Talk:Cham Albanians/Archive 5

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Large-scale pov&or additions

It appears that the recent additions are not supported by the cited works. For example this text was added in the article: "Although recently another source states that an eleventh century Venetian document mentions an Albanian presence dominating the Thesprotian coast opposite the Island of Corfu.". Paradoxically the supposed source claims that: The presence of Albanians in the Epeirote lands from the beginning of the thirteenth century is also attested by two documentary sources: the first is a Venetian...".

To sum up 11th isn't 13th century and presence differs from domination.Alexikoua (talk) 20:53, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

I also wonder, what makes a 19th century travellers account a reliable sources on the issue of demographics and national identity.Alexikoua (talk) 21:01, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

Kokolakis' paper is also severely misinterpreted.Alexikoua (talk) 21:05, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

And that is it. Regarding the medieval source, fine there was a issue on my part with regards to eleventh and thirtieth century. Beyond that the source is important to this article. The GREEK scholar refers to a PRIMARY Venetian document (OF THE ERA) in were it relates that an Albanian presence was present in lands opposite Corfu. It is the earliest mention of Albanians in the area. Konstantinos Giakoumis states the following on page 176:

"The presence of Albanians in the Epeirote lands from the beginning the thirteenth century is also attested by two documentary sources: the first is a Venetian document of 1210, which states that the continent facing the island of Corfu is inhabited by Albanians."

The area opposite Corfu today is mainly the Greek coast of Thesprotia (unless its some other place that i have not heard of) and it says it is inhabited. The only issue that you point out is that the use of the word "dominating" is an issue. Ok, so then why not replace it with "inhabiting". Why delete the whole source ?

Moreover, how is Kokolakis' BOOK (not paper) misinterpreted? He states after much research that people who spoke Albanian resided (makes no mention of them having an Albanian consciousness, nor did i write that too) in those areas. Valentine Chirol, a British diplomat who traveled in the region also made similar observations during the Eastern Crisis. It is a primary source, direct from the person himself of what he saw during that time (the Suliotes article has primary sources of travellers like Byron and so forth, but impartial non Balkan observers cannot be mentioned here? What ? Explain?) Is this a case of different standards? Show me in wikipedia policy where that is so. A lot of scholarship is based on primary sources. As for their national consciousness, there were differing opinions. Greek scholar Skoulidas makes mention of Nikolaos Konemenos, who was from Lakka and he discusses his Albanian and Greek identity (it is a primary source). Chirol also states what he observed when he passed through the Fanari region. Why cannot that be mentioned as it is a primary source?

You fail to justify why you deleted all the other edits too. Regarding importantly the section on Chams in Greece, again a GREEK scholar Lambros Baltsiotis provides information about Chams that remained AFTER the events of 1944-1945. Should we not know about the Muslim Chams after the war if they remained and the conditions they live in. Why did you delete it? Moreover i provided sources by Tsitsipis about a presence of Orthodox Albanian speaking populations in Thesprotia corroborated by Moraitis who also did fieldwork in the area and says an similar thing (apart from Baltsiotis too). Western scholar Sarah Green who did fieldwork in Epirus Pogoni, also spent some time in Thesprotia. Yes she encountered people who still called themselves Chams and she refers about the reluctance about it. The only Albanian that i mentioned is Ardian Ahmedaja, who published in work in a Western peer reviewed publication (as the source indicates). Moreover, i mentioned the war law and i said that it is the opinion of the Albanian government and some Greek legal opinion that it is tied with the issue of the Chams. However the work is by esteemed Tsitsilakis, who is a law professor as Macedonia university. Its mention is important considering that bilateral relations are concerning the Cham Albanians. My point is this Alexikoua, i have made very sure that the sources i placed are one NON-Albanian (except for Ahmedaja- and he is there because he was peer reviewed by Western scholars) and that their academic record was strong. Other Editors can have a look at the language which you think is "inappropriate" in the edits. There may by a wording issue here or there as you have pointed out, but in what way did that warrant complete and utter deletion. You still have not provided ample information for all other edits (mind you Greek sources too, i doubt they would be undertaking a agenda of any kind) I know that editors here may not like the way i have gone about things, but the way you went about things without justifying the deletion goes against the spirit of wikipedia. You even deleted a Euromosaic link that i updated because the old one was not going to the right page as it had moved (was i being biased Alexikoua. Did you even bother to read and check all the edits before doing such a thing? Was that POV?). Wikipedia is about the spread knowledge(not a curtailing of it) to the parts of the world about something that might not be available. I have access to numerous books and journal articles. Many Albanians who have edited so far on this page have had no chance to undertake such an edit as they are unaware of the new (Greek) scholarship coming out of Greece or for that matter western scholarship. I am very much deep in the scholarship, Now if you think i am somehow biased, i think the article before on here is biased (one which you edited) since it uses words such as "Orthodox Chams". People in the region may call the language "Shqip", but according to the field work that Euromosiac did no longer identify as Chams, after the war. So that is an inaccuracy. Moreover Orthodox people in the region who speak Albanian are Orthodox Albanian speakers not Albanians (even in Albania, if you read Nitsakos' 2010 book 'On the border' and a article by Kretsi in the Albanian migration book where she did fieldwork in the village of Mursi, or even Gilles de Rapper's journal articles, they all point in the direction that a sizable number of Orthodox Albanian speakers even in Albania no longer want to be called Albanian. Anyway i am not contributing those articles.) Thus, i differ from a lot of people who are of Albanian heritage, who would argue to the end that these people are 'Orthodox Albanians', when newer research keeps pointing to the other direction. I want you and others to be aware of that point, and i outlined that in the Chameria based articles i have written in Albanian wikipedia. I am not here to push Albanian nationalism. If i did, i would have also used Albanian sources, and they are a plenty. I have used GREEK sources, as i have taken into account Greek concerns that anything Albanian could be considered a "lie". Unless those GREEK scholars are shown to be dubious too (you MUST show evidence), their work is very important in understanding Cham Albanians and the edits should stand. If wording is the issue then you should have said outright in my talk page or this talk page (as wikipedia has provided such a democratic forum) and the discussion would have been about that, and i would not have gone about things the way i did !

Resnjari (talk) 10:59, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

It appears you need to study the correspodent material before taking the initiative to make masive additions. To sum up:

• In the early 11th century there were no Albanian recorded in general, not only in Thesprotia (the earliest account of Albanians as an ethnic group is from 1080, end of 11th century & by the way there were recorded somewhere in central Albania)
• In the text there is already mentioned that one source claims that Albanians arrived prior to 12th century (I agree for a change here but the "prior to 12th century" claim covers the following (13th) century).
• Kokolakis claims that a number of villages in Preveza prefecture + in Thesprotia were inhabited by Albanian communities, that's already stated in the text (see: Chams in Greece). However, you are eager to add that Albanians were dominant in these regions something that Kokolakis does not support.
• 19th century traveler account are in general non wp:rs for wikipedia. I have not problem to remove that in Souliotes and elsewhere.
• In general apart from the 19th century data, the added sources were ok, the problem in this case is that we have original research and the sources do not support what's added in the correspodent text.Alexikoua (talk) 12:29, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

According to my experience here, I've used a couple of Albanian authors, such as Stavro Skendi, who is approved in general by western historiography.Alexikoua (talk) 12:33, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

I've added the correct claim according to Giakoumis, nevertheless even 13th century presence is far from considered "domination of the region". As the author suggests: I believe that the use of hypothetical immigrations as a basis to interpret sources that indicate the presence of Albanians in the Epeirote lands prior to the thirteenth-fourteenth century is somewhat arbitrary.Alexikoua (talk) 12:54, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Great ! See it goes to the point that you should not have immediately deleted, but DISCUSSED first ! I must point out that some workings i intentionally phrased them as such to see how you would go about as an editor, as with the Giakoumis material or like the placing of the updated Euromosiac link. I wanted to see whether you would check all material, is why i placed paragraphs of text (so no accusations that the information is dogy, and people could see for themselves) could be made also. Next time when you decide to "edit" be very observant, check the material, especially if the person has placed links to academic material. There is a purpose to that. Do not be dismissive, even if they person may be of Albanian heritage. Regarding Albanian sources, i only use in Wikipedia English ones that have been trained in the Western tradition, where they are peer reviewed like Ahmedaja.

Regarding Koklakis' book, even if a certain point is stated in the text, if a more better source appears, that should be added in the article, not excluded ? Which means he should be there.

"However, you are eager to add that Albanians were dominant in these regions something that Kokolakis does not support."

I take issue by your assertion that i am "eager". I go by the scholarship. Kokolakis does write that Albanian speaking peoples where there in those places during the nineteenth and early twentieth century. But i should have put up a more stronger source: Lambros Baltsiotis, who has done the most extensive fieldwork in Thesprotia out of all the scholars writes this:

"The Albanian speaking area was quite compact and well marked by the local geography, as the Greek speaking communities were settled at the eastern mountainous areas. Chamouria and Prevezaniko were also symbolically distinguished as the land where the Arvanitēs lived. We can rather confidently argue that Muslim and Christian Chams of the plains made up a distinct “ethno-economic” group. However, there was a particular pattern in the settlements of religious groups inside the area of Chamouria annexed to Greece: most Muslim villages were located at the center of the area, while the large majority of the Christian Orthodox Albanian speaking villages were to the south and the east of the area."

The area regarding Baltsiotis states clearly that the language area was "COMPACT". I hope that is not a controversial word. That is not fully clear in the main wikipedia article and should be there. So being "eager", i think not.

• 19th century traveler account are in general non wp:rs for wikipedia. I have not problem to remove that in Souliotes and elsewhere.

Regarding Chirol, in the paragraph that reads, Baltsiotis mentions Chirol in the footnote:

"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."

Footnote 16:"It is quite characteristic that it was in 1880, when the British Valentine Chirol visited the Christian “Albanian” village of Tourkopalouko (today Kypseli, at the northwest part of the Preveza prefecture), that his confidence for his Greek friends in Yanina “was first shaken”. He was surprised that no one in the village spoke or understood any other language than Albanian although his friends “had assured me that south [of the river] Kalamas there were no Albanian communities” (V. Chirol, “Twixt Greek and Turk, or Jottings during a journey through Thessaly, Macedonia and Epirus, in the Autumn of 1880”,Blackwood’s Edinbrurgh Magazine, n. 785, March 1881, p. 313)."

Since it is in Baltsiotis article, Chirol a eyewitness, does not have issue. I thought that a direct link to the actual primary source would be best. But i think it can be accommodated by saying something like "Nineteenth century travelers passing in the area observed that national affiliations amongst Orthodox Albanian speaking peoples had not taken shape regarding national belonging" or something along those lines and it being linked through the Baltsiotis article. Its why i had Skoulidas' article also. A very important source about what people joining the ranks of the elite (Nikolaos was from Lakka, on the periphery of the Albanian speaking area) from those Albanian speaking communities thought of themselves regarding identity and when the names they use for geography (as cited by Skoulidas).

"the added sources were ok, the problem in this case is that we have original research and the sources do not support what's added in the correspodent text."

That's not what was asserted in the comments you wrote when you deleted it. You accused me POV. Where you trying to smear me and my edits ? You can see why i reacted the way i did without you not even discussing the edits first here on the discussion page. Very disappointing Alexikoua. As for original research, if its regarding primary sources, i was not aware of wikipedia guidelines about that and since you say you want to be strict about it, the Suliotes article is in need of a very big clean up. I am wondering why you have not applied such standards there too ? Anyway, regarding this wikipedia article and the other edits, please POINT OUT if there are issues there, before i start placing them back all. Since you say they are ok, i will be doing that over the next few days. I am not here to do POV ! I believe in robust scholarship, otherwise why bother.

Resnjari (talk) 03:28, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Your additions have been reverted since they were problematic, thus per wp:BRD you need to explain each case. By the way I'm willing to help you (not to mention you need to avoid personal accusation or else you will be reported) as I've did in the medieval history section and proposed a version which is in agreement with the reference you provided.Alexikoua (talk) 13:22, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

As for the so-called Albanian domination in entire Thesprotia, even the 19th accounts you provided claim that there are numerous exceptions (Paramythia, Parga, etc). Kokolakis names a number of settlements, but does not make claims about a Albanian domination in the entire province, a significant part of it is excluded. Kokolakis also mentions something else about the identity of the Cham group ("Χωρίς να ταυτίζεται με το σύνολο του αλβανόφωνου πληθυσμού,") in clear disagreement with what you added in another section using 19th century accounts (meaning that they didn't self-identified as Albanians first in 18-19th century).Alexikoua (talk) 13:57, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

I am glad you’re willing to help and yes each edit will be thoroughly discussed. Now regarding Koklakis, his scholarship pertains to archival material. Baltsiotis material is both archival and fieldwork. Baltsiotis too makes exceptions and is in agreement with Koklakis'. Yet he differs by giving more precise details about those exceptions. He writes:

"It’s worth mentioning that the Greek speaking Muslim communities, which were the majority population at Yanina and Paramythia, and of substantial numbers in Parga and probably Preveza, shared the same route of identity construction, with no evident differentiation between them and their Albanian speaking co-habitants. These last mentioned Muslim communities were in some cases bilingual in Greek and Albanian (see the specific chapter “La question de la langue dans quelques villes et bourgades de l’Épire”, in Lambros Baltsiotis,L’albanophonie dans l’État grec. Expansion et déclin des parlers albanais, diplôme de l’EHESS, Paris, 2002, pp. 305-312)."

He states that there where Greek speaking Muslims (not Greek Muslims as is mentioned in the article and is a POV term since that community does NOT identify as Greeks) and they shared the same identity construction as people who were Muslim and Albanian speaking: In the area where i edited and wrote the following (my edits in bold):

Although the Cham were primarily of Albanian ethnic origin, Greek speaking Muslims from Epirus assimilated into the Cham community because they "shared the same route of identity construction, with no evident differentiation between them and their Albanian speaking co-habitants". According to Hasluck, it was also

the edit should be as it is, as one i corrected a POV assertion regarding "Greek Muslims" (as there are no sources to indicate that Greek speaking Muslims felt 'Greek', not even primary ones regarding this area, unless you know of any) and two gave a GREEK source that directly dealt with Greek speaking Muslims and their constructions of identity with Muslim Albanian speakers. Now how could it be "POV"?

Moreover the sentence that reads (my edits in bold):

"However, in contrast to Greek Muslims in Ottoman Macedonia the mainly Albanian Chams did not face any dilemma over their identity or relations with other Albanian subdivisions such as the Labs, Tosks and others." As it stands at the moment, it reads tribes.

The word tribes is anachronistic and was used by some outsiders to refer to the Gegs, Labs, Tosks and Chams (It would be like saying that the Pontians, Cretans, Thessalians are "tribes", instead of Greek subdivisions). They are Albanian subdivisions, not tribes. It would also be like writing in the wikipedia article the word "coloureds" for African Americans, unless it’s a direct quote from the era and a source. I see no parenthesis on that word here, so it means that Hasluck was not being quoted directly (nor problematically there is no page number to even check ! -I am thus curious to know how it stands for being a source Alexikoua?). Nonetheless, at the very least the word should be subdivisions as it is not POV, unless a page number and direct quote can be found. And even then if it was, the sentence should be followed by a "or subdivisions such as the Tosks, Labs, and so on" to clarify. References by past foreign travelers, by the Albanians themselves and even in current day scholarship refer to Albanian tribes as being in the northern Albania that kept clan like structures (and sometimes to parts of Laberia). I forgot to cleanup the POV term "Greek Muslims" for this part of the paragraph. It needs to be "Greek speaking Muslims".

"Orthodox Cham Albanians still live in the region in three regional units. According to a study by the Euromosaic project of the European Union, Albanian speaking communities live along the border with Albania in Thesprotia, the northern part of the Preveza regional unit in the region called Thesprotiko, and a few villages in Ioannina regional unit. They also dominate a part of the Preveza prefecture known as Fanari in villages like Ammoudia. Albanian is still spoken in the region and some of the older inhabitants are Albanian monolinguals, such as those in the village of Agia."

This paragraph should stand with the only exception of change being made where i wrote: 'They also dominate a part of the Preveza prefecture' for 'They also inhabit a part of the Preveza prefecture'. Apart from that, what i wrote fills a gap in the knowledge, by giving a Greek source about Orthodox Albanian speakers in the Preveza region. I even included an example of a village Ammoundia in Fanari, and a Greek monograph where Albanian speech is mentioned as existing in the village. I also added to the Foss reference about monolinguals, where GREEK researcher, Tsitsipis also mentions the Albanian speaking villages being isolated in the area and cites an example of one: Agia. Not sure how that could be POV also? And instead of "Orthodox Cham Albanians" it should be "Orthodox Albanian speakers". Otherwise its POV. We don;t want to assert a identity on a people who do not want to be called Cham or Albanian. Their link with anything Albanian is the language (calling its Shqip, singing Albanian songs and so on). Just like people in Turkey who speak Greek and are Muslim, but do not call themselves actual Greeks, and regard themselves as ethnic Turks.

Regarding the remaining Muslim Albanian Cham population in Greece, that should be there considering that the article is about Cham Albanians (whatever their number). I wrote the following and placed the paragraphs from academic texts written by GREEK scholars and western ones that the information was based. I wrote the following (my edits separate to the cited sources in bold).

"There still exists a very small Muslim Albanian Cham community in Thesprotia. They are found today in the village of Polyneri (previously Koutsi) and until recently was the only Muslim community in Epirus to have an imam. Their mosque was the last within the area before being blown up by local Christians. The number of Muslim Chams remaining in the area after World War Two included more people who converted to Orthodoxy and assimilated into the local population in order to preserve their properties and themselves.

The only change that i would say i would do is change the sentence "before being blown up by local Christians." would be to have it say "before being blown up by a local Christian" or to say "before being blown up by a local non-Muslim", if that is considered a 'problem'. However i was citing Baltsiotis when he wrote that "One of the last acts of the“cleansing of history” is the blowing up of the mosque at the village of Polyneri (ex-Koutsi,) by a (Christian) villager, during the time of the Colonels’ Dictatorship. A tiny Muslim community and, until recently, the last imam of Epirus still survive in this village." The event happened and here it is important to cite the social conditions in which these people found themselves in, as the article is about them. There are other precedents for this. For example in the Ioannina article, the Jewish community regarding what happened to them after the war, their numbers, their religious sites and traditions are mentioned. Same with the Thessalonika article. So most of what i wrote should be in there, except for the small change needed in the sentence that i said. The section is not POV.

For now i will leave it at that. The rest will follow. Resnjari (talk) 04:55, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

It appears you are into clear wp:pov territory. Actually cherry picking on 19th century material while at the same time ignoring important papers. Thus, according to you the Albanian-speaking communities (regardless of religion) of the Ottoman Empire had a strong national identity. Unfortunately for you there is a mountain of bibliography that contradicts this one: Hart, Laurie Kain (1999). "Culture, Civilization, and Demarcation at the Northwest Borders of Greece". American Ethnologist 26: 196. doi:10.1525/ae.1999.26.1.196. "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.". Thus pretending the existence of a strong national feeling from Ottoman era is the epitomy of wp:pov.

Also it's no wonder that the material you present contradictics your personal pov. In fact Baltsiotis never claimed something about a Albanian identity among the local Albanian-speaking communities of the Ottoman era, he claims that they shared the same identity with the other Muslim groups. Not to mention that 2,900 Muslims Chams during the population exchange declared themselves as Turks rather than Albanians".Alexikoua (talk) 06:46, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

It appears that a mountain of bibliography clearly contradicts the supposed Albanian identity, here is another work (I assume you understand Greek, although your interpratation of Kokolakis was quite weird), Kalivretakis [helios-eie.ekt.gr/EIE/bitstream/10442/8696/1/LK_1995_01_TEXT.pdf] p. 36: Οι τελευταίοι συγκροτούσαν τον συμπαγέστερο μουσουλμανικό πυρήνα στον κατεξο­χήν χριστιανικό νότο και επί Τουρκοκρατίας ενσάρκωναν τοπικά το κυρίαρχο στοιχείο στα πλαίσια του θρησκευτικο-κοινωνικου διπολικού σχήματος της Οθωμανικής Αυτοκρατορίας, εξ ου και «Τουρκαλβανοι» στις μαρτυρίες των πηγών. And all of the sudden another 19th century account (Athanasios Psalidas) contradicts your personal pov about Albanian domination in Thesprotia δίδασκε ο Αθανάσιος Ψαλίδας στις αρχές του 19ου αιώνα και συνέχιζε: «Κατοικείται από Γραικούς και Αλβα­νούς· οι πρώτοι είναι περισσότεροι».

Off course using 19th century stuff to promote a personal pov is at least problematic.Alexikoua (talk) 07:00, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

It appears that a ton of works are in complete contradiction with the so-called strong Albanian identity of the Muslim Cham community (until now we have Hart, Kalivretakis, Roudometof & Fabbe) not to mention the authors you claim (Baltsiotis) do not support your personal view (the common Greek speaking & Albanian speaking Muslims' identity is something diferrent).Alexikoua (talk) 07:28, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

By the way if you are eager to add the destruction of a mosque in Greece, I remind you that the first self declared anti-religious atheistic state was Stalinist Albania (1945-91). If this community had problems of religious freedom we can add an entire section about religious persecution of the Albanian side (or Konispol was exeption in Albania?). Not to mention that they were branded as "murderers" and "collaborators of the Nazis" by an Albanian leader (Hoxha), see Kretsi for details.Alexikoua (talk) 08:32, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

One i am not cherry picking. If that was so, then the whole basis on which wikiepdia and scholarship itself was based would be invalid. You point to a specific part of the research that deals with the matter. I could say what you just did in the reply to was cherry picking (4 sources by the way is not a ton or a mountain). Lol. Though it would be childish of me to do so. Regarding Koklakis, he is there because he refers to Albanian speakers, not Albanians which mind you i did not write in the edit. Since the word "dominate" is a harsh word, it would have been best if i said inhabited the greater part of the region or something like that. Kokolakis, as does Baltsiotis, as does that fantastic source by Kalivretakis (i will be using that in Albanian wikipedia) talk about the rough confines and limits of the Albanian speaking area by discussing the geographical outline. I feel that there are enough sources (Greek) which similarly refer to that and it should be in the article.

Alexikoua, in the above paragraphs relating to those paragraph edits, i did not assert that Muslims had a Albanian national conscious as it is of the modern era of nationalism (each ethno-cultural group has gone through different stages of imagining the community, its always been a ongoing process (Anthony Smith's works and those of Benedict Anderson are some of the best in this regard about nationalism). Its the same with Greeks (Romioi to Hellenes and so on). Albanian speaking peoples have used the self appellation of Shqiptar( from Epirus and Thessaly and beyond) for over two hundred years now, replacing Arberesh. Hobhouse noted that people identified as Albanians. Scholar Gilles de Rapper felt that Hobhouse was credible and he noted Hobhouse's observation in a paper about Lunxheri regarding Orthodox Albanian speakers. My point is that identity amongst Albanian speaking people was complex. At a local level religion was important and so was language at times and so on. Nationalism made things tricky, as people were made to choose (Skoulidas whose work is more recent gives examples to that regard about the Albanian speaking elite, and one from these Cham populations. See also about other Albanian examples by Skoulidas: The Albanian Greek-Orthodox Intellectuals: Aspects of their Discourse between Albanian and Greek National Narratives (late 19th - early 20th centuries)). Baltsiotis to a lesser extent discusses this also. Moreover, referring to "so-called Albanian identity" is problematic. In the paragraphs above I made no such assertion. You may have interpreted the following sentence as being such:

"Although the Cham were primarily of Albanian ethnic origin, Greek speaking Muslims from Epirus assimilated into the Cham community because they "shared the same route of identity construction, with no evident differentiation between them and their Albanian speaking co-habitants".

