![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
This is the most terrible page I have seen till now. Full of shit!
1.Ανάργυρος Φανγκρίδας is not a
WP:RS. RS is
a good article, a reliable author and a reliable publisher. Ανάργυρος Φανγκρίδας is known
only by his family, so he for sure does not fulfill
WP:RS.
2."Clogg, Richard. Minorities in Greece: Aspect of a Plural Society. Oxford: Hurst, 2002." was terribly misscourced. He says that Souliotes were Albanians.
3.The article is terribly written.
4."Psallidas, Athanasios. Γεωγραφία Ηπείρου και Αλβανίας." has not ISBN, page number, year of publishing and etc.
5. If somebody does not fulfill this gaps, I am going to rewrite the article from the beginning.
Balkanian`s word (
talk)
19:37, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Very good work, the page became more terrible than it was and we are glad to learn a new version of the history, that the bilingual and of Greek consciousness Souliotes were Cham Albanians!!!!! - Sthenel ( talk) 14:03, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
google books search leads to the results (however there must be many other):
So they were of Albanian origin the time of the Revolution. In the Souli area there were some families with the name 'Zervas' too. Suppose we have two Cham civil wars... Alexikoua ( talk)
So the definition of Chams is that they are of Albanian conciousnes.... very nice, we got an answer.23:56, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
The page, however, is becoming biased because of easy assumptions. What I mean is that, the following false assumption was made: Arvanites have Orthodox Albanian origin and some Chams are orthodox, so orthodox chams are Arvanites of Epirus and vice versa, so Souliotes that also had an earlier Albanian origin and are Orthodox, are Arvanites of Epirus, so they are Chams, and so Chams played a large role in the Greek War of Independence. Now, haven't Souliotes been self-identifying as Greeks and not Chams for the last few centuries? So how does that make Chams active in the Greek Revolution? You see what I mean?-- Michael X the White ( talk) 21:37, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
No, no! On Souliotes there are references that say that they are Orthodox Albanians of the cham Brench.
And a lot of others. There is no assumption in this page, at least made by me. There are clear references about every single sentence. Balkanian`s word ( talk) 22:05, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
As for the Souliotes, sources often confuse the terms Albanians and Arvanites. A english book said that politician Th. Pangalos said that he is Albanian (actually he said Arvanite). Another english statement that made me lauph: 'Albanians are the Scots of Greece', suppose the author meant the Arvanites too.
About the 1821 Revolution, the section is very one sided. I will add the role of the Muslim Chams in that period and the fierce 'Cham civil war' (waw maybe creat a new article with this title) that occured these period (Botsaris hated his Cham compatriots very much I suppose).
Find a citation of these above, and feel free to create the "Cham civil war". I can help you, on the case of Souliotes war with Ali Pasha, it is "Edward Augustus Freeman" on the book "The Ottoman Power in Europe", stating that "This was a conquest of Christians by Mahometans ; but it was not a conquest of Christians by Turks. It was in truth a conquest of Albanians by Albanians" But, you will have to find a place that clearly cits "Cham Civil war" in a RS. Balkanian`s word ( talk) 22:41, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
On Botsaris do not forget, that he was in the Albanian regiment of the French Army, his mother tangue was cham albanian dialect, per Titos Jochalas, etc. etc. etc. Balkanian`s word ( talk) 22:42, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
I do not doubt that Souliotes may be seen as having earlier Orthodox Albanian origin, but that does not make them Chams. I can see one source speaking of a cham branch, but that still would be cham origin, without making them Cham Albanians. From what is written in the article, Cham Albanians self-identify as Albanians, when Souliotes do not.-- Michael X the White ( talk) 22:46, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
The most common view on the ethnicity of the Souliotes was that they were a mix of Greek and Albanian people living in the area, bilingual in Greek and Albanian, who had possibly Greek consciousness but beyond it they were strongly identified with their region and their "Souliote identity". But it is clear that they never considered themselves Albanians and part of the Albanian nation. Such designations like "Cham Albanians" are irrelevant. The article makes the readers feel that it refers to a clearly Albanian population, and Souliotes were not either in terms of origin or in terms of culture. - Sthenel ( talk) 12:54, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
But it would not be anachronistic to call the Souliotes Cham Albanians because of their bilingualism? "Albanian" stood for an ethnolinguistic group, but the Souliotes were not only Albanian-speakers; you said that everybody was an Albanian who spoke Albanian, in this way the Souliotes were Greeks and not Cham Albanians as they spoke Greek too. And the most important is that this region of Epirus was inhabited by Greek and Albanian people, so people of mixed cultural and linguistic heritage were the most possible "product" of this match. What I can't get is why the article stresses their "Albanian part", calls them definitely Albanians and ignores "anything Greek" in them. - Sthenel ( talk) 13:46, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
The conclusion of my point is that a mixed population should not be called Greeks or Albanians, but this article does so and seems really nationalistic. That's what I want to point out. - Sthenel ( talk) 14:19, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
The notion that they were ethnolinguistically Albanians comes up from where exactly? Ethnically? Has their ethnicity been proven in the sources? I don't think so. Did they have Albanian consciousness (the most important for someone in order to be characterized ethnically)? Of course not! On the contrary, the subjacent to the Ottoman rule Albanian troops were in fact the immediate enemies of the Souliotes, with the latter neither considering them as the brothers who had gone astray. They referred to the Albanian enemies as foreigners to them. Linguistically? They were not only Albanian-speakers, so they were not ethnic Albanians by language. So, the only people that can call them definitely Albanians are these who dispute the Greek presence in Epirus, consider it a pure Albanian territory, and support that the Greek language was spoken there only as a lingua francaof the time and not because Epirus had Greek population as well. - Sthenel ( talk) 15:23, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
If they had a particular consciousness, that was Greek and not Albanian. And finally, I'll say one more time that it seems nationalistic to say that Greek was only spoken in Epirus as a lingua franca and not as a native language. I don't have anything else to say. Thanks for the discussion! - Sthenel ( talk) 15:49, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
FP, with all due respect, your line of argumentation is not very convincing. "Albanian" may have been synonymous with "Albanophone" then, but not today. And our readers live in the here and now. Similarly, we no longer treat Turk and Muslim as synonymous. · ΚΕΚΡΩΨ· 14:45, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
Also, regarding your quip about the Greeks' "taking recourse to the modern construct of Arvanite rather than Albanian", are the "Chams" not a modern construct? · ΚΕΚΡΩΨ· 15:34, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
The salad called Souliotes contains Greek and Albanian ingredients. Please clarify which are these ingredients, because we are confusing the nationality of the 20th century, with the ethnicity of 18th century, when Souliotes existed as such, i.e. as the inhabitants of Souli. It maybe written that they were an Albanian community, which was finally hellenized, after their incorporation in the Greek mainstream culture (of course, when it became mainstream national culture, i.e. in the mid 19th century, when they had long time left Souli). Balkanian`s word ( talk) 16:10, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
"holistically linguistic standpoint" LOL.
