Talk:Manaki brothers/Archive 1

Article name

Hello, Miskin. Saw your move and recent changes. I don't know whether to prefer "Manakis brothers" or "Manaki brothers" ; Google shows about 3:1 preference for the second, and it transposes the Greek form (οι αδελφοι Μανακη), but Manakis is better English syntax: my sisters in English are the "Macrakis sisters".

Some of your other edits are more arguable. First of all, their Macedonian-language name is very relevant since they are treated as "local boys" in Bitoli, which has a film festival named after them. You may not like it, you may consider it a falsification of history, etc., but it is a fact on the ground.

You call them "Greek", which is in some sense obviously true (Greek names, Greek-speaking) and in some sense obviously false (Ottoman nationals, Vlach ethnicity). It would probably be most accurate to call them Ottoman, Vlach, and Greek, no? --Macrakis 16:02, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

No. According to the Ottoman census of Hilmi Pasha (1905), Monastir (modern Bitola) was half Greek half Bulgarian, it's anachronistic to refer to a Macedonian nation or language at the time without sourcing it. What MacSlavs think about hem today is irrelevant. If you check the news you'll find out that last Wednesday the US congress sent an official warning to FYROM, urging it to stop spreading nationalist propaganda in schools (I can link you to this if you like). Therefore nationalist POV has no place in wikipedia. Also, please don't be making such silly remarks such as "Ottoman nationals" if you want to be taken seriously by me. There has never been such thing as an "Ottoman national" and even if it had, a "Roman Orthodox" subject of the Sultan would have never been part of it. There was no "Constitutio Antoniana" in the Ottoman Empire. As for the Vlach origin, I'm only asking for someone to source it. Miskin 17:59, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

"Congress sent an official warning to FYROM"? That's a load of crap. The United States recognizes the RoM by its name, as do most countries, of course. I'm just as skeptical about the other POV pushing edits you've made, and so reverting them. CDThieme

• Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM) should cease its distribution of negative and nationalist propaganda and should work with the United Nations and Greece to find a mutually a

acceptable official name for the FYROM. [1] There's your proof. Now don't revert again to a SlavMac version, I'm warning you from now that I'm willing to take this as far as it takes. I'm sick and tired from chasing SlavMac lies in wikipedia, it just never ends. Miskin 18:20, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Did you even read what you linked to? Two Greek-American members of Congress wrote a letter and got some other members to sign it. When this was introduced as a resolution, (guess what?) it didn't pass. This is far from Congress sending an official warning. Thank you for sharing with us your level of reading skills in English, though. CDThieme 18:28, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Miskin was wrong, but that is no reason to be nasty and sarcastic. --Macrakis 18:37, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

It isn't the first time he has tried to pass of the actions of these individual members of Congress as representing the whole Congress or even the whole government, and he's been told before that this is nonsense. It does tell me how much to trust his take on a source. CDThieme 18:43, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Please don't assume bad faith ("tried to pass off"). By the way, why did you move the article back from Manakia to Manakis? In Greek sources, they are almost always listed as Manakia. In English sources, they come up as Manakis, probably because Ulysses' Gaze got it wrong. On the Web in general, they come up as Manaki, probably because of the Bitola festival. --Macrakis 18:48, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

The name used most commonly in the English sources should govern what the title is here on the English language wikipedia, but the variations should be listed in the text. I fully agree we can do without nasty or sarcastic comments. Jonathunder 19:25, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Please CDThieme try to control your nationalist anger. It's really ironic to see that a person like you has the nerve to ddeliver such insults. If you knew who Carolyn Maloney was (that you ignorantly characterized Greek-American), you'd know why the letter was not compiled only by Greeks, and would have never made those silly remarks that you just did. The word official can however be subjective. Instead of delivering childish insults however, I would advise you to try to come up with some credible sources that would justify MacSlav or Vlach claims on the Manakis brothers. Until you do so, discussing with you is a waste of time. Miskin 19:35, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

"A person like you" -- is that a slur against Jews now, or what? You go to all these pages and fight with anyone who doesn't take the Greek side, even other Greeks. And you talk about my "nationalist anger". Grow up. (unsigned contribution by CDThieme 2005-12-27 18:54:22)

Carolyn Maloney is a congresswoman representing, among other places, Astoria, Queens, "the epitome of a Greek enclave in America", and has twice been Grand Marshal of the New York Greek Independence Day Parade. So she may not be Greek-American, but she represents probably the most heavily Greek-American district in the US, and I don't think I'd count her as a neutral observer.... Miskin, I am not sure what you mean by "The word official can however be subjective."; there may be unclear areas, but surely a resolution which has been proposed but not passed is not "official" in any sense.

