Talk:Souliotes/Archive 7

Archive 1

←

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Manipulation of inline reference

A recent disruption in lede paradoxically adds that Souliotes were "Cham Albanians" while mysterious enough the author of the specific source clearly contradicts this claim " the question of a national identity can hardly be applied here". Thus, I can only assume that this is no more than an obsession of a newly created wp:spa.Alexikoua (talk) 19:51, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

The reference says :ethnologist:Laurie Kain Hart. Culture, Civilization, and Demarcation at the Northwest Borders of Greece. American Ethnologist, Vol. 26, No. 1 (Feb., 1999), pp. 196-220. Published by: Blackwell Publishing on behalf of the American Anthropological Association "Finlay's late 19th century impression gives some impressions of the social complexity of social categories in this area. To begin with, the Souliotes (celebrated by Byron and in Greek national history for their role in the liberation of Greece) were a "branch of the Tchamides, one of the three great divisions of the Tosks" (Finlay 1939:42)-in other words they initially spoke Albanian... the question of a national identity can hardly be applied here". We use "were" and not "are" referring about Souliotes(as they are assimilated-see Wikipedia.)They were a branch of Chams , their "successors" can't be called "Souliotes" and a national identity can hardly be applied here . (as they have been assimilated).If my reliable source says they were a branch of chams,then the only contradictor here are you. Rolandi+ (talk) 08:20, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

The author does not adopt Finley's approach, who is outdated, but he accepts that the community spoke initially Albanian. Let me give you the rest of the inline reference:

Speaking Albanian, for example, is not a predictor with respect to other matters of identity .. There are also long standing Christian Albanian (or Arvanitika speaking) communities both in Epirus and the Florina district of Macedonia with unquestioned identification with the Greek nation

In other words your lede addition is not in aggreement with the inline reference, in fact its clearly against it (they are not classified as Cham Albanians but with the Greek nation).Alexikoua (talk) 08:34, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Why "were" is used in the article instead of "are",because they have been assimilated,souliotes spoke albanian,they don't speak anymore,but this doesn't mean they were greeks.(the references make it clear that they spoke the cham dialect).So souliotes,not assimilated ones (they can't be called souliotes as they are assimilated -see:Wikipedia. ) spoke albanian cham dialect and were part of chams .Rolandi+ (talk) 09:07, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

You need to support your arguments with reliable material. So far both of the works presented, Kretsi and Hart, are clearly against your claims. Souliotes are not considered part of the Cham Albanian community in terms of social classification.Alexikoua (talk) 12:15, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Why Souliotes are not considered part of the Cham Albanian community in terms of social classification ?Because your referenses (Kretsi ) call muslim albanians "turks" ?This means that your referenses aren't reliable.Kretsi means that christian albanians in greece can't be called "albanians" as they aren't muslim.See wikipedia's cham article for more details.Both christian+muslim albanians who lived in Thesprotia are called chams.there are references about this on that article (see Xhufi) .Souliotes were albanians who spoke the cham dialect and then they were assimilated + became "extinct" (see robert elsie at the cham article) Rolandi+ (talk) 13:09, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

• Comment When did the Souliotes speak Albanian? A source from the early 19th c. mentions them as speaking only "little" Albanian. The identification as Cham Albanians is not factual.--Zoupan 13:15, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

• Comment There are some sources that make it clear that souliotes spoke cham albanian (read the article) ,on the other hand where is your source?Rolandi+ (talk) 13:19, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

That is not an answer on my question. You should have a look at Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines.--Zoupan 13:25, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

"The Souliotes' spoke Albanian[1](see Wikipedia) "--sources Hart,Xhufi,Elsie,NY Times,Vickers etc.(see wikipedia) . References like Xhufi+Hart makes it clear that their albanian dialect was the cham dialect.So where is your source? Rolandi+ (talk) 13:33, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a source. I have read those references but they actually do not given any reliable information. I'll ask again, when did the Souliotes speak Albanian (and only "little" Greek)? Did Markos Botsaris speak Albanian? If they were originally Albanian-speakers, when would this have been? Is there a primary source (this would "make it clear") of them speaking Albanian? This needs to be clarified. --Zoupan 13:53, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

They actually do not give any reliable information because you don't want them to give reliable information.These references that you call "unreliable" are used so much times on Wikipedia.This means that they are reliable.So where is your source? Rolandi+ (talk) 14:04, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

What? I really don't think you should be commenting if you refuse to contribute.--Zoupan 14:07, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

If you think I shouldn't be commenting if I refuse to contribute,then go and report me!!!If you don't do that,it means that the person who isn't contributing correctly is you.Rolandi+ (talk) 14:11, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Is them being of ethnic Albanian origin and originally speaking Albanian only a theory? If the questions I asked above cannot be answered, I think this needs to be addressed in the article, and "The Souliotes' spoke Albanian" should be removed from the introduction as it is redundant in the notability of this community.--Zoupan 14:46, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

GO,GO and remove "The Souliotes' spoke Albanian" from the introduction .Go ,please! Rolandi+ (talk) 14:54, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

I have tagged the dubious introduction paragraph. If the questions remain unanswered, that paragraph will be removed.--Zoupan 15:54, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Until "After their assimilation, a language shift to Greek occurred, while the Souliotic dialect became extinct" is properly referenced, that should not stay in the introduction.--Zoupan 16:54, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Guys, please, clam down otherwise this is becoming farcical. For one, it is unknown when the language shift to Greek occurred. This is due to a multitude of factors mainly relating to the Souliote dispersal after their expulsion from Souli in the early 1800s. The language shift occurred at different intervals and is difficult to ascertain it. There are however spinets of information regarding some individuals that the Albanian language was still in use for some Souliotes in the early twentieth century. For example a Greek academic Lambros Baltsiotis who has done much work on the Albanian Cham community (both Orthodox speakers in Greece and Muslim Albanians prior to their departure and thereafter from the region) gives the example of Souliote Dimitrios (Takis) Botsaris (son of Markos Botsaris) who was still Albanian speaking in the early twentieth century. Baltsiotis writes: (Baltsiotis. The Muslim Chams of Northwestern Greece, 2011. link: http://ejts.revues.org/4444):

"The lieutenant of the Greek Army Dimitrios (Takis) Botsaris, after a looting incident during the First Balkan War, pronounces an order that “from this time on every one who will dare to disturb any Christian property will be strictly punished” (see K.D. Sterghiopoulos…, op.cit., pp. 173-174). In pronouncing the order in this manner he left Muslim properties without protection. Botsaris, coming from Souli, was a direct descendant of the Botsaris’ family and was fluent in Albanian. He was appointed as lieutenant in charge of a Volunteers’ company consisting of persons originating from Epirus and fighting mostly in South Western Epirus."

Also we have another peer reviewed source by German academic Thede Kahl (who, like Baltisotis, definitely cannot be claimed as having an axe to grind): In his study of ethno-cultural gorups in Greek Zagori, He states the following about the Souliots historical linguistic situation and thereafter, who after the expulsion from Souli went to live in the Greek region of Zagori)> Thede Kahl (1999). "Die Zagóri-Dörfer in Nordgriechenland: Wirtschaftliche Einheit–ethnische Vielfalt." Ethnologia Balkanica. 3: 113-114.:

"Von größerer Bedeutung ist die jüngere Gruppe der sogenannten Sulioten – meist albanisch-sprachige Bevölkerung aus dem Raum Súli in Zentral-Epirus – die mit dem Beginn der Abwanderung der Zagorisier für die Wirtschaft von Zagóri an Bedeutung gewannen. Viele von ihnen waren bereits bei ihrer Ankunft in Zagóri zweisprachig, da in Súli Einwohner griechischsprachiger Dörfer zugewandert waren und die albanischsprachige Bevölkerung des Súli-Tales (Lakka-Sulioten) engen Kontakt mit der griechischsprachigen Bevölkerung der weiteren Umgebung (Para-Sulioten) gehabt hatte (Vakalópulos 1992: 91). Viele Arvaniten heirateten in die zagorische Gesellschaft ein, andere wurden von Zagorisiern adoptiert (Nitsiákos 1998: 328) und gingen so schnell in ihrer Gesellschaft auf. Der arvanitische Bevölkerungsanteil war nicht unerheblich. Durch ihren großen Anteil an den Aufstandsbewegungen der Kleften waren die Arvaniten meist gut ausgebildete Kämpfer mit entsprechend großer Erfahrung im Umgang mit Dörfer der Zagorisier zu schützen. Viele Arvaniten nahmen auch verschiedene Hilfsarbeiten an, die wegen der Abwanderung von Zagorisiern sonst niemand hätte ausführen können, wie die Bewachung von Feldern, Häusern und Viehherden."