The bits in bold are my editions. Whoever wrote "Chams were of Albanian ethnic origin", was not me. You edit this article for so long, you should have spotted that. Don't pin things on me. However the part that i added regarding that because they "shared the same route of identity construction, with no evident differentiation between them and their Albanian speaking co-habitants" quoting Baltsiotis is important. Greek speaking Muslims and Albanian speaking Muslims had the "same route of identity construction" with each other and did not feel different from one another. If you have issue with that contact Baltsiotis. I mean Greek speaking Muslims felt the way they did. The passage is not stating that they had a strong Albanian or Greek identity, but that they felt a sense of unity when it came to their respective communities that were different from the surrounding Christian one. Anyway Baltsiotis does write this though about Chams and their identity. Considering that Batsiotis has access to the Greek government archive (which he cites in his work) and his work is very recent, his work like Skoulidas take precedence over older works such as Hart who cite more limited material and archive (seriously Alexikoua read the whole article, footnotes and all. Its why i placed a link to everything that i could, and quoted paragraphs from works that i could, if access to that material is difficult to come by for you or others. I wish somehow you could get the whole book.):

"In the same period, when the Muslim Chams were still considered by Greek politicians to be Muslim rather than Albanian, theories that they were of Greek origin were sporadically reintroduced into public discourse: for example in a contemporary article they were described as “Epirotēs converted to Islam” who speak a dialect differing from Albanian and of greater affinity to Greek.46 The question of the Greek origin of Muslim Chams was a weapon to be used for many purposes. For instance, the theory of a possible common Greek-Albanian, Pelasgic (or even Illyrian) origin- very popular among Greeks and Albanians during late 19th and early 20th century- was initially used as an argument to pursue expansionist Greek claims in Albanian-speaking territories. This discourse of Greek or common origin of the Muslim Albanian Chams was directed to the Muslim community itself as well as international observers, Greek politicians and Greek officials of the local administration.47N. I. Anaghnostopoulos, the author of this article, was a well known agronomist/scientist of the Interwar period, closely associated with the Agrarian Bank [ΑγροτικήΤράπεζα]. Written during the debate on the exchangeability of the Muslim Chams, his essay defends their right to remain in Greece and calls for a softer policy approach towards them. It appears that the only way to persuade the state to let them continue to live in the area was to base his argument on an assumed common origin with the Greeks."

"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.16 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).17 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."

We have to be aware that some sources that were written in Greece attempted to obscure that these people had anything to do with the Albanian language or that whatever their numbers identified as Albanians. Baltsiotis gives a very important analysis of this. I am not contradicting myself as you claim.

Moreover some Greek authors of the nineteenth century from Epirus had different agendas as is evidenced by Skoulidas: He states on pages 6-7 that:

"The national perspective is obvious. It is pertinent to remember that, as a boy, Hristovassilis did not consider himself an ελληνόπουλo [Greek child] but a ρωμιόπουλο [Rum child] and a χριστιανόπουλο [Christian child], as Greeks were the people beyond the borders of the Greek State. And in my opinion, Kokolakis correctly described this fluidity in ethnic-religious consciousness. If Hristovassilis, under the influence of the Greek schools and in an area with a strong Greek presence, raised this question, who can speak for sure about how Albanian-speaking populations in Linxurië, Delvino and so on perceived the national consciousness..... Similar classifications mixing ethnic and religious orientations and identities were made by different Epirotes throughout the nineteenth century. This was the time when ethnographic maps were used to solve the national problems in the Balkan Peninsula. Aravantinos uses the term Ημιελληνικόν ή Γραικοαλβανικόν στοιχείον [Semi - Greek or Greek - Albanian element] to describe the bilingual populations speaking Greek with an Albanian accent; the women spoke Greek but their customs were purely Albanian. Aravantinos describes the Albanians as Σκιπεταρικόν ή Αλβανικόν στοιχείον [Skipetarian or Albanian element], the Arvanitovlachs as Γκαραγκούνηδες [Garagounides] and he also talks about Σλαβικόν στοιχείον, Αθίγγανους, Αράπηδες (Μαύρους) [Slavic element, Roma, Blacks] in Epirus..... Serafeim Xenopoulos uses the term Ηπειρώτες Αλβανότουρκοι for the Muslims of Albanian origin in Epirus. He too borrows elements and terms taken from Aravantinos. Nikolaos Konemenos takes a different approach, by not denying his Albanian identity, although he participated in Greek public life. He accepts this identity and embodies it, without excluding the other identity: κι εγώ είμαι φυσικός Αρβανίτης, επειδή κατάγομαι από τα' χωριά της Λάκκας (Τσαμουριά) και είμαι απόγονος ενός καπετάν Γιώργη Κονεμένου ’λ που εμίλειε τα’ αρβανίτικα κι όπου ταις αρχαίς του προπερασμένου αιώνος... είχε καταιβεί κι είχε αποκατασταθεί στην Πρέβεζα...[I too am a natural Albanian, because I originate from the villages of Lakka (Tsamouria) and I’m a descendant of a kapetan Giorgis Konemenos, who spoke Albanian and who at the beginning of the last century... had come down and had settled in Preveza]. The spelling mistakes in this passage are a good indicator of what is happening."

It’s not me, but the recent scholarship coming out of Greece that is saying so delving into the archive. Unless there is a issue with Skoulidas himself as a scholar there is no reason to doubt this and we have to take nineteenth century Greek authors with caution.

Moreover that you cite Hart "here 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."

I agree with that to an extent. However not all Albanian speaking people who where Orthodox as shown by Baltsiotis and Skoulidas did so (immediately). They also show a process that was heading to what Hart correctly asserts, but much later. For example Nikolaos Komenenos accepted a Albanian and Greek identity (apart from referring to the region of Lakka as Tsamouria), and Baltsiotis cites Chirol's observations of Tourkopaloukon in the Fanari. Moreover, its why i stated that we should refer to people who are Orthodox and Albanian speaking as Orthodox Albanian speakers, a neutral term that sums up their associations with Albanian matters. They speak the language. Moraitis and Tsitsipis both encountered the term "shqip" and "Arvanitika" and made mention of it. They said nothing about the people using a self appellation of "shqiptar" or "Cham". Euromosaic specifically states that these Orthodox Albanian speaking people refuse that word after the war for themselves. However Sarah Green did find people in Thesprotia who reluctantly know of themselves as Chams but refuse to use the word publicly and have apprehensions about it.

Regarding the Roudemntof source, true, but Baltsiotis goes into more detail as to how that partially came about:

"The presence of a population considered hostile to national interests near the frontier caused anxiety to Greek officials which was exacerbated by a militaristic perception of security and territory. The central Greek state was eager to push the “hostile” population to migrate to Turkey. To that end it utilized harassment tactics which were carried out by local paramilitary groups. This was a practice that was well known and had been adopted as early as the period of the Balkan Wars. In other cases it just forced people to leave the country, after handing down ultimatums."

"There is no evidence suggesting that the Muslim population was strongly opposed to the idea of migrating to Turkey. Although no one was willing to leave his/her land indefinitely, several sources indicate that as a destination Turkey was far more appealing than Albania. This was also due to the poor economic situation in the latter which was well-known to the people in the area. This phenomenon of warm regard towards migration to Turkey by the Muslims was widely used by Greek nationalist historians in order to prove the “Turkish consciousness” of the population. This notion also confused Greek politicians and diplomats of the time who, insisting on this assertion, failed to comprehend that the population had gradually been “nationalized”, thus constituting a de facto Albanian national minority."

Just because they declared themselves as "Turks" does not mean they felt "Turk". You as well as i know that the word Turk in the Balkans has a more complicated meaning, as often it was synonymous with the word Muslim. For these people who were Albanian speaking and Muslim, declaring oneself as "Turk" was done under difficult circumstances during that time. Regarding the word Turk, a peer reviewed Western scholar (yes he is of Albanian heritage) recent wrote about this:

"As state policy, post- Ottoman “nations” continue to sever most of their cultural, socioeconomic, and institutional links to the Ottoman period. At times, this requires denying a multicultural history, inevitably leading to orgies of cultural destruction (Kiel 1990; Riedlmayer 2002). As a result of this strategic removal of the Ottoman past—the expulsion of the “ Turks” (i.e., Muslims); the destruction of buildings; the changing of names of towns, families, and monuments; and the “purification” of languages—many in the region have accepted the conclusion that the Ottoman cultural, political, and economic infrastructure was indeed an “occupying,” and thus foreign, entity (Jazexhi 2009). Such logic has powerful intuitive consequences on the way we write about the region’s history: If Ottoman Muslims were “Turks” and thus “foreigners” by default, it becomes necessary to differentiate the indigenous from the alien, a deadly calculation made in the twentieth century with terrifying consequences for millions."(Isa Blumi, “Reinstating the Ottomans, Alternative Balkan Modernities: 1800-1912, Palgrave MacMillan, New York, 2011, p. 32.)

My point is we have to be understanding of how the word "Turk" was deployed in the past and be very mindful about it.

"For A. Psalida, “Albania, (former Illyricon and Epirus) is bordered to the east by the lower parts of Macedonia and Thessaly, to the north by Bosnan and Serbia, to the west by the Ionian Sea and to the south by the Gulf of Amvrakia”, a perception without any ethnological basis which reflects the literature of the period. The writer uses the word Albania, the scholars’ way of expressing the older Greek term Arvanitia, to refer to Epirus. “Albania consists of two toparchies or kingdoms, one of Epirus and one of Illyricon”, the writer continues. With this revision he places the river Aoos as a border between Epirus and Illyricon - Ano Arvanitia (upper Arvanitia), a notion which his student Kosmas the Thesprotian also adopts to define Albania. “Albania to the west is bordered by the Adriatic Sea, to the east by the western parts of Macedonia, to the north by Bosnan, Dalmatia and Montenegro and to the south by Epirus, from which it is divided by the river Viosa or Vousa”. In these descriptions it is obvious that Avlona is also included inside the borders of Epirus, although the ancient treatise clearly places it in Macedonia (Ptolemy). A few years later, at the time of the Greek revolution, Psalidas refutes, for obvious reasons, the term Arvanitia and comments: “Epirus is wrongly referred to as Arvanitia, since no one there knows how to speak Arvanitika (Albanian)". > Tassos A. Mikropoulos (2008). Elevating and Safeguarding Culture Using Tools of the Information Society: Dusty traces of the Muslim culture. Earthlab. p. 321.

What am i to make of Psalidas? First he refers to the region as Arvanitia or Albania. The he denies it and says that no one speaks Albanian. First he acknowledges that the term exists, and then refutes it (Skoulidas talks about similar issues by other Epirote authors regarding Albanian matters). That he rejects a Albanian speaking population ever existed is curious, then he accepts it with exceptions. You cite him as acknowledging an Albanian population, and then he denies it in other places. So again what do i make of Psalidas? Is he distorting for a political agenda? I'll get to Psalidas later regarding discussion of another edit, at the moment that's all i'll say for him now.

Regarding though your Kalivretakis source citation (good one by the way), i read the whole article and he does say this on pp: 33-34:

"Ας έρθουμε τώρα στην τρίτη μεγάλη καταγραφή που διαθέτουμε, εκείνη δηλαδή που πραγματοποιήθηκε από το II Γραφείο του Ελληνικού Επιτελείου το 1913 και δημοσιεύτηκε με το γνωστό χάρτη το 1919. Εδώ οι κατηγορίες του πληθυσμού είναι δυο και ξεκάθαρες: «Ελληνες» και «Αλβανοί»17, θα περίμενε κανείς ότι στις αρχές του υ αιω^α, η ομαδοποίηση αυτή θα στόχευε στον εκσυγχρονισμό της σύλληψης των όρων καταργώντας τη θρησκευτική διάκριση μεταξύ των Αλβανών και αθροίζοντας τους σε αντιπαράθεση με τους Έλληνες, ότι δηλαδή οι όροι θα αντιστοιχούσαν σε εθνικό και όχι θρησκευτικό κριτήριο. Συνέβη όμως το ακριβώς αντίθετο: διατρέχοντας τα χωρία ένα προς ένα, διαπιστώνει κανείς ότι ως ελληνικά έχουν χαρακτηριστεί όλα τα χριστιανικά χωριά ανεξαρτήτως του εάν ομιλούν ελληνικά ή αλβανικά. Αυτό θα ήταν αποδεκτό εάν ο πληθυσμός αυτών των χωριών, ανεξαρτήτως γλώσσας, είχε κάνει τη συνειδησιακή επιλογή της ελληνικής εθνικότητας. Ειδάλλως, θα αποτελούσε ένα εξαιρετικά ριψοκίνδυνο αποπροσανατολιστικό μπούσουλα πολιτικοστρατιωτι-κής πρακτικής.

Στα πλαίσια της επιτόπιας έρευνας που πραγματοποιήσαμε στην Αλβανία (Νοέμβριος-Δεκέμβριος 1992), μελετήσαμε το ζήτημα των εθνοπολιτισμικών ομάδων, όπως αυτές συνειδητοποιούνται σήμερα επί τόπου. Είναι ενδιαφέρον καταρχήν το γεγονός ότι οι ντόπιοι Έλληνες που βιώνουν μια πραγματικότητα και δεν αντλούν την εμπειρία τους από επιτελικούς χάρτες, χρησιμοποιούν χαρακτηρισμούς που λαμβάνουν υπόψιν την πολυπλοκότητα του φαινομένου και αποφεύγουν τις απλουστεύσεις. Έτσι τα χωριά χαρακτηρίστηκαν αυθορμήτως ως Ελληνικά, Αλβανικά Χριστιανικά, Αλβανικά Μουσουλμανικά —με ιδιαίτερη μνεία των Τσάμικων— και Βλάχικα. Οι χαρακτηρισμοί αυτοί συμπίπτουν σε σημαντικό βαθμό με εκείνους των πηγών του 19ου αιώνα. Περισσότερο πολύπλοκες είναι οι περιπτώσεις που σχετίζονται με τις πόλεις, τα μικτά χωριά, τα νέα χωρία και τις μετακινήσεις πληθυσμών που έχουν λάβει χώρα τα τελευταία χρόνια.

What is interesting is that in his fieldwork, Kalivretakis found that most descriptions of villages in Albania correpsond to nineteenth century descriptions of distinguishing between Orthodox Albanians and Muslims Albanians, Vlachs and so on. If that is the case then Chirol as a source describing the limits of the Albanian speaking regions has merit in being included in the article and by no means a issue. The wording of a sentence would need to be worked on though. Kalivretakis also states that we need to be careful as Greek sources often lumped every Orthodox and Christian as Greek. Chirol as cited by Baltsiotis experienced this when Ioannina, when his Greeks friends said one thing and he found another reality. It does not though mean that Albanian national consciousness was developed amongst these people as Baltsiotis rightly writes. It just means that Greek national affiliation took longer to reach these populations, one that went beyond common religious identification, which occurred later with the coming of the Greek state to these areas after the Balkans wars. As Tsitsipis points out the area where these Orthodox Albanian speakers reside was very isolated till recently. So going back to Kalivretakis he says that we have to be cautious about calling everyone that was Orthodox "Greek", like Hart does outright.

Moreover the important bit that you left out from the Kalivretakis passage at the beginning was this:

Είναι Βύσκολο να μιλήσουμε για το ζήτημα του ελληνισμού της Νότιας Αλβανίας, χωρίς να αναφερθούμε στο ζήτημα των Τσάμηδων. «Οι κατοικούντες εις Παραμυθίαν και Δέλβινον λέγονται Τζαμηδες και ο τόπος Τζαμουριά», δίδασκε ο Αθανάσιος Ψαλίδας στις αρχές του 19ου αιώνα και συνέχιζε: «Κατοικείται από Γραικούς και Αλβανούς• οι πρώτοι είναι περισσότεροι», ενώ διέκρινε τους δεύτερους σε Αλβανούς Χριστιανούς και Αλβανούς Μουσουλμάνους26. Οι τελευταίοι συγκροτούσαν τον συμπαγέστερο μουσουλμανικό πυρήνα στον κατεξοχήν χριστιανικό νότο και επί Τουρκοκρατίας ενσάρκωναν τοπικά το κυρίαρχο στοιχείο στα πλαίσια του θρησκευτικο-κοινωνικου διπολικού σχήματος της Οθωμανικής Αυτοκρατορίας, εξ ου και «Τουρκαλβανοι» στις μαρτυρίες των πηγών.

He expresses difficulty about this area of research as Greek sources (and going by his footnotes he is using 19th century Greek ones and i have outlined why we should take them with caution) are the main body of his research that he uses to compare the then current state of affairs in 1995. Moreover his fieldwork which he did in 1992 was in Southern Albania, unlike Baltsiotis who has spent huge amount of time in Thesprotia, separate to the archive and his works are also recent (he has massively built on the scholarship).

So the above edits, are there more wording issues or are they to go back up with the adjustments that i suggested?

PS: I cannot give a reply about Fabbe as you did not provide a source or page number. As i have done so my replies to my material, would you place it so i can either access the journal article through my university or get the book from the library in the coming days.

Resnjari (talk) 10:50, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

I'll provide a detailed explanation on why the remaining points are still problematic:

1. Although the Cham were primarily of Albanian ethnic origin, Greek speaking Muslims from Epirus assimilated into the Cham community because they "shared the same route of identity construction, with no evident differentiation between them and their Albanian speaking co-habitants".

and then this is followed by:

2. Identity and social relations between Albanian speaking Muslims and Orthodox during the early 19th century within the region were also quite different from that which emerged in the 20th century. For example, foreign observers like John Cam Hobhouse who stayed for prolonged periods of time in Ali Pasha's domain noted that unlike other parts of the Ottoman Empire where religious identification predominated, Orthodox and Muslim Albanian speakers identified as Albanians first.(19th century account cited, no wonder its not supported by any serious modern account)

The various Greek-Albanian speaking communities had a common identity (#1 Baltsiotis), but #2 is problematic, since their identity inside the Ottoman society wasn't Albanian (a clear mess by mixing academic works with 19th century travelers). In fact the Muslim communities were identified as Turks in Epirus. One source of several that make this clear: Nußberger Angelika, Wolfgang Stoppel (2001), Minderheitenschutz im östlichen Europa (Albanien) (PDF) (in German), p. 8: “no national identity existed in the region that was geographically defined as Epirus, no ethnic but religious criteria classified the Orthodox population as Greeks and the Muslims as Turks.” To sum #2 is pov & or, #1 can be part of the article considered that it will be clear that there were classified as Turks and they were irrelevant with any ethnic Albanian identity.

3. Throughout the 19th century, Orthodox and Muslim Albanian speakers dominated the region of today's Thesprotia and a sizable portion of today's Preveza prefecture,(hope we agree about the removal of 19th century account)

As you see Kokolakis describes a number of places inhabited by Albanian speakers, however he doesn't mention that there was Albanian domination in Thesprotia. He mentions some pockets of Albanian speakers (θύλακας doesn't mean domination if you mean that). No wonder a large part of Thesprotia wasn't Albanian speaking (per Kokolakis east and central regions of Paramithia and Filiates).

As I've stated the use of 19th century accounts which you base the claim of Albanian domination is problematic and they are even contradicting eachother (Psalidas, another 19th century specialist claims the opposite: a Greek majority in Chameria over the Albanians).

Thus I hope you clearly understand that the reverts were reasonable, nevertheless Baltsiotis' claim of a common identity (a Muslim one not an Albanian one) is fine provided that we do not mix it with weird 19th century based conclusions.Alexikoua (talk) 12:09, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

Regarding your assertion that Hobhouse is not taken seriously "that no wonder its not supported by any serious modern account".

This is what Gilles de Rapper state with the Hobhouse quotation (De Rapper, Gilles. "Better than Muslims, not as good as Greeks". p. 10:

Apart from religion, ethno-national affiliation appears to be of great relevance today. It is clear that, in this border area, it has always been important to identify oneself with one or other of the national groups. It is also well-known that, in this part of the Balkans, and back into the Ottoman times, the ethnonyms ‘Greek’ and ‘Orthodox Christian’ were largely synonymous, so that it was difficult to be Orthodox and to claim not to be Greek. Lunxhëri is an illustration of that ambiguity or contradiction. By the beginning of the nineteenth century and later on, the British, French and Austrian travellers who visited Lunxhëri, most of them arriving from Ioannina, described the Lunxhots as Albanian-speaking Orthodox Christians, and had the feeling that, starting north of Delvinaki, they were entering another country, although the political border did not exist at the time. Greek was not spoken as it was further south; there was a change in the way of life and manners of the peasants. As one traveller reported Hobhouse 1813: Every appearance announced to us that we were now in a more populous country. (...) the plain was every where cultivated, and not only on the side of Argyro-castro [Gjirokastër]... but also on the hills which we were traversing, many villages were to be seen. The dress of the peasants was now changed'from the loose woollen brogues of the Greeks, to the cotton kamisa, or kilt of the Albanian, and in saluting Vasilly they no longer spoke Greek. Indeed you should be informed, that a notion prevails amongst the people of the country, that Albania, properly so called, or at least, the native country of the Albanians, begins from the town of Delvinaki; but never being able, as I have before hinted, to learn where the line of boundary is to be traced, I shall content myself with noticing the distinction in the above cursory manner."

The quote i included by Hobhouse was from the same book that Gilles de Rapper included. Gilles de Rapper is a noted anthropologist and if Hobhouse has no credibility, then why would he be used as a source. Yet you say that no one is seriously Hobhouse for their work. Then there is a contradiction. Its a similar argument you made about Chirol until i pointed out that Baltsiotis had used him. As for Psalidas, he is very problematic, even Greek academics point this out and i even outlined how he is problematic by citing them (if you can find a source saying that about Hobhouse, then by all means do so) ! He says one thing then denies it in other writings. How can Pslaidas be called a reliable "specialist" or that his observations be called upon when Greek scholars (i.e: Mikropoulos) point out why he changed views on calling the region Albania or going from one extreme of admitting there are Albanian speakers to saying there are none ! Moreover, you did not give me even a page reference or source for his quote!

“no national identity existed in the region that was geographically defined as Epirus, no ethnic but religious criteria classified the Orthodox population as Greeks and the Muslims as Turks.”

This conclusion, is also contradicted by new scholarship. Skoulidas discusses how Albanian speaking Orthodox elites tried to negotiate Albanian and Greek identities. Baltsiotis talks about those identity issues in Thesprotia between the two Albanian speaking communities.

As for the word Greek, Kalivretakis and Baltsiotis, have pointed out the problems with it, as it masked other identities and that it was used in religious terms. Greek meant Orthodox, for many non-Greek speakers who where Orthodox. Blumi (and Baltsiotis to an extent) cites why "Turk" is an issue too, as outlined. Baltsiotis is much more recent scholarship then Nussberger and Stoppel. Like i said, Baltsiotis has done fieldwork, as well as archival research in the area.

"Throughout the 19th century, Orthodox and Muslim Albanian speakers dominated the region of today's Thesprotia and a sizable portion of today's Preveza prefecture."(hope we agree about the removal of 19th century account)

Agreed, as there is a stronger source. But the source should be replaced with Baltsiotis then, as he has done extensive field work. He writes the following in the section titled 1. The land and the people:

"During the beginning of the 20th Century, the northwestern part of the Greek region of Epirus was mostly populated by an Albanian-speaking population, known under the ethnonyme “Chams” [Çamë, Çam (singular)in Albanian, Τσ(ι)άμηδες, Τσ(ι)άμηςin Greek]. The Chams are a distinct ethno-cultural group which consisted of two integral religious groups: Orthodox Christians and Sunni Muslims. This group lived in a geographically wide area, expanding to the north of what is today the Preveza prefecture, the western part of which is known as Fanari [Frar in Albanian], covering the western part of what is today the prefecture of Thesprotia, and including a relatively small part of the region which today constitutes Albanian territory."