Back to the Manakia brothers -- the form of the name I find in almost all online Greek sources as well as in academic sources. I don't think anyone in this discussion has claimed them as ethnic Macedonians (though I'm sure some people in Macedonia do). They were born in what is apparently unambiguously a Vlach village, and are claims by Vlachs. I would be happy if you would find better sources, of course. --Macrakis 20:26, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

More on ethnic labels

As I said before, obviously "Miltiadis Manakis" is a Greek name, but as it happens, it is incorrect. It turns out that their name in Greek sources is almost always Μανάκια, not Μανάκης. My error. So I will correct this in the text and move the article to Manakia. Google shows a preponderance of "Manaki", but that appears to be largely because of the film festival in Bitola.

Where are you getting this? Please don't move the article yet. Miskin 19:35, 26 December 2005 (UTC

Try the Google search [2]

For such an under-documented article, I think you would agree that online entries (and therefore google results) are not a good criterion. I would trust more easily the anglophone script of Theo Angelopoulos rather than some online entries. Also if you noticed, 50% of the results are FYROM sites, who have purposely corrupted the names to make them sound non-Greek. Miskin 20:29, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Apparently you didn't actually try the Google search in the link above, which is in Greek and is mostly .gr results, and in fact zero .mk sites. Normally, I'd expect Angelopoulos to be a good source, but he seems to have made a mistake, which has now been propagated among all English-language sites since the main reason the Manakia brothers are mentioned in English is his film, just as the "Manaki" spelling has been propagated by everyone referring to the film festival in Bitola. --Macrakis 20:26, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

As for Vlach origins, I admit I don't have any solid sources, but there appear to be articles in the Kathimerini and others referring to this. Vlach origin is claimed by Vlach sources, but of course, that could be boosterism. --Macrakis 19:48, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

The Vlach affiliation is not impossible, I just want to verify it with a credible source. Miskin 19:35, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

There is a book in the Harvard library: Exarchos, Giōrgēs, Adelphoi Manakia : prōtoporoi tou kinēmatographou sta Valkania kai to "Vlachikon zētēma" (The Brothers Manakia: Pioneers of the Cinema in the Balkans and the "Vlach question"). Athēna : Gavriēlidēs, 1991, which is catalogued under Aromanians -- Ethnic identity, among others. I have not seen the book -- and it is conceivable that it talks about the 'legend' of the Vlach identity of the Manaki brothers.... --Macrakis 19:48, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

I'm sure there are books. We just need to get our hands on them, I'll try to deal with that. Miskin 20:29, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

They clearly were not Macedonian in the ethnic sense, since in their time that concept barely existed (the people who now call themselves Macedonian were then called Bulgarians or simply Slavs) -- would you prefer to use a Bulgarian form of their name? :-)

Now, you simply don't use their name, as I explained it's out of context and anachronistic in the given period. It would be like calling Cleopatra an Arab. Miskin 19:35, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Do you have sources for where they were after Bitola became Yugoslav? I don't, I'm afraid. --Macrakis 19:48, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

That's one of the points that I'm planning to verify. Miskin 20:29, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

They were born in the Ottoman empire, they began their career in the Ottoman empire, and they were presumably subjects of the sultan (or do you have evidence to the contrary?). Apparently they continued to work in Bitola after it became Yugoslav/Macedonian; but I don't have solid evidence of this. Do you have good evidence either way? --Macrakis 18:25, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

I do have some sources, but I prefer to search for non-Greek ones so that nobody will be able to object. I doubt that they'd continue to work in Bitola and escape the population exchanges (although not impossible). Even if did stay however, that would make them "Yugoslavian" nationals of "Greek" ethnicity. It's not impossible that they had Vlach origins also, but it would be impossible to be called Miltiadis Manakis, come from Macedonia, and don't have at least some Greek origin on your father's side. Miskin 20:29, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Don't make any changes yet. I'll remove all ethnic labels from the article and will recompile all together after I have gathered credible sources. Miskin 19:35, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

'Ottoman' is not an ethnic label, it identifies their nationality. "Ottoman national" in international law does not mean "of the Ottoman nation" (which you correctly say does not exist), but "subject of the Ottoman Empire". Saying that someone is "British" does not imply that he is English and not Welsh. --Macrakis 19:48, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

