwelling then in the land which is now called Thessaliotis, and also by those that remain of the Pelasgians who settled at Plakia and Skylake in the reg ion of the Hellespont, who before that had been settlers with the Athenians, and of the natives of the various other towns which are really Pelasgian, though th ey have lost the name. If therefore all the Pelasgian race was such as these, the n the Attic race, being Pelasgian, at the same time when it changed and became H ellenic, unlearnt also its language. For the people of Creston do not speak the same language with any of those who dwell about them, nor yet do the people of P lakia, but they speak the same language one as the other: and by this it is prov ed that they still keep unchanged the form of language which they brought with t hem when they migrated to these places. (The Histories, Clio, LVII ) By what he reports in the latter paragraph Herodotus indicates that Hellenic had changed in a language which he saw as different from Pelasgic of his time. He c onveys an important fact that by his time there were still communities that had not assimilated and had preserved their original language, a language that had n ot evolved similarly as the main Greek dialects. There is no reason to assume th at this reality had not continued much after his time. Evolving changes would be observed even in Linear B tablets. Professor Saul Lev in would observe that With our meager knowledge of Linear B, it is safe to affirm that part of it resembles classical Greek and part of it differs; but most of i t we cannot make out one way or other I must add that the undeniably Greek featur es, particularly those of Indo-European origin, amount to less than the undeniab ly non-Greek features (p.188) This conclusion taken together with Herodotus indic ation that the Attic race, being Pelasgian, at the same time when it changed and became Hellenic, unlearnt also its language would mean that Hellenic language had

significantly evolved away from its original Pelasgic identification. (The Line ar B Decipherment, Contraversy Re-examined, State University of New York, 1964) The Greek neighbors to the north, the Illyrians with their neighbors continued t o be identified as Pelasgic. Here is how Aeschylus (c. 525/524 BC c. 456/455 BC ) would affirm Pelasgic identity of Illyrian tribes when he talks about Macedoni ans and Epiriots:

THE KING OF ARGOS (The Suppliants, 490 BC, translated by E.D.A. Morshead)

I am Pelasgus, ruler of this land, Child of Palaichthon, whom the earth brought forth; And, rightly named from me, the race who reap This countrys harvests are Pelasgian called. And oer the wide and westward-stretching land, Through which the lucent wave of Strymon flows, I rule; Perrhaebias land my boundary is Northward, and Pindus further slopes, that watch Paeonia, and Dodonas mountain ridge. West, east, the limit of the washing seas Restrains my rule- the interspace is mine. But this whereon we stand is Apian land, Styled so of old from the great healers name; For Apis, coming from Naupactus shore Beyond the strait, child of Apollos self And like him seer and healer, cleansed this land From man-devouring monsters, whom the earth, Stained with pollution of old bloodshedding, Brought forth in malice, beasts of ravening jaws, A grisly throng of serpents manifold. And healings of their hurt, by knife and charm, Apis devised, unblamed of Argive men,

And in their prayers found honour, for reward. Lo, thou hast heard the tokens that I give: Speak now thy race, and tell a forthright tale; In sooth, this people loves not many words.