"These Albanian speaking areas were known under the name Chamouria [Çamëri in Albanian, Τσ(ι)αμουριά or Τσ(ι)άμικο in Greek]. With the exception of the short lived sanjak of Reşadiye, which was founded in 1910,3 this region never constituted a distinct administrative division under Ottoman rule. It was annexed to Greece in the later half of 1912, when the Ottoman Empire was retreating from a large part of the Balkan Peninsula as a result of the Empire’s defeat in the First Balkan War. This was also the period when Albanian independence was declared."

"Applying linguistic principles, the whole area constituted an Albanian speaking enclave, isolated at least in strict geographical terms, with a continuum of Albanian language in today’s Albania and adjoining areas, i.e, Kosovo and the Republic of Macedonia. In the north-eastern part of that area, east to the city of Filiat(i) within Greek territory, a Greek speaking area began growing and expanding eastwards to today’s Albanian territory and up to the coast of Albania."

"The Albanian speaking area was quite compact and well marked by the local geography, as the Greek speaking communities were settled at the eastern mountainous areas. Chamouria and Prevezaniko were also symbolically distinguished as the land where the Arvanitēs lived. We can rather confidently argue that Muslim and Christian Chams of the plains made up a distinct “ethno-economic” group.10 However, there was a particular pattern in the settlements of religious groups inside the area of Chamouria annexed to Greece: most Muslim villages were located at the center of the area, while the large majority of the Christian Orthodox Albanian speaking villages were to the south and the east of the area."

So instead then the sentence needs rewording: New version (or something similar): "By the early twentieth century, Orthodox and Muslim Albanian speakers inhabited a wide area that included parts of current day Thesprotia and Preveza prefectures, that were known as Çamëri (gr.Tsamouria)." (With Baltsiotis as source in references).

Instead of having Hobhouse mentioned though, as it might be considered "original research', one part of that section sentence needs reworking, the other part can be discarded.

Instead of it saying: "Identity and social relations between Albanian speaking Muslims and Orthodox during the early 19th century within the region were also quite different from that which emerged in the 20th century."

It could say "Identity regarding Orthodox and Muslim Albanian speaking communities during the 19th century and part of the 20th century in the region was fluid. (With Baltsiotis and Skoulidas as sources, and quotation of Baltsiotis' Chirol and Skoulidas's Konemeno quotation in the footnote, with maybe Hobhouse[see what you say on that last one] lol).

You say: "As I've stated the use of 19th century accounts which you base the claim of Albanian domination is problematic and they are even contradicting eachother"

Greek ones yes as Skoulidas and Kalivretakis point out. Nothing at the moment about Western ones. Baltsiotis uses them and so does Gilles de Rapper as a primary source.

Regarding the sentence:

"Although the Cham were primarily of Albanian ethnic origin, Greek speaking Muslims from Epirus assimilated into the Cham community because they "shared the same route of identity construction, with no evident differentiation between them and their Albanian speaking co-habitants"

the bit "Although the Cham were primarily of Albanian ethnic origin" being restored for the original Halsuck citation as it stands now.

While the rest should be reworded something like "While, Greek speaking Muslims from Epirus "shared the same route of identity construction, with no evident differentiation between them and their Albanian speaking co-habitants". with Baltsiotis as reference source.

"One source of several"

What are the other 6 ?list them. Also Fabbe, what is the source (journal article, page number and so on. I have provided you with such material, i expect the same courtesy. I cannot analyse, and then include or exclude sources if its just "several" or 6, or just Fabbe (?).

PS: What about the other edits, that i mentioned, good to go?

Resnjari (talk) 14:21, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

About #1&2, in light of the new evidence a balanced text will be the following

Albanian and Greek speaking Muslim communities in Epirus, shared the same route of identity construction,<Baltsiotis> while religion, and not ethnicity, defined each social group in Ottoman society<Nußberger, Stoppel > In this context, population groups in Ottoman Epirus were defined classified as “Turks”, while Orthodox as “Greeks”, regardless of their origin.<Nußberger, Stoppel>.

Social classification in Ottoman society and "Islamization" was not based on ethnic origin. Thus the above part is the most suitable for the specific section. The conditions in Lunxhery (&partly Pogoni) and the Christian communities there are interesting but they prove nothing about the common identity of Greek&Albanian speaking Muslims. Also per Ottoman era terminology the term “Albanian” isn't an ethnonym which concerned fluid identities of specific population groups. Also “assimilation” isn't a correct term in this case, it can wrogly point to ethnic assimilation, or that for a weird reason that the Greek-speaking community adopted an Albanian ethnic identity, which is not the case.

About #3, the best we can do is to mention Kokolakis geographic description, not using general comments like region X was dominated by group Y.

To #4: Recent Greek scholarship though has shown that non-elite Chams suffered from discrimination such as severe expropriations of their lands making life difficult.

First of all you need to explain why Roudometof is worthless (Recent Greek scholarship though has shown...), also AFAIK Batlsiotis isn't the representative of what can be termed "Recent Greek scholarship", though wp:rs. Moreover, why this concerns non-elites? Baltsiotis says "small properties and gardens" but small properties can be also part of a larger portfolio. Most important here is that the complaints filled by the Albanian side were turned down by the League of Nations. Roudometof offers some details on the issue:

"The resulting impasse led to a new round of Albanian complaints in 1928. The complaints raised two issues: the land question and the treatment of the Chams. With regard to the Chams, the Albanian goverment was persecuting the minority. There was little evidence of direct state persecution, but the Albanians insisted that the Greek stated open minority schools for the Chams, which the Greek side firmly opposed. Also the Albanian government complained that the Chams property was epxropriated and given to Greek refugees from Anatolia. The Greek government replied that this was done in consulation with the local religious authorities of the Albanian community, and it concerned solely the necessity to find accommodation for the regugees."Alexikoua (talk) 07:09, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Regarding the sentence, "Albanian and Greek speaking Muslim communities in Epirus," that is fine. It should go in as suggested.

"The conditions in Lunxhery (&partly Pogoni) and the Christian communities there are interesting but they prove nothing about the common identity of Greek&Albanian speaking Muslims."

I only included the Gilles de Rapper article because Hobhouse was cited (i do agree, the article is very interesting, much of his work). You were saying that Hobhouses material is problematic by lumping him with other nineteenth century commentators that have had those 'problem' issues, i.e Psalidas. Hobhouse wrote way before the age of nationalism, his observation at the very least is interesting. Spent a prolonged period in the Ali's Pashalik and was not fond of Ali or Albanians, if you read his travelogue (they are two volumes). Since he would be regarded as an "original research" source, than inclusion here might cause issues (Though in the Tripolitsa massacre article, Kolokotronis', memoirs are cited direct from an old copy in a quote. Not sure how that is allowed there then? Different standards? Nonetheless, just redeeming Hobhouse, unless you have come across a scholar saying he is an issue (if you do put the source up, i would like to know, very important).

Yes ditch "Recent Greek scholarship though has shown that". Reason i put that there in the first place is because Baltsiotis published in 2011, way after Roudomentof. He has built on the scholarship, by locating more primary sources, by citing direct from the Greek government archive of government officials writing about such matters pertaining to land. The sentence should something like: "Also, (non-elite/or lower strata or something along those lines) Chams underwent land and property expropriations that made life difficult." As is quoted direct by Baltsiotis of Greek government circles. The Greek government official is referring to small properties which earlier in the article Baltsiotis clearly says were not owned by Beys and other high up Cham elites.

"In Chamouria there were numerous chiftliks and bastaines27 which belonged to Muslim landowners28 known as beys. Although in Balkan and western historiography beys have in general been portrayed as religious, conservative and somewhat slothful oriental figures, numerous beys of Chamouria, and other Albanian speaking areas, did not correspond to this stereotype. They had internalized at least some western ideas, such as women’s rights, participation in higher education, etc. At the beginning of the 20th century these beys were oscillating between the discovery of their own (Albanian) nationalism and the safety provided by belonging to the Ottoman Empire. By acting as Ottoman elites, these notables had achieved high ranks as officers of the Sublime Porte. Furthermore, there were individual beys, largely from the southern areas of Chamouria, who remained cemaat [cemaat-i İslami] oriented, even after the area’s annexation to Greece.29

"Despite the myth that Chamouria had only chiftliks, comparisons with other areas show that Epirus in general had the same percentage of chiftlik distribution with that of Macedonia and lower than that of Thessaly (see Kostas Vergopoulos, Τοαγροτικόζήτημα, Εξάντας, Athens 1975, p. 136)."

Besides beys, it seems that the majority of the Muslim population consisted of middle sized estate owners. The land they owned varied in size, fertility and production. Although there is no sufficient written proof to support the idea, it’s almost certain that families owning very small parcels of land, or just a few small fields and a small number of sheep, were not an exception and were also present in villages."

My point was not the issues between the Albanian and Greek government at the League of Nations, but who these expropriations affected. By that i mean, it was not just large landowners, but middle sized ones and the less well-off strata of the Muslim Cham community that experienced expropriations. Roudimentof can stay, but important additions need to be placed in that sentence or in a new sentence after it. In the article as it stands, it just infers in that sentence that basically all Chams as being "Albanian overlords", where property was expropriated, which was not the case, as the Greek government archive cited by Baltsiotis testifies. These exportations involved smaller personal plots of land and gardens, that involved day to day living and made life difficult with their loss for those not well off. Whether that was for a minority or majority of the Cham community is not outlined in the article or in the Greek government quotation. But it is important to state in the wikipedia article that it affected others that were not beys or Pashas or Agas, and thus gives more information about the issue of expropriations. Determining what was "middle sized" and under, as Baltsiotis states does not delve into.

About #3, the best we can do is to mention Kokolakis geographic description, not using general comments like region X was dominated by group Y.

Yes, yes, ditch the word dominating and that sentence. I proposed a rewording of the sentence previously "By the early twentieth century, Orthodox and Muslim Albanian speakers inhabited a wide area that included parts of current day Thesprotia and Preveza prefectures that were known as Çamëri (gr.Tsamouria)." (With Baltsiotis as source in references, Kokolakis' should be there alongside Baltsiotis, he mentions communities of Albanian speakers). Though Baltsitois does not specifically mention certain communities, he states thier geographically spread. Kalivretakis does a similar thing in his study. He did fieldwork like Baltsiotis (though in Albania), yet does not provde individuals settlements, but talks in terms of roughly defining the Greek speaking area in Albania which is factual. Moreover, Baltsiotis cites Kokolakis research and builds upon it extensively. Baltsiotis specifically states:

"During the beginning of the 20th Century, the northwestern part of the Greek region of Epirus was mostly populated by an Albanian-speaking population, known under the ethnonyme “Chams” [Çamë, Çam (singular)in Albanian, Τσ(ι)άμηδες, Τσ(ι)άμηςin Greek]. The Chams are a distinct ethno-cultural group which consisted of two integral religious groups: Orthodox Christians and Sunni Muslims. This group lived in a geographically wide area, expanding to the north of what is today the Preveza prefecture, the western part of which is known as Fanari [Frar in Albanian], covering the western part of what is today the prefecture of Thesprotia, and including a relatively small part of the region which today constitutes Albanian territory."

"These Albanian speaking areas were known under the name Chamouria [Çamëri in Albanian, Τσ(ι)αμουριά or Τσ(ι)άμικο in Greek]. With the exception of the short lived sanjak of Reşadiye, which was founded in 1910,3 this region never constituted a distinct administrative division under Ottoman rule. It was annexed to Greece in the later half of 1912, when the Ottoman Empire was retreating from a large part of the Balkan Peninsula as a result of the Empire’s defeat in the First Balkan War. This was also the period when Albanian independence was declared."

"Applying linguistic principles, the whole area constituted an Albanian speaking enclave, isolated at least in strict geographical terms, with a continuum of Albanian language in today’s Albania and adjoining areas, i.e, Kosovo and the Republic of Macedonia. In the north-eastern part of that area, east to the city of Filiat(i) within Greek territory, a Greek speaking area began growing and expanding eastwards to today’s Albanian territory and up to the coast of Albania."

"The Albanian speaking area was quite compact and well marked by the local geography, as the Greek speaking communities were settled at the eastern mountainous areas. Chamouria and Prevezaniko were also symbolically distinguished as the land where the Arvanitēs lived. We can rather confidently argue that Muslim and Christian Chams of the plains made up a distinct “ethno-economic” group.10 However, there was a particular pattern in the settlements of religious groups inside the area of Chamouria annexed to Greece: most Muslim villages were located at the center of the area, while the large majority of the Christian Orthodox Albanian speaking villages were to the south and the east of the area."

My proposal for a new sentence for that section should be considered.

"Social classification in Ottoman society and "Islamization" was not based on ethnic origin."

No, but it took “new evidence” for you to write that. You placed a source that said outright that Chams decided to call themselves “Turk” and wanted to go Turkey during the exchange. Yes that is true for a portion of the population, but I clarified by using Greek sources that gave a different picture of how some others came to that conclusion under duress.

"Social classification in Ottoman society and "Islamization" was not based on ethnic origin."

Agreed. It varied. With Albanian speaking areas collapse of church hierarchy, liturgy not being in Albanian and especially down south regarding the Orlov revolts lead to people becoming Muslims amongst other things. (see book: Religion und Kultur im albanischsprachigen Südosteuropa, 2011 especially the chapter about Orthodoxy and conversions in Albania by Konstantinos Giakoumis, half of the chapters are in English.). But it affected Albanian speaking areas differently from Bosnia, from Crete and so on. "“Also per Ottoman era terminology the term “Albanian” isn't an ethnonym which concerned fluid identities of specific population groups."

The word Albanian existed as a self-appellation that was not considered a national ones during that time. We can go to the Florina village, or the Thrace villages, and there is the Banfi source with no page numbers that allegedly claims the word in Thesprotia was used or is still used by Albanian speaking peoples for themselves when talking to each other. The main thing here is it did not acquire a national dimension to it, as say with their Muslim Albanian speaking neighbours (as nationalism can to the fore). Same with Greek speakers in Crete, Muslims spoke Greek and called themselves Romioi, though before Romioi gave way to Hellenes, it began to acquire national connotation which were absent from a local level for Muslim Greek speakers. Instead the overarching term for national affiliation was "Turk" for this community. Yet go today in Turkey, many of these people speak Greek (deputy prime minister Bulent Arinc, the guy who is most vocal about re-converting the Agia Sofia into a mosque, is a fluent Greek Cretan dialect speaker. He did so in front of Turkish media a few years back when in his hometown!) and they use words such as Romeika for language and Romioi for a local self-appellation (same in the Of valley of Pontus). Nationalism solidified some of these local linguistic and communal self-appellations into national ones (Shqiptar for Albanian Muslims and Catholics), while with others it was not important, if anything it was seen as a hindrance (Orthodox Albanian speakers -whether in Albania even today, or in Greece -the non Arvanites using the words Shqiptar and Shqip). It’s more complicated as Baltsiotis, Skoulidas and Blumi point out.

Also “assimilation” isn't a correct term in this case, it can wrongly point to ethnic assimilation, or that for a weird reason that the Greek-speaking community adopted an Albanian ethnic identity, which is not the case.

Ok the word could have been something different. But for some peoples entering and becoming one part of one community for another was recorded in the Balkans (Both of Skoulidas articles deal with that quite clearly). In some places in the Balkans it’s still an ongoing process. I never asserted that about Orthodox Greek speakers who identified as Greeks.

Agreed, wording problematic. Thus with your sentence it should have the addition of something like: “Albanian and Greek speaking Muslim communities in Epirus, shared the same route of identity construction,<Baltsiotis> while religion and not ethnicity, defined each social group in Ottoman society, <Nußberger, Stoppel > though small exceptions existed.” (skoulidas, komenenos referance here and Baltsiotis Chirol reference here).

What about other edits?

Resnjari (talk) 09:38, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

I've placed the distribution of Albanian speech in the correspondent section. It appears that this kind of information is most suitable there since already the geographic definition of the region exists as a separate part. The definition "northwestern part of Epirus" by Baltsiotis is not well defined. In terms of administration this can be Thesprotia prefecture. However, when he gives a detailed description of the Chameria area he includes specific parts of Preveza (west & southwest Ep.) and excludes eastern Thesprotia. Thus, instead of using general geographic terms, giving a precise definition of this area is the best option.

About #4: This obviously belongs to the following section, since it concerns the Venizelos government (1928-32) and the agrarian reformation which wasn't implemented due to political reasons.Alexikoua (talk) 21:44, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Ok agreed. Sounds good.

Alexikoua, was just checking the Victor Roudometof reference and it is a clear case of plagerisation. The sentence needs to be reworded and parts that stay as a direct quotation to have parenthesis. While the source page where that information came from is wrong. Whoever did it, just put down as a page reference to the footnotes to his chapter, which discusses the other stuff.

Wikipedia section:

Albanian reports to the League of Nations and the reply by the Greek government reveal that part of the bone of contention concerned the change in the status of the local Albanian landlords. In Ottoman times, the Albanian landlords received revenues from the neighboring villages. But the peasants refused to pay tribute after their land became part of the Greek state and in this case they expropriated from the Albanian overlords what they considered to be their property.

Roudometof paragraph (p. 157):

The reports of the League of Nations committee and the reply by the Greek government reveal that part of the bone of contention concerned the change in the status of the local Albanian landlords. In Ottoman times, the landlords received revenues from neighboring villages. But the peasants refused to pay tribute after their land was occupied by the Greek state and in this case they “expropriated” what the Albanian overlords considered to be their property (Mihalopoulos, 1987: 108-9).

Regarding post war geographical distribution of Orthodox Albanian speakers, Arthur Foss in his book Eprius (p.173 gave an interesting description (ill' put the whole paragraph up dealing with that population):

There are still many Greek Orthodox villagers in Threspotia who speak Albanian among themselves. They are scattered north from Paramithia to the Kalamas River and beyond, and westward to the Margariti Plain. Some of the older people can only speak Albanian, nor is the language dying out. As more and more couples in early married life travel away to Athens or Germany for work, their children remain at home and are brought up by their Albania-speaking grandparents. It is still sometimes possible to distinguish between Greek- and Albanian-speaking peasant women. Nearly all of them wear traditional black clothes with a black scarf round their neck heads. Greek-speaking women tie their scarves at the back of their necks, while those who speak primarily Albanian wear their scarves in a distinctive style fastened at the side of the head."

What about the other edits?

Resnjari (talk) 06:17, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

I'll check the issue about Roudometof, it appears that this needs a γοοδ copy-edit. Some additional issues:

• 5 Meanwhile, Greek kindergartens and schools where opened in Orthodox Albanian speaking villages where an absence of Greek predominated.

I have two specific objections about the above part: The reason for the establishment of kindergartens stated by Baltsiotis was not in all cases the absence of knowledge of Greek, the second reason should be stated too (demographic importance). Second, Baltsiotis says kindergartens, but not schools (I assume elementary ones). By checking this work about education in Thesprotia: [[1]], it appears that Greek elementary schools were already operating from Ottoman era in (at least some) of the villages (for example in p. 108 in Kanalaki, p. 505 in Dragani & Kastri).

• 6 There still exists a very small Muslim Albanian Cham community in Thesprotia. They are found today in the village of Polyneri (previously Koutsi) and until recently was the only Muslim community in Epirus to have an imam. Their mosque was the last within the area before being blown up by local Christians. The number of Muslim Chams remaining in the area after World War II included more people who converted to Orthodoxy and assimilated into the local population in order to preserve their properties and themselves.

So we have "There still exists a very small Muslim Albanian Cham community in Thesprotia.". I believe a more precise estimation is needed: "very small" isn't too helpful for the reader. According to Kouzas [[2]] p. 103, "in more recent times (citing a work of 1995 of Veremis) there were 44 most of them born after 1948".Alexikoua (talk) 19:48, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

Regarding the kindergartens issue. Ok.

• About clarifying post war Muslim Albanian Cham numbers in Greece, when i wrote small numbers, i had Ktistakis in mind. I put him as a source in Albanian wikipedia, forgot to here. Anyway, Ktistakis quotes Greek census numbers after the war and their settlements about those who outright declared themselves as Chams. (Giorgos Ktistakis (2006). Περιουσίες Αλβανών και Τσάμηδων στην Ελλάδα: Aρση του εμπολέμου και διεθνής προστασία των δικαιωμάτων του ανθρώπου(PDF). Center of Studying of Minority Groups. pp. 8-9):

"Το 1947 αναφέρονται 113 Τσάμηδες στην περιφέρεια της Πάργας, εκ των οποίων 7 είναι άντρες και 79 γυναίκες. Η δε απογραφή του 1951 αναφέρει στην Ήπειρο 127 μουσουλμάνους αλβανικής γλώσσας. Σύμφωνα με μία πρόσφατη πηγή, σήμερα στο νομό Θεσπρωτίας διαμένουν 44 Τσάμηδες οι περισσότεροι των οποίων έχουν γεννηθεί (στην Ελλάδα) μετά το 1948 και συγκεκριμένα: 7 άτομα στα Σύβοτα (πρώην Μούρτος), 12 στον Αργυρότοπο (συνοικισμός Πολυνέρι, πρώην Κούτσι) και 25 στη Μαζαρακιά (συνοικισμός «Κόντρα»)."

• Baltsiotis' fieldwork deals with the only community of Muslim Albanians Chams still living in Greece as citizens, which he came across living in the village of Polyneri in the 2000s. He does not give a number. But, going by Ktistakis' mention of numbers in the immediate aftermath of the war, they are small regarding Polyneri. Thought that might assist in the issue. In think also mention is needed of the other numbers quoted by Ktistakis to give a better picture of Cham demographics after WW2.

What about the other edits ?

Resnjari (talk) 07:42, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

Let's continue:

• 7: They also dominate a part of the Preveza prefecture known as Fanari in villages like Ammoudia. such as those in the village of Agia.

I don't disagree. In fact Fanari, Agia are located in northern Preveza pr. and it's already stated in the description of the previous sentence ("also" is wrong).

• 8: In contrast with Arvanites, some have retained, not only a distinct linguistic and ethnic identity, but also the Albanian national identity.

I assume linguistic identiy hear means the knowledge of Albanian (or being bilingual of Albanian and another language). Also Banfi, apart from the diferrent term they selfidentify, doesn't claim this (this was a very old addition).

9: Amongst some Orthodox Albanian speakers like those in the village of Kastri near Igoumentisa, there has also been a revival of Albanian traditions in recent years.

This kind of folklore (αναβιώσεις) isn't something new among the traditional Arvanite/Albanian speaking communities or a feature that revived the last years. I fail to see in the source.

The rest of the Cham in Greece section appears ok (Winnifrith, cultural identity, relactance etc.). I also propose the split of the section into Muslim and Christian communities (since the former were more closely assosiated with the term Chamis, per Hart, Kretsi). Alexikoua (talk) 16:21, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

They also dominate a part of the Preveza prefecture known as Fanari in villages like Ammoudia.such as those in the village of Agia.

They also dominate a part of the Preveza prefecture known as Fanari[3] in villages like Ammoudia.[4] Albanian is still spoken in the region and some of the older inhabitants are Albanian monolinguals,[5] such as those in the village of Agia.