"because there did not exist a national culture" yes because the albanians had a "national culture" before the early 20th century when the souliots were already greeks in every meaningful sense...
you are arguing post-national matters in pre-national times. the souliots were albanian-speaking greek orthodox people of albanian and greek-speaking (yes actually) origin 85.74.215.73 ( talk) 00:45, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
What's wrong with "Albanophone Greek Orthodox", as suggested here? It is not only factually more precise but avoids loaded ethnonyms altogether, referring only to the objective reality of their language and religious affiliation. · ΚΕΚΡΩΨ· 14:37, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
The Arnakis ref [2] will of course be removed again. It is quite obviously not suitable to support that point in the text. Apparently it was chosen deliberately as a polemical commentary against the very point made in the text, replacing an attempt at formulating a neutral middle ground with a polemical partisan statement. Unacceptable. Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:37, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
I think, we have forgot that the first think we have to do is to give sources. Lets put the sources about Souliotes down and see who is right, and who is wrong, without analyzing them. I will add some sources which , please add more:
Are Albanians:
Are Hellenized Albanians:
Are Greeks or Albanian-speaking Greeks:
I think that only arguing about nothing is making this page as Greek-Albanian. If there are no more sources that claim Greekness than it would be reworded (without pulling out their Greekness, but ofcourse emphasising their Albanianness), because not just the majority, but also great historians, like Hobsbown (one of the best in 20th century) agree on that point. Waiting for discussion, not on issues, but on sources (do not forget: reliable, and most of all on this field.) Balkanian`s word ( talk) 17:08, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
Ok I added Arnakis, if he is reliable there`s no problem. I`m not trying to maximalise anything. But, just seeing the list, the most prominent and the majority in the same time of historians, say clearly about their origin. If this is the final result, than it would be NPOV to say "Albanians, whose ethnicity is disputed by historians as Greeks", if the result turns upround than "Greeks, whose ethnicity is disputed...". As for Hobsbawn, it would be a blasphemy to say that his not the one, as he is considered the best historian of the century.:-) Balkanian`s word ( talk) 18:36, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
GK1973 ( talk) 19:51, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
As far as we can see:
All of them integrated conclude on this points:
So the only encyclopedic solution instead of Greek-Albanians which says nothing is: Souliotes were ethnic Albanians, with a regional identity, which later became integrated into the Greek nation.
Greek Albanian cannot stay inthere because it is not explained how such a thing can exist. Balkanian`s word ( talk) 13:06, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
The Souliotes ( Albanian: Suliot, Greek: Σουλιώτες), also known as Souliots or Suliots were a warlike ethnicaly Albanian community, with a regional identity, which later was integrated into the Greek nation. They were named after the village of Souli, a mountain settlement in Thesprotia, Greece, where they established an autonomous association of villages resisting Ottoman rule in the 17th and 18th centuries. Τhey belonged to the Greek Orthodox Church and spoke the Cham dialect of Albanian.
Thats all. Balkanian`s word ( talk) 13:13, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
One thing is certain, the Souliots identified with the Greek liberation cause for which they fought as 'Greeks' against the 'Turks' (including against the Albanian Muslims). Politis ( talk) 13:53, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
Hah. It feels so great being right in the middle equidistant to both sides in a dispute, for once. It makes me sooo feel I must be right and my solution is the best. Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:11, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
I can see no reason at all, after all this discussion, nobody managed to give a single reference that they were ethnically Greeks, so I am going to add in the page, their Albanian ethnic belonging, and their Greek national belongig, keeping ofcourse their Souliot different identity. Balkanian`s word ( talk) 17:32, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
I cannot understand whats going on. My proposal (based on sources) does not fit to you, futs proposal (based on sources) does not fit to you. Your proposal (based on assumptions on one source) cannot be added my friend. Whatever that will be written will have at least this fact Albanian ethnicity (per all sources) Greek nationallity (per all sources) and souliot identity (per all sources), because thats just what fucking sources say. Balkanian`s word ( talk) 19:05, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
Respecting sources. I am waiting for proposals, for the lead. For sure "Greek-Albanian" cannot stand, because it is inacquarate. Sources are clear, "ethnically albanians", "natioanlly greeks" and "souliot identity". I insist in my proposal, cause it is the NPOV-ist. But I am waiting for new ones too. Balkanian`s word ( talk) 11:04, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
I have made an according-to-sources-lead. If you have a new according-to-sources-proposal, than you are welcomed. Balkanian`s word ( talk) 16:20, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
I am not using a small number of sources, but the majority. Some sources, are not reliable, thats why are not used, others, have not been presented. The lead that I proposed, it is not nationalistic, since it stresses that they were integrated into the Greek nation, i.e. that nationally they were Greeks, but ethnically Albanians, and with a totally different regional identity, the Souliotic one. This means that the current lead, says exactly that they were Greek-Albanians, but just explains what it means, since a Greek-Albanian (as a modern term) could not have existed in a period, when nations were in the process of being formed and where their identity was neither Greek, nor Albanian. Balkanian`s word ( talk) 16:50, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Its not me that decide their natioanllity and ethnicity, sources do, read them once, and the discuss. NPOV does not mean having a consensus of what you like or not, it means to use whatever reliable sources say. And thats exactly what they say. Balkanian`s word ( talk) 17:07, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
What do sources say? It is pretty clear, see #Talking on sources. What is not unclear in there? Balkanian`s word ( talk) 17:58, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
After a quick research I found these:
- Sthenel ( talk) 20:05, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Unfortunately, just seeing them, is not enough.