As we know Perrhaebi were Illyrians, as were Enchelaeae, Autariates, Dardani, Ma edi, and Taulantii; according to this, the classical Greeks believed that Illyri ans were of Pelasgian ancestry. Original Hellenes, as indicated above, were also Pelasgic.This similar identification would indicate that both original Hellenes and the Illyrians had to have had similar language and other cultural attribute s. With coming of Dorians from the north in Poleponnese, some degree of Pelasgi c affinity was maintained, for as Neibuhr maintains that the Dorians and Pelasgi ans were kindered races. Many historians believe that todays Albanian language provides a link with Illyri ans. The Albanians are the inheritors of territories that Illyrians inhabited. I t is interesting to note an element of continuity that todays Albanians have main tained. Linguists, particularly, E. Cabej, have pointed out that the ancient nam es of important cities and rivers have passed without interruption to the Albani ans. These are geographic names from Antiquity the evolution of which into their present forms can be explained by the rules of the Albanian language. Periphera l locations, such as Tivar (Antibaris), Nis (Naissus), Shkup (Scupi), Stip (Asti bos), Oher (Lychnis), Arta (Arachthos), and Cami (Thyamis),7 the territories whi ch southern Illyrians inhabited testify to the survival of the autochthonous pop ulation. Kolec Topalli, an Albanologue indicates that the core of the Albanian language i s autochthonous and this component is the most active from which other words hav e been created. Then come the borrowed words, first from Latin, because the Alba nian language has had a 10 century relationship with this language, then continu ing with the Italian language during the Middle Ages. Other borrowings are from Greek, due to the neighborly position but also the colonies that spread on the c oast. Then the influence persisted in border areas to the south during the Middl e Ages through Byzantine and then modern Greek. Other noted borrowings are from Slavic; last are the Turkish borrowings which are considered significant, but ju st as these had entered the language are currently being abandoned After reviewing opinions on this subject, and establishing a pool of Albanian wo rds identified as Illyrian, Z. Mayani would conclude in his book, The Etruscans began to speak, that for all the borrowings which have occurred in Albanian thro ugh the centuries have done nothing to alter a cardinal fact: the fact of contin uity between Illyrian and Albanian (p. 383) The same pool of people has contributed in the make-up of both Albanians and Gre eks. This does not entail assuming that the development of the two peoples was pure and on a straight line. Separate development evolves into difference, and i t was also exaggerated by infusion of new comers which Balkans knows so well. Be ginning of these differences could be traced very early. For example, unlike Gre ece where the Iron Age was accompanied by the destruction of the Mycenaean-Creta n civilization, the introduction of the new metal appears to have been peaceful in Albania. Albanian archeologists have observed no evidence to support the intr oduction of the Aegean factor in the development of Illyrian ethno-genesis. Thus e scaping the thrust of invasions and in turn securing a cultural continuity that

eventually differentiates them from their neighbors to the south. This would log ically explain why the ancient Greek writers continued to refer to the inhabitan ts of Epirus, Illyria, Macedonia as barbarian. But still commonalities must have p ersisted, especially in isolated areas which normally are slow to change. It is difficult to accept the view that in admixture of people one unique langua ge survived. Indications of a heterogeneous population, I would say cultural and also ethnic, was evidenced even during classical times. A picture of Greeces et hnographic state comes from a proverbial citation of Macedonian King, Philip V, about the demand of the Roman delegation that he withdraw from Greece: What is this Greece which you demand that I should evacuate, and what how do you define Greece? Certainly most of the Aetolians themselves are not Greeks! The co untries of the Agraae, the Apodotea, and the Amphilochians cannot be regarded as Greeks. So do you allow to me to remain in those territories. (Polybius, Book X VIII. 5) Strabo at around the dawn of the new era informed us: all the tribes that are marked off by the Ister and by the Illyrian and Thracian mountains, deserve to be mentioned, occupying as they do the whole of the Adriat ic seaboard beginning at the recess, and also the sea-board that is called the le ft parts of the Pontus, and extends from the Ister River as far as Byzantium. But there remain to be described the southerly parts of the aforesaid [Note] mounta inous country and next thereafter the districts that are situated below them, am ong which are both Greece and the adjacent barbarian country as far as the mount ains. Now Hecataeus of Miletus says of the Peloponnesus that before the time of the Greeks it was inhabited by barbarians. Yet one might say that in the ancient times the whole of Greece was a settlement of barbarians, if one reasons from t he traditions themselves: Pelops [Note] brought over peoples [Note] from Phrygia to the Peloponnesus that received its name from him; and Danas [Note] from Egypt ; whereas the Dryopes, the Caucones, the Pelasgi, the Leleges, and other such pe oples, apportioned among themselves the parts that are inside the isthmusand also the parts outside, for Attica was once held by the Thracians who came with Eumo lpus, [Note] Daulis in Phocis by Tereus, [Note] Cadmeia [Note] by the Phoenician s who came with Cadmus, and Boeotia itself by the Aones and Temmices and Hyantes . According to Pindar, there was a time when the Boeotian tribe was called Syes. ( Book 7.7.1) [Note] [Note] Moreover, the barbarian origin of some is indicated by their namesC ecrops, Godrus, Aclus, Cothus, Drymas, and Crinacus. And even to the present day the Thracians, Illyrians, and Epeirotes live on the flanks of the Greeks (though this was still more the case formerly than now); indeed most of the country tha t at the present time is indisputably Greece is held by the barbariansMacedonia a nd certain parts of Thessaly by the Thracians, and the parts above Acarnania and Aetolia by the Thesproti, the Cassopaei, the Amphilochi, the Molossi, and the A thamanesEpeirotic tribes. (Book 7.7.1) As history that followed has indicated, the admixture of people had not resulted in a rapid assimilation, and differences in language and culture characterizing various communities survived for a long time during the anarchy of the Middle A ges. The mix got further compounded as Anthony D. Smith would point out that "Gr eek demographic continuity was brutally interrupted in the late sixth to eighth centuries A.D. by massive influxes of Avar, Slav and later, Albanian immigrants. " He added that the modern Greeks "could hardly count as being of ancient Greek descent, even if this could never be ruled out. Smith states that after the Alban ian migrations, the Greeks concentrated mainly in the Agean area, Ionian littora l of Asia Minor and the Constantinople. (Anthony D. Smith, National identity, Pe nguin, 1991, p. 29)