Your right about Thesprotia prefecture being mentioned in the previous sentence. In that sentence though, it talks about the area of Thesprotiko, which is the region of Lakka (where Nikolaos Komenenos comes from), is different from Fanari. Additions to the sentence that need to be made in order so the reader knows that Fanari is a region(or that its also a internal administrative division of Preveza prefecture.), or that at very least that Ammoundia and Agia are villages/settlements(he/she might not know the geography) and different from Fanari in that respect.

• "In northern Preveza prefecture such communities are found in Fanari,[115] in villages such as/like Ammoudia[116] and Agia."

"I assume linguistic identiy hear means the knowledge of Albanian (or being bilingual of Albanian and another language)."

Yes, that is why i wrote it that way. Who ever put the Banfi footnote, not sure. I just thought i would clarify the linguistic identity bit based on sources. Since i could not find the Banfi stuff, unless you have access to it, then add clarification to it. If you do, type out the source paragraph of what Banfi wrote so we can all see. Banfi talks about, i guess some kind of local self appellation (shqiptar?)that might have attained some kind of national connotations as that which is expressed by Muslim Albanians etc. The original sentence without my addition was referring to ethnic identity and Albanian national identity. Though, i am not sure about this, or that the original editor may have manipulated the sources. I left the latter part as it was.

"This kind of folklore (αναβιώσεις) isn't something new among the traditional Arvanite/Albanian speaking communities or a feature that revived the last years. I fail to see in the source."

The article in question was talking about a traditional wedding done the old way, which it not preformed that way now. The article talks of Arvanites in village of Kastri, Igoumenitisa and calls it a Arvanitohoria. Since its also a local blog written by e Greek priest, it details something that is no longer practiced, alongside the words Arvanites and Arvanihoria. Baltsiotis does say that local Greek authors or commentators have tried to distance or hardly talk about locals being able to speak Albanian. He wrote "The Albanian language, and the Christian population who spoke it- and still do- had to be concealed also, since the language was perceived as an additional threat to the Greekness of the land. It could only be used as a proof of their link with the Muslims, thus creating a continuum of non-Greekness." Hence, I thought it would be good example coming from the area as it touches upon that Arvanite issue of acknowledgement and concealment. There is a disclaimer at the end of the post that says (talks about those customs [έθιμα] practiced not being associated with "Albanians"):

"Να σημειωθεί ότι τα αρβανίτικα έθιμα είναι καθαρά ελληνικά και δεν έχουν καμία σχέση με τα αλβανικά. Άλλωστε οι Αρβανίτες είναι Έλληνες με ιδιαίτερο γλωσσικό ιδιίωμα και όχι Αλβανοί"

"I also propose the split of the section into Muslim and Christian communities (since the former were more closely associated with the term Chamis, per Hart, Kretsi)."

Agreed. That's how i have done it in Albanian Wikipedia when discussing the two communities, post WW2.

Resnjari (talk) 16:26, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Alexikoua, there is this edit that i had also. Its regarding the war law, Cham Properties and Albanian-Greek bilateral relations. Konstantinos Tsitsilakis is a law professor in human rights and minority affairs from Macedonia University. I thought this edit was important regarding the issue of Cham properties today in relation to Greek property law (and the war law matter) and so on. Your views on this. Changes and or other to the sentence (see also article [ http://www.balkaninsight.com/en/article/albania-calls-on-greece-to-abolish-war-declaration Albania Asks Greece to Declare War Finally Over]:

The Cham issue is been linked with the issue of the War Law declared against Albania by Greece during World War Two. Though revoked by Greek cabinet in 1987, it is seen by some Greek law experts and the Albanian government as in force and thus preventing Cham restitution as their properties are interpreted as “enemy property”. <ref.>Tsitselikis, Konstantinos (2012). Old and New Islam in Greece: From historical minorities to immigrant newcomers. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. pp. 312-313. "In the aftermath of the events of 1944–1945, Cham real estate was considered as abandoned and gradually confiscated or put at the disposal of landless peasants and refugees. On the ground, the situation until the early 1950s was out of control. Legally, the real estate was supposed to pass to state ownership as set forth by Act 1539/1938 (article 54). But in practice, the abandoned and devastated plots, fields, and houses were occupied by inhabitants of the nearby villages or by the new settlers. The situation soon became chaotic and the local police were unable to establish order. Finally, LDs 2180/1952, 2185/1952 (FEK A 217), and LD 2781/1954 (FEK A 45) regulated the transfer of ownership, and LD 2536/1953 (FEK A 225) legalized the resettlement of the empty Cham villages by newcomers from other places in Greece. According to article 17 of the LD 3958/1959 (FEKA 133), the residents of the mountainous areas of Filiates and Paramythia as well as those of ‘Greek descent’ originating from Northern Epirus were allowed to settle in the ‘abandoned Muslim plots of Thesprotia’. The policy of national homogenization remained incomplete, however, until the 1970s, when the Hellenization of the former Muslim property was completed. This guaranteed the population’s loyalty to the state and minimized Greece’s Muslim population. As mentioned earlier, numerous Muslims of Greece chose to obtain foreign citizenship in order to be exempt from the population exchange or for other reasons. Some Chams acquired Albanian citizenship, although they could remain in Greece as citizens of ‘Albanian origin’. After 1945, those who held Albanian citizenship faced expropriation of their property as its legal status was that of 'enemy property’, since Albania was a conquered territory of fascist Italy and a nemesis of Greece during Word War II. Thus, Albanian real estate was sequestrated according to Act 2636/1940 (FEK A 379) and Act 13/1944 (FEK A 11), which, in theory, should not have affected ownership per se. Much of this real estate remains sequestrated to this day and is registered at the Office of Sequestration based in Athens. According to article 38 of the LD 1138/1949 (FEK A 257) amending Act 2636/1940, sequestration can be abolished by joint decision of the Ministers of Interior, Economy, Justice, and the Prime Minister. Income gained by the sequestrated real estate is kept in special accounts at the Bank of Greece. It is worth noting that inhabitants of Albania (Albanian citizens) of Greek origin were exempt from sequestration or expropriation (Ministerial Decision, Minister of the Finance, 144862/3574/17.6.1947, FEK B 93). This reading of the category ‘of origin’, reflects the ideological nature of policies aimed at ethnicizing land ownership. According to several court decisions, the Albanian property would remain under sequestration until the removal of the state of war between the two countries. However, even though the Greek government declared the state of war with Albania to be over in 1987, the sequestration of Albanian estates was continued, as the declaration was not legally ratified. Such measures do not comply with legal standards set by international instruments banning discrimination on grounds of ethnicity (ICCPR, ECHR etc.). Meanwhile, LD 2180/1952 on ‘the compulsory expropriation of lands for the restitution of the landless farmers and cattle-breeders’ authorized special committees to take possession of the properties and then bestow them on persons entitled to a share. In practice, such persons were squatters tolerated by the authorities during the Civil War or later. These persons received title deeds in the late 1950s until the 1970s."</ref.>

Resnjari (talk) 04:08, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

What I can conclude is that the issue isn't so simple. Tsitselikis covers only the cases that were under sequestration. By the way, the end of the state of war doesn't necessary mean the return of the initial owners. Ktistakis in his research concluded that (p. 53) Η λήξη της εμπόλεμης κατάστασης συνεπάγεται την επιστροφή των αλβανικών μεσεγγυημένων περιουσιών ή την απαλλοτρίωσή τους με βάση τις γενικές διατάξεις. Μόνος (αλλά σημαντικός) ανεκτός λόγος διάκρισης των αλβανών δικαιούχων-ιδιοκτητών είναι η αντεθνική τους διαγωγή..

This last reason is also stated by Kouzas p. 120. Also Kouzas states (p. 102): Είναι τα περιουσιακά στοιχεία στην Ελλάδα που «ανήκαν νομικά ή οικονομικά σε νομικά και φυσικά πρόσωπα του εχθρικού κράτους» , δηλαδή της Αλβανίας. Οι εχθρικές αυτές περιουσίες τέθηκαν δηλαδή υπό μεσεγγύηση. ∆εν είναι ξεκαθαρισμένο αν σ’ αυτή την κατηγορία συμπεριλαμβάνονται και Τσάμηδες.

Thus, it's no clear if this is the case of 'enemy properties'. Most important is that there are two additional categories that concern confiscated Cham properties: those of the Axis-collaborators and those confiscated in in the 50s, as abandoned. Both cases don't raise any legal consequences, per Ktistakis (p. 53).

Kouzas also mentions some additional fact that make the Cham issue more complicated (p. 119): Αν ισχύει η αρχή της θεμελιώδους μεταβολής των περιστάσεων οι Τσάμηδες δεν μπορούν να αναγνωριστούν, μετά τη φυγή τους από την Ελλάδα, ως μειονότητα. Ο Αντώνιος Βενέτης αντιμετωπίζοντας το θέμα υπό το πρίσμα της σχέσης με το Β ́ Παγκόσμιο Πόλεμο αναφέρει πως «είναι λοιπόν προφανές ότι το ζήτημα των Τσάμηδων δεν είναι διμερές πρόβλημα μεταξύ Ελλάδος και Αλβανίας. Είναι πανευρωπαϊκό. Αφορά τις συνέπειες του Β ́ Παγκοσμίου Πολέμου. Λύση του, σύμφωνα με τις επιθυμίες των Τσάμηδων, σημαίνει επιστροφή των Σουδητών στην Τσεχία, των Γερμανών σε Ντάντσιχ, Πομερανία, Σιλεσία, Ανατολική Πρωσία, και ενδεχομένως αναδιάταξη των συνόρων της Ευρώπης κ.λπ.». Η προσέγγιση αυτή έχει ως ένα βαθμό νομική διάσταση, αλλά είναι κυρίως πολιτικά ανεφάρμοστη. Οι Τσάμηδες δεν αναγνωρίζονται ως μειονότητα με κατοχυρωμένα νομικά δικαιώματα από κανένα διεθνή (ΟΗΕ) ή περιφερειακό οργανισμό (Συμβούλιο της Ευρώπης - ΟΑΣΕ).

I propose to restore the text you propose with the addition of Ktistakis' conclusions 5, 6 & 7 (thus we include all legal cases). Also a brief mention of the WWII population movements/expalsions, per Kouzas would be a good addition in light of the general post war situation.Alexikoua (talk) 20:59, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Agreed. Regarding post WW2 population movements and property issues, alongside Kouzas, Kretsi can go there as well [in the footnote] and so can Baltsiotis who makes partial mention of it. Kretsi wrote:

Kretsi. The Secret Past of the Greek-Albanian Borderlands. 2002. p. 187. "The social component of the respective redistribution or property transfers is evident. At the point where the “national” redistribution halted in the prewar period, the “hellenization” of property was taken up once and for all after the war. The economic mobilization of loyal majority groups (i.e., Vlachs along the entire northern Greek border) for the purposes of national homogenization was more often than not carried out to the disadvantage of minorities. In this case it was combined with a strategic purpose, namely the “national stabilization” of the border region and the guarantee of ideological and thus military loyalty to the central state. This becomes evident in a series of laws giving a social or populist character to the expropriation of the Chams and explicitly concerned with supporting border settlers: Athanasakos (n. d.:70 f.) names: 1. N.Δ. 2536/1953 “on the resettlement of the border regions and the enforcement of these populations” art. 6. and 2. N. Δ. 2180/1952 “on the compulsory expropriation of lands for the restitution of the landless farmers and cattle-breeders” which were completed and modified later. According to the aforementioned, the financial revenue office took possession of the properties. In coordination with the direction for agriculture and under the Committee for the expropriations they were bestowed on persons entitled to a share. According to the same author, these persons received title-deeds in the 1960s to 1970s by buying them for the amounts defined by the Committee. The owners of urban properties received acts of concession."

From Baltsiotis "The Muslim Chams of Northwestern Greece" article: "The process of extinguishing any signs of previous minority existence occurred both in real and symbolic ways. The villages of Muslim Chams were repopulated by Greek speaking populations from the adjacent mountainous areas and Vlachs, immediately after their expulsion."

About the bit on Muslim Chams in Greece today, i feel that it is a bit slim. The section from Ktistakis giving post World War Two numbers in the immediate aftermath (census and so on) might give the reader a better idea as to what the numbers where. Starting off from 1995 leaves a partial gap when information exists about prior numbers. Your thoughts?

I forgot to also mention that the Roudometof paragraph has not been rewritten and still is in its plagiarized form. Its still the same and the bulk of it is copied word for word:

Albanian reports to the League of Nations and the reply by the Greek government reveal that part of the bone of contention concerned the change in the status of the local Albanian landlords. In Ottoman times, the Albanian landlords received revenues from the neighboring villages. But the peasants refused to pay tribute after their land became part of the Greek state and in this case they expropriated from the Albanian overlords what they considered to be their property.

Roudometof paragraph (p. 157):

The reports of the League of Nations committee and the reply by the Greek government reveal that part of the bone of contention concerned the change in the status of the local Albanian landlords. In Ottoman times, the landlords received revenues from neighboring villages. But the peasants refused to pay tribute after their land was occupied by the Greek state and in this case they “expropriated” what the Albanian overlords considered to be their property (Mihalopoulos, 1987: 108-9).

I propose this new version (my bit in bold):

Albanian reports to the League of Nations and the reply by the Greek government reveal that part of the dispute concerned changes to the status of local Albanian landlords. During the Ottoman era, revenues were received by Albanian landlords from nearby villages. After these lands became part of the Greek state, local peasants expropriated from Albanian landlords what they considered was their property and refused to pay those (not sure about having this bit, might be to much description?>previous Ottoman era) taxes.

Just in case there might be issues about why some words are not there, i cite the example of the phrase "their land was occupied by the Greek state" in the paragraph was replaced with the phrase "their land became part of the Greek state" in the wikipidia article as setting a precedent. While almost everything else stayed the same when the Roudometof paragraph was copied, that part changed. Now i thought that just so there is are not POV issues, the words "Albanian landlord" should stay at all times instead of "overlord" and that "tribute" should be "(Ottoman era) taxes", which is what the locals paid, the harac and so on (as unfair as it was). Your thoughts ?

PS: By the way you forgot to put the Veremis source for the 1995 Cham Muslim numbers, otherwise we may editors coming here and disputing that and causing all sorts of issues.

Resnjari (talk) 04:56, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Fine with the plagiarism issue. About Veremis it appears I was wrong, Kouzas cites Ktistakis ('95) and the latter cites Krapsitis V., work of '86 [[3]]. Ok with the addition of the settlements, although I don't find it too essential to mention how many people lived on each village (either 7 or 25), but it's not big deal to me.Alexikoua (talk) 18:51, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Good on the edits. A few other problematic sentences.

There is an issue with the sentence:

"Apart from the formation of a Nazi collaborationist local administration and armed battalions, a terrorist organization named Këshilla and a paramilitary group called Balli Kombetar Cam"

In citing Kretsi, it makes a few claims that are not supported by Kretsi in terms of terminology especially. Regarding the administrative the makeup of the Keshilla, Kretsi does not refer to it as a “terrorist organization”. On page 177, she writes:

An Albanian political administration called ‘Këshilla’ was founded in 1942, and after 1943 it was completed with its own armed forces as well as a gendarmerie. The latter must have had a less political character during the Italian occupation, and may have been more of a military gendarmerie, which the fascists used to maintain as a security organ for their military. When the Germans succeeded the Italians in July 1943, however, the Këshilla seemed to gain a role as a political administration. In vain they tried to switch off the Greek occupation authorities. An official hand—over of the administration to the Albanians would automatically mean the annexation to Albania, a move that was not necessarily in the interest of the German headquarters in Athens. Nevertheless the Këshilla appointed itself as the supreme administrative office (with law-making power), subsequently ignoring the Greek administration and introducing illegal taxes in order to finance its men.

First it was founded in 1942 during the Italian occupation, so calling it Nazi ignores this aspect. Considering that both Italian and German occupying forces were known collectively as the Axis powers, the word Axis would be more accurate in place of Nazi as it covers both periods and occupying powers of the era. Also Keshilla was the main paramilitary organization. Kretsi, partially mentions the Balli group, but it is to Keshilla who she attributes as the violence being perpetrated. Hence my proposal for the new sentence is (my additions in bold):

Apart from the formation of an Axis collaborationist local administration and armed battalions, a paramilitary organization named Këshilla and other similar groups called Balli Kombetar Cam

Your thoughts ?

Also this sentence contains weasel words:

"However, according to British historian Mazower, it seems that, most of the local beys, the majority of whom were part of the nationalist resistance group Balli Kombëtar[3] (not to be confused with the collaborationist Balli Kombetar Çam)[14] and the mufti did not support such actions."

Though there is the citation of Vickers, the sentence in whole for one is attributed to Mazower. In the Wikipedia article it is inferred that Vickers is a pro-Albanian author, however nothing of the sort is inferred about Mazower or Kretsi, yet they stand as references to a sentence that has words such as “it seems that” casting doubt on their scholarship which they have based on primary sources from the era. Unless some scholar has pointed out an issue with them, then having the words “it seems that” is very problematic to say the least. My new proposal for the sentence is (my additions in bold):

Whereas, most of the local beys, the majority of whom were part of the nationalist resistance group Balli Kombëtar[3] (not to be confused with the collaborationist Balli Kombetar Çam) and the mufti did not support such actions.

Your thoughts ?

You didn’t get back to me about an addition I proposed to this sentence (my proposed additions in bold):

“Albanian and Greek speaking Muslim communities in Epirus, shared the same route of identity construction,<Baltsiotis> while religion and not ethnicity, defined each social group in Ottoman society, <Nußberger, Stoppel > though small/some exceptions existed.” (skoulidas, komenenos referance here and Baltsiotis Chirol reference here).

Since both Skoulidas and Baltsiotis do cite exceptions or examples that did not always conform to those realities, they either need to be part of that sentence or those two examples they present need to be in places somewhere else in the article as they are based on primary sources and show important observations about the situation during the era.

Your thoughts ?

Resnjari (talk) 06:36, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

• Ok about Skoulikas
• The part about the local beys, per Mazower should be slightly adjusted: Whereas, it appears that most of the local beys, the majority of whom were part of the nationalist resistance group Balli Kombëtar[3] (not to be confused with the collaborationist Balli Kombetar Çam) and the mufti did not support such actions.
• The Keshilla part, I remember that Meyer labels it as [[4]] (terrororganisation), though I don't think that there is much diferrence. The rest is 100% fine. In the same section an addition should be made that Cham initiatives also included "assasinations of Greek officials" (Kretsi).Alexikoua (talk) 16:43, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

About Keshilla, i did the changes as i proposed per Kretsi because she gives the best and concise definition of the organization and its (paramilitary) functions and uses the correct spelling of the name. Meyer refers to it as "Kosla", a misspelling and "terrororganisation" has its issues like some problematic words that Roudometof used like "occupied" about the area's inclusion in Greece or "overlord" after already stating that the sentence it talking about Albanian landlords. I thought i should elaborate on that in the discuss, just in case.

The adjustment of "it seems that" for "it appears that" would just be a synonym change implying the same thing which still presents similar issues of it inferring that it was likely while still casting doubt on the information. While recently looking through wikipedia guidelines, it says that "Expressions of doubt" should be avoided as "Words such as supposed, apparent, alleged and purported can imply that a given point is inaccurate" (see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Words_to_watch). The meaning of "it appears" is can refer to something being evident, it also contains definition to a likelihood of something as is given in definition 4) of the word appear when it is used alongside words like "it" (see: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/appears ). The synonyms for "it appears" also refer to it in that way (see: http://www.thesaurus.com/browse/it+appears+that ). This dualistic meaning of being evident, while being likely at the same time being used in a sensitive Wikipedia article such as this hence should be undertaken with caution. Considering that both Kretsi and especially Mazower are listed as the academic sources for the sentence and their scholarship has been proven to be robust, the need for "it seems that" and "it appears that" is unneeded, unless otherwise indicated by another source either disproving them, casting their scholarship in doubt or another academic source which is very robust/credible in giving information that is different from them.

Your thoughts ?

Alexikoua, you also said that underneath the war law edit you were going to have "the addition of Ktistakis' conclusions 5, 6 & 7 (thus we include all legal cases). Also a brief mention of the WWII population movements/expalsions, per Kouzas would be a good addition in light of the general post war situation."

I wasn't sure if you were going to add a sentence proposal here. It why i have not done anything about it. I didn't know how you wanted to word it about Ktistakis' conclusions which presents another view point on the properties issues and is important. While the bit about population movements/expulsion, i wasn't sure how you were going to word the bit that was going to be from Kouzis. There is a sentence, which i was thinking of slightly enlarging, or the very least placing Baltsiotis and Kretsi as sources (alongside the Vickers) to make it robust in the information it gives. The Wikipedia article sentence is (and may be the area where you want to put stuff about properties/post war demographic situation):

"The demographic structure of northwestern Greece was meanwhile altered by the introduction of settlers, especially Vlachs, from other parts of Greece."

Your thoughts?

"In the same section an addition should be made that Cham initiatives also included "assasinations of Greek officials"

Not sure sure what wording you had in mind. A Greek source which goes into this is Giorgos Margarites (2005). Anepithymetoi sympatriotes. Stoicheia gia ten katastrophe ton meionoteton tes Elladas. Bibliorama. Athena. p. 155-156. who states that the assiiniations of people of influence amongst the two communties began on the 12 January 1942, when the chief of police in Paramythia, Ilias Nikos, murdered two prominent Cham personalities, the land owner Tefik Qemali and the doctor Ahmet Qazimi which resulted in armed Chams retaliating and killing the prefect of Thesprotia, Georgios Vassiliakos. On page 160 of the same book, Margarites gives more examples where this was followed by on the 6th of December where another Cham notable, Jasin Sadiku from Margariti was killed. Whereby the next day Christian notables from the village of Spatharioi, Vasilis Tsoupis and the priest Spyridon Noutsis were killed. Anyway thought that might assist. Mention of the cycle of violence/revenge between the two groups is worth mentioning regarding assassinations. First propose what wording you had in mind, before i make suggestions. I also think that mention of the deaths of 472 Muslim Albanian Chams "rebels" by the Germans during the “Augustus” cleansing operation between 7 July - August 1943, deserves mention due to the large number and that the operations were not just targeting Greeks and local Orthodox Albanian speakers but Muslim Cham Albanians who were not to the Germans liking. Meyer cites this in his book on pages: 207, 238.

Your thoughts ?

Resnjari (talk) 08:43, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

I fail to see the 472 Muslim Cham dead claim in Meyer. To be precise in p. 472 in "Albanische Opfer" mentions the number of Albanian citizens killed: Augustus and the other cleansing operations expanded in south-Albania as the head of the table states (for example the victims of the "March nach Ioannina" include also the victims of the Massacre of Borova). Also in p. 207 it mentions the dead of the Augustus operations in southern Albania. The fact that Cham-German activity expanded in Albania is already stated.Alexikoua (talk) 11:32, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Ok about the German-Cham activity being mentioned in the article. My sentence proposal for the assassinations bit (to go under the sentence "The results were devastating: many Greek as well as Albanian citizens lost their lives and a great number of villages were burned and destroyed."):

Assassinations of Greek officials,<ref.>Kretsi. The Secret Past of the Greek-Albanian Borderlands. 2002. p. 178.</ref.> Albanian community leaders and other notables from both communities followed<ref.>Giorgos Margarites (2005). Anepithymetoi sympatriotes. Stoicheia gia ten katastrophe ton meionoteton tes Elladas. Bibliorama. Athena. pp. 155-156, 160.</ref.> that perpetuated a cycle of revenge and retribution that worsened communal relations.<ref.>Baltsiotis. The Muslim Chams of Northwestern Greece. 2011.</ref.>

I use the term Albanian community leaders as people like Jasin Sadiku were such for the Cham Albanians during that time. As for the term notables, its a term i thought would be useful to encompass other people of the local elite like landowners, businessmen, merchants, religious figures, etc. I placed Baltsiotis there also as he goes into the reasons about the violence which he covers in the section of his article titled "6.The cycle of revenge".