translation:

"Of greater significance is the newer group called Souliots – the mostly Albanian-speaking population from the area of Suli in central Epirus - with the beginning of the exodus to Zagori also made an important contribution to the economy of Zagori. Many of them were already bilingual when they arrived in Zagori, because in Suli citizens of Greek-villages had immigrated there, and the Albanian-speaking population of Suli-Tales (Lakka-Suliots) had had close contact with the Greek-speaking population of the wider area (Para-Suliots) (Vakalópulos 1992 91). Many Arvanites married into the Zagori society, while others were adopted by Zagorians (Nitsiákos 1998: 328) and assimilated quickly in their society. The Arvanite population was not irrelevant. Due to their large share of the insurgencies of the Klefts, Arvanites mostly well-trained fighters were protecting with a correspondingly large experience in dealing with the villages of Zagori. Many Arvanites attended to various auxiliary works that no one would or could perform, because of the exodus of Zagorians, such as guarding of fields, houses and livestock. Many Arvanites attended to various auxiliary works that no one would or could perform, because of the exodus of Zagorians, such as guarding of fields, houses and livestock."

What is important about this piece of information and its academic content is that the Souliote population became bilingual after Greek immigrants had come to live in Souli and also of Souli's proximity to and of being an Albanian speaking periphery bordering Greek speaking regions and villages which contributed to them becoming bilingual. Hence there is a peer reviewed source that explains how they became bilingual in the Greek language. Your deletion Zoupan regarding the Albanian language is unjustified as there are peer reviewed sources and thus the sentence with some reworded version will need be restored. The Albanian language has formed a important part of the Souliote experience and that is undeniable. Your comment "When did the Souliotes speak Albanian? A source from the early 19th c. mentions them as speaking only "little" Albanian. The identification as Cham Albanians is not factual." This is very problematic. I once placed a Hobhouse source in the Chams Albanians article and Alexikoua explained to me that was original research (and have since refrained from using such sources unless they are cited in other peer reviewed works who have had oversight regarding them). Your placing of the Pouqueville source and the other earlier existing Byron source (which was placed by someone else) contravene Wikipedia policy regarding the matter as the constitute Original research (See: Wikipedia:No original research) and thus cannot be there and needs to be removed. Moreover, I could also very easily cite a multitude of early nineteenth century travelers of the era, if we went by your methodology such as Leake, Hughes and so on saying that the Souliotes were Albanians and or Albanian speakers. A further reading section should be created for Pouqueville, Byron and other nineteenth century travelers accounts should go there for a reader/s of the article to consult if they wish. I have noticed that you have also interpreted a source which Wikipedia policy strongly is against. For example in the sentence "Lord Byron called them "Romans" (Greeks) who speak "little Illyric" (Albanian)." Byron says nothing about "Illyric" being "Albanian" (see: no original research policy). There is also a problem with this sentence "Their maternal (primary) language was Greek and they also knew Albanian" which you have reworked, but also this source in previous sentences as it stood. Firstly the author (on which the source sentence is based upon) Iakōbos Rizos-Nerulos was a Greek Phanariote prime minister for the Greek administration in Wallachia and Moldavia (contemporary Romania) (as stated in the opening page of the book). He was in other words a Greek politician. According to Wikipedia policy regarding no original research that also has information about how to base information on reliable sources, it states the following:

In general, the most reliable sources are:

   Peer-reviewed journals
   Books published by university presses
   University-level textbooks
   Magazines, journals, and books published by respected publishing houses
   Mainstream newspapers

Iakōbos Rizos-Nerulos book > (1834). ""Histoire de l'Insurrection Grecque, precédée d'un précis d'Histoire moderne de la Grèce", has to be taken with extreme caution as it does not fulfill any of the above criteria, unless you have a credible academic who can vouch for him in a peer reviewed source importantly citing him. Baltsitois in the Chams Albanian article also wrote this regarding Albanian speaking populations and the view of the Greek state:

"The fact that the Christian communities within the territory which was claimed by Greece from the mid 19th century until the year 1946,known after 1913 as Northern Epirus, spoke Albanian, Greek and Aromanian (Vlach), was dealt with by the adoption of two different policies by Greek state institutions. The first policy was to take measures to hide the language(s) the population spoke, as we have seen in the case of “Southern Epirus”. The second was to put forth the argument that the language used by the population had no relation to their national affiliation. To this effect the state provided striking examples of Albanian speaking individuals (from southern Greece or the Souliotēs) who were leading figures in the Greek state. As we will discuss below, under the prevalent ideology in Greece at the time every Orthodox Christian was considered Greek, and conversely after 1913, when the territory which from then onwards was called “Northern Epirus” in Greece was ceded to Albania, every Muslim of that area was considered Albanian."

My point about the matter is that Greek authors such as Iakōbos Rizos-Nerulos of the era where trying to minimize the connections that Orthodox people within the region had to the Albanian language. Baltsiotis, a Greek academic who works at Athens Panteion University refers to the Souliotes as being Albanian speaking. Please take these matters into consideration. As for other Albanian editors, when you challenge something, please provide actual sources otherwise you wont get far. Like you, i understand there are very big issues with this article, but do it according to Wikipedia policy. There is much to do....Resnjari (talk) 07:39, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

^ You are welcome to add any studies. Do not, however, edit the introduction until concensus. Takis Botsaris' fluency in Albanian is evidently not a qualification for ethnicity, and also, note that the ref says "fluent in Albanian" and not "primary language was Albanian". Thede Kahl should be added to the article, after a thorough translation has been done; he clearly divides the Souliotes into groups. It is clear that the Souliote clans have various origins, and not the result of one migration from one place at one time. You obviously haven't read WP:OR; your claim that the Lord Byron-entry is OR is therefore wrong. If, hypothetically, the first settlers of Souli in the first half of the 17th century all or mostly came from Albania and spoke Albanian, does this mean that the Greek-assimilated and Greek-identity Souliote community of the early 19th century should be identified as Albanians [in the introduction]? No, but that should without a doubt be added to the article. More contemporary sources, such as travellers', should also be added to clarify. More information of the various clans should be added. I appreciate that you are discussing the matter, and I would suggest that you be brief and concise in the future. --Zoupan 11:46, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

"More contemporary sources, such as travellers', should also be added to clarify. More information of the various clans should be added. I appreciate that you are discussing the matter, and I would suggest that you be brief and concise in the future." I was. This is a complicated issue. Saying things in a few words, would then open me up to you saying i was not 'clear enough' or something along those lines in elaborating my position. I rather discuss it in depth than have a few sentences which is what the rest have been doing that sound more like rants, instead of a proper discussion. This is the discussion page after all for discussing edits and Wikipedia places no limits about how much one can discuss unless it has nothing to do with the editing process and is some generalised commentary on the subject. Also you can't include traveller's accounts cited directly within the article itself, unless they have been verified by a peer reviewed secondary source or are from reputable sources that have deemed their content right for use (its in the original research policy).

So Zoupan, in case you overlooked what i wrote, i also said nothing about "ethnicity". What i was referring to was the Souliots and the Albanian language (their cultural connections). As for "consensus", that did not stop you from making those edits which went against consensus. Unless you undo some of your edits which i might add constitute original research and goes against Wikipedia policy, i think i too can make the edits that you have done. However, I have refrained from doing so, but the behavior you have taken does not show good faith. Moreover, why i cited Baltisotis' mention of Dimirtris Botsaris as important is regarding this. The Albanian language was still present in the early twentieth century amongst some peoples in the Souliot diaspora. I did also cite that Baltsiotis refers to the Souliots as Albanian speaking. Of course there is nothing to say that it was a primary language. But they were fluent in Albanian, while being in the diaspora and long after the exile. Moreover, if anything Kahl specifically points out that the Souliots had become bilingual in Greek due to their living to nearby Greek regions and due also to a Greek immigration (and its a peer reviewed source). Again in your comment "If, hypothetically, the first settlers of Souli in the first half of the 17th century all or mostly came from Albania and spoke Albanian, does this mean that the Greek-assimilated and Greek-identity Souliote community of the early 19th century should be identified as Albanians [in the introduction]?" you are doing a source interpretation and that constitutes original research. You have to find a credible peer reviewed source that says that. Otherwise what you have stated is an assertion and hypothetical. Clearly Kahl states they became bilingual in Greek later and that they are Arvanites. Also "You obviously haven't read WP:OR; your claim that the Lord Byron-entry is OR is therefore wrong." Really ? I did point out that one you made a interpretation on a source. How did you go and interpret "illyric" being "Albanian"? And where is your peer reviewed source that offers an explanation that that is what Byron meant? Also, i point to the part of the policy that relates to using primary sources and specifically stated that in my comment. If your allowed to use those primary sources to make the argument, i got many more that say they were Albanian and Albanian speaking.

