claim - krufa sxoleia in ottomans were a myth [Archive]

View Full Version : claim - krufa sxoleia in ottomans were a myth

Tsontos

08-02-2006, 07:23 AM

http://19thc-artworldwide.org/autumn_02/articles/dano.html

anyone?

Orphic_Hymn

08-02-2006, 10:13 AM

Yeah I've seen this before, several of the so-called 'progressivists' attempt to refute the well proven fact..

What these individuals intentionally avoid to mention is that, while education was allowed, it was not allowed to the masses which the Ottomans wanted to be nothing more than a hubled reya. But only to those that were to be future Patriarchs. One of the best examples would be that of Dimitsana that in the entire 17th cent. managed to produce less than 6 Patriarchs (S.Runciman "The Great Church in Captivity" p. 217)

Besides our knowledge of the schools themselves like the two in Volos, that at Proussos (monestary of Panagia Prousiotissa), in Chios (monestary of Agios Minas), in the village of Makrinitsa in Pilion (the chapels of Agios Nikolaos and Agioi Pantes)... and hundreds of others.
We could also not the many toponyms in various areas of Hellas like in Ioannina, Mani, Io, Korinth, Crete, Boeotia...etc where we find villages named, "KRYFO SXOLEIO" or the well known little island of 'DASKALEION' just across the shore of Tolo in Peloponessos (outside Nauplio) and local legend has it that the children were either 'smuggled' in small fishing boats or even swam the short distance across to be taught..

We also have many written accounts.

Steven Runciman, The Great Church in Captivity, Cambridge University Press, 1968, p. 218

" Though the Sublime Port never interfierd with the Patriarchal Academy at Constantinople, provincial governors were free to be as oppressive as they pleased; and many of them regarded the education of the minority races as being most undesirable..

The most effective academies of the 18th cent. were situated in districts that were not under direct Turkish control. In the two Capitals of the Danubian principalities, Bucharest and Jassy, and in the island of Chios which enjoyed a limited self-goverment.

From : Steven Runciman, The Great Church in Captivity, Cambridge University Press, 1968, p. 224

" It is impossible that the Turks would ever allow the Church to obtain enough money in order to construct many schools. And, even if they could raise the ammount needed, it is equally impossible to believe that the provincial Turkish command would allow Hellinic schools preform large scaled education.. While there was never an official order, the existing schools were confiscated and the children sent home, making any further attempts meaningless..
(p.224 is a rough translation from a Hellinic copy, so if anyone has the original in english, please do correct any mistakes)

George Horton, "The Blight of Asia" (can be read online) quoted Sir Edward Pirs saying :

"Under the rule of its new masters Constantinople was destined to become the most degraded capital in Europe, and became incapable of contributing anything whatever of value to the history of the human race. No art, no literature, no handicraft even, nothing that the world would gladly keep, has come since 1453 from the Queen City. Its capture, so far as human eyes can see, has been for the world a misfortune almost without any compensatory advantage."

Rene Paux in his book "Poor N. Epirus' (probably a mistranslated title) mentions visiting Argyrokastro in 1913, just one year after it's independance. He has recorded that the children told him of going to school in utmost secrecy. If this took place in the later stages of the empire, one cna only but imagine what was going on in the 16th, 17th cent..

General J. Makrygiannis (see war of Independence in 1821' ) in his memoirs makes an extent reference to the priests and the 'secret schools' ..

There's a great article related to the issue here:
http://img.pathfinder.gr/clubs/files/61143/5.html

Tsontos

07-10-2007, 09:18 PM

The Helleniccomserve, (i think reproducing an article by Athens News) on Turkish occupation and whether it "really was that bad". Somehow (and god knows how) the author has managed to link such a subject to Turkey's EU prospects!?!

I dont understand if the author considers himself a historian or a "progressive journalist"

The Tourkokratia - Was it Really That Bad?-Part 1A (http://www.helleniccomserve.com/tourkokratia.html)

The author makes a number of questionable claims:

3. That Greeks were under pressure to convert to Islam. No. The relatively few conversions were for personal advantage. There was no pressure to convert.

Christians in the Ottoman Empire were subject to paying taxes which to Muslims werent, were subject to daily reminders of their 'captivity' to their Muslim hosts through laws such as the one which allowed a Muslim to beat a passing Christian if he did not dismount his horse and show deference. Escaping the general brutalisation of the Christian "rayah" and "Giour", ("cattle" and "infidel" as they were referred to even officially), I imagine is what the author means by "conversions for personal advantage".