Your thoughts ?

How about the other stuff regarding the "Whereas" issue. Is it good to go? How about the demographic structure sentence, what additions did you have in mind ?

PS:The Kouzas reference appears outside the reference area below. Needs a fixup and link up to the 3 Kouzas references in the main which is short.

Resnjari (talk) 03:14, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Alexikoua, i changed the sentence to "Whereas, it appears that" to your proposal after looking up Mazower. However, i also wrote on the reason for change that it may need a (better) rewording as the few words "it appears that" have issues regarding Wikipedia policy about "expressions of doubt".

Regarding the new sentence proposal for assassinations and about post war properties/demographics, what did you have in mind as you gave no comments about the above sentence proposals ? Resnjari (talk) 02:21, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

I'm ok with your proposal about WWII violence. I also notice that there is an absence about when the first Cham armed units were formed. Thus, a brief addition of this piece of info would be essential (June '41, Sabatakis, 2003[[5]]).Alexikoua (talk) 20:03, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

About the absence of the first Cham units, thats your one. Not sure what wording you want for that. I have a few more sentence proposals/additions. In the section that deals with the population exchange, in light of Baltsiotis work, i thought a few more points need to be added. These additions are to be added under the sentence (my additions in bold).:

The majority of the Muslim Cham community had no idea of their ethnic origin or preferences beyond that of their local religious affiliations and considered themselves simply Muslims. Though by the time of the population exchange, the Muslim Cham population had been nationalized and constituted a “de-facto Albanian national minority".<ref.>Baltsiotis. The Muslim Chams of Northwestern Greece. 2011.</ref.> As such, Greek officials viewed the Muslim Chams as a population that were hostile to Greece’s national interest of security and territory. In doing so, the Greek state insisted on the Muslim Chams migration to Turkey by both handing down ultimatums and utilizing harassment tactics that were undertaken by local paramilitary groups to pursue that aim.<ref.>Baltsiotis. The Muslim Chams of Northwestern Greece. 2011. "The presence of a population considered hostile to national interests near the frontier caused anxiety to Greek officials which was exacerbated by a militaristic perception of security and territory. The central Greek state was eager to push the “hostile” population to migrate to Turkey. To that end it utilized harassment tactics which were carried out by local paramilitary groups. This was a practice that was well known and had been adopted as early as the period of the Balkan Wars. In other cases it just forced people to leave the country, after handing down ultimatums."</ref.>

My proposals/additions for the sentence (in bold):

The demographic structure of northwestern Greece was meanwhile altered by the introduction of settlers, Greeks and especially Vlachs, from other parts of Greece. <ref.>Baltsiotis. The Muslim Chams of Northwestern Greece. 2011. "The process of extinguishing any signs of previous minority existence occurred both in real and symbolic ways. The villages of Muslim Chams were repopulated by Greek speaking populations from the adjacent mountainous areas and Vlachs, immediately after their expulsion."</ref.><ref.>Kretsi. The Secret Past of the Greek-Albanian Borderlands. 2002. p. 187. "The social component of the respective redistribution or property transfers is evident. At the point where the “national” redistribution halted in the prewar period, the “hellenization” of property was taken up once and for all after the war. The economic mobilization of loyal majority groups (i.e., Vlachs along the entire northern Greek border) for the purposes of national homogenization was more often than not carried out to the disadvantage of minorities. In this case it was combined with a strategic purpose, namely the “national stabilization” of the border region and the guarantee of ideological and thus military loyalty to the central state. This becomes evident in a series of laws giving a social or populist character to the expropriation of the Chams and explicitly concerned with supporting border settlers: Athanasakos (n. d.:70 f.) names: 1. N.Δ. 2536/1953 “on the resettlement of the border regions and the enforcement of these populations” art. 6. and 2. N. Δ. 2180/1952 “on the compulsory expropriation of lands for the restitution of the landless farmers and cattle-breeders” which were completed and modified later. According to the aforementioned, the financial revenue office took possession of the properties. In coordination with the direction for agriculture and under the Committee for the expropriations they were bestowed on persons entitled to a share. According to the same author, these persons received title-deeds in the 1960s to 1970s by buying them for the amounts defined by the Committee. The owners of urban properties received acts of concession."</ref.>

Your thoughts ?

Resnjari (talk) 06:51, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

A more close interpretation of what's stated in the correspodent references would be "The abanonded Cham villages were repopulated by adjucent Greek and Aromanian-speaking communities." It isn't stated that Aromanians (Vlachs) were the majority of this population.Alexikoua (talk) 20:09, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Sounds good. That sentence can go in. How about the other proposal regarding the exchange ? issues with wording ?

PS: In the section titled "In Greece", considering that the section now has been rewritten and resolved should the old tag

stay there when there are pages numbers and sources provided, or should the tag be deleted (as it makes the section look cluttered)? Resnjari (talk) 04:05, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Ok with the tag removal & addition of Baltsiotis. About the formation of the first units the most suitable place would be at the beginning of the collaboration section " Fascist Italian as well as Nazi German propaganda promised that the region would be part of Great Albania after the end of the war.. The first armed Cham units where formed in June 1941.."Alexikoua (talk) 14:40, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Ok, but i also think that the official (non publicised) but official German position should also be stated (as per primary document from the era) contained in the Robert Elsie compilation of documents from the era. Germans opposed unification of the area with Albania. I put a little sentence in bold, although i couldn't decide between "non publicised/internal" words. Which would you reckon makes for a better read ? You need to put a page number for the Sabatakis source. Otherwise the section is good to go.

Fascist Italian as well as Nazi German propaganda promised that the region would be part of Great Albania after the end of the war.. Though the non publicised/internal official German position was against Albanian unification.<ref.>“German military document of Army Group Southeast, dated 7 July 1944, for a commission to travel through Chameria for 8-10 days to report on the Albanian-Greek conflict”. In Elsie, Robert & Bejtullah, Destani (eds.). The Cham Albanians of Greece. A Documentary History. p. 339. “On the other hand, the unification of this territory (Chamuria) with Albania which is what the Albanians actually want, cannot be granted.”</ref.> The first armed Cham units where formed in June 1941.."

Regarding my sentence proposal for the exchange bit, i am not sure if there are issues. Is it good to go ? Here it is again (my bit in bold underneath the sentence that it should go under):

The majority of the Muslim Cham community had no idea of their ethnic origin or preferences beyond that of their local religious affiliations and considered themselves simply Muslims. Though by the time of the population exchange, the Muslim Cham population had been nationalized and constituted a “de-facto Albanian national minority".<ref.>Baltsiotis. The Muslim Chams of Northwestern Greece. 2011.</ref.> As such, Greek officials viewed the Muslim Chams as a population that were hostile to Greece’s national interest of security and territory. In doing so, the Greek state insisted on the Muslim Chams migration to Turkey by both handing down ultimatums and utilizing harassment tactics that were undertaken by local paramilitary groups to pursue that aim.<ref.>Baltsiotis. The Muslim Chams of Northwestern Greece. 2011. "The presence of a population considered hostile to national interests near the frontier caused anxiety to Greek officials which was exacerbated by a militaristic perception of security and territory. The central Greek state was eager to push the “hostile” population to migrate to Turkey. To that end it utilized harassment tactics which were carried out by local paramilitary groups. This was a practice that was well known and had been adopted as early as the period of the Balkan Wars. In other cases it just forced people to leave the country, after handing down ultimatums."</ref.>

Also in the ethnic appellations section, at the end of that section, a mention about local Vlachs also using a self appelation derived from the words Chameria and Cham need to be mentioned, as Koukidis does in his wide ranging study of the Vlachs. He quotes the word as Tsamoureni but in parenthesis gives the Aromanian pronunciation/spelling of the word. In his book on page 25 regarding the pronunciation guide, the ń sound is meant to signify the ny sound. So as the book is on Vlachs and their language, i put the word Tsamuréńi in the sentence proposal (below in bold):

Vlachs living the region also use a regional self appellation Tsamuréńi for themselves derived from the words Chameria and Cham.<ref.>Koukoudis, Asterios (2003). The Vlachs: Metropolis and Diaspora. Zitros. p. 271. "However, there are groups of Arvanitovlachs, both in Albania and in Greece, who refuse to be defined as Farsariots, preferring other names, often toponymical too. These include.... Tsamoureni (Tsamuréńi) (from the area of Çamëria, mainly in Thesprotia)."</ref.>

Your thoughts on this as well ? Resnjari (talk) 02:22, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

The proposal about the exchange is ok. Same with the Aromanian self-identification, since the appellation had also a geographical meaning. About the German positions it's already stated that the change of the border was promised after the end of the war, thus we can adjust the text to "Fascist Italian as well as Nazi German propaganda was against the immediate cession of the region to the Albanian state, but promised that the region would became part of a Greater Albania after the end of the war."

Also, per B. Kondis [[6]] (p. 401 "After the capitulation of Italy in September 1943, the British mission in Epirus tried to arrive at an understanding with the Chams in the hope of persuading them to turn against the Germans. The Chams refused") the proposal of the British mission and the Cham response is essential for the understanting of WWII devolopmenst. I believe a brief mention, in the contenxt of the beginning of the German occupation is ok.Alexikoua (talk) 13:18, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

The suggestions you made are good. The Elsie citation of the primary document should go alongside Kondis as it says the same thing (i didn't have time before to write the whole thing as i was doing other edits) but basically is in line with Kondis (put a link to the google books regarding the document). The wording is good. You need to put a full citation for Kondis and Sabatakis, otherwise it will be a bit diffuclt to know which of their works the information came from. Otherwise, with the references bit done, its a go:

Fascist Italian as well as Nazi German propaganda was against the immediate cession of the region to the Albanian state, but promised that the region would became part of a Greater Albania after the end of the war.. Though the non publicised/internal official German position was against Albanian unification.<ref.>“German military document of Army Group Southeast, dated 7 July 1944, for a commission to travel through Chameria for 8-10 days to report on the Albanian-Greek conflict”. In Elsie, Robert & Bejtullah, Destani (eds.). The Cham Albanians of Greece. A Documentary History. p. 339. “On the other hand, the unification of this territory (Chamuria) with Albania which is what the Albanians actually want, cannot be granted. Both sides have been informed that a German commission will be set up to decide the issue, but it has always been put off.”</ref.> The first armed Cham units where formed in June 1941..

In April 1944, a group of Chams working with the Germans assisted them in the arrest and deportatation of the ancient Romaniote Jewish community of Ioannina.

There is this sentence though which a citation tag has remained for a very long while now, though no source has been placed or provided next to it. Unless you or someone else has come across a text/book/journal article based on good credible sources, this sentence without sources may be a bit of an issue remaining. According to Wikipedia policy, it states that if a sentence or section is not sourced it can be challenged or removed. I have placed a {{POV-statement.}} tag next to this sentence. Unless, a source can be found for it, its reason for being there is very problematic and may need to be removed.

Your thoughts ?

Resnjari (talk) 15:30, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

About the interpretation of primary sources there should be some precaution per wp:primary. But in light of secondary sources (the paper of E. Manta [[7]] p. 7) who states that Germany was (at the moment) against the annexation of the region to Albania: Greek Thesprotia was not included amongst the territories annexed to Albania and remained under the control of the High

Command of Athens because of the German reaction. It seems that, amongst other factors which worked against such an annexation was the fact that, in contrast to Kosovo, the inhabitants of Epirus were by a vast majority Greeks, which could not justify any administrative reorganization in that region. So, since we have a secondary reference I believe there is no need to state that "according to X report Y happened" & the fact can be straight mentioned. Another point useful under the context of the begging of the occupation is that the Italian authorities were established up until middle May '41 (Manta p. 7). In light of the new reference, my new proposal will be:

Germany was against the annexation of the region to Albania that time (Manta p. 7). Nevertheless, both Fascist Italian as well as Nazi German propaganda promised that the region would became part of a Greater Albania after the end of the war.(Meyer, p. 702) The Italian occupation authorities were established in Epirus up until middle May 1941 (Manta p. 7) and the following month the first armed units consisting of Cham Albanian were formed (Sabatakakis p. 30).

The part about the Holocaust is unsourced, there is no reason to keep it. But a brief mention about the fate of the Jewish community of Paramythia may be ok (p. 17 [[8]]).Alexikoua (talk) 18:22, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Regarding a brief mention about the Jewish presence in Paramythia, all the source says is:

"Dr. Jean Papadopoulos writes an article about the Jewish presence in Paramythia (part of Ipirus). The Jewish community there was small, but ceased to exist after the Holocaust."

Now unless the article can be located, stating that the Chams where somehow responsible for their disappearance as a community, then their mention within this article is problematic. The Jewish community could have suffered a fate in that the Germans rounded them up without Cham assistance. Or they may have fled before Zervas' forces went to Paramythia and so on. The source's mention though important would be best in the Paramythia article as it says nothing about the Chams (And even then its still weak as it does not provide the article name and so on. If i had put up an Albanian source of that kind you might say similar things about it). Otherwise we would be in the dangerous area of speculation. If you can locate the article in question, and provide the paragraph (like i have with all my sources regarding changes to this sensitive article), and it states that the Chams where responsible then by all means. Otherwise it would be speculation and POV.

Regarding Robert Elsie, im fine whether its included or not within the section you proposed. I find it a little bit amusing though as it does though back up what is said in the sentence you proposed. Lol. Wikipedia policy does state:

Policy: Unless restricted by another policy, 'primary sources that have been reliably published may be used in Wikipedia; but only with care, because it is easy to misuse them.'[4] Any interpretation of primary source material requires a reliable secondary source for that interpretation. A primary source may only be used on Wikipedia to make straightforward, descriptive statements of facts that can be verified by any educated person with access to the primary source but without further, specialized knowledge. For example, an article about a novel may cite passages to describe the plot, but any interpretation needs a secondary source. Do not analyze, synthesize, interpret, or evaluate material found in a primary source yourself; instead, refer to reliable secondary sources that do so. Do not base an entire article on primary sources, and be cautious about basing large passages on them. Do not add unsourced material from your personal experience, because that would make Wikipedia a primary source of that material. Use extra caution when handling primary sources about living people; see WP:BLPPRIMARY, which is policy.

Elsie can be used with this context and your sentence proposal. Reliable secondary sources back up that document(Manda, Meyer) and hence that sentence you wrote and per the policy. I put a link to goggle books so you can see it yourself (does not contradict).

However regarding the main edit about the inclusion of the Robert Elsie book within the article's Further Reading Section and its deletion, there are issues with that. One i did not use Robert Elsie within the article content itself, hence i have not attempted to "analyze, synthesize, interpret, or evaluate material" and so on. I placed the book in the Further Reading section. I fail to see how that is violating the terms or spirit of the above policy. The Robert Elsie book is of importance for the reader if they so wish to read and consult more about these matters for themselves. Other Wikipedia articles have similar things by placing links to such material. Two fine examples on wikipedia are the articles on The Holocaust and the Armenian Genocide. Regarding the first, its further reading section is titled over there as External links while the other has much material in the Bibliography section (in particular the Survivors' testimonies and memory section and External links too. It contains links to archives to a multitude of primary source material (and there are many more examples on Wikipedia). I don't see how that is violating the terms of the policy. Otherwise they too would have too remove it as it is primary sources. Robert Elsie's book is a compilation of documents that contain material relating to the era and to this subject matter. As the Wikipedia policy states, as long as primary source material is not used outright within the content of the article, or that diligence is taken into account within the content of the article when used, it can be there. But i did not use it within the content of the article, it was outside its scope. I'm interested to hear your thoughts on this per the policy?

Also, i have another more sentence proposal. Its to do with the Balkan Wars and the situation around that(section should be above section not in bold):

With the onset of the Balkan Wars (1912-1913), Muslim Chams were uneager to fight as part of the Ottoman army, yet were treated by Greek forces as "de facto enemeies".<ref.>Baltsiotis. The Muslim Chams of Northwestern Greece. 2011. "Although Muslim Chams were not eager to fight on the side of the Ottoman army during the Balkan Wars, they were nevertheless treated by the Greek army as de facto enemies, while local Christians were enlisted in the Greek forces."</ref.> Local Christians were enlisted as part of the Greek forces. Within a few days of the arrival of the Greek army within the region, a Greek irregular military unit executed between 72 or 78 Muslim Cham notables from Paramythia, who were accused of being traitors. "For example, a few days after the occupation of the area of Chamouria by the Greek Army, 72 or 78 Muslim notables were executed by a Greek irregular military unit in the religiously mixed town of Paramythia, evidently accused of being traitors."<ref.>Baltsiotis. The Muslim Chams of Northwestern Greece. 2011.</ref.> This was followed by other atrocities perpetrated by the Greek army on the Muslim Chams that also included defilement of mosques and looting.<ref.>Baltsiotis. The Muslim Chams of Northwestern Greece. 2011. "While there is no Greek source describing the behavior of the Greek army against the Muslim population after they seized the area, there are several relevant descriptions in Albanian sources. There are only indirect (but clear) references to atrocities committed by the Greek army. It should be noted that in the spirit of the times, offensive acts such as defilement of mosques and, obviously, looting, would most certainly have taken place."</ref.> Following the defeat of Ottoman forces in the Balkan Wars of 1912-1913, an international boundary commission awarded the northern part of the region of Epirus to the Principality of Albania, and the southern part to the Kingdom of Greece, leaving Greek and Albanian minority areas on both sides of the border.

Your thoughts ?

PS: Regarding your sentence proposal, its a go. But before you do, about footnoting, one put the whole Sabatakakis reference as its not in the article yet, unlike Meyer (no short thing, first time round, otherwise we wont know the text he write it in). And about Manda, already one of her works is mentioned under Manta(in Greek) in the article. One spelling of her surname is needed and since the article your going to put in there has no prior reference, distinguish it from her other work (if you do a shortening of it, etc)

Resnjari (talk) 04:36, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

About the Jewish community, although a connection with the reprisal activities is made by the author, since they fled to Ioannina due to the executions in Paramythia and the unrest this caused, it's better to have a more specialized source to the subject. About the activity of the Balkan Wars Baltsiotis states something quite weird: "Although Muslim Chams were not eager to fight on the side of the Ottoman army.... Muslim Chams were fighting on the side of the Ottoman Army". Although there is a clear contradiction here, the reason why they were forced to fight without their will isn't stated. A more detailed description on the subject (Pitouli-Kitsou [[9]], also note that both she and Baltsiotis use same primaries in some occations) sheds some additional light on the subject. Moreover, Baltsiotis isn't sure if attrocities occured due to lack of evidence, expressions like "There are only indirect (but clear) references", "would most certainly have taken place", reveal the intention of the author to question the subjectivity of these claims. Thus my proposal will be:

With the onset of the Balkan Wars (1912-1913), most the of Lab and Cham beys formed irregular armed groups and fought against the Greek units, burning a number of villages in the regions of Paramythia, Fanari and Filiates. On the other hand some beys in Margariti were not willing to fought and were ready to accept Greek rule due to the general anarchy in the Ottoman Empire. Local Christians were enlisted as part of the Greek forces. Within a few days after the Greek army secured control of the region, a Greek irregular military unit executed 72 or 78 Muslim Cham notables from Paramythia, who were accused of being traitors.<ref.>Baltsiotis. The Muslim Chams of Northwestern Greece. 2011.</ref.> After the end of the war the Greek authorities suspected that a local anti-Greek movement was possible, supported by the Provisional Government of Albania and Italy, and decided to disarm the population. Moreover, Albanian representatives accused Greece of assasinations and persecution of Cham representatives. This accusations were rejected by the Greek government.<ref.>Baltsiotis. The Muslim Chams of Northwestern Greece. 2011. "While there is no Greek source describing the behavior of the Greek army against the Muslim population after they seized the area, there are several relevant descriptions in Albanian sources. There are only indirect (but clear) references to atrocities committed by the Greek army. It should be noted that in the spirit of the times, offensive acts such as defilement of mosques and, obviously, looting, would most certainly have taken place."</ref.> Following the defeat of Ottoman forces in the Balkan Wars of 1912-1913, an international boundary commission awarded the northern part of the region of Epirus to the Principality of Albania, and the southern part to the Kingdom of Greece, leaving Greek and Albanian minority areas on both sides of the border.Alexikoua (talk) 21:52, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

I like your additions. However, the removal of some sentences relating to Baltsiotis wont do as it wont give a full picture of what was going on during the time. There is nothing weird. You yourself state the Baltsiotis and Kitsou draw upon the same sources. Regarding Baltsiotis and about Cham war involvement there is nothing weird with that also. He just states, due to his research that the Chams where not eager to use his word to fight for the Ottomans. The rationale as to why that was, is not stated. Baltsiotis did not state it, because there may not have been a reason documented about the 'why' they they where not eager back then. And he avoids speculation. He nonetheless states thier outwardly view as was documentation during the time that during the Balkan Wars the Cham population was not eager to fight. But in the few sentences below where he states that they did form part of the Ottoman forces. As they were Muslims, they were conscripted into the Ottoman forces. Nothing weird there. But there is a similar section of the Beys and Mufti's views in WW2 about them not supporting local armed Muslim forces. Mazower gives no reason for this in his research, just that outwardly that was the view displayed and that is what was documentation. The why reason for that is not there. However that does not preclude Baltsiotis mention within the paragraph about their views regarding the matter.

"While there is no Greek source describing the behavior of the Greek army against the Muslim population after they seized the area, there are several relevant descriptions in Albanian sources.34 There are only indirect (but clear) references to atrocities committed by the Greek army.34 It should be noted that in the spirit of the times, offensive acts such as defilement of mosques and, obviously, looting, would most certainly have taken place.34"

Footnotes:

33"See for example K. Naska (ed.)…, op. cit., pp. 1-104."

34"For example see HAMFA, The Vice-governor of Paramythia to the Ministry of Internal Affairs, 30.03.1917 (1917/A/4X(16))."

35"Two written examples that come to us from the Greek side can illustrate the point. At his diary, a Greek officer describes his sadness when he visited a mosque outside the city of Arta, at the Imaret settling, and found it defiled by Greek soldiers (see, Lindia Tricha (ed.), Ημερολόγιακαιγράμματααπότομέτωπο. ΒαλκανικοίΠόλεμοι 1912-1913, Ε.Λ.Ι.Α.,Athens 1993, p. 75. We should mention that no battle or resistance to the Greek Army took place in the Imaret area.

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."