"after a thorough translation has been done; he clearly divides the Souliotes into groups". Go for it. I encourage it Zoupan. Alexikoua can read German too and there is google translate. Kahl does not however divide the Souliots into groups. He refers to the Suliot regions. Lakka Souli, encompassed the whole region of the core of Suli, while Para Souli were the outer regions that were and are still Greek speaking. Kahl also refers to Greek immigration into the areas that spoke Albanian and made them bilingual. It was a process of language shift. As to what the Souliots identified themselves regarding "ethnicity", we should express extreme caution in not applying twenty first century ideas of national affiliation to that time unless otherwise stated in a source, and even then not countered by another credible source. Yes you may say they saw themselves as 'Greeks' upon the eve of the Greek war of independence and thereafter. But what did Greek mean for them at that moment in time? Did it mean just being Orthodox or did they feel Greek in the sense that Greek identity is expressed in contemporary times or could it have been both? What role did the Albanian cultural element such as language have in expressing a Albanian identity also? Or did they even have a sense of an Albanian identity? Or did they have an Albanian identity alongside the Greek one? Or was Albanian identity just a linguistic one for them ? Yes you and others will quote Hart and i will quote Fleming (both Western peer reviewed academics published in 1999, see Fleming quotation below in reply to Alexikoua) that states a counter view. So the issue of ethnicity is very problematic.

Resnjari (talk) 04:56, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

The fact that Fauriel's collections in 1824 included Souliotic folksongs in Greek language,[[1]] is a strong argument to claim that Greek speech was already well established as part of the community's tradition. A language shift from one language to another is a slow procedure, but bilingualism was a typical feature in the Balkans. In general the proposal to add in the first line that "Souliotes were Cham Albanians" lacks citation and is a product of wp:synth & wp:or.Alexikoua (talk) 18:36, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

I agree that writing "Souliotes were Cham Albanians" is an issue. However writing that they spoke Albanian (in particular the Cham dialect) and became bilingual in the Greek language is not. And Elsie points out that the Souliots spoke the Cham dialect of Albanian (unless anyone can cite a source challenging Elsie's credibility, then he counts). Moreover, Fleming does point out something important about the Souliots and the Albanian language which Potts cites (The Ionian Islands: Aspects of their History and Culture. p.108-109).

"K. E. Fleming writes that the Souliots are of Albanian origin and “the people of Souli, who both spoke Greek and practiced a form of Orthodox Christianity, were seen not as Greeks but as Albanians.” In a note, she quotes Henry Baerlein, who describes the heroic Souliots shouting, in Albanian, their defiance “of the threatening Greek letters sent by Ali Pasha!” Henry Holland writes that the Souliots: were Albanians in origin, belonging to the division of the people called the Tzamides [Chams]. While many of their countrymen had become Mahometans, the Suliotes retained the Christian religion [...] They were the terror of the southern part of Albania; and the descent of the Suliotes from their mountain-fastnesses, for the sake of plunder or vengeance, was a general signal of alarm to the surrounding country."

Fleming cites Holland who was present in the region during the era at as a Ali's Pasha's court. What is important to note here is the Souliots used the Albanian language, just as much as the Greek. The Albanian language formed an important cultural element to their everyday life and as Baltsiotis shows was still present for some even in the twentieth century. The Fauriel stuff that you have cited there is directly inline with Thede Kahl, who elaborates on how that became so. Alexikoua, i am also interested regarding your views about original research and the content that has been used in the article. If other editors are allowed to use such sources, then i will too, otherwise being selective about it means as the article stands now, is contravening neutrality policy.

Resnjari (talk) 04:56, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Why was Thede Kahl added to the introduction, without thorough translation? His quote relates to a migrant population of Souliotes in Zagori, from Súli-Tales in Lakka-Souli (a specific place, but unspecific time). I have moved the assertion to the appropriate section.--Zoupan 13:08, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

I did give a thorough translation. Alexikoua, a Greek editor who speaks German seems not to have had any qualms with one the sentence i wrote for the main article based on the German source and two the translation i gave. Are you questioning that i have somehow inappropriately translated the section? If so, do find a German editor/s to have a look at it. I encourage it. Yes, Suli Tales and Lakka Suli are specific places. The core of Suli in Greek is also known as Lakka Souli and the outer parts are known as Para Souli. You have overlooked something and not bothered with the translation. Thede Kahl specifically writes "Suli-Tales" in German which means the "valley of Suli" next to the Greek version "Lakka Souli" which means in Greek valley of Suli, thereby explaining the term. While you have placed within the article Súli-Tales, the German version of what should be the valley of Suli. Also Kalh states based on Greek sources that Suli region was mostly Albanian speaking in general. This is not an "assertion" Zoupan. So interpreting a source by claiming it’s an assertion when Kahl, a peer reviewed academic bases his information on Greek academic sources (even Kahl has provided footnotes) is problematic and refrain from doing so, unless you have peer reviewed material in that respect.

Anyway i will place the whole paragraph from the Thede Kahl article for all to read regarding Orthodox Albanian speaking populations in Zagori (Thede Kahl (1999). "Die Zagóri-Dörfer in Nordgriechenland: Wirtschaftliche Einheit–ethnische Vielfalt." Ethnologia Balkanica. 3: 113-114.)

"Im Laufe der Jahrhunderte hat es mehrfach Ansiedlungen christlich-orthodoxer Albaner (sog. Arvaniten) in verschiedenen Dörfern von Zagóri gegeben. Nachfolger Albanischer Einwanderer, die im 15. Jh. In den zentral- und südgriechischen Raum einwanderten, dürfte es in Zagóri sehr wenige geben (Papageorgíu 1995: 14). Von ihrer Existenz im 15. Jh. wissen wir durch albanische Toponyme (s. Ikonómu1991: 10–11). Von größerer Bedeutung ist die jüngere Gruppe der sogenannten Sulioten – meist albanisch-sprachige Bevölkerung aus dem Raum Súli in Zentral-Epirus – die mit dem Beginn der Abwanderung der Zagorisier für die Wirtschaft von Zagóri an Bedeutung gewannen. Viele von ihnen waren bereits bei ihrer Ankunft in Zagóri zweisprachig, da in Súli Einwohner griechischsprachiger Dörfer zugewandert waren und die albanischsprachige Bevölkerung des Súli-Tales (Lakka-Sulioten) engen Kontakt mit der griechischsprachigen Bevölkerung der weiteren Umgebung (Para-Sulioten) gehabt hatte (Vakalópulos 1992: 91). Viele Arvaniten heirateten in die zagorische Gesellschaft ein, andere wurden von Zagorisiern adoptiert (Nitsiákos 1998: 328) und gingen so schnell in ihrer Gesellschaft auf. Der arvanitische Bevölkerungsanteil war nicht unerheblich. Durch ihren großen Anteil an den Aufstandsbewegungen der Kleften waren die Arvaniten meist gut ausgebildete Kämpfer mit entsprechend großer Erfahrung im Umgang mit Dörfer der Zagorisier zu schützen. Viele Arvaniten nahmen auch verschiedene Hilfsarbeiten an, die wegen der Abwanderung von Zagorisiern sonst niemand hätte ausführen können, wie die Bewachung von Feldern, Häusern und Viehherden. Auch aus der Umgebung von Kónitsa kamen einzelne Arvaniten in das Gebiet, z.B. Maurer aus Gorgopótamos und Maler aus Chionádes. Sie blieben jedoch meist nur vorübergehend in Zagóri und siedelten sich nur selten an. Die Gewohnheit, arvanitische Bevölkerung für Bauarbeiten anzuheuern, war auch im übrigen Griechenland sehr verbreitet. Eine besondere Rolle scheint arvanitische (albano-vlachische?) Bevölkerung in Trísteno gespielt zu haben (Lambrídis 1993: 81, 83). Auch wenn die heutige Bevölkerung keinerlei Erinnerung an arvanitische Vorfahren bewahrt hat, legen albanische Sprachreste in ihrem Griechisch nahe, daß die ersten Siedler des Dorfes Arvaniten gewesen sind. Dies würde auch seinen aromunischen Namen erklären: Arbineși heißt „das albanische“. Arvanitische Familien haben sich in mindestens zwölf Dörfern in Zagóri angesiedelt."