Aside from these "pressures" to convert there are various instances and places in Turkish occupied Greece where Christians were forced to convert or be killed. Crete is the most well known of these places where large scale violent conversions and killings occured.

Aside from this, the Janissary system forced children to convert to Islam and was obviously forcible.

7. That the Turks cut Greece off from Europe's Renaissance and Enlightenment. No. The main barrier to Greek artistic and intellectual development Was the conservatism of the Greek Church, and of the education for which it was responsible.

Quite a claim here. He forgets the fact that the Italian rennaisance kicked off when it did largely as a result of Byzantines emigrating to Italy, taking with them the knowledge of the classics. According to Knapp in his book, Multicultural Writers from Antiquity to 1945, "with the advent of Ottoman rule, the Greek mainland lost any kind of cultural ingenuity. The plains and cities became de-populated as people took to the mountains to obtain some degree of autonomy from Ottoman rule. A primitive economy and largely violent, bandit prone landscape was not errupted until the forces of the enlightenment arrived in Greece via the Ionian islands and Napoleon's exportation of the French revolution all over Europe"

He also reiiterates the claim that there was no restriction or pressure against Greek education in anyway:

That Greek education had to be in secret. No, not true at all.

Spartan

07-10-2007, 10:07 PM

That guy is a complete idiot! He may be an historian but he has no idea about history! All he has to do to see if it was 'really that bad' was to look at Greece during the 400 years of occupation and compare it to ALL THE OTHER european countries during the same period. Greece was a backwater place that was left 400 years behind the other countries such as Italy, France, Germany, Spain and England. All these countries were able to develop culturally, economically and socially. While the Greeks under Otoman rule were forced to be uneducated and become 3rd class citizens in their own lands behind Muslims and Jews.

So what exactly did this author see that makes him think things were 'not that bad'??

Seleucus Nicator

07-13-2007, 03:14 PM

Ptolemy

07-16-2007, 01:15 PM

From "The Ottoman Empire, The Classical Age, 1300-1600" By the Turkish author Halil İnalcik who is the leading historian of the Ottoman Empire.

Page 138

During 14th cent. most of these slaves were former captives of war, because according to 'Seriat', 1/5 of all the captives belonged to the Sultan. Also the children of noble families in new-inhabited areas were transfered sometimes to the Sarai as hostages. Another source of personell was the slave-bazaars. According to an estimate, during 17th century 20 thousand prisoners were arriving only in Constantinople per year. However during 15th and 16th centuries most slaves originated from forceful recruitment of the subjects, from 'paidomazoma' or 'devsherme'. Sources of that period showed that this system was in use even from the end of 14th century.

During 16th century, while was coming the date of 'paidomazoma', Sultan appointed with the firman, a representative and an officer of Janissaries for every region. With the supervision of Cades and the local Spahis, this commitee called in every village ALL boys between 8 and 20 years old, together with their fathers and chose in the end all the boys being healthy. The choice was taking part among children of christian peasants who were engaged into agriculture and left out chldren of cities and every only child.[..]

One Ottoman source of late 17th century explains the exception of Muslims Turks from 'paidomazoma': "If they became slave of the Sultan, they would abuse their priviledges.Their relatives in the provinces would oppress rayas and wouldnt pay their taxes. They would quarell with Santzabeyis and would become rebels. If Christian children would accept Islam, they would be fanatical followers of the faith and enemies of their relatives".
Only from Bosnia they were taing children from families that had been islamized.

The state considere paidomazoma as a special contribution of rayas, and not as slavery of the subjects themselves. Surely it was a harsh measure and eventhough some families of poor people and mountaineers gave their children with their permission, sources state that people in general were trying to avoid paidomazoma. Such a recruitment was taking place every 3 to 7 years accordingly with the needs A sourse esteems the amount of children who were being gathered every year in a 1000 during 16th cent. Another source estimates them in 3000 per year.

page 142

Regardless if their origin was Greek, Serbian , Bulgarian, Albanian, Hungarian or Russian, these boys lost any contact with their past.

Poor Fyromians, neither the turkish author knew any "Macedonians" of your kind.