As a conclusion just go and read WP:RS, and then post new sources. Balkanian`s word ( talk) 20:18, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
1. It is not about "general belief", it is about "reliable sources". And for sure, these above are not, not for me, but for WP:RS. "Slender allegations?" You presented books, with no bibliography, written by non-historians, and primary sources. Please, just read WP:RS. On Michael, Vickers is a RS, whatsoever, even if you dont like her there is Eric Hobsbawm and NGL Hammond, who are not just RS, but the best historians of XX century, just read their pages, or google them. Wikipedia is not "what we like" or what "we think", but what WP:RS authors thinks. If you cannot provide RS authors, then it just means that my proposal is right. Balkanian`s word ( talk) 21:37, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
LMAOF. this article suck. sulliots are greek and NOT ALVANIANS. i find stuff: [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] 71.172.195.65 ( talk) 17:28, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
[16] [17] [18] more stuffs for read. no prapoganda. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.225.116.150 ( talk) 18:06, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
I added some sources according to my comments above. I also add (according to the sources) that they were integrated the time of the Revolution (seems also logical, who fights his compatriotsand? only if they were some kind of machochists, or else they did that for money, or they were too stubid and didn't know what they really were). Alexikoua ( talk) 17:26, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
What about Victor Roudometof? Alexikoua ( talk) 18:51, 16 March 2009 (UTC) The Muslim Bonaparte: diplomacy and orientalism in Ali Pasha's Greece. Katherine Elizabeth Fleming. The Ottoman Empire and Its Successors, 1801-1927. William Miller. Helen Angelomatis-Tsougarakis. Taylor & Francis, 1990. ISBN 0415034825. "The most obvious examples of gradual integration of Albanians into the national consciousness of the Greeks are the Ydraioi and the","Their Albanian origin was soon forgotten even by themselves".
It seems that they were assimilated that time (1821), but how knows what that have in mind. Alexikoua ( talk) 18:54, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
It seems you are confusing the terms, being ethnically something does not equal being of that origin. You are ignoring a number of sources I add:
Most sources say they were of Albanian origin. It is you that need to find out sources that oppose this. Alexikoua ( talk) 20:23, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
Balázs Trencsényi, Michal Kopecek. Discourses of Collective Identity in Central and Southeast Europe (1770-1945): The Formation of National Movements, Published by Central European University Press, 2006, ISBN 963732660X, 9789637326608 p. 173 "The Souliotes were Albanian by origin and Orthodox by faith". Where on hell is Greekness here?
By the way The eve of the Greek revival: British travellers' perceptions of early nineteenth-century Greece clearly states about their ethnicity :"The most examples of gradual integration of Albanians into the national consciousness of the Greeks are the Ydraoi and the Souliotes. The diffusion of the Greek language among the Albanians was a further important factor in their cultural assimilation with the Greeks." Albanians, Albanians, Albanians. So I am adding it on Albanians. Balkanian`s word ( talk) 20:53, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
It also says that "however the process of integration and acceptance of this ethnic group as part of the greek nation was not uniform in all parts of greece." Even after the war of independence they were not accepted as Greeks. What on hell are you trying to prove. 100 refere4nces are clear. Albanians which became hellenized. Balkanian`s word ( talk) 21:05, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
They were already hellenized in the War of Independence. Don't know why you make things so complicated, if you combine a number of sources and explain them wrong you can also prove with a complicated sequence that their were from azerbajain.
Let's see: Balázs Trencsényi, Michal Kopecek. Discourses of Collective Identity in Central and Southeast Europe (1770-1945): The Formation of National Movements, Published by Central European University Press, 2006, ISBN 963732660X, 9789637326608 p. 173 "The Souliotes were Albanian by origin and Orthodox by faith". Where on hell is Greekness here?
'Balkanian's:'What does this mean? He speaks about Hellenized Albanians, i.e. Albanians who became Greek. Alexikou's: No he says Greek-Albanians, no Albanians that became Greek...
Balkanian's:is not a historian, no bibliography, etc. etc. he does not fulfill WP:RS Alexikoua's: Woodhouse has written a number off historical books about Epirus. Did he write on the preface: hey, this is just bullshit, fairytailes...
Balkanian's:contains no bibliography. How can this be reliable? WP:RS, WP:RS, WP:RS. Alexikoua's: what about deleting every book that didn't cite the sentence about the Souliot ethnicity? (Beginning with Vickers maybe?), because hardly any books has inline citation about the source he has used on how the Souliots came from.
Balkanian's:"The Souliotes, Christian Albanians who had intermixed with Greeks". What does this mean? He speaks about Hellenized Albanians, i.e. Albanians who became Greek. Alexikoua's:intermixed means: an Albanian marries a Greek (i mean from different gender), their child is 'Greek-Albanian', right? (or hellenized-Albanian? why not albanized-Greek?)
However in: The eve of the Greek revival: British travellers' perceptions of early nineteenth-century Greece clearly states about their ethnicity :"The most examples of gradual integration of Albanians into the national consciousness of the Greeks are the Ydraoi and the Souliotes. The diffusion of the Greek language among the Albanians was a further important factor in their cultural assimilation with the Greeks." So they were Albanians? She says that but they were already assimilated that period (early 19th century, in the Greek Revolution) This is an argument to claim that they were already ethnic Greeks that period.
I suggest to write in the lead that they were masochist, killed their compatriots for unexplained reason while allying with a foreign nation, in which they got assimilated after. Sounds more simple and clear. Alexikoua ( talk) 21:29, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
What does the terms 'Greek-Albanian' and 'intermix of Greek-Albanians' mean for you? You seem really comfused on how to define ethnicity. Ethnicity isn't the same whith language, it's a combination of several factors (language, religion, tradition, heritage, common memories, ancestral links...maybe figting on a side could be a indicator?). And off course beeing of Albanian origin doesnt equal to being ethnically Albanian.
In order to support your opinion you need to find sources that estamblish a clear link between Souliotes and Albanian clans that came to the region in 14th cent. Because sources are unclear about what was happening in that era (Zenebishti, Sphatha clans and other tribes moved out from Epirus at 15th-16th century) naming them 100% Albanians (that period) is simple a pov approach. I agree with F.P. to adopt the Greek-Albanian approach in the lead.