Translation:

"Over the centuries Orthodox Christian Albanians (also called: Arvanites) have settled repeatedly in different villages of Zagori. Successive Albanian immigrants of the 15th century immigrated to central and southern to Greece, with few to Zagori. Of its existence in Zagori, we know it through Albanian toponyms. Of greater significance is the newer group called Souliots – the mostly Albanian-speaking population from the area of Suli in central Epirus - with the beginning of the exodus to Zagori also made an important contribution to the economy of Zagori. Many of them were already bilingual when they arrived in Zagori, because in Suli citizens of Greek-villages had immigrated there, and the Albanian-speaking population of Suli-Tales (Lakka-Suliots) had had close contact with the Greek-speaking population of the wider area (Para-Suliots) (Vakalópulos 1992 91). Many Arvanites married into the Zagori society, while others were adopted by Zagorians (Nitsiákos 1998: 328) and assimilated quickly in their society. The Arvanite population was not irrelevant. Due to their large share of the insurgencies of the Klefts, Arvanites mostly well-trained fighters were protecting with a correspondingly large experience in dealing with the villages of Zagori. Many Arvanites attended to various auxiliary works that no one would or could perform, because of the exodus of Zagorians, such as guarding of fields, houses and livestock. Many Arvanites attended to various auxiliary works that no one would or could perform, because of the exodus of Zagorians, such as guarding of fields, houses and livestock. From around Kónitsa individual Arvanites came in the area, e.g. masons from Gorgopotamos and painters from Chionádes. They remained, however, usually only temporarily in Zagori and settled rarely. The habit of hiring Arvanite populations for building, was also very common in rest of Greece. The Arvanites (Albano-Vlachs?) seemed to have played a special role amongst the Trísteno population (Lambrídis 1993 81, 83). Although today's population has preserved no memory of Arvanite ancestors, there are Albanian language remnants within the Greek that the first settlers of the village could have been Arvanites. This would also explain the Aromanian name: Arbineşi meaning "the Albanian". Arvanite families have settled in at least twelve villages in Zagori."

Here is part of Thede Kahl's bibliography of the sources he uses regarding this section about Albanians speakers in Zagori (in case you or others want to double, triple or quadruple check).

>Papageorgíu, Geórgios 1995: Ikonomikí ke kinonikí michanismí ston orinó chóro. Zagóri, mesa 18u – arches 20ú eóna [Wirtschaftliche und gesellschaftliche Mechanismen im Gebirge. Zagóri, Mitte des 18. – Anfang des 20. Jahrhunderts]. Ioánnina.

>Ikonómu,_Konstantínos E. 1991: Toponymikó tis periochís tu Zagoríu [Toponyme der Region Zagóri]. Ioánnina.

>Vakalópulos, Konstantínos A. 1992: Istoría tu Voríu Ellinismú. Ípiros [Geschichte des nördlichen Griechentums. Epirus]. Thessaloníki.

>Nitsiákos, Vasílis G. (ed.) 1998: Nomós Ioannínon. Sýnchroni politismikí geografía [Provinz Ioánnina._Heutige Kulturgeographie]. Ioánnina.

>Lambrídis, I. 1993: Ipirotiká Meletímata [Epirotische_Untersuchungen]. Bde. 8–9 (Zagoriaká). Athen (Nachdruck des Originals von 1870).

As for a migration date, Kahl does not give a date as to when precisely these migrations occurred to Zagori, due to Souli's history of conflict as outlined in the article was continuous and so were the migrations. What he does say about the Albanian speakers such as the Souliots is that they are a newer Albanian speaking population in Zagori that came long after the Albanian migrations of the 15th century into southern Greece (giving rise to the Arvanite populations of today) that passed through Zagori and left little trace except in some local toponyms. However, Kahl does describe the Souliots as Arvanites and Albanian speaking. Resnjari (talk) 07:52, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Albanian name in the lead

Alexikoua, you have deleted the Albanian name from the lead. Your reason being that it is non existent in the literature. If you want a peer reviewed source which uses the Albanian name in the peer reviewed literature. Source: Shkëlzen Raça (2012). "Disa Aspekte Studimore Mbi Sulin Dhe Suljotët [Some aspects Study On Suli And Suliotes]". Studime Historike. 1. (2): passim. Its from the Albanian historical journal. If Greek sources are used so can this Albanian one considering it was published recently. Now if you say there is no source attesting that the Souliots have used that name themselves, i can very easily say the same thing about the Greek name in the lead regarding the Cham Albanians. If the Albanian name cannot be in the lead here for that reason, than the Greek name cannot be in the lead in the Chams Albanian article. I am yet to find a source that says the Chams themselves used a Greek name "Tsamides" for themselves (only used by non-Albanian speaking outsiders) and yet there it is in the lead. As the Wikipedia policy on naming convention regarding ethncities states: "How the group self-identifies should be considered. If their autonym is commonly used in English, it would be the best article title. Any terms regarded as derogatory by members of the ethnic group in question should be avoided." For the sake of consistency, the Albanian name should be there because the Suliots did speak Albanian and the word Suljotet has been used in academic literature as cited above. Also there is no literature stating that Suljotët is derogatory. Resnjari (talk) 06:39, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Um, this is the English wikipedia. It doesn't matter that Albanian language sources use Suljotet, which of course they do. It matters what English languages sources use. And so far as I have seen, none use "Suljotet". Athenean (talk) 06:44, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

So Alexikoua, just to clarify beyond doubt, so there can be no misunderstandings regarding the matter, your saying that if an English peer reviewed academic source uses the Albanian term Suljotët within the source then the Albanian term can go in the article lead alongside the Greek name? Resnjari (talk) 07:52, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

To many edits, i meant Athenean.Resnjari (talk) 15:03, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

None use "Shqiptaret" but there is "shqiptaer " on the albanians' article.Souiliotes spoke albanian so there must be "suljotet " on the article. Rolandi+ (talk) 08:06, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Rolandi, don't take this the wrong way but the article is not about Albanians in general within the whole Balkans, so the word Shqiptar here is not the main issue. Its the Albanian term Suljotët we need to concentrate on.Resnjari (talk) 07:52, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Apart from the alternative name another kind of disruption now emerged: In contrast to the variety of multiple references what's the reason to have the "Albanian origin" in the 1st line? In general both origins and alternative name (non-existent in English literature) in such a way are clearly against wp:lede.Alexikoua (talk) 13:18, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

It was proposed by Macrakis because the absolute majority of sources says that they were of albanian origin.There can't be just "christians".They were a population group that the majority of sources say they were albaniansRolandi+ (talk) 13:40, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

That's not an excuse for disruption. Especially when this isn't something agreed in talkpage. When origin is irrelevant to the notability of the subject, which is the case here, this can't be part of the first line.Alexikoua (talk) 13:45, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Morevoer, unfortunately people in the society where Souliotes lived were classified by religion: they were Orthodox Christians, per contemporary accounts classified as "Greeks", per the rest of the Orthodox communities in this region.Alexikoua (talk) 13:49, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Alexikoua, i do want to clarify beyond doubt, so there can be no misunderstandings regarding the matter, if there is an English peer reviewed academic source that uses the Albanian term Suljotët within the source then the Albanian term can go in the article lead alongside the Greek name, right? Resnjari (talk) 15:03, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