Still one might imagine that people in various areas had survived the onslaught and continued to live next to the new comers. The case of Tzakones and Maniote s is indicative of the survival of at least some of the original population. The se communities have been describes as what had remained from the Dorian past. S ome have seen Albanian characteristics in these people, but it did not take long before the official line rejected any possible connection, as we saw above. In fact, there has been no extensive study on their language and any of any possibl e Albanian affiliation. It is interesting to note that in 1180 there was mention of a none-Greek langua ge being used in Athens. A certain metropolitan in Athens named Mihal Akominato who indicates that "that the Athenians who came from Attica and the villages spe ak a barbarian language." (p, 154) It is logical to assume that this language wa s Albanian because there is no record to indicate any other people inhabited the area during the Middle Ages.

This map indicates the ethnic relationship in the adjoing area of Boeotia in 15 70. The Byzantine writer Mazaris listed the various races inhabiting Peloponnesus (s pecifically the region of Mystras) at the beginning of the 15th century. The lis t consisted of Lacedaemonians, Italians, Peloponnesians , Sclavonians, Illyrians , Egyptians, and Jews. (Finlay, Mediaeval Greece, p. 234). At this the general t ime frame, Albanians were still settling in the Peloponnesus. Masaris uses the old term to identify Albanians and not the term with which Albanians were known at that time. One would assume that he is probably referring to the native Alban ians, not the new settlers. Masaris makes an interesting remark, he says that La cedaemonians (Tzakones) had become barbarians in their language. (William Miller, The Latins in the Levant 1204-1566, 1908, p.383) The specimens he gave to exempli fy these changes have not been professionally evaluated. These indications are in support of the view that the original people had survi ved in mainland Greece, and that isolated areas had continued to preserve the ol d language and other cultural aspects. It is within the realm of reason to conc lude that cultural elements identified as Albanian by Sathas, G. Panayotopoulos an d P. Kanelidis, Petros Furakis, as well as the barbarian language referred to the primate of Athens in 1180 are indications that language elements distinct from B yzantine Greek had survived from the past. The tendency of modern historians to refer to the people of Greece as Greeks an d connoting a culturally and linguistically unified people is not appropriate. F or more than a 1000 years the area was part of a multiethnic empire in which peo ple identified as Romaioi and the term Greek was rarely used. By the end of the Middle Ages, whatever remained of the Greeks, they were a changed people. Event ually, the church and the language it created for its needs became a source of Gr eek identity for people from various ethnic backgrounds. For the Greek idealist, backed by western philhellenes, this language was a good enough a connection of modern Greeks with classical Greeks, and for nationalist historians to claim th at Greeks represent a continuous and uninterrupted ethnicity from the earliest o f times. Many see the Albanians as an important component in the indicated Greek diversi ty. It is interesting to note the opinion of researcher and Albanologue, Niko St ilos who has focused his studies on the history of Albanians in Greece. He consi ders the Albanians to have been autochthonous In Greece. The later immigrations were supplanted the already existing Albanian populations. He considers Dorians to be the ancestors of southern Albanians while he links the northern Albanians to the Ionians.