I'm afraid you're confusing the Ottoman Empire with Turkey. They're so much alike and yet so different. Of course they were born in the Ottoman Empire. Of course they were subjects of the Sultan. But that doesn't change the fact that there was no "Ottoman" nor "Turkish" nationality prior to the reforms of Kemal Ataturk. In the Ottoman empire there was only a religious grouping of the populations, not an ethnic one. The muslims would be regarded as the people who ran the Empire, but were by no-one officially labeled as Ottomans or Turks. Anyway Christian populations didn't have the same rights, and were not regarded as Ottomans neither by themselves nor by others. This is why I keep rejecting terms just as "Ottoman nationalist", it's just an oxymoron such as "monarchical democracy" for instance. If we followed the classification system of the Ottomans, we'd have to label all christian populations of the region as "Greek" or "Roman" orthodox. (comment by 2005-12-26 15:29:41 Miskin)

No, I'm not confusing them, am quite aware of the millet system and the subordinate position that non-Muslims held in the Ottoman Empire, and was certainly not using "Ottoman" as an ethnic descriptor. You are right, though that "Ottoman" is in itself problematic as a term, since it often does refer to just the ruling class; what do you suggest as an adjective for a resident and subject of the Ottoman Empire?

Then again, all these terms are problematic. A friend of mine is Jewish, with a German family name, and a Turkish passport. He is certainly not a member of the Turkish nation (a "Turk"), but he is a Turkish national.

As for "Ottoman nationalist", I never used that term, though it is arguably applicable to some political positions in the period around 1900. But that's neither here nor there. --Macrakis 20:59, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

I meant to say 'national'. Anyways, in order to make the long story short, if you don't understand what I've been explaining, I have the right to revert you because you're adding a terminology that you just invented last night. Secondly I just verified that one of the brothers died in Thessaloniki in the 50's, so if you really want to follow your "national" theory then you should add 'greek' for at least one of them. Secondly, I'm removing the .mk external links because they're far from credible and neutral sources. I'm not using Greek sources myself, so I demand some co-operation from the supporters of the opposing view. CDthieme is obviously not willing to co-operate, not just in here but in all articles that he's edit-warring, so I'm not expecting much. I just checked with an admin and the revertion of unsourced information falls under official policy vandalism (provided that you have been warned to source it), therefore CDthieme's blind reverts can be reverted as many times as it takes. Miskin 00:56, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

I have divided the discussion into three parts, which are more or less independent. I hope we'll be able to advance more efficiently, and less contentiously, this way. --Macrakis 18:51, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

"Ottoman"

Should the Manakia brothers be described as "Ottoman photographers"? I am changing the phrasing to "photographers in Ottoman Epirus". I hope this will be clear and unambiguous.

Arguments for:

• The Manakia brothers were born in, worked in, and were subjects of the Ottoman empire. Grevena, Iannina, and Monastir were all part of the Ottoman Empire in the period we're talking about. Ottoman of course does not describe their ethnic identification, which was probably Greek or perhaps Vlach. --Macrakis 18:51, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Arguments against:

• The term "Ottoman" might be misinterpreted as meaning a member of the ruling class of the Ottoman Empire (a narrower class, by the way, than "Turks").

The name: Manaki, Manakis, or Manakia?

Which is the correct name?

In English-language sources on the Web, the most commonly-found versions are Manaki and Manakis. Manaki is the accusative of Manakis in Greek, and so is often equivalent to Manakis in English. But of course there are not many references to any of the versions....

Manakis is the form of the name used in the film Ulysses' Gaze, and therefore in works about cinema. In the book Theo Angelopoulos: Interviews (Thodoros Angelopoulos), they are referred to four times as Manaki (p 91, 92, 95, 98 -- accusative of Manakis?) and once as Manakia (p 90). Manaki is also the Macedonian form of the name, used in references to the film festival held in Bitola (formerly Monastir). Manakia is the form found in most Greek-language online references (try the Google search [site:gr Μανάκια]. In print references, a Greek-language book about them spells the name Manaki(s) (Christodoulos 1989) and one spells it Manakia; a Turkish-language book about them spells it Manakis (Margulies, 1997), and another Greek-language book spells is Manakia(s) (Exarchos, 1991). An article on "Greek Film and the National Interest: A Brief Preface" by SE Constantinidis in Journal of Modern Greek Studies calls them Manakia.