In case there is a decent coverage I won't object. If the term is mentioned in at least 10% of the relevant bibliography, it seems enough to me to warrant a place in lede. Alexikoua (talk) 15:28, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Nevertheless, since the article has been expanded enough I believe all alternative names can be placed in the correspondent section per wp:mos.Alexikoua (talk) 15:36, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Ok, actually that is probably a better option. English name at the top only and is a neutral solution to the matter. The same way as the Greek name in Greek letters is not found repeatedly in English literature and I doubt they have ten percent coverage regarding that (out of curiosity though, where in or which wikipedia policy though does it say 10% as i want to clarify that for future reference). Under what sentence or section though did you have in mind to create a sentence to cater for the other names, so i can put the Albanian name in and the peer reviewed English sources alongside it? Greek name too needs to be there as well in Greek letters cited by a peer reviewed English source, so everything is covered and is consistent and we finally put an end to this disruptive editing which has become ridiculous. Resnjari (talk) 16:05, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

I seriously don't see why the Albanian spelling would be added to the lead section, and I view that addition as POV. The "peer-reviewed English source"^ is by an Albanian author.--Zoupan 20:25, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Zhupan, i am more than content with that reasoning, if the Greek name also stays out of the lead. No POV from either side. Only the English name, as Greek editors have selectively reminded me at times that this is English Wikipedia after all. Also, it does not matter if the person is an Albanian academic. A person's heritage has nothing to do with it, unless their credibility as a Western scholar is called into question (and you must provide a source for that as per Wikipedia policy on identifying credible sources). We are not here to judge a academic solely because of their heritage and frankly that would be borderline racist (Wikipedia says that is a definite no). According to Wikipedia (see Wikipedia policy regarding [[Wikipedia:No original research) regarding how to identify credible sources it states the following:

In general, the most reliable sources are:

   Peer-reviewed journals
   Books published by university presses
   University-level textbooks
   Magazines, journals, and books published by respected publishing houses
   Mainstream newspapers

The source i will place is published by peer reviewed publishing house and academic. It has merit in being within the article, otherwise i can challenge all the Greek authors that are within the article if we start going after people's heritage. I remind all here (and i'll include myself here in case anyone feels i am leaving someone out), its the content and creditability as a scholar that counts that makes their academic work applicable here (or not if proper proof according to guidelines can be produced). I wish everyone here the best in their editing, but it must according to Wikipedia policy. Resnjari (talk) 09:32, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

@Resnajari: You mean that if one academic source mention an alternative name, that's enough for you to warrant an addition in the lead? I'm waiting for your arguments about how well established Suljotet in literature is.Alexikoua (talk) 20:42, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

By the way, as part of the general lede disruption, the Souliote community appears now to be still Albanian speaking.Alexikoua (talk)

For one Alexikoua, i have had no part in editing the lead for a few days. For a cessation regarding the lead issues, the name issue must be resolved. As long as the Greek name in Greek letters stays were it does, that is a neutral solution to the issue. Unless you can find me English literature using the name Souliotes in Greek letters as being covered in more than 10% of literature (and provide me with that amount too) than ok going by the standards that you have set (yet i could not find what you said on Wikipedia policy anywhere and you still have not shown where in Wikipedia policy it says there has to be a 10% threshold). As the Greek name is accounted for in the Etymology section, and the section also gives different views regarding the etymology of the name Souli and Souliote and a sizable bit had peer reviewed sources that says it is possible for the term/s to be derived from Albanian, the Albanian name will go alongside the Greek. This is important regarding Neutrality, as it has been established beyond doubt (i stress this point especially as it has been accounted for by peer review literature, in Greek and other sources) and that the Albanian language has played a important role regarding the linguistic aspect of Souliote life for a prolonged period of time. Resnjari (talk) 09:32, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Souliotes' names

I think that there is a consensus finally.This means that Souliotes' names will be only in english on their respective articles.(not in albanian or greek ).The other option is that their names will be in english , greek and albanian .Choose your best option please.Their articles' categories will be related to albanian and to greek.(or none of them) . Rolandi+ (talk) 19:05, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

No concensus. Calm down.--Zoupan 20:27, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Rolandi, i reckon the Greek name in Greek letters should be where it is, in the etymology section as it is not used in English academic material and also relevant to the section alongside the Albanian name. As for Zoupan, where discussing it. All solution must be based on policy and not contravene Wikipedia neutrality policy. Resnjari (talk) 09:32, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

According to this approach, Souliotes never wrote in the Albanian (Latin letters )script, there were just some few examples were Souliotic sub-dialect of Tosk was written down in Greek letters, like in the Arvanitika script. Taking this in account I don't see a reason why an anachronistic name in modern Albanian and in Latin leters has a place in the article.Alexikoua (talk) 10:41, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Alexikoua, Baltsiotis states this regarding people within the region who spoke the local Cham dialect:

"Although the langue-vehiculaire of the area was Albanian, a much higher status was attributed to the Greek language, even among the Muslims themselves. Thus, during the late Ottoman era, besides the official Ottoman Turkish, Greek functioned as a second, semi-official language, accepted by the Ottoman Administration. This characteristic can be followed partly from public documents of the era."

Just because people used Greek letters did not make them "Greek" by default. If we take that methodology and apply that say to Western Europe, who used and still use the Latin alphabet, does that make them all Latins or Romans ? Or i could put it another way, many Greek speakers who where not Orthodox, but where names that Grecophone Muslims such as Muslim Cretans or Grecophone Catholics of Chios might have used for themselves not relevant in a article because they don't use them now because they are written in another alphabet that they don't use anymore? (see: Kotzageorgis, Phokion (2010). “Reworking the Ascension in Ottoman Lands: An Eighteenth-Century Mi'rājnāma in Greek from Epirus”. In Gruber, Christiane J., & Frederick Stephen Colby (eds). The Prophet's ascension: cross-cultural encounters with the Islamic mi'rāj tales. Indiana University Press. p.297. “The element that makes this text a unicum is that it is written in Greek script. In the Ottoman Empire, the primary criterion for the selection of an alphabet in which to write was religion. Thus, people who did not speak—or even know—the official language of their religion used to write their religious texts in the languages that they knew, though in the alphabet where the sacred texts of that religion were written. Thus, the Grecophone Catholics of Chios wrote using the Latin alphabet, but in the Greek language (frangochiotika); the Turcophone Orthodox Christians of Cappadocia wrote their Turkish texts using the Greek alphabet (karamanlidika); and the Grecophone Muslims of the Greek peninsula wrote in Greek language using the Arabic alphabet (tourkogianniotika, tourkokretika).")

It is up to you to prove that "an anachronistic name in modern Albanian and in Latin letters has a place in the article". You are making an assertion based on what source? Wikipedia states that such comments has to based on a peer reviewed source. What are you basing (or which policy) your comment on ? Which peer reviewed academic stated that the Albanian name is "anachronistic"? In the Arvanites article the Albanian language name is given in both Latin characters Arbëreshë and in Greek characters: Αρbε̰ρεσ̈ε̰. If you want to have Suljotë spelt also in Greek characters i am fine with that alongside the Latin characters. But the Albanian name stays, as there is a peer reviewed source to vouch for it by reputable academics and a reputable publishing house thereby satisfying Wikipedia policy about reliable sources. Resnjari (talk) 12:10, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Proposed Additions

Within the article a few additions can be made to better improve it and end some of the farcical edit wars that have emerged here for a prolonged period of time. These proposed additions fill important though small gaps within the article (they are all based on academic material and referenced and do a thorough overview regarding grammar or sentence fixup, expansion etc). Anyway, here are the proposals:

This bit to go under this sentence (my additions in bold).

And in fact, a mountaintop Souliote village in southern Greece was called "Soulima" (Greek: Σουλιμά) before it was renamed "Ano Dorio."

In a study by Petros Fourikis examining the onomastics of Souli, most of the toponyms and micro-toponyms such as: Kiafa, Koungi, Bira, Goura, Mourga, Feriza, Stret(h)eza, Dembes, Vreku i Vetetimese, Sen i Prempte and so on were found to be derived from the Albanian language.

This bit to go under this sentence (my additions in bold).

According to this, the Muslim communities in Epirus were classified as Turks, while the Orthodox (Rum), like the Souliotes, were classified as Greeks

From the middle of the nineteenth century however, the term Turk and from the late nineteenth century onwards, derivative terms such as Turkalvanoi have been used as a pejorative term, phrase and or expression for Muslim Albanian populations by non-Muslim Balkan Peoples. Amongst the wider Greek-speaking population until the interwar period, the term Arvanitis (plural: Arvanites) was used to describe an Albanian speaker regardless of their religious affiliations. In Epirus today, the term Arvanitis is still used for an Albanian speaker regardless of their citizenship and religion.