I dont know why you adopt the 'pure' Albanian approach without checking a number of sources and stating that they were not integrated in the early 19th century. Alexikoua ( talk) 06:48, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
The term Albanian-Greeks is unacceptable unless you have both parents with different ethnos, or you have a different ethnos form your ancestors but you live in a different country (Italo-Americans for example) you can not be called like that. Everybody who has dealed seriously with them has called Souliotes as Orthodox Albanians. There are peoples who clearly mix religion with ethnos and voila.. Eastern Orthodox = Greek. If you use this kind of approach then every Orthodox Albanian up to 1919 (Albanian Orthodox Church declared its autonomy) is to be called Albano-Greek or Greek-Albanian?? What about the Orthodox Slavs until they declared their own Orthodox Churches? Were they Greek Slavs or Slavonian Greeks? What about the Arberesh in Italy? They belong to Eastern Orthodox liturgy...should they be called Greek-Albanians or viceversa? Why don't you ask them, you would be surprised I guess. Remember guys we are talking for peoples of 1800. Nationalism as ideology was not even born then. They had their regional identity as Souliotes, but they were not different form the other Chams except for their religion, and remember that even the Moslem Chams were Orthodox before the Turks arrived in mid XV century. The Souliotes maintaned their religion while other Chams changed theirs, but Souliotes were not the only ones who maintained their religion. There were also Albanians in Korca, Berat, Lushnje, Fier, Elbasan, Durres, Tirana which remained Orthodox and also Mirdita, Puka and the highlands of Shkodra who remained Catholics. Now how should we call them?? Only because they maintained their religion should they be called Latins or what? Also I might add that as per the numbers of Albanians in Greece and the Greek identity during XIX century better refresh your sources. Aigest ( talk) 09:45, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Let me remind you that the orthodox of southern Albania were considered total aliens to the muslim Albanians before 1912, its written on several sources (whether primary or secondary), different traditions, customs, habits, social organization and culture. This is obvious to the many wars and armed conflicts they fought against each other. A term Greek Albanian or Albanian Greek means a combination of ethnic features both Albanian and Greek (ancestry is only one, and I dont mean just mother and father but the generation tree). There isn't a clear link between Albanian clans that descented and Souliotes. Moreover, you are relaying to much on the language criterion as for ethnicity. See Ethnicity. Alexikoua ( talk) 11:40, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
anyone home? alvanian pov is wrong. soulli and sulliots greek.
Nations and states: an enquiry into the origins of nations and the politics of nationalism By Hugh Seton-Watson Published by Taylor & Francis, 1977
page 110, autor say that soulli was "ruled by greek chiefs" [24]
The crescent and the eagle: Ottoman rule, Islam and the Albanians, 1874-1913 By George Walter Gawrych Edition: illustrated Published by I.B.Tauris, 2006
page 103, autor say sulliots was "greek-speaking orthodoxoi christianoi" [25]
i show more stuffs and nobodi respond. 96.225.113.171 ( talk) 14:07, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
No comment on Alexikoua, you are just putting OR-ish theories here, in order to make noise, cause you have no argument. On Fut. you continiue being wrong, because nobody said that Souliotes were just "Albanians". THe phrase I added was that they "were an ethnically Albanian community, which became integrated into the Greek nation". And that is too clear and too obvious. This is just a minor correction to your "Greek-Albanian", because strictly speaking it is the same, but essentially differs. Aigest said, and I agree, that being a Greek Albanian, means either that they had double anescetery (and the did not, the had Albanian one), or that they were ethnically Albanian and nationally Greeks, or vice-versa. Since we are not talking about a present population, like Arvanites e.g., but for a community of the 16-19 century, we do not know when did they became integreted into the greek nation, we just now, that they did. So having a sentence "were an ethnically Albanian community, which became integrated into the Greek nation", is strictly correct, essentially not wrong, and does not imply the "time" factor", cause says nothing on when did they integrate. Balkanian`s word ( talk) 15:34, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
more alvanian pov. perraivos live and fight with sulliots and he says theyre greek in all ways. did commie <<historikoi>> and albanophils do the same? no. sulliots fight for greece not alvania. ali pasha write to sulliots in greek, not alvanian. catherine of russia declare greeks fight and sulliots respond. get your facts together cause article shouldnt have alvanian propagnda. 96.225.105.150 ( talk) 15:52, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Balk. make some lead examples, I believe the problem is more about playing with words. We may find something good. Alexikoua ( talk) 17:10, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Do you agree with the equation ethnically Albanians=of Albanian origin? Some books say that, that way. It's how they understand the assimilation proccess (definitelly a long-term proccess). Alexikoua ( talk) 19:11, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
"were an ethnically Albanian community, that became integrated into the Greek nation. They estamblished .... during the 18th-19th cent.". As for the integration proccess and details about the ethnicity a seperate section can be created. What do u think? Alexikoua ( talk) 20:16, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
So is this our final consensus:
and after this a section about the integration can be created. Do we agree?20:22, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Ok, we have it. Alexikoua ( talk) 21:06, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
yea right. course everyone ignoring sources i show that say theyre greeks. pov consensus. 1700s-1800s: alvanians hate and kill sulliotes; 1900s-2000s: alvanians love sulliotes. irony. 96.225.105.150 ( talk) 23:07, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
"Ali Pasha, I am glad that I have deceived a treacherous man like you. I am here to lead my country-men against a thief. My son may perish. But I will avenge his death with desperation. Some Turks, like you, will say that I am a pitiless father in that I am sacrificing my only son to save myself. I answer, that if you seize these mountains, you will murder my son, my family and all my people. And I shall not live to avenge their deaths. But if we win, I shall have other sons. My wife is young. If my son, young as he is, is not satisfied to die for his country, he is not worthy to live, and to be known as my son. Proceed, then, treacherous Albanian. I am impatient to take vengeance. I, your sworn enemy, Capitan Lambros Tjavella."
this was said before the greek revolution. sulliots are greek. nuff said. 96.225.105.150 ( talk) 23:49, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Greek Orthodoxy is an ill-defined notion. Some authors ( [27]) say that it is the same as Eastern Orthodoxy, some others (WIKI) that it is about the churches that use Greek language. In every case, the religion is Eastern Orthodoxy and not Greek Orthodoxy. If we keep here Greek Orthodoxy here, than Greeks in Albania would be Albanian Orthodoxs, since they are under the Albanian Orthodox Church. Balkanian`s word ( talk) 15:46, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
Actually, up in the mountains people did challenge eachother in verse (a bit like rapper/hip-hop challenges in New York, only with more violent outcomes) but also in writing? BIG doubts all around. If it was Cavafy's work it doesn't count unless he was a Souliot :-) Politis ( talk) 16:38, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
It's just "Cavafy" because he doesn't know any other Greek poet. So don't be so evil with him."Και τώρα πια τι θ απογίνουμε χωρίς βαρβάρους? Οι άνθρωποι αυτοί ήσαν μιά κάποια λύσις".-- Michael X the White ( talk) 20:54, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
What about the books, scientific works etc. that state that the Souliotes were Greek? shouldn't this be added to the article per WP:NPOV-- 85.74.252.76 ( talk) 23:08, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
This is the most terrible page I have seen till now. Full of shit!