Stilos opinion is in line with conclusions of some other historians, particular ly Biris (1961), who have likened the medieval Arvanitic migrations to that of t he ancient Dorians. Other Greek authors, working from fallacious assumption that Epiriots were Greek, have proposed an ancient identity of the settlers based on their supposed Epirote ancestry. Stilos goes to say that in antiquity it was th e predecessor of todays Albanian that was spoken. In support of this theory he de ciphered Doric inscription of the Perugia stone through Albanian, in both Greek and Latin alphabets. Another subject dear to the motivated Greek historians is Epirus, and how to pr otect its greekness. Here is how Titos Jachalas analyzes the migration of Albani ans: In archival material, the arrival of the Albanians in Greece is first referred to in a letter by Marino Sanudo dating from 1325, in which he reports on the mig ration of the Albanians and their raids, from which the local Greeks and Catalan s suffered. He also states that the Greeks and Catalans tried to drive the invad ers, whose numbers were ever increasing with their family members, out of Thessa ly Johannes Cantacuzene then adds a brief note that is worth mentioning because it reveals that when Sirjannis was ostracized from Byzantium, he is said to have landed in Euboea, Locris and Acarnia and to have sought refuge amongst the Alba nians in Thessaly, whom he had known from the time when he was General of the Wes t. We know that Sirjannis held this office around the year 1315 and can thus conc lude that the Albanians were already present in Thessaly at the start of the 14t h century It is also possible that the Albanians had already begun to spread peacefully s outhwards in the second half of the 13th century, taking advantage of the rivalr y between the Despot of Epirus, Michael II, and the imperial dynasties of Nicaea and Constantinople. The southward spread of the Albanians, as Dionysios Zakythi nos noted, was also facilitated by the Fourth Crusade that sowed confusion in Al bania and elsewhere in the Byzantine Empire. New Albanian immigrants arrived shortly thereafter with the Serbian forces that conquered Albania, Thessaly and Epirus under Stefan Dushan (1348). The Greek po pulation was gravely affected. The Serbs no doubt displaced many Greeks to make room for their Albanian allies. The Albanians spread again over Epirus, Thessaly and Aetolia-Acarnania. The sudden death of Stefan Dushan (1355) led to renewed upheaval. The deposed Despot of Epirus, Nikephoros II Ducas, hoped to take advan tage of the confusion and endeavoured to seize power once again by driving the A lbanians out of the region. His move failed, however, after the spectacular Alba nian victory in the Battle of Acheloos (1358) in which Nikephoros was slain. The Albanian victor, Charles Thopia, abandoned Greece soon thereafter and proclaime d himself King of Albania.