Considering that within the Wikipedia article it has been credibly cited (academic peer reviewed sources) that identifies the Souliotes as being part of the subdivsions of the Chams (in a past sense) and speaking the Albanian Cham dialect (in a past sense), an addition from Baltsiotis exists regarding the issue of language. Baltsiotis states that amongst Albanian Cham speakers within the region, the Greek language had a high status ans was used as a second language. This sentence within the article is needed because the Chams where Albanian Cham speakers, while they wrote in Greek and spoke it too. It places context on the matter of language, writing, documentation. This bit to go under this sentence (my additions in bold).

Emmanouel Protopsaltes, former professor of Modern Greek History at the University of Athens, who published and studied the dialect of this diary, concluded that Souliotes were Greek speakers originating from the area of Argyrkokastro or Chimara.

Amongst people who spoke the Cham Albanian dialect during the Ottoman era, a high status was attributed to the Greek language and it functioned as a second semi-official language that was also used in documents.

I changed this clunky sentence a few days back and i split it and added a few extra details that are of the source themselves (in bold). The editor Pinkbeast reverted the changes back to its clunky. form and also questioned my motive for the edit with "Split a clunky sentence into an ungrammatical one, and describing a text printed in Paris in French as "greek" is a stretch. But some good catches." Anyway, I have replaced it with "Greek author" in my proposal as the person who wrote the text Rizos-Nerulos Iakōbos was a Greek Phanariote prime minister for the Greek administration in Wallachia and Moldavia (contemporary Romania). Back then people where pusblishing all over the place, however it is important to note such matter regarding the sensativites of the subject, like Miranda vikcers being a "pro Albanian" author. And just in case there is a further Why, one might ask is it important to note that the author is Greek, or Byron from Western Europe. Because the way the sentence stands now and its contents, it has neutrality issues as it is written now in a way that makes what it asserts (e.g. "that their maternal language was Greek") a common place view held by many or all. Best to have clarification and no POV issues. My proposal for the fix up is this (in bold):

Nevertheless, the Souliotes are also described with peculiar terms. For example such as "Albanian-speaking Greeks", while in some contemporary Western European accounts of the early 19th century report that the Souliotes were speaking "a little Illyrian" (Byron) or by Greek authors that their maternal language was Greek and knew also Albanian.

Also, as the article does state from credible source that the Souliotes where once Albanian speaking and had some kind of prolonged connections to wider Albanian populations, the Albanian version of what the Souliotes are called needs to go right alongside the Greek name. Precedents exists in this regard. This has also been done so for the Arvanites page, where the Arvanitika (Albanian language name) name is in the lead. Also its a similar practice for the Albanian Cham article, where the Greek name is alongside the Albanian one. My proposal is this (in bold):

Souliotes (Greek: Σουλιώτες; Albanian: Suliotët)

Also that would leave the other names of the Souliotes out of the lead. i propose this sentence to cater for that. This bit to go under this sentence (my additions in bold):

After their assimilation, a language shift to Greek occurred, while the Souliotic dialect became extinct.

Within Western European literature other spellings of the Souliotes exist such as: Souliots or Suliots.

Resnjari (talk) 13:23, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

I have some objection on the above proposals:

• In a study by Petros Fourikis examining the onomastics of Souli, most of the toponyms and micro-toponyms such as: Kiafa, Koungi, Bira, Goura, Mourga, Feriza, Stret(h)eza, Dembes, Vreku i Vetetimese, Sen i Prempte and so on were found to be derived from the Albanian language. Is Fourikis (1922) the most modern scientific approach available? As far I remember the word Souli itself has a variety of possible origins, not only Albanian. Thus, a more up do date work on linguistics is needed.
• From the middle of the nineteenth century however, the term Turk and from the late nineteenth century onwards, derivative terms such as Turkalvanoi have been used as a pejorative term, phrase and or expression for Muslim Albanian populations by non-Muslim Balkan Peoples. Why is this relevant with the subject? Souliotes were neither Muslims nor were called Turks. Moreover, these definitions were of general use in the Ottoman Empire not of local use in epirus.
• Amongst the wider Greek-speaking population until the interwar period, the term Arvanitis (plural: Arvanites) was used to describe an Albanian speaker regardless of their religious affiliations. This specific part is ok & relevant to the subject.
• In Epirus today, the term Arvanitis is still used for an Albanian speaker regardless of their citizenship and religion, true but it's irrelevant with the subject since Souliotes have left Epirus more than a century ago.
• About the lede addition, I see no strong arguments for that, English literature avoids to use Souliotet (while "Tsamides" is widely known in western literature).
• Amongst people who spoke the Cham Albanian dialect during the Ottoman era, a high status was attributed to the Greek language and it functioned as a second semi-official language that was also used in documents. I fail to see where inline no. 8 claims this. Alexikoua (talk) 14:57, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Start with the easy bit, when i did the second Baltsiotis reference, i stuffed it up within the talk page so it was not coming up. Thank you for pointing that out. It goes to show why this process is important. Its all fixed. Check the sentence again (footnote appears on the talk page now).

Regarding Petros Fourikis there is no issue with his research being conducted in 1922. Hasluck, if you recall on the Cham Albanian page, has an academic study from the the 1920s and is a source used in the article. His scholarship is suburb and used. No one has bothered to contradict him and scholarship has added to his stuff. "As far I remember the word Souli itself has a variety of possible origins, not only Albanian. Thus, a more up do date work on linguistics is needed." I had that in mind also, its why i did not add Souli to that list in the sentence. The etymology of Souli has many different positions regarding its origin and will always be contested. However within those works of academics discussing the origin of Souli, Greek or Albanian, how many have bothered to cover the rest of the toponyms and micro-toponyms? No one (unless you know of a academic) has looked into the matter and examined it. Fourikis has. Its why i wrote the sentence "most of the toponyms and micro-toponyms such as: Kiafa, Koungi, Bira, Goura, Mourga, Feriza, Stret(h)eza, Dembes, Vreku i Vetetimese, Sen i Prempte and so on were found to be derived from the Albanian language." Its most, only Souli (maybe Samoniva and Arvariko, if you have source for that) has been contested, that's why the sentence has been written with "most", not "all". Mention of his study is relevant to the article.

• "In Epirus today, the term Arvanitis is still used for an Albanian speaker regardless of their citizenship and religion, true but it's irrelevant with the subject since Souliotes have left Epirus more than a century ago."

Ok, agree to a point. However, actually, Suliotes still exist in other parts of Epirus due to their dispersal. German academic and Vlach specialist Thede Kahl writes this on the matter:

Thede Kahl (1999). "Die Zagóri-Dörfer in Nordgriechenland: Wirtschaftliche Einheit–ethnische Vielfalt." Ethnologia Balkanica. 3: 113-114. "Von größerer Bedeutung ist die jüngere Gruppe der sogenannten Sulioten – meist albanisch-sprachige Bevölkerung aus dem Raum Súli in Zentral-Epirus – die mit dem Beginn der Abwanderung der Zagorisier für die Wirtschaft von Zagóri an Bedeutung gewannen. Viele von ihnen waren bereits bei ihrer Ankunft in Zagóri zweisprachig, da in Súli Einwohner griechischsprachiger Dörfer zugewandert waren und die albanischsprachige Bevölkerung des Súli-Tales (Lakka-Sulioten) engen Kontakt mit der griechischsprachigen Bevölkerung der weiteren Umgebung (Para-Sulioten) gehabt hatte (Vakalópulos 1992: 91). Viele Arvaniten heirateten in die zagorische Gesellschaft ein, andere wurden von Zagorisiern adoptiert (Nitsiákos 1998: 328) und gingen so schnell in ihrer Gesellschaft auf. Der arvanitische Bevölkerungsanteil war nicht unerheblich. Durch ihren großen Anteil an den Aufstandsbewegungen der Kleften waren die Arvaniten meist gut ausgebildete Kämpfer mit entsprechend großer Erfahrung im Umgang mit Dörfer der Zagorisier zu schützen. Viele Arvaniten nahmen auch verschiedene Hilfsarbeiten an, die wegen der Abwanderung von Zagorisiern sonst niemand hätte ausführen können, wie die Bewachung von Feldern, Häusern und Viehherden."