1.Ανάργυρος Φανγκρίδας is not a
WP:RS. RS is
a good article, a reliable author and a reliable publisher. Ανάργυρος Φανγκρίδας is known
only by his family, so he for sure does not fulfill
WP:RS.
2."Clogg, Richard. Minorities in Greece: Aspect of a Plural Society. Oxford: Hurst, 2002." was terribly misscourced. He says that Souliotes were Albanians.
3.The article is terribly written.
4."Psallidas, Athanasios. Γεωγραφία Ηπείρου και Αλβανίας." has not ISBN, page number, year of publishing and etc.
5. If somebody does not fulfill this gaps, I am going to rewrite the article from the beginning.
Balkanian`s word (
talk)
19:37, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Very good work, the page became more terrible than it was and we are glad to learn a new version of the history, that the bilingual and of Greek consciousness Souliotes were Cham Albanians!!!!! - Sthenel ( talk) 14:03, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
google books search leads to the results (however there must be many other):
So they were of Albanian origin the time of the Revolution. In the Souli area there were some families with the name 'Zervas' too. Suppose we have two Cham civil wars... Alexikoua ( talk)
So the definition of Chams is that they are of Albanian conciousnes.... very nice, we got an answer.23:56, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
The page, however, is becoming biased because of easy assumptions. What I mean is that, the following false assumption was made: Arvanites have Orthodox Albanian origin and some Chams are orthodox, so orthodox chams are Arvanites of Epirus and vice versa, so Souliotes that also had an earlier Albanian origin and are Orthodox, are Arvanites of Epirus, so they are Chams, and so Chams played a large role in the Greek War of Independence. Now, haven't Souliotes been self-identifying as Greeks and not Chams for the last few centuries? So how does that make Chams active in the Greek Revolution? You see what I mean?-- Michael X the White ( talk) 21:37, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
No, no! On Souliotes there are references that say that they are Orthodox Albanians of the cham Brench.
And a lot of others. There is no assumption in this page, at least made by me. There are clear references about every single sentence. Balkanian`s word ( talk) 22:05, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
As for the Souliotes, sources often confuse the terms Albanians and Arvanites. A english book said that politician Th. Pangalos said that he is Albanian (actually he said Arvanite). Another english statement that made me lauph: 'Albanians are the Scots of Greece', suppose the author meant the Arvanites too.
About the 1821 Revolution, the section is very one sided. I will add the role of the Muslim Chams in that period and the fierce 'Cham civil war' (waw maybe creat a new article with this title) that occured these period (Botsaris hated his Cham compatriots very much I suppose).
Find a citation of these above, and feel free to create the "Cham civil war". I can help you, on the case of Souliotes war with Ali Pasha, it is "Edward Augustus Freeman" on the book "The Ottoman Power in Europe", stating that "This was a conquest of Christians by Mahometans ; but it was not a conquest of Christians by Turks. It was in truth a conquest of Albanians by Albanians" But, you will have to find a place that clearly cits "Cham Civil war" in a RS. Balkanian`s word ( talk) 22:41, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
On Botsaris do not forget, that he was in the Albanian regiment of the French Army, his mother tangue was cham albanian dialect, per Titos Jochalas, etc. etc. etc. Balkanian`s word ( talk) 22:42, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
I do not doubt that Souliotes may be seen as having earlier Orthodox Albanian origin, but that does not make them Chams. I can see one source speaking of a cham branch, but that still would be cham origin, without making them Cham Albanians. From what is written in the article, Cham Albanians self-identify as Albanians, when Souliotes do not.-- Michael X the White ( talk) 22:46, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
The most common view on the ethnicity of the Souliotes was that they were a mix of Greek and Albanian people living in the area, bilingual in Greek and Albanian, who had possibly Greek consciousness but beyond it they were strongly identified with their region and their "Souliote identity". But it is clear that they never considered themselves Albanians and part of the Albanian nation. Such designations like "Cham Albanians" are irrelevant. The article makes the readers feel that it refers to a clearly Albanian population, and Souliotes were not either in terms of origin or in terms of culture. - Sthenel ( talk) 12:54, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
But it would not be anachronistic to call the Souliotes Cham Albanians because of their bilingualism? "Albanian" stood for an ethnolinguistic group, but the Souliotes were not only Albanian-speakers; you said that everybody was an Albanian who spoke Albanian, in this way the Souliotes were Greeks and not Cham Albanians as they spoke Greek too. And the most important is that this region of Epirus was inhabited by Greek and Albanian people, so people of mixed cultural and linguistic heritage were the most possible "product" of this match. What I can't get is why the article stresses their "Albanian part", calls them definitely Albanians and ignores "anything Greek" in them. - Sthenel ( talk) 13:46, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
The conclusion of my point is that a mixed population should not be called Greeks or Albanians, but this article does so and seems really nationalistic. That's what I want to point out. - Sthenel ( talk) 14:19, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
The notion that they were ethnolinguistically Albanians comes up from where exactly? Ethnically? Has their ethnicity been proven in the sources? I don't think so. Did they have Albanian consciousness (the most important for someone in order to be characterized ethnically)? Of course not! On the contrary, the subjacent to the Ottoman rule Albanian troops were in fact the immediate enemies of the Souliotes, with the latter neither considering them as the brothers who had gone astray. They referred to the Albanian enemies as foreigners to them. Linguistically? They were not only Albanian-speakers, so they were not ethnic Albanians by language. So, the only people that can call them definitely Albanians are these who dispute the Greek presence in Epirus, consider it a pure Albanian territory, and support that the Greek language was spoken there only as a lingua francaof the time and not because Epirus had Greek population as well. - Sthenel ( talk) 15:23, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
If they had a particular consciousness, that was Greek and not Albanian. And finally, I'll say one more time that it seems nationalistic to say that Greek was only spoken in Epirus as a lingua franca and not as a native language. I don't have anything else to say. Thanks for the discussion! - Sthenel ( talk) 15:49, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
FP, with all due respect, your line of argumentation is not very convincing. "Albanian" may have been synonymous with "Albanophone" then, but not today. And our readers live in the here and now. Similarly, we no longer treat Turk and Muslim as synonymous. · ΚΕΚΡΩΨ· 14:45, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
Also, regarding your quip about the Greeks' "taking recourse to the modern construct of Arvanite rather than Albanian", are the "Chams" not a modern construct? · ΚΕΚΡΩΨ· 15:34, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
The salad called Souliotes contains Greek and Albanian ingredients. Please clarify which are these ingredients, because we are confusing the nationality of the 20th century, with the ethnicity of 18th century, when Souliotes existed as such, i.e. as the inhabitants of Souli. It maybe written that they were an Albanian community, which was finally hellenized, after their incorporation in the Greek mainstream culture (of course, when it became mainstream national culture, i.e. in the mid 19th century, when they had long time left Souli). Balkanian`s word ( talk) 16:10, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
"holistically linguistic standpoint" LOL.
