In the editorial of the previous issue of our newspaper, we concluded: Two key actions (the ecclesiastical unification of the entire territorial region under the name of the Metropolis of Mani in 2010 and the determination of the will for cooperation across all areas for common developmental purposes through the establishment of the Mani Development Company in 1995 as a corporation with all local communities as shareholders) created a strong combined dynamic. This dynamic could serve as a starting point for generalised mobilisation of all the micro-societies of the Mani region and its cultural expressions. In particular, the unifying force, which exists as a possibility in the local ecclesiastical expression, could mobilise all the human resources of the region and our compatriots, both in Greece and abroad, in order to promote common goals of restructuring and development. The formulation of such a roadmap, and only this, could give substantial meaning to the concept of “Unified Mani” that we all advocate.

The forerunner of this idea, a sensitive and resourceful compatriot of ours, the philologist-historian Sarantos Kargakos, who is no longer with us, had already articulated this vision as early as 1996 in an article in the newspaper “Eleftheros Typos” titled “Mani, the Wronged”.  We transcribe the main part of it below, as it was recently reintroduced in publications by the always active journalist Ilias N. Christeas:

“As a Maniot, I experience a psychological split. It is difficult to define myself as either a Laconian or a Messinian. This is because Mani was divided, with one part, Aposkiaderi (Western Mani), annexed to Messinia, while Prosiiliaki (Eastern Mani) and Mesa Mani were annexed to Laconia. Thus, Mani, which should have become a separate prefecture covering the entire Taygetos up to Alagonia, lost its autonomy. Unfortunately, the administrative fragmentation, which certainly served the ambitions of some Maniots (MPs in Laconia — MPs in Messinia), harmed Mani as a region. Its population shrank. However, the administrative division did not lead to a psychological one. A Maniot is a Maniot, whether residing in Messinian or Laconian Mani. Maniots retain their most solid characteristics, even in their appearance.

However, this division constitutes a great injustice. Mani has done a lot for Greece. Some of it was negative, like the assassination of Kapodistrias, even though Kapodistrias treated the Mavromichali family unjustly. Except for some areas of Macedonia, no other region has honoured Mani’s contributions.

I would like to propose something simple: The conditions are now ripe for Mani (Messinian and Laconian) to become a unified prefecture: Nομός Μάνης. This would rectify a great historical injustice. It is the least Greece owes to Mani. The elevation of Mani to a prefecture would offer immense opportunities to the region, first of all creating a solid number of prefecture employees. As a prefecture, Mani would have the ability to participate in the European Community’s development programs, absorb its own resources, and no longer be the poor relation of Messinia and Laconia, which supposedly lives off tourism, while in reality, it lives from the sale of land and towers to foreigners. Within a single Mani prefecture, Maniots would continue – despite their eternal differences (after all, what kind of Maniots would they be otherwise?) – to maintain the unique cultural characteristics of their lineage. As for where the prefecture’s seat would be, today with the progress in transportation and communication, these are trivial problems.

Mani, in order to avoid being destroyed as a region – i.e., to avoid becoming a German “Kreis” (meaning an administrative region with a majority of foreign residents) – needs all its villages. Maniots once declared: ‘When Mani is united, it raises great warriors.’ That is, when Maniots are united, they are invincible.”

Not much can be added to what was expressed around 30 years ago. We will focus on three points: 1) The Metropolis of Mani is now a reality and could become the nucleus of developments leading in this direction. 2) Given the restricted development potential of the country through the administrative framework of the existing Regions, there is often talk about reducing their numbers and reshaping them so that they consist of Sub-Regions (περιφερειακές ενότητες) with homogeneous traditional characteristics, territorial, demographic, and genetic. (It should be noted that this last element was the main argument for the joint proposal by the local government bodies (αυτοδιοικητικοί φορείς) of Mani for funding of 2 billion drachmas through the European Community Initiative LEADER II in 1995). 3) On the central political stage, there is at least one compatriot who is driven by the same emotional connection to the land and our ancestors as expressed by Sarantos Kargakos.

It remains for us to focus on the unification idea and unite. The rest will come because “when Maniots are united, they are invincible.”

                                                                                                            THE EDITORIAL BOARD

MANI: IDEAS FOR THE FORMULATION OF A COHERENT PLAN OF ACTION AND IMPLEMENTATION

The main article of the previous issue, which referred to the genomic origins and customary practices formed over centuries, concluded: Systematic genomic comparisons of contemporary individuals with scientifically documented genomes from racial groups that history has recorded as having settled in our region during the Middle Ages and mixed with its Eleutherolakonian inhabitants could lead to conclusions about behavioural tendencies created on the basis of these racial affinities. Most importantly, however, these comparisons of the inhabitants of modern Mani and those who emigrated, with the genome of inhabitants of the region from 3-4 centuries ago, will undoubtedly reveal the multifaceted common characteristics found throughout the entire geographical area. This element, now substantiated, should lead to common actions by individuals with Maniot genetic roots to successfully addressing future challenges related to the promotion of our region.

The groups of citizens who have in the past expressed themselves publically, incorporating the concept of unity over the past three decades and more, are attempting, with whatever means the circumstances allow, to promote these genetic and customary practices. In this way, there is also some softening of egocentric tendencies and a connection of individual benefit with the common developmental and cultural goals of Mani. Unfortunately, very few other actions moving in this direction have been recorded during the period in question. Only two are noteworthy, the first because it has a strong basis that can lead to efficiency and the second, despite its negative outcome, can serve as a model for opening dialogues between the various regions of Mani and synthesing views to create cohesive plans and find pathways for their implementation.