It would be useful to have additional information. --Macrakis 18:51, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

How to describe Vlach connection

There are many mentions in the literature of the Manakia brothers' origin in a Vlach village. It is probable, given the names "Milton" and "Iannakis", that they had Greek national consciousness. Exarchos discusses their connection to Vlachness, but no one here has read the book. It would be useful to have additional information on this. --Macrakis 18:51, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Epirus, Macedonia, etc.

A recent edit changed "Ottoman Epirus" to "Ottoman Macedonia". I'm afraid I committed the original error of calling it "Epirus". But in fact, now that I think about it, both are incorrect anachronisms. Though Avdela is in Greek Macedonia, there is really no such thing as Ottoman Macedonia, only the vilayets of Monastir, Selanik, etc. I believe Avdela and Grevena were in the vilayet of Monastir. Comments? Corrections? --Macrakis 23:59, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Evidence of national allegience and ethnic identity

'...the twin Manakis brothers, founders of Balkan cinema, Vlachs from Avdela, one of whom died a "Greek" in Thessaloniki, the other a "Yugoslav" across the border....' -- Mark Mazower, "Introduction to the Study of Macedonia", Journal of Modern Greek Studies 14:2 (1996) 229-235 --Macrakis 19:07, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Archives first offered to Athens- source?

I clearly remember reading that the brothers first offered all their archives to the Greek state but that Athens (in a moronic act of snobbishness and ignorance), turned them down. So they next turned to Belgrade. Does anyone have a source for this? Politis 14:38, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Another point that should be enquired is when the offer was made, and if the offer was made jointly by both brothers; since one died in Yugoslavia, and another in Greece, it would seem they seperated at some point, possibly making different political and national choices.--Aldux 17:23, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Who ever has called Ioanina as Yanya???

I strongly protest the accusation of macrakis that I made a "dishonest" edit! The term Yanya was and is completely unknown and not in use by any! The most logical assumption is that the name was written wrongly in the article instead of Giannena(contemporary term) as Yanya. If it was not an orthographical mistake but it was done on purpose then it is misleading since the city is a well known Greek city and it was known by its Greek name during its existence. Even at the Ottoman conquest period the city was known with the local Greek name “Giannena” (the Vlachs and the Albanians were using the same with minimum differences!). If the "Yanya" does exist (and I don’t object its existence!) it was not a “contemporary name” but the official Ottoman that probably appears as such only in Ottoman documents! So I am reverting the Yanya back in Ioannina since the name was the contemporary one (even in “Giannina” form) and Yanya is misleading! Any differences in the name as it was preannounced should remain in the Ioannina article! {Let me remind that the official name of Constantinople was during Ottoman period as Konstantiniyie (excuse the orthographical) and not Istanbul;. Should we use it as contemporary?? (I do of course expect an apology from macrakis . Although I assume that he made a honest but unfortunate remark)} Seleukosa 09:06, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Also I want to add that my mistake was not the edit! But the reason I used for the edit!!!! I thought that Yanya was an Orthographical mistake! (Or as I said a “transliteration mistake”) I never thought that someone would have put “Yanya” in purpose or that someone considered “Yanya” as contemporary!!! I reverted the Yanya to Ioannina because Yanya was not a contemporary name!!!! (Maybe official but NOT contemporary, or to be more correct not in Use by anyone!!!). By putting “Yanya” into the article it is like saying that Lord Elgin stole the Parthenon marbles from “Atina” since “Atina” was the Turkish name for the occupied Athens! Or to say that Phanariots lived in “Konstantiniyie”!! And again in 1943 the German attacked a big demonstration in “Athen” and “Piräus” and the Italians in 1943 moved forces from “Grecia” to north Italy!!! Do you get my point? It is not enough to have a name used by some official to make it contemporary! That’s why I revert the “Yanya” back to “Ioannina”! With respect Seleukosa 20:18, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Please stop shouting -- the exclamation points really aren't necessary. Having looked into this further, I think you are right, because both the contemporary local name (in both Greek and Albanian, the main local languages at the time) and the contemporary English name (as checked in the 1911 Britannica) were Ioannina/Yannina. --Macrakis —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 21:57, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

I did not shout in any way! I post always with respct and I do expect some! With respect Seleukosa 11:14, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Yanaki and Milton Manaki which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 20:19, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

Latest article move

See Talk:Yanaki and Milton Manaki#Requested move 4 November 2021. Andrewa (talk) 20:32, 11 November 2021 (UTC)