"because there did not exist a national culture" yes because the albanians had a "national culture" before the early 20th century when the souliots were already greeks in every meaningful sense...
you are arguing post-national matters in pre-national times. the souliots were albanian-speaking greek orthodox people of albanian and greek-speaking (yes actually) origin 85.74.215.73 ( talk) 00:45, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
What's wrong with "Albanophone Greek Orthodox", as suggested here? It is not only factually more precise but avoids loaded ethnonyms altogether, referring only to the objective reality of their language and religious affiliation. · ΚΕΚΡΩΨ· 14:37, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
The Arnakis ref [2] will of course be removed again. It is quite obviously not suitable to support that point in the text. Apparently it was chosen deliberately as a polemical commentary against the very point made in the text, replacing an attempt at formulating a neutral middle ground with a polemical partisan statement. Unacceptable. Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:37, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
I think, we have forgot that the first think we have to do is to give sources. Lets put the sources about Souliotes down and see who is right, and who is wrong, without analyzing them. I will add some sources which , please add more:
Are Albanians:
Are Hellenized Albanians:
Are Greeks or Albanian-speaking Greeks:
I think that only arguing about nothing is making this page as Greek-Albanian. If there are no more sources that claim Greekness than it would be reworded (without pulling out their Greekness, but ofcourse emphasising their Albanianness), because not just the majority, but also great historians, like Hobsbown (one of the best in 20th century) agree on that point. Waiting for discussion, not on issues, but on sources (do not forget: reliable, and most of all on this field.) Balkanian`s word ( talk) 17:08, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
Ok I added Arnakis, if he is reliable there`s no problem. I`m not trying to maximalise anything. But, just seeing the list, the most prominent and the majority in the same time of historians, say clearly about their origin. If this is the final result, than it would be NPOV to say "Albanians, whose ethnicity is disputed by historians as Greeks", if the result turns upround than "Greeks, whose ethnicity is disputed...". As for Hobsbawn, it would be a blasphemy to say that his not the one, as he is considered the best historian of the century.:-) Balkanian`s word ( talk) 18:36, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
GK1973 ( talk) 19:51, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
As far as we can see:
All of them integrated conclude on this points:
So the only encyclopedic solution instead of Greek-Albanians which says nothing is: Souliotes were ethnic Albanians, with a regional identity, which later became integrated into the Greek nation.
Greek Albanian cannot stay inthere because it is not explained how such a thing can exist. Balkanian`s word ( talk) 13:06, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
The Souliotes ( Albanian: Suliot, Greek: Σουλιώτες), also known as Souliots or Suliots were a warlike ethnicaly Albanian community, with a regional identity, which later was integrated into the Greek nation. They were named after the village of Souli, a mountain settlement in Thesprotia, Greece, where they established an autonomous association of villages resisting Ottoman rule in the 17th and 18th centuries. Τhey belonged to the Greek Orthodox Church and spoke the Cham dialect of Albanian.
Thats all. Balkanian`s word ( talk) 13:13, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
One thing is certain, the Souliots identified with the Greek liberation cause for which they fought as 'Greeks' against the 'Turks' (including against the Albanian Muslims). Politis ( talk) 13:53, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
Hah. It feels so great being right in the middle equidistant to both sides in a dispute, for once. It makes me sooo feel I must be right and my solution is the best. Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:11, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
I can see no reason at all, after all this discussion, nobody managed to give a single reference that they were ethnically Greeks, so I am going to add in the page, their Albanian ethnic belonging, and their Greek national belongig, keeping ofcourse their Souliot different identity. Balkanian`s word ( talk) 17:32, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
I cannot understand whats going on. My proposal (based on sources) does not fit to you, futs proposal (based on sources) does not fit to you. Your proposal (based on assumptions on one source) cannot be added my friend. Whatever that will be written will have at least this fact Albanian ethnicity (per all sources) Greek nationallity (per all sources) and souliot identity (per all sources), because thats just what fucking sources say. Balkanian`s word ( talk) 19:05, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
Respecting sources. I am waiting for proposals, for the lead. For sure "Greek-Albanian" cannot stand, because it is inacquarate. Sources are clear, "ethnically albanians", "natioanlly greeks" and "souliot identity". I insist in my proposal, cause it is the NPOV-ist. But I am waiting for new ones too. Balkanian`s word ( talk) 11:04, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
I have made an according-to-sources-lead. If you have a new according-to-sources-proposal, than you are welcomed. Balkanian`s word ( talk) 16:20, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
I am not using a small number of sources, but the majority. Some sources, are not reliable, thats why are not used, others, have not been presented. The lead that I proposed, it is not nationalistic, since it stresses that they were integrated into the Greek nation, i.e. that nationally they were Greeks, but ethnically Albanians, and with a totally different regional identity, the Souliotic one. This means that the current lead, says exactly that they were Greek-Albanians, but just explains what it means, since a Greek-Albanian (as a modern term) could not have existed in a period, when nations were in the process of being formed and where their identity was neither Greek, nor Albanian. Balkanian`s word ( talk) 16:50, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Its not me that decide their natioanllity and ethnicity, sources do, read them once, and the discuss. NPOV does not mean having a consensus of what you like or not, it means to use whatever reliable sources say. And thats exactly what they say. Balkanian`s word ( talk) 17:07, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
What do sources say? It is pretty clear, see #Talking on sources. What is not unclear in there? Balkanian`s word ( talk) 17:58, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
After a quick research I found these:
- Sthenel ( talk) 20:05, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Unfortunately, just seeing them, is not enough.