If one would agree with this explanation, that It is also possible that the Alba nians had already begun to spread peacefully southwards in the second half of th e 13th century, it has to be assumed that at the start of their migration, Albani ans chased all the Greeks out and established their dominance. This is improbabl e and without historical support. In reality the Albanian presence should be see n as inhabitants of Epirus prior to the mention in archival material in 1325 or th e second half of the 13th century. George Akropolites (1217 1282) (Tr ford University Press, 2007) confirms the traditional border between Epirus and o ur Hellenic land to be Pindos mountains (p.82) and than adds that the Epiriotes ar e not Romans; they are the western race ( P. 95). In another passage, . Akrop. exp resses the contrast between Nicaea and Epiros in strong terms of identification whic h separate us from them:ours, our men, our Hellenic land, as opposed to the wester 8) This information is also a confirmation of ethnic unity of Epirus Vetus and E pirus Nova.

It is clear from this information that Epirus was not Greek in early 13th Cenu ry. It cant have been anything else but Albanian. Anonymous Panegyric of Emperors Manuel and John VIII Paleologos, clearly describes the cities of Arta and Ioanni na as peopled by Greeks, while the Albanians occupy the rest of Epirus. (Brendan Osswald, The Ethnic Composition of Medieval Epirus, 2005, p. 10). One can conclu de that the ethnicity of Epirus as a whole has never changed. Greek population o f Ioannina and Arta is explained by the fact that the former center was establis hed in the 9th century, by Greeks fleeing from Constantinople, while Arta, as a religious, administrative and business center, became home for many Greeks. N. G. L. Hammond has followed Greek nationalist claims when it comes to the eth nicity of population of Epirus. He ignored all sources that point to non-Greek c haracter of Epirus throughout history. And he has been careful not to compromise his opinions. Here is what he states about the language of the Arvanites: The fact that most Albanians in Greek lands have spoken the Geg dialect during the last hundred years is an indication of their geographical origin; that is to say, the first settlers came predominantly from north of the Shkumbi river, i.e . from north of Arbana , as indeed the literary sources suggest. When they passe d through the country south of the Shkumbi, they carried with them only a small number of the Albanians then resident in Epirus Nova, speakers at that time evid ently of Tosk, Ljap and Tsam. It was this last group - speakers of Tosk, Ljap an d Tsam - which occupied much of Epirus Vetus (37) when the speakers of Geg had l eap-frogged beyond them into central Greece and the Peloponnese. With this basic assumption, Hammond is wrong. It is an accepted by linguists th at the Arvanites speak an Albanian variant that is part of dialect spoken in Epi rus Vetus. According to Jorgji Gjinari, Albanians in Greece as well as Italy, kn own as arbresh, speak the southern dialect (Fjalori Enciklopedik Shqiptar, 1985, p.188). While Encyclopdia Britannica Online. would indicate (under Albanian lang uage, dialects): All of the Albanian dialects spoken in Italian and Greek enclaves are of the To sk variety and seem to be related most closely to the dialect of amria in the extr eme south of Albania. Hammond has a reason to insist on the northern Albanian origin of Arvanites bec ause anything else would compromise his established claim that in his opinion Epir iots were Greek speaking. He has supported nationalist Greek historians who main tain that the population of Epirus was Greek speaking, and thus, it would be log ical to assume, that Albanian speaking Arvanites cant have originated there! A typical established opinion about the new comers was that they settled in rou gh areas. Here is how Hammond puts it: "This race are all nomads, and do not make their stay for long in any one place " they were, then, transhumant pastoralists without fixed abodes or villages. Bu t there were many others who wanted to cultivate the land and were given land by the Venetians and the Greeks, because they were such hard-working and expert cu ltivators. They had evidently been engaged in agriculture in lands south of the Shkumbi river or in the lakeland and had joined the stream of migrants in the ho pe of obtaining better land. When Manuel Cantacuzenus, Despot of Mistra in the P eloponnese, took over "all Albania," he deported two groups of Albanians and set tled them, one near Constantinople and the other in the Peloponnese, the latter "a great number" (30). The Albanians were acceptable to the Greek, Catalan or Ve netian overlords, as the case might be, because they were capable of reviving ag riculture in derelict areas. These historians have never explained how come that without exception all Greek