The proposed sentance should stay and it is inline with the source such as Kahl. > "Amongst the wider Greek-speaking population until the interwar period, the term Arvanitis (plural: Arvanites) was used to describe an Albanian speaker regardless of their religious affiliations. In Epirus today, the term Arvanitis is still used for an Albanian speaker regardless of their citizenship and religion."

• "From the middle of the nineteenth century however, the term Turk and from the late nineteenth century onwards, derivative terms such as Turkalvanoi have been used as a pejorative term, phrase and or expression for Muslim Albanian populations by non-Muslim Balkan Peoples. Why is this relevant with the subject? Souliotes were neither Muslims nor were called Turks. Moreover, these definitions were of general use in the Ottoman Empire not of local use in epirus."

I thought further explanation might be needed. Ok, you make a good point. Hence since you have revert privileges, make sure that this sentence "According to this, the Muslim communities in Epirus were classified as Turks, while the Orthodox (Rum), like the Souliotes, were classified as Greeks." remains written as such and vandalisation of it is not done. The word Turk is very problematic and has been used in other ways too and can be offensive. Its from this point of view that i based my change upon, but i accept your point regarding it here.

"* About the lede addition, I see no strong arguments for that, English literature avoids to use Souliotet (while "Tsamides" is widely known in western literature)."

No, no, Alexikoua i was not referring to that at all. To clarify any mixup on my part, of course in English they don't use Suliotet. What i was referring to is that as the Souliotes where an Albanian speaking population (pointed out by peer reviewed sources in the article) like the Arvanites, and thus the Albanian name of what they where(and are) called should be in the lead alongside and after the Greek name. The Souliotes at the very least had connections to these two cultures(and eventually only one) through language and it is within these two cultures today that the Souliotes have national relevance. Also I could challenge the relevance of having Greek spelling in the lead on the arguments you have made. English literature does not use Greek alphabet letters to spell Σουλιώτες, but there it is in the lead, same with Cham Albanians the spelling "Τσάμηδες" is there in the lead and with the Arvanites page "(Greek: Αρβανίτες, Arvanitika: Arbëreshë or Αρbε̰ρεσ̈ε̰)" Regarding the Arvanites, they definitely do not use Arberesh as a self appellation today, but there it is in the lead). Its why i also proposed the sentence "Within Western European literature other spellings of the Souliotes exist such as: Souliots or Suliots." to cater for the English spellings. I have never come across Greek spellings of "Souliots" or "Suliots" in Greek academic works unless you know of any. In English literature yes. Thus even on that front, having the additional sentence "also spelled Souliots or Suliots)" to "(Greek: Σουλιώτες," is factually incorrect and non existent in Greek. Only the form Souliotes exists. Correct me if i am wrong, but i think i'm on firm ground with at least the last point i refer to. You may also say that the Suliotes stopped speaking Albanian when they went into exile in the nineteenth century and hence the Albanian name would not be relevant. Not so though. We are not fully sure as to when all Souliotes completely lost the ability to speak Albanian. Baltsiotis gives a striking example of Albanian language continuity amongst Soulitoes regarding lieutenant Dimitrios (Takis) Botsaris who served in the Balkan Wars of the twentieth century(almost a century after the exile) that still in a linguistic sense had connections to the Albanian language. Baltsiotis writes (Baltsiotis. The Muslim Chams of Northwestern Greece, 2011. link: http://ejts.revues.org/4444):

"The lieutenant of the Greek Army Dimitrios (Takis) Botsaris, after a looting incident during the First Balkan War, pronounces an order that “from this time on every one who will dare to disturb any Christian property will be strictly punished” (see K.D. Sterghiopoulos…, op.cit., pp. 173-174). In pronouncing the order in this manner he left Muslim properties without protection. Botsaris, coming from Souli, was a direct descendant of the Botsaris’ family and was fluent in Albanian. He was appointed as lieutenant in charge of a Volunteers’ company consisting of persons originating from Epirus and fighting mostly in South Western Epirus."

So the Albanian name needs to be in the lead. There are precedents with similar Orthodox Albanophone peoples like the Arvanties where their Albanian language name is in the lead. And a Greek name for the Albanian Chams.

Looking forward to you thoughts on the matter.

Resnjari (talk) 05:43, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

In general outdated references such as 19th century works, should be treated with high precaution. If we should include a variety of them, in order to point out there are is a general disagreement on the subject, it should be clearly stated that author "X" claimed "Y", but author "Z" claimed something similar or was clearly against that.Alexikoua (talk) 06:17, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Ok, well since Zoupan has included a selection of them, i will too so as to "point out there are is a general disagreement on the subject, it should be clearly stated that author "X" claimed "Y", but author "Z" claimed something similar or was clearly against that." so as to have consistency and keeping in line with neutrality on the matter. Resnjari (talk) 07:52, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Needles to say that a letter of the representatives of a Greek or Albanian irredentist organisation (Cham community letter for example) is de facto useless as an academic reference.Alexikoua (talk) 14:04, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

I did not place that source in the article. Someone else did. Please, don't pin it on me.Resnjari (talk) 12:28, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

The Lead

The lead, like the rest of the article, needs to be based on solid reliable sources and not our own conclusions. The most direct way we can do that is to see how reputable modern authors define or introduce the Souliotes in their own work. We have to be careful with older works, where (for example) "Greek" and "Turk" are used as synonyms for "Christian" and "Muslim" (and I suspect in some places "Albanian" is also used to mean "Muslim Albanian", but it isn't completely clear).

Here is what I have found so far:

• "The Souliotes were a warlike Albanian Christian community..." -- Richard Clogg, Minorities in Greece: Aspects of a Plural Society, 2002
• "The Souliotes were a small patriarchal mountain tribe of Christian Epirots" -- Joseph Braddock, The Greek phoenix, Coward, McCann & Geoghegan, 1973
• "the Souliotes, a warlike, Albanian-speaking, Christian Orthodox group... early champions of a Greek identity and the Greek independence movement" -- Theodore Zervas, The Making of a Modern Greek Identity
• "The Souliotes, a Greek-speaking Orthodox tribe of Albanian origin"; "The Souliotes, who are of Albanian origin but usually are grouped separately" (p62)-- Katherine Elizabeth Fleming, The Muslim Bonaparte: Diplomacy and Orientalism in Ali Pasha's Greece

All these sources characterize the Souliotes as Christian. They disagree about their language, but do agree that they are "Albanian" in some way (origin, language, ...). I have not found any sources that characterize them as "Cham Albanian" or as "Ottoman Greek". All agree that they were warlike, but I didn't find any instances of the term "warrior community" or "warlike community", which I think is also misleading in that it makes them sound like a strictly military group or caste.

We also have good evidence that religion, language, and national identification were not tightly coupled, but that all were important at the time:

• "Language, then, was a dominant organizational principle for the nascent nationalism in Ali's teritories.... Albanians, Turks, and Greeks all spoke Greek.... ...the Greek language was not the sine qua non of Greekness, but simply one of the many factors in the construction of national identity" (p65-66). "The Albanian-speaking Orthodox Suliotes resisted domination of all sorts, Orthodox and Muslim, Albanian- and Greek-speaking" (p66) -- Fleming
• "the heroic Suliotes, who in Albanian shouted their defiance of the threatening Greek letters sent by Ali Pasha" Henry Baerlein, Southern Albania, 1968, quoted by Fleming (p66)

So here is a proposed lead for discussion:

The Souliotes were an Orthodox Christian group of Albanian origin from the area of Souli, Epirus, known for their military prowess, their resistance to Ali Pasha, and their contribution to the Greek cause in the Greek War of Independence.