It was probably my issue in not including the footnotes to Baltsiotis' bit from the article also (the article is online though). He states that there are "several relevant descriptions in Albanian sources". He does not question their verifiability, and in doing takes them to be in good stead, unlike what he does with later Greek texts and authors omitting the occurrence of the Paramythia massacre and so on. He follows on by stating that there are indirect (meaning they not referring to these events directly, but touch upon them), but importantly "clear references" from the Greek side about such events. In that he cites a Greek government document that makes references about these occurrences. And he gives further examples from a officer's diary discussing those events and also that a directive was given by the Greek army that did not cover protection of Muslim properties also. The sentence i proposed may need a rewording. Hence with your stuff then (my bit in bold)

With the onset of the Balkan Wars (1912-1913), Muslim Chams were uneager to fight as part of the Ottoman army.<ref.>Baltsiotis. The Muslim Chams of Northwestern Greece. 2011. "Muslim Chams were not eager to fight on the side of the Ottoman army during the Balkan Wars"</ref.> Nonetheless, most the of Lab and Cham beys formed irregular armed groups that fought against the Greek units, burning a number of villages in the regions of Paramythia, Fanari and Filiates. On the other hand some beys in Margariti were not willing to fight and were ready to accept Greek rule due to the general anarchy in the Ottoman Empire.[34][35] Local Christians were enlisted as part of the Greek forces. Within a few days after the Greek army secured control of the region, a Greek irregular military unit executed 72 or 78 Muslim Cham notables from Paramythia, who were accused of being traitors.<ref.>Baltsiotis. The Muslim Chams of Northwestern Greece. 2011. "For example, a few days after the occupation of the area of Chamouria by the Greek Army, 72 or 78 Muslim notables were executed by a Greek irregular military unit in the religiously mixed town of Paramythia, evidently accused of being traitors."</ref.> Occurrences of atrocities perpetrated by Greek forces within the region were recorded that included defilement of mosques and looting.<ref.>Baltsiotis. The Muslim Chams of Northwestern Greece. 2011. "While there is no Greek source describing the behavior of the Greek army against the Muslim population after they seized the area, there are several relevant descriptions in Albanian sources. There are only indirect (but clear) references to atrocities committed by the Greek army. It should be noted that in the spirit of the times, offensive acts such as defilement of mosques and, obviously, looting, would most certainly have taken place.... For example see HAMFA, The Vice-governor of Paramythia to the Ministry of Internal Affairs, 30.03.1917 (1917/A/4X(16)).... Two written examples that come to us from the Greek side can illustrate the point. At his diary, a Greek officer describes his sadness when he visited a mosque outside the city of Arta, at the Imaret settling, and found it defiled by Greek soldiers (see, Lindia Tricha (ed.), Ημερολόγιακαιγράμματααπότομέτωπο. ΒαλκανικοίΠόλεμοι 1912-1913, Ε.Λ.Ι.Α.,Athens 1993, p. 75. We should mention that no battle or resistance to the Greek Army took place in the Imaret area. 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."</ref.> Following the defeat of Ottoman forces in the Balkan Wars of 1912-1913, an international boundary commission awarded the northern part of the region of Epirus to the Principality of Albania, and the southern part to the Kingdom of Greece, leaving Greek and Albanian minority areas on both sides of the border.

This bit that you included is about the end of the whole Balkan/WW1 war period. It would be chronologically out of place as the sentence underneath it in your proposal starts of with talking about the Balkan war and boundary commission. This part that you have would best go after this Wikipedia sentence, that also ends the section about that time period, as that is what Kitsou's reference also talks about too. Your bit in bold after the sentence that would make it chronologically flow.

In the december 1915 legislative elections, due to the general boycott declared by the party of Eleftherios Venizelos, two of the three deputies of Preveza electoral periphery were Muslim Chams: Ali Dino and Musli Emin Ramiz. After the end of the war the Greek authorities suspected that a local anti-Greek movement was possible, supported by the Provisional Government of Albania and Italy, and decided to disarm the population. Moreover, Albanian representatives accused Greece of assassinations and persecution of Cham representatives. This accusations were rejected by the Greek government.[36]

Your thoughts ?

Resnjari (talk) 09:04, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

The first part of the proposed paragraph is ok. What's problematic is that the author neither claims that defilement of mosques took place in the specific region (or better said, in the regions that the specific community resided, since Arta and its surrounding isn't part of the region in question) neither an order about the protection of Christian properties is an evidence for atrocities (Assuming that both examples is the best unclear evidence, as the author states). Baltsiotis is careful about stating that according to Albanian reports there were indirect (clear, but still indirect) references to atrocities. Then it follows a general conclusion about Balkan Wars era warfare: "in the spirit of the times, offensive acts such as defilement of mosques and, obviously, looting, would most certainly have taken place" but neither evidence of defilement of mosques in the specific region nor evidence of looting is mentioned in the notes, only general claims. Thus my proposal will be: Occurrences of atrocities perpetrated by Greek forces within the region were recorded by the Albanian side, however providing only indirect, though clear, evidence. The Greek side rejected these accusations by presenting concrete facts.(Kitsou-Pitouli: p. 361: Την αναφορά αυτή διέψευσε λίγο αργότερα η ελληνική κυβέρνηση με συγκεκριμένα στοι­χεία).

The last part about the measures taken to disarm the population was already completed in July '13, thus it belongs to the BW-era. It can be a single paragraph in the same section.Alexikoua (talk) 21:24, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Under the (S.)P.R. of Albania

It seems weird that the Cham community appears as non-existent in Albania for 36 years (1945-91). However, the correspondent bibliography provides interesting data showing that this community was an active element of the Albanian society.Alexikoua (talk) 21:24, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Thus, a necessary addition will be the following:

The regime of Enver Hoxha was increasingly conspicuous towards the Cham community. It believed that they were of questionable loyalty and could be easily became agents of a foreign power. This view was probably based because they were Greek citizens and their elites were traditionally rich landlords, while collaboration with the Axis and anti-communism were also significant factors that contributed to this.(Kretsi,2007, p. 57) In 1949 the leadership of the People's Republic of Albania tried to mobilized the Cham community in order to fight with the communists in the Greek Civil War. After their negative response they were labelled as "reactionaries" and suffered a certain decree of persecution within Albania. Moreover, the Cham issue was neglected by the local regime (Kretsi, 2002, p. 185).

In 1947 the regime revealed a conspiracy in which 85 Chams were allegedly part in the creation of an armed nationalist group named "Balli Kombetar".(Kretsi,2007, p. 58) In 1960 another anti-communist conspiracy was uncovered under Teme Sejko, a Cham admiral of the Albanian navy from Konispol. The alleged perpetrators, among them also 29 Chams, were accused as agents of "American, Yugoslav and Greek separatists". As a result, Sejko was executed and several of his relatives persecuted, while other members of the Cham community were imprisoned.(Kretsi,2007, p. 63)

Change the following: the as next to "labelled as", delete it. Change "mobilized" > mobilize; change "decree" > degree. Otherwise, go for it, it’s good.

Regarding the situation Post War, it was a situation of Albanian doing over other Albanians. Enver made enemies out of the Northerners Geg Muslims where the uncivilised bunch who need to be 'civilised' (linguistically regarding imposing the Tosk dialect, Catholics too in this regard), Catholics were in league with the Italians, so many of their elite went missing. Cham Albanians (those not from Greece) lived in area that was heavily militarised and could not move around the country. Enver purposefully underfunded the region and left it undeveloped. He targeted the Slavic Macedonians also by changing village names and so on. It wasn't just the Greek minority who had their hardship in that state. Enver, if you ever get a chance to read his memoirs (they exist in English too), was a paranoid person and his regime reflected that fear and paranoia. Albanians today are still trying to come to terms with the Enverian period. Literature has been written, but many from that era or their families are still in power, so discussion about certain things remains private. Its why a lot of Albanian scholarly literature in Albania mainly deals with the period up to 1945 (For example see article by: Dr. Shannon Woodcock: [10]. Not much has been written about the Cham experience in Albania during Enver's time (Folklorist Fatos Rrapaj wrote a monograph about their resettlement experience, Winnifirth mentions it in his Faratsoul article on the demographics survey article he wrote). I was thinking a while back of doing my post-grad into this very issue, before i decided not to go through with that topic. The problem is that access to the Albanian archives is very limited (communist era documents are still off limits as to who it might implicate people for certain things), and getting access to people would take time, but not enough time to interview and travel (as the Chams are found now in 4 main concentrations (the area around Konispol=locals), the area around Saranda (settled there in the interwar period and some past WW2), in Myzeqe and the Elbasan area, mainly post WW2 and it also reflects the 4 members of parliament. Each one of them represents at least of those places in parliament. Regarding also the WW2 era, though not published, there are controversies within families about the roles certain individuals from families played. As the amount of people convicted was about 1, 500, out of a then community of roughly 18,000 not all supported those actions, and there are frictions even today between family members. It very complicated, even calling this conflict, Greek vs Albanian is problematic. Most of Thesprotia was inhabited by Albanian speakers (Muslim and Orthodox). People speaking Greek and using the self appellation of Greki lived north of a line from Plesion, Filiates, Fararomeni up to Pente Ekklises near the Kalamas river all the way to the Murgana mountains and the border. Everything south of that was mainly Albanian speaking, with the exception of Nea Selevkia (founded in 1923 by Greek refugees) and the partial settlement of refugees in Perdika, Parga, Petrovitsa and Zervohori). There were conflicts between these Muslim Albanian speakers and Orthodox Greek speakers, as Nicholas Gage fleetingly points out in his book Eleni (though in words that are partisan, but cooperation too as Dr.Hajredin Isufi points out in the Filiates villages, the Kalohori area e.g Fanaromeni etc.), while the bulk of the conflict was between Muslim Albanian speakers and Orthodox Albanian speakers. They formed the larger part of the population and with the Orthodox they formed a sizable number of Zerva's forces as Yannis Sarras (alb. Jani Sharra) from Kastri points out in his memoirs about being part of EDES. Anyway, its complicated. Back to the edits.

About the other stuff, i didn't put the proper footnote numbers from the paragraph as they were all listed as 34. My issue. Corrected that. I' going to say some words about the section, as i may have caused some confusion. In the Baltsiotis sentence that says "While there is no Greek source describing the behavior of the Greek army against the Muslim population after they seized the area, there are several relevant descriptions in Albanian sources." Apart from citing Naska, he does not call the Albanian source into question. Instead he states in that sentence that they are "relevant descriptions" (with footnote 33). In that sentence, there is no mention of the word indirect or clear. It is in the following sentence, that he writes "There are only indirect (but clear) references to atrocities committed by the Greek army." with footnote 34, that Baltsiotis cites a Greek primary document (from the Greek government archive) by the "Vice-governor of Paramythia to the Ministry of Internal Affairs" in 1917 discussing such prior events (he gives the whole document source). Why would the Vice-governor of Paramythia mention such things if they did not take place or for that matter Baltsiotis placing it as a source citation. Greek authorities outwardly said one thing, but in internal government documents they were aware, and that is what Baltsiotis is conveying in citing that document. It’s similar to what happened with the agrarian reform. In the League of Nations the Greek government denied expropriations or discrimination, but in internal documents to those events, they were discussed (see Baltsiotis for more). This is what Baltsiotis means that there were indirect mentions of those events occurring, but in Greek sources they are touched upon or sidelined and they do not go into the army's behavior in the region. Hence Baltsiotis still states that they mentioned atrocities happening, but not why it happened or the rationale for it, e.g :behavoir). It does not mean that they did not happen, as he does not call Naska's work into question or the government document he cites. He then states in the next sentence that "It should be noted that in the spirit of the times, offensive acts such as defilement of mosques and, obviously, looting, would most certainly have taken place." Here in this sentence he is placing these events in the wider context of their times. In footnote 35, he gives the Arta example, though yes not part of Chameria, these events where going on nearby too and the bit about Botsaris is important, at least in being in the footnote of the article as it gives a picture into how the Greek state at that moment in time viewed local Muslim properties in the region. Regarding the other bit, ok it can go back, put the word Balkan, next to war because, otherwise it get confusing as in our region where where basically experiencing about 6 of continuous war, though the two conflicts are named differently. Hence, my new proposal in line with Baltsiotis and his footnote (34) of mentioning as an example a document by the Vice-governor of Paramythia (a Greek administrative official.) [my additions in bold]:

Occurrences of atrocities perpetrated by Greek forces within the region were recorded mainly by the Albanian side, whereas those events were noted indirectly, though clearly by Greek government officials.<ref.>Baltsiotis. The Muslim Chams of Northwestern Greece. 2011. "While there is no Greek source describing the behavior of the Greek army against the Muslim population after they seized the area, there are several relevant descriptions in Albanian sources. There are only indirect (but clear) references to atrocities committed by the Greek army. It should be noted that in the spirit of the times, offensive acts such as defilement of mosques and, obviously, looting, would most certainly have taken place.... For example see HAMFA, The Vice-governor of Paramythia to the Ministry of Internal Affairs, 30.03.1917 (1917/A/4X(16)).... 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."</ref.> After the end of the Balkans war, Greek authorities suspected that a local anti-Greek movement was possible, supported by the Provisional Government of Albania and Italy, and decided to disarm the population. Moreover, Albanian representatives accused Greece of assassinations and persecution of Cham representatives. These accusations were rejected by the Greek government.[36]

I have a few more sentence proposals. These are small though (my additions is bold) and sentence that it would best go under. While with the other, the addition of a footnote.

After these lands became part of the Greek state, local peasants expropriated from Albanian landlords what they considered was their property and refused to pay such taxes.While the majority of the Muslim Cham population consisted of middle sized land owners with land that varied in fertility, production and size. <ref.>Baltsiotis. The Muslim Chams of Northwestern Greece. 2011. "Besides beys, it seems that the majority of the Muslim population consisted of middle sized estate owners. The land they owned varied in size, fertility and production. </ref.>There were other Muslim Chams though who were more limited financially and in land.<ref.>Baltsiotis. The Muslim Chams of Northwestern Greece. 2011. “Although there is no sufficient written proof to support the idea, it’s almost certain that families owning very small parcels of land, or just a few small fields and a small number of sheep, were not an exception and were also present in villages…. According to a 1936 document, at the Muslim village of Liopsi there are 170 families. More than one hundred of them “prosper” as they own land at the Chamouria plain, the rest of them being “poor and driven to desperation” , The Local Authorities Inspector [attached at the General Governance of Epirus], Jianina 30.07.1936, HAMFA, 1936, 21.1. At the document it is underlined that at the neighboring village of Kotsika 150 persons left to Turkey during 1926-1927, reducing the current (at 1936) population to 450. One can suppose that the emigrants were coming from the “poor” families, although further research should be undertaken.”</ref.>

The results were devastating: many Greek as well as Albanian citizens lost their lives and a great number of villages were burned and destroyed.<ref.>Kretsi. The Secret Past of the Greek-Albanian Borderlands. 2002. p. 179. “It is difficult however, to make final statements on Cham participation in this systematic persecution of the Christian population in the region, especially as there is evidence that the arbitrary rule of the Dino clan was directed even against some Muslims and Albanian-speaking Christians (Arbanits) (Isufi 2002: 2 19—254).”</ref.>

Resnjari (talk) 11:36, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

I forgot to put this proposal up as well (proposal in bold). Its about the Muslim Roma of Thesprotia. The Roma are always neglected in many Albanian and Greek sources sadly. Baltsiotis has written a great article about the Roma in the region and the proposal is based on some of its content. The sentences would best go under this sentence:

Perhaps it would be best to leave things at that."(PRO/FO,371/48094) During this time, small numbers of Muslim Roma from Filiates also fled to Albania alongside the Muslim Chams. <.ref name = Baltsiotis2015/.> They settled in village of Shkallë, near Saranda, where due to immigration in recent years, some have resettled in Greece. <.ref name = Baltsiotis2015.>Lambros Baltsiotis (2015). "Balkan Roma immigrants in Greece: An initial approach to the traits of a migration flow." International Journal of Language, Translation and Intercultural Communication. 1. (1): 5. " In general terms, it seems that previous ties of any kind with Greece facilitate not only the migration but also a more permanent way of living in the country. This is the case with the Muslim Roma of Filiati in Thesprotia who, following the expulsion of the Muslim Albanian Chams from Greece in 1944-1945, were settled in the village of Shkallë Sarandë in Albania. The majority of the families, more than fifteen, gradually settled in Greece.<./ref.> And these other two proposals:

From these actions, many villagers managed to escape to the nearby island of Corfu. The local Orthodox Albanian speaking population did not share the national ideas of their Muslim Albanian speaking neighbours, whereas instead they remained Greek-oriented and identified themselves as Greeks.<.ref>Baltsiotis. The Muslim Chams of Northwestern Greece. 2011. “The Albanian-speaking, Orthodox population did not share the national ideas of their Muslim neighbors and remained Greek-oriented, identifying themselves as Greeks.”<./ref>

In Greece, Muslim Chams were referred to by a number of names by different authors. They were called Albanochams (Αλβανοτσάμηδες, Alvanotsamides), and Turkalbanians (Τουρκαλβανοί, Tourkalvanoi) or Turkochams (Τουρκοτσάμηδες, Tourkotsamides). 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.<.ref>Baltsiotis. The Muslim Chams of Northwestern Greece. 2011. “Until the Interwar period Arvanitis (plural Arvanitēs) was the term used by Greek speakers to describe an Albanian speaker regardless of his/hers religious backround. In official language of that time the term Alvanos was used instead. The term Arvanitis coined for an Albanian speaker independently of religion and citizenship survives until today in Epirus (see Lambros Baltsiotis and Léonidas Embirikos, “De la formation d’un ethnonyme. Le terme Arvanitis et son evolution dans l’État hellénique”, in G. Grivaud-S. Petmezas (eds.), Byzantina et Moderna, Alexandreia, Athens, 2006, pp. 417-448.” </.ref> — Preceding unsigned comment added by Resnjari (talk • contribs) 04:37, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Your thoughts ?

Resnjari (talk) 03:56, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

All proposals appear fine to me. Though in the BW part the last sentence "Moreover, Albanian representatives accused Greece of assassinations and persecution of Cham representatives. These accusations were rejected by the Greek government." should be placed right after "...Greek government officials.", for chronological order. Also in "...were noted indirectly", "only" should be placed before "indirectly" per reference. Everything else is ok exactly as it is.Alexikoua (talk) 21:32, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Ok, all the edits are in the article. There is this sentence though which sounds a little awkward. It reads:

"The only census that counted Orthodox communities of Albanian ethnicity, was a highly unreliable fascist Italian, conducted during World War II (1941)."

After going through Kitsakis' article, he does not mention anything about the Italian census being "highly unreliable". On page 8 all he says is this "Τέλος, οι ιταλοί υπολόγισαν το 1941, κατά τρόπο όμως υπερβολικό, ότι στην περιοχή κατοικούσαν 26.000 χριστιανοί Αλβανοί Τσάμηδες, 28.000 μουσουλμάνοι Αλβανοί Τσάμηδες έναντι μόνο 20.000 Ελλήνων."

In that sentence he makes no mention of the census being "highly unreliable". It is in the preceding sentences that he talks about the Greek census having such issues because of lack of completion due to the war. Kitsakis only says that the numbers the Italians use are excessive not "highly unreliable". I thought the sentence should be reworded with a footnote to Kitsakis p.8. My proposal (in bold):

The only census that counted Orthodox communities of Albanian ethnicity, was undertaken by Italian occupational forces and conducted during World War II (1941)." (Kitsakis. p.8)

Also the Italian census should be part of the wikitable about historical demographics.

|1941 || 28,000 || 26,000 || Unknown || Italian census

Also a sentence addition about Islamisation and the Chams. To go after this sentence (additions in bold):

This combination resulted in the first wave of conversions in the beginning of the 18th century, by a number of poor farmers. At this time Muslims became the majority in a few villages like Kotsika, near Sagiada.

The wars of the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries between Russia and the Ottoman Empire negatively impacted upon the region.<.ref name = Giakoumis2010/.> Increased conversions followed, often forced, such as those of 25 villages in 1739 which are located in current day Thesprotia prefecture. < ;/ ref name=Giakoumis2010.> Giakoumis, Konstantinos (2010). "The Orthodox Church in Albania Under the Ottoman Rule 15th-19th Century." In Oliver Jens Schmitt (ed.). Religion und Kultur im albanischsprachigen Südosteuropa. Peter Lang. p. 85. “In the 18th century Islamization increased and a large number of inhabitants of Labëri, Filiates, Pogon and Kurvelesh converted."; p. 86. “In 1739, twenty five villages in Thesprotia were forced to convert to Islam en masse. It has also been noted that conversions intensified after the wars of Russia with the Porte (1710-1711, 1768-1774, 1787-1792, 1806-1812).” </ref.>

i wrote that bit "located in current day Thesprotia prefecture." like that because Thesprotia did not exist as an administrative unit when the conversion occurred, but those settlements are located all in the prefecture today.

Regarding the sentence:

Although the Albanian government complained that Chams were discriminated against by the Greek authorities, there is little evidence of direct state persecution at this time.

Onur Yildrim is also tagged as a reference as supporting this sentence. I looked in his book, at page 121 too which the citation or the information is supposed to be based on and there is nothing supporting that Onur also wrote that there was little state persecution or in any of the other pages about Albanians. See it on google books. So, the question beckons, do we keep Onur as a citation for this sentence?

Also addition of Poulton as a footnote to sentence(to make it more academically robust as Poultan gives a good explanation about the term "Turk" and its uage during that era): "Under this context the Muslim communities in Ottoman Epirus were classified as “Turks”, while the Orthodox as “Greeks” regardless of their ethnic origin,"

Poulton, Hugh (2000). "The Muslim experience in the Balkan states, 1919‐1991." Nationalities Papers. 28. (1): 47-48. “While the Christian population hence faced a threat of ethnic assimilation arising out of the nature of the millet system itself, Muslim populations in the Ottoman Empire clearly faced a parallel threat of Turkification. It is important to note, however, that the Ottoman state recognised no official differentiation by language or ethnicity among its Muslim citizens: the modem notion of being a “Turk” was until the end of the nineteenth century alien to the Ottoman elites, who regarded themselves as “Ottomans” rather than “Turkish.” In fact the term “Turk” had the connotation of being an uneducated peasant. Ottoman Turkish, the language of state, was not the vernacular of the mass of the Turkish-speaking population, and along with being a Muslim, knowledge of it was a requirement of high office in the Ottoman state.’° Ethnicity per se was not a factor in this respect and many Grand Vezirs and high officials were originally from Albanian, Muslim Slav, or other Ottoman Muslim populations. Indeed when the dervişme system—whereby the subject Christian populations had to give up a number of their most able sons, who were then educated and raised as Muslims to run the Empire in both civilian and military capacities—was still in operation (it fell into abeyance in the seventeenth century and had disappeared by the eighteenth) the state officials were necessarily from non-Turkish Christian backgrounds. In spite of this, however, vernacular Turkish became widespread as the mother tongue among the Muslim populations (and even the Christian populations) of Anatolia, although this process was less pronounced in the Balkans.”

Your thoughts ?