historic centers, such as Argos, Sparta, Attica, Beotia, etc. were exclusively inhabited by the Albanians. No historian as yet has provided a logical explanati on for the absence of Greeks in these areas. Or, maybe people that came to be kn own as Albanians made up the population of these areas earlier in time! According to Hammond, Albanian movement south resulted as opportunities arose th rough the decline and disruption of the Byzantine Empire and the wars which foll owed between the various small principalities of Greeks, Serbs, Catalans, Veneti ans and others A contributory factor seems to have been overpopulation among the Albanians. Evidently, we have to assume that Albanians had no such problems in t heir poor, unproductive high mountains. There is a mistaken tendency to somehow covey the impression that there was a s izable Greek population in Peloponnesus but due to wars and pestilence it was red uced (no one else was effected, just the Greeks) . The fact is that the Greek noti on of identity had not taken hold as yet. Identification of people as Greeks does not appear in an enumeration by Mazaris of the various races inhabiting Peloponn esus. This Byzantine writer of first quarter of the 15th century enumerates Lace daemonians (Tzakokones), Italians, Peloponnesians , Sclavonians, Illyrians, Egyp tians, and Jews. (Finlay, Mediaeval Greece, p. 234) Only the designation Pelopon nesians can be considered to represent Greeks. Evidently, Hammond subscribes to the baseless theory that sees the Albanians as an expanding people, not as a contracting population as history indicates. To i ndicate how baseless this theory is, one has to think and ask how possible is it for a small, mountainous area in northern Albania to maintain its population, and at the same time supply a surpluss of people to repopulate the whole of Epir us (as some historians maintain) and 50% of Greece. I maintain that this is impo ssible. Albanian migrations during the 14th and 15th centuries only supplanted a n already existing Albanian population in Greece. Ironically, Albanians neighbo r to the north caught soon on the idea, and they explained Albanian presence in Kosovo and other regions on the basis of migration from northern Albanian mounta ins. While there certainly is information that that there also was an Albanian popul ation to the south and east of Epirus much earlier than Tito Jochalas seems read y to accept. The earliest mention of the presence of a none-greek language in At hens comes from year 1180, from a certain metropolite in Athens named Mihal Akom inato who indicates that "that the Athenians who came from Attica and the villag es speak a barbarian language." (p, 154) Although the source refers to barbarian language speakers, there is no doubt th at these people were Albanian speakers, for it is the Albanians who are known to have inhabited the area during the Middle Ages. The reference barbarian is basica lly reflective of a reality in which people were not seen on ethnic basis, and t he metrolopolite spoke the language that the Church had established, and enforce d on the people. There is no doubt that the presence of the Albanian speaking pe ople in Greece did precede the documented settlements that occurred during the 1 4th and 15th cenuries. But nationalist opinion in Greece has not allowed an adequate appreciation of t he subject because it does not fit with their view that Greeks are direct descen dents of classical Greeks. As one can see from Tito Jochalass quote, the intent i s to support their superfluous ideas about Greek history rather, than reflect on the merits of the subject. An interesting cases is their view on Epirus. To pro tect the greekness of this area, they have devised a view that Arvanites settler s in Greece originated in Albanian north, for if they had to admit that they cam e from south, then they have to accept that Epirus was inhabited by Albanians. B ut this view is fallacious for the reason that the language of the Arvanites is based on the southern Albanian (historical Epirus) dialect, not the northern. Th