Most sources characterize them as Albanian-speaking, but this isn't entirely clear, and probably changed over time as they assimilated to the Greek nation. --Macrakis (talk) 04:26, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

So it's the time to find the final consensus. Rolandi+ (talk) 11:00, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Disagree. Bold: "was an Ottoman Greek Orthodox (Rum Millet) community of the area of Souli, in Epirus ... The community also spoke Albanian besides Greek, for which there are theories that a part of the community were of Albanian origin."--Zoupan 21:46, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

The word Greek should be taken with caution and in this context removed. Orthodox during this area was a complicated meaning. Lambros Baltsiotis, a Greek peer reviewed academic from Panteion University in Athens states the following regarding the matter who i might add has done much academic fieldwork work today amongst both Muslim and Orthodox Albanian speakers of the area(for more see: "The Muslim Chams of Northwestern Greece", link: http://ejts.revues.org/4444 ):

"Yet this situation was not a novelty. Prior to this period, Chamouria was already a nuisance both for the Greek state and the Christians of Epirus who identified themselves as Greeks. As the less ambitious Greek irredentists’ target in 1912 was to include all the areas up to a line including Korçë-Gjirokastër-Himarë within the frontiers of the expanded Greek state, the aim was to obscure the fact that the Christian, or even the Muslim population, didn’t speak Greek but Albanian. Concealing the existence of the Albanian language appeared as a concept as soon as the possibility of Greek expansion into Epirus appeared. Dimitrios Hassiotis, a historian and politician who supported Greek claims, writes in 1887 that in the whole of the Chamouria region, only in Paramythia do “some of the inhabitants understand the Albanian language for commercial reasons” (author’s emphasis). The initial distortion of facts was followed by an effort to account for the allegedly “occasional” use of Albanian. This “appeal to hope” is not only applied to the distortion of the linguistic reality of the area as perceived by non natives, but is extended to a wider spectrum of facts and evaluations. An example of the way this “appeal to hope” was accepted as reality is that Greek officers in the interwar period truly believe that Italy and “Albanian propaganda” are to blame for the reactions of the Muslims in Chamouria and not Greek policies implemented in the area."

"The fact that the Christian communities within the territory which was claimed by Greece from the mid 19th century until the year 1946, known after 1913 as Northern Epirus, spoke Albanian, Greek and Aromanian (Vlach), was dealt with by the adoption of two different policies by Greek state institutions. The first policy was to take measures to hide the language(s) the population spoke, as we have seen in the case of “Southern Epirus”. The second was to put forth the argument that the language used by the population had no relation to their national affiliation. To this effect the state provided striking examples of Albanian speaking individuals (from southern Greece or the Souliotēs) who were leading figures in the Greek state. As we will discuss below, under the prevalent ideology in Greece at the time every Orthodox Christian was considered Greek, and conversely after 1913, when the territory which from then onwards was called “Northern Epirus” in Greece was ceded to Albania, every Muslim of that area was considered Albanian."

Orthodox Albanian speakers were conflated as Greeks by the Greek state and others perusing a political agenda. The sentence should be neutral (e.g.: "for which there are theories that a part of the community were of Albanian origin."). The word "theories" should also be removed for something more neutral like "there are different academic and non academic explanations that a part or most of were of Albanian origin." so it is inline with the content within the article. Resnjari (talk) 09:48, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

@Resnajari: What has this to do with Souliotes? The Greek state was created after they left Thesprotia thus Greek politics from mid-19th&20th century about this region are irrelevant with Souliotes. Someone may assume that continuous posting of huge amounts of irrelevant information in this discussion isn't at all helpfull.Alexikoua (talk) 12:35, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Kahl, states quite clearly based on Greek sources that a Suliote population went to live in Zagori which is Epirus. Now correct me if am wrong, but Zagori and Epirus only became part of the nation state of Greece in 1912-1913. There where Orthodox Albanian speaking people from Souli (who where transitioning to Greek or bilignual in Greek) present in Epirus long after their dispersal. Now Baltsiotis states that the Greek state was trying to disassociate the Albanian linguistic factor from national affiliations or its very existence in the area, by conflating the terms Orthodox to mean Greek. He follows that on by examples. Baltsiotis again in case you overlooked it wrote:

The second was to put forth the argument that the language used by the population had no relation to their national affiliation. To this effect the state provided striking examples of Albanian speaking individuals (from southern Greece or the Souliotēs) who were leading figures in the Greek state.

"huge amounts of irrelevant information"

That is your opinion. Regarding myself, i prefer to cover all grounds than none opening myself to accusations of what this based on. Instead i can say firmly this is what it is based on. The onus is on you and others to prove the credibility of the peer reviewed source as being an issue. I post no amount of irreverent information. I only focus on relevance as per Wikipedia policy. I remind all that you may not be in favour of what a academic has written, however if it is peer reviewed and no credibility issues exist, then the works of that academic count.Resnjari (talk) 13:10, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

"Kahl, states quite clearly based on Greek sources that a Suliote population went to live in Zagori which is Epirus." To make it clear: Thesprotia, (homeland of Souliotes, Souli is a toponym in Thesprotia) is a small part of Epirus, Zagoris isn't part of Thepsrotia. Also don't expect your co-editors being obliged to read 110k of text each day in order to correct you in basic geographic terminology. On the other hand Kahl states that a small number moved to Zagori, but there was no permanent settlement. Not to mention that the residents in Zagori weren't Albanian speaking (few villages spoke Aromanian).

To sum up, foreign politics of the era of nationalism (1870s+) are clearly irrelevant with this article which deals with a community that was expelled from Epirus from the era of the Greek revolution. The fact that a small number was hosted for a short term period somewhere out of Thesprotia, doesn't reflect international politics. The vast majority of the Souliote diaspora (+almost all notable clans) ended up in Greece.Alexikoua (talk) 13:32, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Kahl does not say anything about them being "hosted". He says that they became part of the Zagorian community. The Arvanite community there mainly stems from the Souliotes, and he points that out. Look if you want the whole article i can email it, as the information is in table format in the article. He has a section where he gives details of which village has Arvanite families. Souliotes in Zagori did not move on, they stayed and became part of the community. However people still refer to those families as Arvanites, and Kahl distinguishes them as such in his village list by families numbers. There were Souliotes still present in the territory known as Epirus. You have to give a source that says they were "hosted" and moved on. Don't put a personal interpretation to a source that says nothing about being "hosted". Provide a source, then it ok and inline with Wikipedia policy. Resnjari (talk) 13:49, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Albanian name being in the Etymology section

"Please familiarize yourself with use-mention distinction, the source mentions "suljote", but does not *use* it. No english language sources do)"

Athenean, i accept that to an extent if it applies to all such terms. As per Wikipedia policy (e.g. Wikipedia:Search engine test) regarding or making sure beyond doubt about these matters, I also did a search (Wikipedia says that google books, but especially scholar are best for considering these issues) on google books [2] and [3] and on google scholar [4] and [5] and also found that the term Souliotes written in Greek characters/letters e.g: Σουλιώτες is also not used in English literature (footnotes citing a Greek source about Souliotes don't count, with English source also citing the Albanian term within a academic title used in footnote not counting. Has to be within the content of the source). They do not use the word in Greek characters. So according to the policy and so on the one you have cited and for the sake of neutrality and consistency, the Greek term in Greek characters would also have to be deleted. I for one think that should not be the case, however if the rationale used for the Albanian term not being there is used, the same exists for the term in Greek characters. All deleted, or all stay. Resnjari (talk) 08:18, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Weird use of Baltsiotis

The section about "Identity, ethnicity and language" includes a part of Baltsiotis paper, but however this involves a policy adopted by Greece at a latter chronological stage making it virtually irrelevant with the identity of the Souliotes. Most striking is that this policy used the Souliotes as a historic example of a Greek revolutionary. Thus de facto this can't be part for the construction of the Souliotic identity, in particular of a community which was already history.

The specific part, although irrelevant with the community's identity can remain as part of this article, but as part of latter politics.Alexikoua (talk) 13:40, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

There are examples of people identified as Souliotes (and being Albanian speaking) long after the events and exiles of the early 19th century. Dimitris Takis Botsaris for one still being fluent in Albanian during the early twentieth century. Also Baltsiotis in that paragraph cites the Arvanites and Souliotes as Orthodox Albanian speaking populations as examples that the Greek state tried to disassociate links they had with the Albanian language. As this policy was conducted during the 19th century, the eventual assimilation into wider Greek society also occurred during this period (in Corfu, Zagori etc). Apart from saying it was aimed and Orthodox Albanian speakers in both Southern Albania and Greek Epirus, he includes in this list the Arvanites and Souliotes. Similar or the same views of dissociating Orthodox Albanian population from links to the Albanian language was a wide ranging national Greek policy and or idea not confined to just the geographical locality of historic Epirus, but outside it too. No misue of Baltsiotis. It states:

The second was to put forth the argument that the language used by the population had no relation to their national affiliation. To this effect the state provided striking examples of Albanian speaking individuals (from southern Greece or the Souliotēs) who were leading figures in the Greek state.

Resnjari (talk) 15:26, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Resnjari (talk) 15:26, 29 June 2015 (UTC)