As a conclusion just go and read WP:RS, and then post new sources. Balkanian`s word ( talk) 20:18, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
1. It is not about "general belief", it is about "reliable sources". And for sure, these above are not, not for me, but for WP:RS. "Slender allegations?" You presented books, with no bibliography, written by non-historians, and primary sources. Please, just read WP:RS. On Michael, Vickers is a RS, whatsoever, even if you dont like her there is Eric Hobsbawm and NGL Hammond, who are not just RS, but the best historians of XX century, just read their pages, or google them. Wikipedia is not "what we like" or what "we think", but what WP:RS authors thinks. If you cannot provide RS authors, then it just means that my proposal is right. Balkanian`s word ( talk) 21:37, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
LMAOF. this article suck. sulliots are greek and NOT ALVANIANS. i find stuff: [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] 71.172.195.65 ( talk) 17:28, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
[16] [17] [18] more stuffs for read. no prapoganda. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.225.116.150 ( talk) 18:06, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
I added some sources according to my comments above. I also add (according to the sources) that they were integrated the time of the Revolution (seems also logical, who fights his compatriotsand? only if they were some kind of machochists, or else they did that for money, or they were too stubid and didn't know what they really were). Alexikoua ( talk) 17:26, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
What about Victor Roudometof? Alexikoua ( talk) 18:51, 16 March 2009 (UTC) The Muslim Bonaparte: diplomacy and orientalism in Ali Pasha's Greece. Katherine Elizabeth Fleming. The Ottoman Empire and Its Successors, 1801-1927. William Miller. Helen Angelomatis-Tsougarakis. Taylor & Francis, 1990. ISBN 0415034825. "The most obvious examples of gradual integration of Albanians into the national consciousness of the Greeks are the Ydraioi and the","Their Albanian origin was soon forgotten even by themselves".
It seems that they were assimilated that time (1821), but how knows what that have in mind. Alexikoua ( talk) 18:54, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
It seems you are confusing the terms, being ethnically something does not equal being of that origin. You are ignoring a number of sources I add:
Most sources say they were of Albanian origin. It is you that need to find out sources that oppose this. Alexikoua ( talk) 20:23, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
Balázs Trencsényi, Michal Kopecek. Discourses of Collective Identity in Central and Southeast Europe (1770-1945): The Formation of National Movements, Published by Central European University Press, 2006, ISBN 963732660X, 9789637326608 p. 173 "The Souliotes were Albanian by origin and Orthodox by faith". Where on hell is Greekness here?
By the way The eve of the Greek revival: British travellers' perceptions of early nineteenth-century Greece clearly states about their ethnicity :"The most examples of gradual integration of Albanians into the national consciousness of the Greeks are the Ydraoi and the Souliotes. The diffusion of the Greek language among the Albanians was a further important factor in their cultural assimilation with the Greeks." Albanians, Albanians, Albanians. So I am adding it on Albanians. Balkanian`s word ( talk) 20:53, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
It also says that "however the process of integration and acceptance of this ethnic group as part of the greek nation was not uniform in all parts of greece." Even after the war of independence they were not accepted as Greeks. What on hell are you trying to prove. 100 refere4nces are clear. Albanians which became hellenized. Balkanian`s word ( talk) 21:05, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
They were already hellenized in the War of Independence. Don't know why you make things so complicated, if you combine a number of sources and explain them wrong you can also prove with a complicated sequence that their were from azerbajain.
Let's see: Balázs Trencsényi, Michal Kopecek. Discourses of Collective Identity in Central and Southeast Europe (1770-1945): The Formation of National Movements, Published by Central European University Press, 2006, ISBN 963732660X, 9789637326608 p. 173 "The Souliotes were Albanian by origin and Orthodox by faith". Where on hell is Greekness here?
'Balkanian's:'What does this mean? He speaks about Hellenized Albanians, i.e. Albanians who became Greek. Alexikou's: No he says Greek-Albanians, no Albanians that became Greek...
Balkanian's:is not a historian, no bibliography, etc. etc. he does not fulfill WP:RS Alexikoua's: Woodhouse has written a number off historical books about Epirus. Did he write on the preface: hey, this is just bullshit, fairytailes...
Balkanian's:contains no bibliography. How can this be reliable? WP:RS, WP:RS, WP:RS. Alexikoua's: what about deleting every book that didn't cite the sentence about the Souliot ethnicity? (Beginning with Vickers maybe?), because hardly any books has inline citation about the source he has used on how the Souliots came from.
Balkanian's:"The Souliotes, Christian Albanians who had intermixed with Greeks". What does this mean? He speaks about Hellenized Albanians, i.e. Albanians who became Greek. Alexikoua's:intermixed means: an Albanian marries a Greek (i mean from different gender), their child is 'Greek-Albanian', right? (or hellenized-Albanian? why not albanized-Greek?)
However in: The eve of the Greek revival: British travellers' perceptions of early nineteenth-century Greece clearly states about their ethnicity :"The most examples of gradual integration of Albanians into the national consciousness of the Greeks are the Ydraoi and the Souliotes. The diffusion of the Greek language among the Albanians was a further important factor in their cultural assimilation with the Greeks." So they were Albanians? She says that but they were already assimilated that period (early 19th century, in the Greek Revolution) This is an argument to claim that they were already ethnic Greeks that period.
I suggest to write in the lead that they were masochist, killed their compatriots for unexplained reason while allying with a foreign nation, in which they got assimilated after. Sounds more simple and clear. Alexikoua ( talk) 21:29, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
What does the terms 'Greek-Albanian' and 'intermix of Greek-Albanians' mean for you? You seem really comfused on how to define ethnicity. Ethnicity isn't the same whith language, it's a combination of several factors (language, religion, tradition, heritage, common memories, ancestral links...maybe figting on a side could be a indicator?). And off course beeing of Albanian origin doesnt equal to being ethnically Albanian.
In order to support your opinion you need to find sources that estamblish a clear link between Souliotes and Albanian clans that came to the region in 14th cent. Because sources are unclear about what was happening in that era (Zenebishti, Sphatha clans and other tribes moved out from Epirus at 15th-16th century) naming them 100% Albanians (that period) is simple a pov approach. I agree with F.P. to adopt the Greek-Albanian approach in the lead.