The first action concerns the renaming of the local Diocese from Diocese of Gytheio and Oitylo to Diocese of Mani, which emerged in 2010 following a decision by the Synod of the Hierarchy of the Church of Greece. It cannot be characterised as a typical action because its boundaries did not change. On the contrary, it was a significant event because it brought the concept of “Mani,” lost since the 9th century, back to the ecclesiastical forefront. Naturally, this provided the opportunity for the associative expansion of the new ecclesiastical name into the socio-political space of the area and its inhabitants, to our compatriots in the diaspora, and before the entire state territory. The renaming did not come easily. Besides the conscious will of our local social expressions and then archibishop Chrysostomos, it required substantiation with a well-documented memorandum on the historical origin of the name compiled by the late scholar Dikaios Vayiakakos, as well as support from many Maniots and Philomaniots in Athens.This project has a solid foundation for success.

The second action concerns the founding of the Development Company of Mani in 1996, with headquarters in Oitylo. It was a corporation with shareholders being the four Development Associations of our area, based in Kardamyli, Areopoli, Gytheio, and Agios Nikolaos Smynou respectively, and almost all local government organisations of Mani as members. Its founding and operational start arose as a necessary condition for claiming one of the three agrotourism programs with ΕU funding allocated to the Peloponnese, concerning socially homogeneous areas without urban centers. All preparatory actions, the creation of its legal entity, the gathering of share capital with shareholders being the four Development Associations and their member local government organisations, and the selection of private investors for agrotourism projects, were conducted in a spirit of absolute harmony with successive meetings of the coordinating group and the investment proposal evaluation group. Thus, the goal was achieved, and the initial allocation of EU and state funding amounting to 1.5 billion drachmas was approved, intended for cultural enhancement projects and privately subsidised agrotourism programs at 50%. Unfortunately, this substantial financial foundation and its intended autonomous management by the Company’s representatives were not well-received by the politicians. Consequently, the traditional internal conflicts and quarrels arose, resulting in the loss of 90% of the projected funding and the eventual dissolution of the Company! This project, despite its failure, offers a model for future dialogue and planning.

The combined impact of these two actions shows the potential for unified efforts across Mani and it could serve as a starting point for the joint activity of all micro-societies in the Mani region and their cultural expressions. In particular, the unifying force, which is inherent in the local ecclesiastical expression with the manifestation of the will to act, could unite the entire human potential of the area and our compatriots at home and abroad, for the promotion of common restructuring and developmental goals. The formation of such a roadmap, and only this one, could give substantial meaning to the concept of “Unified Mani,” which we all invoke.

THE EDITORIAL BOARD

The science of Biology, and particularly its subfield Genetics, determines that every human being carries two types of traits during his/her lifetime: inherited and acquired. The inherited properties come from the interaction of genes contained in the father’s sperm and the mother’s egg when they combined to create the individual. The acquired are formed mostly during the early years of life through the interaction of each individual with the natural and man-made environment in which he/she grows up.

However, the genes of our parents contain properties and characteristics of two categories. Some are in harmony with the apparent characteristics of the parents, while others result from non-apparent traits, which are the recessive genetic factors. From the joining of sperm and egg during the creation of new life, it is equally likely that characteristics from both these groups of genes will appear. This possibility points to the research of the genome of our distant relatives from whom our parents inherited their genetic material. (Note that a genome is all the genetic material of each organism, while a gene is the basic physical unit of heredity in living organisms, part of the chromosome that passes on information about properties from one generation to the next). The logical analysis imposed by this cause ultimately leads to common racial characteristics of the population groups that have long inhabited each geographic area. The research process to identify these characteristics is generally difficult, but it is facilitated if the reference geographical areas are “closed,” i.e., if they have limited communication with other areas over long periods of time. This category also includes Mani, which for about four centuries before the creation of the modern Greek state, and for several decades afterwards, had limited communication with other regions. The mapping of the human genome, completed in recent decades, allows for the comparison of the genome of contemporary individuals with the genome of population groups that are believed to have contributed to its formation in distant periods of time, when they settled in these specific areas. However, a prerequisite for the reliability of the results of this comparison is a sound knowledge of the relevant historical data of each era combined with archaeological research that has led to the recording of genetic material from the bodily remains of individuals from those periods.

Moreover, in the creation of acquired traits, a dominant role is played by each child’s interactions with the environment in which he/she is raised, both the immediate and the wider family environment, as well as the physical space in which he/she develops. The influence of the customs and traditions of the society in which he/she lives, the language he/she first hears spoken, and in later years, the approach to the supernatural element through the religion embraced by his/her family environment also play a dominant role. According to more recent approaches of Sociobiology, a subfield of Biology, some acquired qualities can affect genes and become inheritable over a long-term perspective.

The long list of scientific opinions presented above is an attempt to substantiate the causes that created the common characteristics of the inhabitants of Mani, as they have appeared over the two centuries that they began to leave the region and integrate into the structures and functions of the modern Greek state. Throughout the 25-year publishing journey of MANIOT SOLIDARITY, aspects of these common characteristics have been presented in our columns, and we believe that our compatriot readers recognise some of their own traits in them. Among these common characteristics are the impulsive tendencies to accept or reject many of the ongoing socio-political developments.

Systematic genomic comparisons of contemporary individuals with scientifically documented genomes from racial groups that history has recorded as having settled in our region during the Middle Ages and mixed with its Eleutherolakonian inhabitants could lead to conclusions about behavioural tendencies created on the basis of these racial affinities. Most importantly, however, these comparisons of the inhabitants of modern Mani and those who emigrated, with the genome of inhabitants of the region from 3-4 centuries ago, will undoubtedly reveal the multifaceted common characteristics found throughout the entire geographical area. This element, now substantiated, should lead to common actions by individuals with Maniot genetic roots to successfully addressing future challenges related to the promotion of our region.

                                                                                                     THE EDITORIAL BOARD