Resnjari (talk) 08:24, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Everything appears ok with the exeption of the inclusion of the Axis census in the table. In general exagerated figures for propaganda purposes should be termed as such, while the inclusion with the rest of the estimates in the same table is unacceptable, in terms of concistency. As for the interwar section a noticed that a couple of points are missing and need to be added as follows:

• In reponse to accusation of the Albanian government (in 1925-28) , the Greek side stated that the same expropriation policy was implemented nationwide for all Greek citizens. In general the fact that no discrimination against the Cham community took place that time, was also apparent in the refugge policy which the Greek state implemented in Epirus, where only a very limited number of Asia Minor refugges were allowed to settle next to the Cham communities.(Manta, 2009: p. 4: “In reply to all accusations the Greek side clarified that the expropriation was of general character and implemented in the same way for all citizens of the state. Not only was there no special discrimination against the properties of the Çams, but the government took care to implement the measure more leniently in their case and, especially in Epirus, to limit the influx and establishment of refugees. In any case, according to the 1928 census, in all of Epirus there resided only a total of 8,179 refugees, of whom 323 were in the province of Paramythia, 720 in Filiates and 275 in the province of Margariti, numbers that cannot support the Albanian accusations on privileged treatment of refugees to the detriment of the Albanians”)

• The Venizelos government (1928-1932), despite the former Greek-Albanian crisis, took measures to intensify the improment of the Cham communities both on economic and social basis. In 1931 a law was passed that allowed direct payment of reimbursement through the granting of analogous bonds and the direct return of improperly expropriated urban properties. A number of Cham families responded to these favorable regulations. Moreover, the Albanian government accepted the Greek proposal for the payment of indemnifications in bonds,allowing that way the promulgation of the relevant legislation and thus enabling the process of paying indemnification to the Albanian citizens. Thus, in 1935, according to Greek dimplomatic reports, most of the Albanian demands that concerned the Cham communities appeared to be settled.(Manta, 2009: p. 5: “Despite the crisis in relations between Athens and Tirana and the broader problems this caused, the Venizelos government (1928-32) seemed determined to intensify efforts for the improvement of the Çams’ situation on the economic and social levels. The first issue that had to be dealt with was definitely the land one and the government made efforts to settle the issue of reimbursement, for this constituted a permanent source of grievances for the Albanian population. Thus, by mid 1931 a law was passed which provided for the direct payment of reimbursement to Greek citizens through their granting of analogous bonds and the direct return of improperly expropriated urban properties. 11 Indeed, some Albanian families began to respond to these new favorable regulations and to accept the reimbursement determined by the state. On the other hand, the Albanian state accepted the Greek proposal for the payment of indemnification in bonds, thus freeing the way for the promulgation of the relevant legislation on June 15, 1933 and the hastening of the process of paying indemnification to the Albanian citizens. 12 According to information from the Greek embassy in Tirana, by the middle of 1935 a great number of Albanian demands had been satisfied and consequently one of the most chronic problems for Greek-Albanian relations seemed at least to be coursing towards settlement.”)

Good for spotting this out. Regarding your first paragraph, considering that it discusses the matter of the exchange, refugees and property expropriation, i thought it might best go in the "Population exchange and appropriation of property (1923–1926)" section. And in particular under the sentence "This law was reported even to the League of Nations, but in June 1928 the Albanian petition against Greece was turned down".

The Albanian government responded to these events with accusations of discrimination during 1925-1928. While the Greek side stated that the same expropriation policy was implemented nationwide for all Greek citizens.<ref.>Manta, Eleftheria (2009). "The Cams of Albania and the Greek State (1923 - 1945)". Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs. 4. (29): 4.</ref.>

New paragraph based on Baltsiotis' research and citation of the Greek government archive that states a contrary view being discussed in internal Greek government documents, one different to the external or diplomatic position outlined. Also Manta does not cite the Greek government archive in her footnotes relating to page 4 or 5 (page 4: footnotes 7-9; page 5: 10-13) except by citing the official law and the diplomatic exchanges with the Albanian/Greek embassy and diplomats. Manta's references, though important relate to the outward Greek government position. As this is about missing bits, i have written up a paragraph based on that internal government documentation/positions/policy implementations as cited by Baltsitotis. One sentence in your proposal, when placed alongside Baltsiotis sources (and i was trying to find where Manda states this) becomes problematic at the very best as it is not supported on the evidence that Baltsiotis gives. Also Baltsitois wrote his piece in 2011 (building on the scholarship), about 2 or so years after Manta and based on his sources, was privy to government archival material that Manta was not. So this part of the sentence "In general the fact that no discrimination against the Cham community took place that time, was also apparent" cannot be in the article as it is not supported academically as there is strong information supporting the contrary. This part of the sentence though: "in the refugge policy which the Greek state implemented in Epirus, where only a very limited number of Asia Minor refugges were allowed to settle next to the Cham communities."; yes and i have incorporated it within the proposal (expanded on it too).

However, during the period of 1922-1926, the Greek government used the settling of Greek refugees as a tool for applying pressure on Muslim Chams to leave Greece.<ref.>Baltsiotis. The Muslim Chams of Northwestern Greece. 2011. " Two years earlier, Greek refugees from Asia Minor had been settled in the area. These newcomers were used as a tool for applying more pressure against Muslims for them to decide to leave Greece."</ref.> These refugees in accordance with Greek law of the time took advantage of land expropriations and settled in the houses of Cham Muslims, which made some sell their land and become landless.<ref.> Baltsiotis. The Muslim Chams of Northwestern Greece. 2011. "The newcomers took advantage of the land expropriations, and settled in the houses of Muslims. These actions were in accordance with legal provisions applicable to the whole territory of Greece. It is highly probable, therefore, that some Muslims, pressed by the legislation relating to expropriation and the presence of refugees who presented a threat to them, sold their estates and remained landless."</ref.> There were also government restrictions on the right to lease, sell or cultivate land due to Muslim Chams being classified as “exchangeable” which led to the gradual financial devastation of the Muslim Cham population.<ref.>Baltsiotis. The Muslim Chams of Northwestern Greece. 2011. "The restrictions imposed on the right to sell, rent or even cultivate land, due to the consideration of Muslims as “exchangeable”, gradually led to the financial devastation of the Muslim population."</ref.> As such, in 1925 the Greek government by means of a special operation was still trying to persuade Muslim Chams to leave the country.<ref.>Baltsiotis. The Muslim Chams of Northwestern Greece. 2011. "For instance, as late as February 1925, the General Administration of Epirus undertook the task of carrying out a special operation with the purpose of persuading them to leave the country."</ref.> It was only by 1926, when the Muslim Chams were decided by the Greek government not to be exchanged that most of these refugees were resettled to other parts of Greece.<ref.>Baltsiotis. The Muslim Chams of Northwestern Greece. 2011. "The great majority of the refugees were resettled when it was decided that the Muslim population would not be exchanged."</ref.><.ref name = Psomiades.> Thereafter, only a limited number of Asia Minor Greek refugees remained in the region and were resettled throughout settlements within the provinces of Filiates, Margariti and Paramythia.<ref.>Manta. The Cams of Albania. 2009. p. 4. “In reply to all accusations the Greek side clarified that the expropriation was of general character and implemented in the same way for all citizens of the state. Not only was there no special discrimination against the properties of the Çams, but the government took care to implement the measure more leniently in their case and, especially in Epirus, to limit the influx and establishment of refugees. In any case, according to the 1928 census, in all of Epirus there resided only a total of 8,179 refugees, of whom 323 were in the province of Paramythia, 720 in Filiates and 275 in the province of Margariti, numbers that cannot support the Albanian accusations on privileged treatment of refugees to the detriment of the Albanians”</ref.>

This section though would best go under the Interwar section sentence of "However, this proposal was rejected by the Greek side, who feared that Albania would forcibly evict its Greek minority from the country, making the exchange involuntary":

The Venizelos government (1928-1932), despite the former Greek-Albanian crisis, took measures to intensify the improvement of the Cham communities both on economic and social basis. In 1931 a law was passed that allowed direct payment of reimbursement through the granting of analogous bonds and the direct return of improperly expropriated urban properties. A number of Cham families responded to these favorable regulations. Moreover, the Albanian government accepted the Greek proposal for the payment of indemnifications in bonds, allowing that way the promulgation of the relevant legislation and thus enabling the process of paying indemnification to the Albanian citizens. Thus, in 1935, according to Greek diplomatic reports, most of the Albanian demands that concerned the Cham communities appeared to be settled.<ref.>Manta. The Cams of Albania. 2009. p.5. "Despite the crisis in relations between Athens and Tirana and the broader problems this caused, the Venizelos government (1928-32) seemed determined to intensify efforts for the improvement of the Çams’ situation on the economic and social levels. The first issue that had to be dealt with was definitely the land one and the government made efforts to settle the issue of reimbursement, for this constituted a permanent source of grievances for the Albanian population. Thus, by mid 1931 a law was passed which provided for the direct payment of reimbursement to Greek citizens through their granting of analogous bonds and the direct return of improperly expropriated urban properties. Indeed, some Albanian families began to respond to these new favorable regulations and to accept the reimbursement determined by the state. On the other hand, the Albanian state accepted the Greek proposal for the payment of indemnification in bonds, thus freeing the way for the promulgation of the relevant legislation on June 15, 1933 and the hastening of the process of paying indemnification to the Albanian citizens. According to information from the Greek embassy in Tirana, by the middle of 1935 a great number of Albanian demands had been satisfied and consequently one of the most chronic problems for Greek-Albanian relations seemed at least to be coursing towards settlement.”</ref.> During this time though, there were ongoing efforts by Greek authorities to prompt the dislocation of the Muslim Cham population by means of hard-line policies and migration to Turkey, while discouraging or even forbiding it to Albania.<ref.>Baltsiotis. The Muslim Chams of Northwestern Greece. 2011. "Various documents indicate that the Greek Authorities either prompted dislocation, or, as one document vividly puts it, “all of our services, but most of all the Sub-prefecture and the Gendarmerie [Χωροφυλακή] οf Filiati and Igoumenitsa are working hardly to reinforce the [migration] flow”. Practical incentives were provided to individuals and most of all to families wanting to migrate to Turkey. Another mechanism that was used in some cases was the demographic disruption of Muslim communities targeting the disassociation of the social web of the communities with a view to put additional pressure to emigrate. This migration flow presents a prima facie controversial acknowledgment in consideration of the fact that we have mentioned that an Albanian national minority was called into being: The great majority of the emigrants chose to leave for Turkey and not Albania. However, a closer reading of the relevant documents indicates that the Greek Authorities were unofficially encouraging (legal) migration to Turkey while discouraging, or even forbidding, migration to Albania. One more fact that should not be underestimated is that there was an underground migration to Albania, which was not documented in the reports of Local Authorities to the Centre (since, for instance, no passports were issued) and only indirectly referred to in Greek sources. However, this migration is testified to by the relevant Albanian bibliography which includes the testimonies of members of the community. This underground migration of individuals and families to Albania continued until 1940."</ref.> The Muslim Chams by the 1930s were viewed in Greece as a hostile population and “a lost cause for “Hellenism”.<ref.> Baltsiotis. The Muslim Chams of Northwestern Greece. 2011. "In the 1930s it was obvious that the Chams were viewed as a hostile population and “a lost cause for “Hellenism”"</ref.>

"exeption of the inclusion of the Axis census in the table. In general exagerated figures for propaganda purposes should be termed as such, while the inclusion with the rest of the estimates in the same table is unacceptable, in terms of concistency."

I don't think there is an issue. There are other articles (e.g. Polish areas annexed by Nazi Germany) on wikipedia where Axis forces statistics/data are used in the wikitable for census matters. As long as it is stated that it is the Italian census, like i proposed with an addition ( |1941 || 28,000 || 26,000 || Unknown || Italian census (undertaken by Axis occupational forces during World War Two) ) then its ok. Its exclusion seems a little weird as it is a census about the area. Also unless a academic source states that the Italian census was based on or used for "propaganda" purposes (i would be interested if those are out there and would gladly have a look at them), then it should and must be stated in the article, otherwise as per Wikipedia policy on editing (Wikipedia:Tendentious editing, we would be "editorialis[ing] or interpret[ing]" the information. Also, a similar presumption could be made about other census numbers or statisitic already in the wikitable regarding this matter can also challenged about either under counting the numbers of so and so group for their own purposes or over inflating them (Baltsiotis regarding Greek numbers does clearly state: "In the official censuses of the Greek State in the Interwar period there is major manipulation involving the numbers of the Albanian speakers in the whole of the Greek territory"). Instead though, those Greek numbers in the wikitable are placed there in a neutral way. Our task here is to withdraw ourselves from interpreting them unless a academic source has already done so, like Baltsiotis regarding Greek statistics on the area). Like i said Kitsakis has not stated that the Italian census was propaganda. And there are other wikipedia articles that quote Axis forces statistics, as they were produced during the era, without them being used in the article to advance Axis ideologies and so on. Also there already is consistency on other wikipedia pages that deal much more sensitive and heaver content than is within the article. Considering that there are many editors out there regarding those pages, that is a definite.

Also there is a issue with a word in this sentence (in bold): "Moreover, in contrast to Greek Muslims in Ottoman Macedonia the mainly Albanian Chams did not face any dilemma over their ethnic identity or relations with other Albanian tribes."

Sine the sentence is taking about Chams, the use of the word tribes was done by some outside authors to refer the Albanian subdivisions of Geg, Tosk, Lab and Cham as tribes. Hasluck was writing in the 1920s after all. The term "Tribe" is apart from being anachronistic, also not employed in today's literature (unless you know of sources that do so). Moreover, when the word tribe is invoked by non-Albanians, it is mainly in discussion of the clans of Northern Albania like the Mirdita, Shala, Kelmendi and son within the Geg grouping, and sometimes the clans of the Labs. Hence there could also be a mix up regarding equating the Chams with those smaller clans (as the word in the sentnace stands now), which is not the case or what Haslack wrote. Chams are always equated with the Gegs. Tosk, Chams and Labs. For example certain words used for American Americans in the past are no longer used for them today and in Wikipedia articles being written do not reflect that language of the past in those terms, (unless direct quotation of a certain passage etc). My proposal is that "tribes" it be replaced with "socio-cultural subdivisions" or "socio-cultural and dialectal subdivisions" (with accompanying footnote of course: Loshi, Xhevat (1999). “Albanian”. In Hinrichs, Uwe, & Uwe Büttner (eds). Handbuch der Südosteuropa-Linguistik. Otto Harrassowitz Verlag. p. 285.).

Your thoughts ?

Resnjari (talk) 07:39, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

I forgot about including these two sentence proposals as well which fill important gaps in the article.

First proposal is for the Metaxas section and for it to go under this sentence:

"Meanwhile, either due to the absence of Greek or for reasons of demographic importance, Greek education was expanded with the establishement of kindergartens in some Orthodox Albanian speaking villages"

Whereas in 1936, the Greek state created a new prefecture called Thesprotia, from parts of Ioannina and Preveza prefecture, as to exercise better control the Cham Muslim minority.<.ref.>Baltsiotis. The Muslim Chams of Northwestern Greece. 2011. “Finally, so as to exercise better control over the minority, the Greek state created in late 1936 a new prefecture, that of Thesprotia, consisting of areas that previously belonged to the Prefectures of Ioannina (Yanina) and Preveza, embodying all the Muslim population…. According to the suggestion of the General Administration of Epirus to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (the 24th of October 1936), the presence of Albanian Muslims and the difficulties in “administrating” them from a far away capital calls for the creation of a new prefecture (HAMFA, 1937, A4/9).”<./ref.>

Second to go in the demographics section under this sentence::

"According to 1913 Greek census, in Chameria region were living 25,000 Muslims[80] who had as mother tongue Albanian, in a total population of about 60,000, while in 1923 there were 20,319 Muslim Chams. In Greek census of 1928, there were 17,008 Muslims who had as mother tongue the Albanian language."

During the interwar period, the numbers of Albanian speakers in official Greek censuses varied and fluctuated, due to political motives and manipulation.<.ref.>Baltsiotis. The Muslim Chams of Northwestern Greece. 2011. “In the official censuses of the Greek State in the Interwar period there is major manipulation involving the numbers of the Albanian speakers in the whole of the Greek territory…. The issue here is not the underestimation of the numbers of speakers as such, but the vanishing and reappearing of linguistic groups according to political motives, the crucial one being the “stabilization” of the total number of Albanian speakers in Greece.”</.ref.>

Your thoughts?

Resnjari (talk) 08:13, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

The argument that Manta lacks inline in the non-persecution argument can also be used in the case of Baltsiotis about the un-eager Chams to fight in BW (both inlines there deal only with the execution of beys), however Pitouli-Kitsou provides inlines that point that it was their intention to fight for the Ottoman side according to information by Greek intelligence before the outbreak of the war. In the case of Manta (although Roudometof is quite fine with the addition of 'non direct state persecution' in the post 1923 period) it's important to mention that the influx of refugges was very limited in the region in question and this is an evidence against persecution. Moreover, per Ktistakis most of the refugees that were initially planned to settle in Thesprotia (where they were to be used for pressure against the Cham community), finally went to Thessaly.

About the Axis census, the inclusion in the table together with non-axis data is unproductive and inconsistent with the demographics picture. In contrary the example about the Germans, as the title of this article indicates, deals exclusively with WWII events not with general 20th century accounts. However, I wouldn't object if in the specific line is clearly stated that this data contains exaggerated figures published by the WWII occupation forces. Another part that should be changed is the label “Orthodox Chams” which should be “Christian Albanian-speaking communities”, since the former term is very rarely used to define this community (Kretsi, Balkanica), especially in 20th century, where Chams applies to Muslims only (Hart).

Most important is to state that all Cham demands and reactions, especially about the land issue, were turned down by the L. of Nations, a fact that is neglected in the present version of the article. (Manda, p. 5: the decision of the League of Nations was a clear vindication of the Greek position. ) A more detailed depiction of the situation is present in Ktistakis, where the L. of Nations rejected the Albanian claims and was generally satisfied with the initiatives taken by the Greek government.

To be more precise, an addition about the situation of the non-elites can be based on this part (Ktistakis: p. 14) Τον Απρίλιο του 1930 έφθασαν στην Κοινωνία των Εθνών καταγγελίες μικροϊδιοκτητών Τσάμηδων για παράνομες απαλλοτριώσεις σε κτήματα στην Τσαμουριά κάτω των 30 εκταρίων που προέβλεπε ο αγροτικός νόμος του 1926 . Η ελληνική αντιπροσωπεία απάντησε ότι ο αγροτικός νόμος προέβλεπε εξαιρέσεις για την περιοχή της Ηπείρου και οι ίδιοι ισχυρισμοί είχαν απορριφθεί από το Συμβούλιο της Επικρατείας. Πάντως, τον Ιούνιο του 1930 ψηφίζεται ειδικός νόμος για τα απαλλοτριωθέντα κτήματα στην Τσαμουριά και η αρμόδια τριμελής επιτροπή της Κοινωνίας των Εθνών έμεινε ικανοποιημένη.

Also about the refugees issue: (Ktistakis: p. 14) Η δεύτερη Αναφορά, εκείνη «των Μωαμεθανών κατοίκων των χωριών Γαρδίκι και Δραγούμη», αφορούσε την κατάληψη σπιτιών και κτημάτων από πρόσφυγες. Σύμφωνα με την ελληνική εκδοχή, οι Τσάμηδες είχαν πουλήσει τα σπίτια τους ελπίζοντας σε ανταλλαγή. Όταν όμως δεν αναχώρησαν, ζήτησαν την ακύρωση των πωλήσεων. Για τα κτήματα ζήτησαν και έλαβαν από τους πρόσφυγες το 1/3 της παραγωγής. Η Τριμελής Επιτροπή της Κοινωνίας των Εθνών θεώρησε ικανοποιητική την ελληνική εξήγηση αν και ζήτησε να κρατηθεί ενήμερη των εξελίξεων.)Alexikoua (talk) 20:29, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

“A lost cause for “Hellenism” sound too poetic and abstract, I assume the author means they didn't integrate in Greek society.Alexikoua (talk) 20:49, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

"however Pitouli-Kitsou provides inlines that point that it was their intention to fight for the Ottoman side"

Alexikoua, you should have made mention of this earlier when we were working on the sentence. Its important. I am going to come up with a proposal for it to go under the uneager sentence(give a page number/s, go it can be added):

"However, according to information gathered by Greek intelligence before the outbreak of the Balkans war, the Muslim Chams intended to fight Greek forces if war broke out."

"it's important to mention that the influx of refugges was very limited in the region in question and this is an evidence against persecution."

Now i get what your meant with this sentence "In general the fact that no discrimination against the Cham community took place that time, was also apparent in the refugee policy which the Greek state implemented in Epirus, where only a very limited number of Asia Minor refugees were allowed to settle next to the Cham communities."

Regarding the limited amount of refugees being settled and being moved on in 1926, i mentioned that. Manda treats the league of nations matter a little separate from that. Persecution as outlined by Baltsiotis did exist until 1926. Its only from 1926 till 1928 when Albania took those concerns to the League of Nations that it was more than two years that a lack of persecution existed and could not be argued for. Its why Albania lost .So the information Manta gives about the League of Nations challenge which Albanians brought forth in 1928, was long after the refugees where moved on and lost out. Moreover Manta makes no mention in her work that the Albanian issues raised at the League was in relation to the refugees. Conflating the two would be a distortion, as Baltsiotis has brought much from the Greek archive that states the contrary. Then in addition to the paragraph, we should have a sentences that clarifies this (to go under the first paragraph i redid).

"After 1926, with the relocation of the refugees to other parts of Greece, the Greek government took careful discretion in Greek Epirus to implement its land reform and expropriations toward the Muslim Cham population so as to prevent discrimination occurring against them regarding the matter. (Manda, p4) In 1928, the Albanians took their concerns regarding property ownership, expropriations and restitution, issues over minimal socio-politcal representation and military recruitment. The League of Nations in its findings relegated the matter of property restitution or (re)-compensation of expropriated lands to bilateral negotiations. The League of Nations also stipulated that it would not deal with other raised Albanian concerns, as they had been subject to past reports and discussions. In sum, the League of Nations decision regarding the Greek position relating to the Muslim Chams was considered a clear vindication." (Manda. p. 5)

To go in first paragraph or rework section under this sentence:

There were also government restrictions on the right to lease, sell or cultivate land due to Muslim Chams being classified as “exchangeable” which led to the gradual financial devastation of the Muslim Cham population.<ref.>Baltsiotis. The Muslim Chams of Northwestern Greece. 2011. "The restrictions imposed on the right to sell, rent or even cultivate land, due to the consideration of Muslims as “exchangeable”, gradually led to the financial devastation of the Muslim population."</ref.>

"Due to the fluidity of the situation, there were some Muslim Chams who sold their properties to the incoming refugees with a view of proceeding with a migration to Turkey, due to the exchange, while the League of Nations sought to informed of these developments." (Kitsakis. p.14)

To go in second paragraph under this sentence: "demands had been satisfied and consequently one of the most chronic problems for Greek-Albanian relations seemed at least to be coursing towards settlement.”</ref.>"

"In April 1930, the League of Nations heard claims by small property Muslim Cham landowners that illegal expropriations occurred within the region, while Greek authorities stated that the region had been exempted from those land reform laws. In June 1930, the Greek government passed a special law that properties within Thesprotia were exempt from the Agrarian land laws which satisfied the League of Nations regarding the matter." (Kitskais; p. 14)

"Another part that should be changed is the label “Orthodox Chams” which should be “Christian Albanian-speaking communities”, since the former term is very rarely used to define this community (Kretsi, Balkanica), especially in 20th century, where Chams applies to Muslims only (Hart)."

Orthodox Chams can only be used until the Albanians awakening period. As per Hart, she states that Orthodox Albanian speakers where known as such until the late or early nineteenth century. Everywhere after that, yes change is required.

"About the Axis census, the inclusion in the table together with non-axis data is unproductive and inconsistent with the demographics picture. In contrary the example about the Germans, as the title of this article indicates, deals exclusively with WWII events not with general 20th century accounts."

Ok, agreed. I see your point.

"However, I wouldn't object if in the specific line is clearly stated that this data contains exaggerated figures published by the WWII occupation forces."

No source that says that. If that was written without sources then it would be placing a interpretation on the census. As wikipedia stipulates, only a academic source who has made an analysis of the issue can be included. Unless a sources can be provided, whatever one may think of that census ("exaggerated" or "unreliable"). The article cannot make as fact without sources, otherwise they are assertions.

Ok, rewording of this sentence:

"The Muslim Chams by the 1930s were viewed in Greece as a hostile population and unable to be integrated within the socio-political structures of the state."

Also what about the other stuff ?