I dont know why you adopt the 'pure' Albanian approach without checking a number of sources and stating that they were not integrated in the early 19th century. Alexikoua ( talk) 06:48, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
The term Albanian-Greeks is unacceptable unless you have both parents with different ethnos, or you have a different ethnos form your ancestors but you live in a different country (Italo-Americans for example) you can not be called like that. Everybody who has dealed seriously with them has called Souliotes as Orthodox Albanians. There are peoples who clearly mix religion with ethnos and voila.. Eastern Orthodox = Greek. If you use this kind of approach then every Orthodox Albanian up to 1919 (Albanian Orthodox Church declared its autonomy) is to be called Albano-Greek or Greek-Albanian?? What about the Orthodox Slavs until they declared their own Orthodox Churches? Were they Greek Slavs or Slavonian Greeks? What about the Arberesh in Italy? They belong to Eastern Orthodox liturgy...should they be called Greek-Albanians or viceversa? Why don't you ask them, you would be surprised I guess. Remember guys we are talking for peoples of 1800. Nationalism as ideology was not even born then. They had their regional identity as Souliotes, but they were not different form the other Chams except for their religion, and remember that even the Moslem Chams were Orthodox before the Turks arrived in mid XV century. The Souliotes maintaned their religion while other Chams changed theirs, but Souliotes were not the only ones who maintained their religion. There were also Albanians in Korca, Berat, Lushnje, Fier, Elbasan, Durres, Tirana which remained Orthodox and also Mirdita, Puka and the highlands of Shkodra who remained Catholics. Now how should we call them?? Only because they maintained their religion should they be called Latins or what? Also I might add that as per the numbers of Albanians in Greece and the Greek identity during XIX century better refresh your sources. Aigest ( talk) 09:45, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Let me remind you that the orthodox of southern Albania were considered total aliens to the muslim Albanians before 1912, its written on several sources (whether primary or secondary), different traditions, customs, habits, social organization and culture. This is obvious to the many wars and armed conflicts they fought against each other. A term Greek Albanian or Albanian Greek means a combination of ethnic features both Albanian and Greek (ancestry is only one, and I dont mean just mother and father but the generation tree). There isn't a clear link between Albanian clans that descented and Souliotes. Moreover, you are relaying to much on the language criterion as for ethnicity. See Ethnicity. Alexikoua ( talk) 11:40, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
anyone home? alvanian pov is wrong. soulli and sulliots greek.
Nations and states: an enquiry into the origins of nations and the politics of nationalism By Hugh Seton-Watson Published by Taylor & Francis, 1977
page 110, autor say that soulli was "ruled by greek chiefs" [24]
The crescent and the eagle: Ottoman rule, Islam and the Albanians, 1874-1913 By George Walter Gawrych Edition: illustrated Published by I.B.Tauris, 2006
page 103, autor say sulliots was "greek-speaking orthodoxoi christianoi" [25]
i show more stuffs and nobodi respond. 96.225.113.171 ( talk) 14:07, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
No comment on Alexikoua, you are just putting OR-ish theories here, in order to make noise, cause you have no argument. On Fut. you continiue being wrong, because nobody said that Souliotes were just "Albanians". THe phrase I added was that they "were an ethnically Albanian community, which became integrated into the Greek nation". And that is too clear and too obvious. This is just a minor correction to your "Greek-Albanian", because strictly speaking it is the same, but essentially differs. Aigest said, and I agree, that being a Greek Albanian, means either that they had double anescetery (and the did not, the had Albanian one), or that they were ethnically Albanian and nationally Greeks, or vice-versa. Since we are not talking about a present population, like Arvanites e.g., but for a community of the 16-19 century, we do not know when did they became integreted into the greek nation, we just now, that they did. So having a sentence "were an ethnically Albanian community, which became integrated into the Greek nation", is strictly correct, essentially not wrong, and does not imply the "time" factor", cause says nothing on when did they integrate. Balkanian`s word ( talk) 15:34, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
more alvanian pov. perraivos live and fight with sulliots and he says theyre greek in all ways. did commie <<historikoi>> and albanophils do the same? no. sulliots fight for greece not alvania. ali pasha write to sulliots in greek, not alvanian. catherine of russia declare greeks fight and sulliots respond. get your facts together cause article shouldnt have alvanian propagnda. 96.225.105.150 ( talk) 15:52, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Balk. make some lead examples, I believe the problem is more about playing with words. We may find something good. Alexikoua ( talk) 17:10, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Do you agree with the equation ethnically Albanians=of Albanian origin? Some books say that, that way. It's how they understand the assimilation proccess (definitelly a long-term proccess). Alexikoua ( talk) 19:11, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
"were an ethnically Albanian community, that became integrated into the Greek nation. They estamblished .... during the 18th-19th cent.". As for the integration proccess and details about the ethnicity a seperate section can be created. What do u think? Alexikoua ( talk) 20:16, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
So is this our final consensus:
and after this a section about the integration can be created. Do we agree?20:22, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Ok, we have it. Alexikoua ( talk) 21:06, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
yea right. course everyone ignoring sources i show that say theyre greeks. pov consensus. 1700s-1800s: alvanians hate and kill sulliotes; 1900s-2000s: alvanians love sulliotes. irony. 96.225.105.150 ( talk) 23:07, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
"Ali Pasha, I am glad that I have deceived a treacherous man like you. I am here to lead my country-men against a thief. My son may perish. But I will avenge his death with desperation. Some Turks, like you, will say that I am a pitiless father in that I am sacrificing my only son to save myself. I answer, that if you seize these mountains, you will murder my son, my family and all my people. And I shall not live to avenge their deaths. But if we win, I shall have other sons. My wife is young. If my son, young as he is, is not satisfied to die for his country, he is not worthy to live, and to be known as my son. Proceed, then, treacherous Albanian. I am impatient to take vengeance. I, your sworn enemy, Capitan Lambros Tjavella."
this was said before the greek revolution. sulliots are greek. nuff said. 96.225.105.150 ( talk) 23:49, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Greek Orthodoxy is an ill-defined notion. Some authors ( [27]) say that it is the same as Eastern Orthodoxy, some others (WIKI) that it is about the churches that use Greek language. In every case, the religion is Eastern Orthodoxy and not Greek Orthodoxy. If we keep here Greek Orthodoxy here, than Greeks in Albania would be Albanian Orthodoxs, since they are under the Albanian Orthodox Church. Balkanian`s word ( talk) 15:46, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
Actually, up in the mountains people did challenge eachother in verse (a bit like rapper/hip-hop challenges in New York, only with more violent outcomes) but also in writing? BIG doubts all around. If it was Cavafy's work it doesn't count unless he was a Souliot :-) Politis ( talk) 16:38, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
It's just "Cavafy" because he doesn't know any other Greek poet. So don't be so evil with him."Και τώρα πια τι θ απογίνουμε χωρίς βαρβάρους? Οι άνθρωποι αυτοί ήσαν μιά κάποια λύσις".-- Michael X the White ( talk) 20:54, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
What about the books, scientific works etc. that state that the Souliotes were Greek? shouldn't this be added to the article per WP:NPOV-- 85.74.252.76 ( talk) 23:08, 26 March 2009 (UTC)