is important fact raises an important question, how is it possible for a poor, m ountainous territory like Epirus provide such a mass of people, not only to main tain its numbers in Epirus, but also populate, as indicated above, extensive Gre ek territories. Or is it a case where the settlements supplemented the existing Albanian speaking population in Greece? Area that Finlay portrays as Albanian inhabited is extensive. As figures above indicate, the estimates indicate a decline in size of the Albanian community in Greece. The main reason for this decline is most likely due the state-sponsored Hellenic propaganda that was generously being harnessed by your Philhellenic friends in England, Germany and France atter the independence. There is also t he influence of the Patriarchate from the 18th century, which may have had diffe rent ideals to those propagating a Hellenic ideology - but still shared the same goal, namely, the creation of new Greek-speakers. The effect of assimilation ca n be seen by comparing the indicated 19th century population estimates Hann seems to indicate 20%, while Edmond About indicates 25%, of the Peloponnesus populatio n, with the data given by early Ottoman defters (population records) whole areas populated by Albanians, just like the area in north-central Peloponesus where o ut of the 198 population villages, 155 were identified as Albanian. The map bel ow shows the extent of Albanian speaking areas in the 19th century (assuming tha t it is complete). Talk about the origin of Albanian in Greece has not been approached in the right context, it basically has been subordinated to support Greek claims of their co ntinuity in the areas since the earliest of times. Take the case of Peloponnesus , which as indicated above, the Albanian speaking population constituted the maj ority, and in addition there were other non-Greek communities, thus making Greeks a minority. As I indicated, the Byzantine writer Mazaris does not even identify anyone as Greek in enumerating its population. The most plausible explanation (as to origin of the 14th and 15th century Albanian settlers), that people from a sm all mountainous area like Epirus, retained its optimal population and at the sam e time repopulated 50% of Greece is not credible. A more credible explanation w ould be that a population that spoke the southern Albanian dialect populated lar ge section of Greece much earlier than the recorded Albanian migrations. Bayard Taylor would write: Only in Maina, on the slopes of Parnassus and in parts of Doris, did I find the ancient type in any considerable amount." (Travels in Greece and Russia, Bayard Taylor, 1872, p.262). William Gifford would describe these people very similar i n their character to the Albanians in the north of Greece are the Mainiotes at t he southern extremity of the Morea.These people, supposed to be the descendants of ancient Sparta. (The Quarterly review, Volume 23 By William Gifford). It is of interest to note that their descendents in southern Italy, who were expelled fr om Koron in the Mani region speak and call themselves Albanian today. It is interesting to George Fnlays reference the Arvanites of Bardunia, he state s: For three centuries this district was possessed by Albanians, who were without any tradition concerning the period at which their ancestors had colonized the c ountry, or embraced MahammedanismIt may, perhaps, be inferred from this ignorance , that the Barduniots expelled the Sclavonion population, which the Byzantine wr iters tell us occupied this district at the time of the Turkish conquest, and th at they embraced Mohammedanism to become landlords instead of peasants..." (p. 3 0) The passage is full of unproven assumptions; for one, we dont know if the Byzan tine writers had a clear view what was Serbian and what was Albanian, specially in a situation when they were considered allies. The important statement in the

passage is Finlays assertion that the Albanians of the area were without any tradi tion concerning the period at which their ancestors had colonized the country. F inlay, as many other historians of the time relied on archived history of 14th a nd 15th century Albanian settlements, and did not go deeper to explore past comp lexities of Albanian presence in Greece. John Wilkes (The Illyrians, 1995, p. 39) points out that modern historians have stayed away from Pan-Illyrian theories, but, the question that prompted their fo rmulation still remain: there are traces of Illyrian names, and some historical tradition, for the presence of Illyrian peoples in parts of Europe beyond the li mits of their historical homelands, and also in Asia Minor. What one is to make of these references remains a challenge? In general the linguistic evidence for Illyrians in Greece, Asia Minor and Italy is yet to be interpreted In Greece, where, as we indicated this Illyrian evidence is much more numerous , and was followed by additional evidence resulting from Albanian settlements, h as never attracted scholarly interest. Whatever information has been available, It has been misinterpreted, distorted, and ignored, for the dominant view, the i dealistic view that modern Greeks are auchauchtanous and have survived unaffecte d by migrations, an unrealistic view, not many have been ready to challenge. A more realistic history of southern Balkans requires historians to be more critic al, rely on evidence, and break away from narrow nationalist viewpoints.