Resnjari (talk) 02:13, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

I forgot about this very important sentence proposal to go after this sentence: "n Greece, Muslim Chams were referred to by a number of names by different authors. They were called Albanochams (Αλβανοτσάμηδες, Alvanotsamides),[14] and Turkalbanians (Τουρκαλβανοί, Tourkalvanoi)[15] or Turkochams (Τουρκοτσάμηδες, Tourkotsamides)."

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.<.ref name = Karpat;>Karpat, Kemal H. (2001). The politicization of Islam: reconstructing identity, state, faith, and community in the late Ottoman state. Oxford University Press. p. 342. “After 1856, and especially after 1878, the terms Turk and Muslim became practically synonymous in the Balkans. An Albanian who did not know one word of Turkish thus was given the ethnic name of Turk and accepted it, no matter how much he might have preferred to distance himself from the ethnic Turks.”</ref;><.ref name = Megalommatis;>Megalommatis, M. Cosmas (1994). Turkish-Greek Relations and the Balkans: A Historian's Evalution of Today's Problems. Cyprus Foundation. p. 28. “Muslim Albanians have been called “Turkalvanoi” in Greek, and this is pejorative.”<./ref;><;ref name = Tzanelli2008>Tzanelli, Rodanthi (2008). Nation-building and identity in Europe: The dialogics of reciprocity. Palgrave Macmillan. p. 62. “Consequently, at the beginning of the 1880s the Greek press openly incited anti-Albanian hatred, associating the Albanian irredentists with Turkish anti-Greek propaganda, and baptizing them Vlachs and ‘Turkalbanian brigands’ (Aión. 10 and 14 July 1880; Palingenesía, 3 April 1881).”<;/ref;><;ref name = Nikolopoulou>Nikolopoulou, Kalliopi (2013). Tragically Speaking: On the Use and Abuse of Theory for Life. University of Nebraska Press. p. 299. “Instead of the term “Muslim Albanians”, nationalist Greek histories use the more known, but pejorative, term “Turkalbanians”. <;/ref;> <;ref name = Millas>Millas, Iraklis (2006). "Tourkokratia: History and the image of Turks in Greek literature." South European Society & Politics. 11. (1): 50. “The ‘timeless’ existence of the Other (and the interrelation of the Self with this Other) is secured by the name used to define him or her. Greeks often name as ‘Turks’ various states and groups—such as the Seljuks, the Ottomans, even the Albanians (Turkalvanoi)”.</ref;><ref;>Mentzel, Peter (2000). "Introduction: Identity, confessionalism, and nationalism." Nationalities Papers. 28. (1): 8. "The attitude of non Muslim Balkan peoples was similar. In most of the Balkans, Muslims were “Turks” regardless of their ethno-linguistic background. This attitude changed significantly, but not completely, over time."</ref;>

I thought this should be there to as to explain the words that have Turk in them regarding Albanians since there are academic sources for this.

Best regards

Resnjari (talk) 03:29, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Most of the proposed parts appear fine. To sum up, I'm ok with the following:

• The Albanian government responded to these events...
• However, during the period of 1922-1926, the Greek government used the settling...
• The Venizelos government (1928-1932), despite the former Greek-Albanian crisis, took measures to intensify the improvement of the Cham communities both on economic and social basis. In 1931 a law was ...(with the proposed change in the ending)
• Whereas in 1936, the Greek state created a new prefecture called Thesprotia, ...
• During the interwar period, the numbers of Albanian speakers... (to the correspodent section)
• After 1926, with the relocation of the refugees to other parts of Greece...
• In April 1930, the League of Nations heard claims...
• Italian census in table with the indication that it was published by the occupation authorities & change of label.

Now about the pre-Balkan War situation of the local communities. Per Pitouli a necessary addition is the following, though it should be placed on the previous section before BW:

The Muslim Cham communities in the regions of Paramythia, Margariti and Preveza, according to information by the Greek foreign ministry collected from 1908 to 1911, were supporters of the Ottoman side and shared a clear Turkish national identity, but they were still sympathizers of the Albanian national movement to a certain decree.(Kitsiou-Pitouli, p. 121: Ειδικότερα για τους Τσάμηδες στις υποδιοικήσεις Παραμθιάς, Μαργαριτίου και Πρέβεζας, στο ελληνικό Υπουργείο είχε σχηματισθεί η εντύπωση ότι κατά το διάστημα 1908-1911 αυτοί έτρεφαν αρκετές συμπάθειες για το εθνικό αλβανικό Κίνημα, αλλά ότι, καιροσκόποι και εφεκτικοί απέναντι στην οθωμανική Διοίκηση στην πλειονότητα τους, με στοιχειώδη αλβανική συνείδηση, έκλιναν προς τον Τουρκισμό ή είχαν καθαρά τουρκικά αισθήματα. Για το γεγονός αυτό προβαλλόταν εκ μέρους των Ελλήνων η εξήγηση ότι οι Τσάμηδες είχαν ασπασθεί σχετικά πρόσφατα τον ισλαμισμό, όχι όμως και τον μπεκτασισμό, σε αντίθεση προς τους άλλους μωαμεθανούς της Ηπείρου, για τους οποίους δεν είχαν ευνοϊκές διαθέσεις.) The Muslim Albanians in the Sanjack of Preveza, especially the rich overlords and the ones serving in the Ottoman administration who recently settled in the region, supported the Ottomans too and persecuted the local Christian element. The number of local Albanian settlers increased as a result of the official Ottoman policy which was initiated in earlier times.(Kitsiou-Pitouli, p. 122: Ειδικότερα στο σαντζακι της Πρέβεζας όσοι έτειναν να ασπασθούν τις εθνικές αλβανικές ιδέες, αν και ήταν οπαδοί του Ισμαήλ Κεμάλ, δεν συνεργάζονταν με τους ' Ελληνες και καταδίωκαν τους χριστιανούς, συμπράττοντας με τους Τούρκους, ιδίως οι μεγαλοϊδιοκτήτες ή οι κρατικοί υπάλληλοι που προέρχονταν από άλλα μέρη . Ο αριθμός των Τουρκαλβανών στο σαντζακι αυτό εξάλλου αυξανόταν, άγνωστο σε ποιο ποσοστό, καθώς η τουρκική Διοίκηση συνέχιζε την τακτική της εγκατάστασης άλλων, που είχε εγκαινιάσει από παλαιότερα.)Alexikoua (talk) 20:43, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

First and second paragraph is all in there with additional sentence. Added in Thesprotia creation sentence, also census sentence and changed within article everywhere where it said Orthodox Chams to Orthodox Albanian speakers (twentieth century and beyond, after i checked Hart properly as she stated that only Muslim where known as Chams in the twentieth century, as does Kretsi). The other stuff, i'll do tomorrow night as there needs to be tweaking of thee sentances you proposed. I have deadline to meet for uni tomorrow. However regarding the sentence of the word Turk, is that good to go ?

Best

Resnjari (talk) 04:46, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Ok here the sentences written, so they can encompass more of what Pitouli wrote.

"The Muslim Cham communities in the regions of Paramythia, Margariti and Preveza, according to information gathered by the Greek foreign ministry during 1908 to 1911, were supporters of the Ottoman administration and shared a Ottoman national identity, while still being sympathizers of the Albanian national movement to a certain degree."

A few words need to be said. Pitouli mentions that Albanians in the area exhibited a "Turkish" national consciousness. She also says that they supported the Ottoman state and that the Albanians supported the national movement or were sympathetic to it. That's ok, but the word Turk that she uses is an issue. In the second inline citation that you put up, Pitouli uses the word Turkalvanoi to describe the Muslim Albanians. Now as Millas pointed out that Turkalbanian is another pejorative word for Turk regarding Albanians and Nikolopoulou specifically states that "Instead of the term “Muslim Albanians”, nationalist Greek histories use the more known, but pejorative, term “Turkalbanians", in the above sentence i went for the word of Ottoman, instead of Turkish. Ottoman and Turkish were interrelated but also different things. Under Ataturk, Turkish, gains new national affiliations, devoid of the context discussed here. Yes i know your going to say that Turk meant Muslim, but definitely by the end of the nineteenth century, Turk, Turkalvanoi, anything with the word Turk used for Albanians had a pejorative connotations. Thus Ottoman is the most neutral word, while still stating the same thing (see book "Gawrych, George. The crescent and the eagle: Ottoman rule, Islam and the Albanians, 1874-1913. IB Tauris, 2006. It gives a detailed analysis of the complexities of Albanian identity regarding the Ottoman state and so on). Its similar to Roudementof who used the word "occupy" for when the area became part of Greece which was a problem word for the article and not used, while the person who had plagiarized his sentence decided that other problem words where a go. Thus i don't want to discredit Pitouli and say she is not worth having in here because of that. I think she is a great source, however, Ottoman is best and mainly reflective of the situation.

"Especially in the Sanjak of Preveza, Muslim Chams embraced ideas regarding the Albanian national movement of the time. Amongst them large landowners and state employees who came from other places were hostile to the local Greek population and persecuted them. Also though unknown in numbers, the proportion of Muslim Chams over a prolonged period increased within this area, due to Ottoman government policies of safeguarding geo-strategic interests through population resettlement."(Pitouli-Kitsou reference + Nesim Şeker reference)

I expanded the sentence based on Pitouli. Regarding this bit, i included the word geo-strategic because it is important as it is what Pitouli was implying with the use of τακτική or tactics that the Ottomans used. Şeker also goes into great detail about the matter regarding population resettlement as a geo-strategic measure or tactic. See journal article: [Forced Population Movements in the Ottoman Empire and the Early Turkish Republic: An Attempt at Reassessment through Demographic Engineering] by Nesim Şeker.

I also thought that these sentences (to go under: "The local Orthodox Albanian speaking population did not share the national ideas of their Muslim Albanian speaking neighbours, whereas instead they remained Greek-oriented and identified themselves as Greeks.") outlining the Greek view are also needed:

Throughout this period the Albanian speaking zones in Thesprotia and adjacent areas that later became part of Albania was considered a nuisance for both the Greek state and Christians of Epirus who self identified as Greeks.<ref.>Baltsiotis. The Muslim Chams of Northwestern Greece. 2011. "Prior to this period, Chamouria was already a nuisance both for the Greek state and the Christians of Epirus who identified themselves as Greeks."</ref.> The non-Greek linguistic factor posed a hindrance to Greek territorial ambitions.<ref.>Baltsiotis. The Muslim Chams of Northwestern Greece. 2011. "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."</ref.> Tackling this issue was undertaken through two policies. The first was that Greek historians and politicians attempted through concerted efforts to conceal the existence of the Albanian language within the region.<ref.>Baltsiotis. The Muslim Chams of Northwestern Greece. 2011. "Concealing the existence of the Albanian language appeared as a concept as soon as the possibility of Greek expansion into Epirus appeared.... 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”."</ref.> The second was to present the argument that the language spoken by the local population had no relation upon their national affiliations.<ref.>Baltsiotis. The Muslim Chams of Northwestern Greece. 2011. "he second was to put forth the argument that the language used by the population had no relation to their national affiliation."</ref.> According to the prevalent ideology in Greece at the time, every Orthodox Christian was considered Greek, whereas after 1913, especially the area of Southern Albania deemed “Northern Epirus” by Greece, Muslims were considered Albanians. <ref.>Baltsiotis. The Muslim Chams of Northwestern Greece. 2011. "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."</ref.> With the incorporation of the area within Greece, these discursive polices alongside the practical were continued.<ref.>Baltsiotis. The Muslim Chams of Northwestern Greece. 2011. "The existence of a region (Chamouria) whose population was roughly half Muslim and almost entirely Albanian speaking was considered a serious problem for the Greek state, which had to be confronted both practically and discursively."</ref.> This was due to the sizable Albanian Muslim population being considered a real problem for the Greek state and hence any pro-Albanian movement eventuating had to be eliminated by all means.<ref.>Baltsiotis. The Muslim Chams of Northwestern Greece. 2011. "The existence of a region (Chamouria) whose population was roughly half Muslim and almost entirely Albanian speaking was considered a serious problem for the Greek state, which had to be confronted both practically and discursively. Every pro-Albanian movement in these areas had to be eliminated by all means."</ref.>

Your thoughts ?

Resnjari (talk) 16:36, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Ok with the first part of Pitouli about the Ottoman stuff. In the second part the author talks about "Muslim Albanians" not only "Chams", thus Muslim Albanians should stay since it concerns resettlement from other region (not necessarily only Chams/or geographically speaking from Chameria. Also, "geo-strategic interests" is too abstract, "official resettlement policy" is more simple, without being necessary to explain what are these geostrategic objectives (political, demographic change etc., diplomatic, favoring/targeting specific social groups for various reasons etc).Alexikoua (talk) 21:07, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

i agree with the addition of "official resettlement policy". But then the question of why (of why did the Ottomans do that) that was policy was undertaken is omitted, when there is ample scholarly information regarding the Ottoman state and its mindset during the era when conducting these actions. Including the words "geo-strategic interests" basically condenses Seker's whole article into a few words, words which are commonly used in academia. If you want we can have a new sentence underneath explaining the why of the policy, if "geo-strategic interests" is still to "abstract". I also went with the term Muslim Albanians, as Pitouli makes no reference about Muslim Chams being specifically part of that policy, but Muslim Albanians, so hence in keeping with the source. New bit to the sentence is in bold.

"Especially in the Sanjak of Preveza, Muslim Chams embraced ideas regarding the Albanian national movement of the time. Amongst them large landowners and state employees who came from other places were hostile to the local Greek population and persecuted them. Also though unknown in numbers, the proportion of Muslim Albanians over a prolonged period increased within this area, due to official Ottoman resettlement policy regarding geo-strategic interests and concerns."(Pitouli-Kitsou reference + Nesim Şeker reference)

Separate to that, what about the sentence about the word Turk, the a section regarding Greek views, and the replacement of the tribes word with subdivision sentances? Issues, grammar etc with that or is it a go?

Best

Resnjari (talk) 05:19, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

I'm ok with the new wording. Also, as already noted "Muslim Chams" should be changed to "Muslim Albanians" per references & also because it also refers to newly moved population from elsewhere. Thus, some of them "might" be Chams, but there were "Muslim Albanians" in general.

Another essential point about the Albanian national movement section is the agreement between I. Qemal and the Greek government. This addition can be the following:

1. In January 1907 a secret agreement was signed between Ismail Qemali, leader of the Albanian national movement, and the Greek government which concerned the possibility of an alliance against the Ottoman Empire. According to this the two sides agreed that the future Greek-Albanian boundary should be located on the Acroceraunian mountains, thus leaving Chameria to Greece.(Kondis, 1976: p. 33-34, Pitouli: 168) As part of the agreeement, Qemali in exchange asked the Greek authorities to support the Albanian movement and the Greek side agreed, provided that no armed Albanian activity will emerge south of the Acroceraunians.(Pitouli: p. 168 Ο Ισμαήλ Κεμάλ υπογράμμιζε ότι για να επιβάλει στη σύσκεψη την άποψη του να μην επεκταθεί το κίνημα τους πέραν της Κάτω Αλβανίας, και ταυτόχρονα για να υποδείξει τον τρόπο δράσης που έπρεπε να ακολου­θήσουν οι αρχηγοί σε περίπτωση που θα συμμετείχαν σ' αυτό με δική τους πρωτοβουλία και οι Νότιοι Αλβανοί, θα έπρεπε να αποφασίσει η κυβέρνηση την παροχή έκτακτης βοήθειας και να του κοινοποιήσει τις οριστικές αποφά­σεις της για την προώθηση του προγράμματος της συνεννόησης, ώστε να ενισχυθεί το κύρος του μεταξύ των συμπατριωτών του. Ειδικότερα δε ο Ισμαήλ Κεμάλ ζητούσε να χρηματοδοτηθεί ο Μουχαρέμ Ρουσήτ, ώστε να μην οργανώσει κίνημα στην περιοχή, όπου κατοικούσαν οι Τσάμηδες, επειδή σ' αυτήν ήταν ο μόνος ικανός για κάτι τέτοιο. Η ελληνική κυβέρνηση, ενήμερη πλέον για την έκταση που είχε πάρει η επαναστατική δράση στο βιλαέτι Ιωαννίνων, πληροφόρησε τον Κεμάλ αρχι­κά στις 6 Ιουλίου, ότι ήταν διατεθειμένη να βοηθήσει το αλβανικό κίνημα μόνο προς βορράν των Ακροκεραυνίων, και εφόσον οι επαναστάτες θα επι­ ζητούσαν την εκπλήρωση εθνικών στόχων, εναρμονισμένων με το πρόγραμ­μα των εθνοτήτων. Την άποψη αυτή φαινόταν να συμμερίζονται μερικοί επαναστάτες αρχηγοί του Κοσσυφοπεδίου. Αντίθετα, προς νότον των Ακρο­κεραυνίων, η κυβέρνηση δεν θα αναγνώριζε καμιά αλβανική ενέργεια. Απέκρουε γι' αυτόν το λόγο κάθε συνεννόηση του Κεμάλ με τους Τσάμηδες, δε­χόταν όμως να συνεργασθεί αυτός, αν χρειαζόταν, με τους επαναστάτες στηνπεριοχή του Αυλώνα).Alexikoua (talk) 10:45, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
2. (about the population exchange) In January 1923, the Greek representative of the population exchange committee was against the inclusion of the Muslim Cham community by declaring that "Greece has no intention to proceed to an exchange of Muslims of Albanian origin". (Manda, p. 2: on January 19, 1923 the Greek delegation which had participated in the negotiations in Lausanne had declared, through Dimitrios Caclamanos, official representative of Greece at the negotiations, , that “Greece has no intention to proceed to an exchange of Muslims of Albanian origin.) However, a delegation of the League of Nations that visited the area concluded that the vast majority of the community declared that they were of Turkish origin and wished to be included in the exchange. One year later, a second commission in general confirmed the conclusions of the first one. (Manta, p. 2-3" For the implementation of the decision the Mixed Commission appointed a special three-member delegation, which was assigned the task of local investigation of the issue. The delegation visited Epirus in May of that same year, where they met groups of people from the villages of the region, people who had been chosen by the Greek authorities and by the Μuftis. Their conclusions were that the vast majority of Muslims residing in Epirus declared that they were of Turkish origin and wished to be included in the exchange." p. 3: "According to the conclusions of the Greek authorities, at that time the Çams of Epirus did not yet have a clearly developed ethnic consciousness. Perhaps they felt themselves more Muslim than Albanians or Turks; it was religion that played the prime role in their self-determination. This also explains the general confusion which initially prevailed amongst them regarding what their position should ultimately be, i.e. if they should take part in the exchange and depart for Turkey or remain in the regions where they were living. The conclusions that the three-member delegation arrived at, together with the incessant disagreements and mutual recriminations exchanged between the Greek and the Albanian sides, ultimately led to the Council of the League of Nations September 1924 decision. This called for the treatment of the whole matter as an issue connected with the implementation of the Treaty on the Protection of Minorities and required the gathering of more information. Thus, the three neutral members of the Mixed Commission decided to visit Epirus in order to examine the situation from up close, a visit which took place in June, 1925. In the end what the three members ascertained through meetings they had with various representatives of the Çams did not differ essentially from the conclusions which the three-member delegation had come to a year earlier")Alexikoua (talk) 11:13, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Good for spotting this out. I have partially expanded the sentences you have written. The sentences on the exchange i though would best go under these sentences (sentences for article in bold) (with all you inline citations remaining of course). Regarding the first exchange sentence, i added in the word officially, as that was the official Greek government position. Baltsiotis has shown the contrary however regarding internal matters. Also which Kondis doc (as he has published a lot, so i know when i do the references).

They approached the Albanian government in 1923, but Albanian officials refused to consider the second scheme.

In January 1923, the Greek representative of the population exchange committee regarding the Muslim Chams declared officially that Greece "has no intention to proceed to an exchange of Muslims of Albanian origin".

This second exchange sentence i thought should be expanded on as per the sources. I also added in sentence about the local Muftis where Tsitsilakis cites their views regarding the Greek state.

In doing so, the Greek state insisted on the Muslim Chams migration to Turkey by both handing down ultimatums and utilizing harassment tactics that were undertaken by local paramilitary groups to pursue that aim.

However in May 1924 a delegation of the League of Nations visited the area to investigate the issue of exchangeability. The delegation met groups of Albanian Cham Muslims from various villages in the area that had been chosen by Greek authorities and local muftis. The local muftis were supportive of the Greek administration. (Tsitsilakis, Old, new Islam, p. 370. "In 1913, the Moufti of Paramythia, Hafiz signed a memorandum declaring their wish to join Greece rather than Albania at a time the latter was in the process of gaining its independence. In March 1917, the Moufti of Paramythia expressed his gratitude and loyalty to the Prime Minister Lambrou and King Constantine. In 1934, the Moufti of Paramythia, Hasan Abdul, similarly denounced Albanian propaganda in his region.") Later the delegation concluded that the vast majority of the Cham community declared that they were of Turkish origin and wished to be included in the exchange. One year later, a second commission in general confirmed the conclusions of the first one.)

Regarding this sentence, added in rationale for Ismail Qemali agreement with Greece in 1907 as there is a source for it (plus your inlince citations).

In January 1907 a secret agreement was signed between Ismail Qemali, a leader of the then Albanian national movement, and the Greek government which concerned the possibility of an alliance against the Ottoman Empire. According to this, the two sides agreed that the future Greek-Albanian boundary should be located on the Acroceraunian mountains, thus leaving Chameria to Greece. Qemali's reasons for closer ties with Greece during this time was to thwart Bulgarian ambitions in the wider Balkans region and gain support for Albanian independence.(Blumi, Isa (2013). Ottoman refugees, 1878-1939: migration in a post-imperial world. A&C Black. p. 82; p. 195. "As late as 1907 Ismail Qemali advocated the creation of “una liga Greco-Albanese” in an effort to thwart Bulgarian domination in Macedonia. ASAME Serie P Politica 1891–1916, Busta 665, no.365/108, Consul to Foreign Minister, dated Athens, 26 April 1907.")

Alexikoua, separate to that and so we don't get a backlog, what about the sentence regarding the word Turk, the a section about Greek views, and the replacement of the tribes word with subdivision sentences? Issues, grammar etc with that or is it a go?

Best

Resnjari (talk) 12:56, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

I'm ok with all suggestions.Alexikoua (talk) 20:53, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

All done! The article looks great now, especially with the removal of all the POV. Should the article be renominated for good article status now ? Or should it wait a while before proceeding with such a thing ?

Best

Resnjari (talk) 06:39, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

References

Accusations that all my edits are POV without giving any reasons

Recently i rewrote part of the article in relation to the Cham Albanians, by adding sources that have not been accessible to many. They are by Western scholars who have done fieldwork in Thesprotia, accessed the Greek government archive, non impartial nineteenth century observers of the situation. In the article i included sources that one were not Albanian (as Albanian sources are accused of being biased and in factual by Greek editors). I included in the article academics that where importantly of Greek heritage. I also included in the footnotes the relevant pieces of information of where that information came from to prevent a deletion and have a serious discussion. Yet when i came here, all i saw was complete deletion !!! I ask, is this how wikipedia works, that when a credible source/s is given, it gets deleted without even proper discussion ? I ask fellow wikpedians is this the type quality we are after ? I am currently in postgraduate studies, and stifling of discussion is unacceptable. Its about scholarly debate. I still dont understand how i was pushing POV. For example, in the section about Chams today in Greece, i came across sources that have encounted Orthodox Albanian speaking populations. There also still exists a Albanian Muslim Cham community. Yet that got deleted. Voltaire once said "I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it". I thus ask Alexikoua to justify each one of your deletions ? Otherwise you are pushing POV !

Resnjari (talk) 03:05, 20 April 2015 (UTC)