Talk:Krifo scholio

Sources needed

I created this article and put up a few 'sources needed' warnings myself. I think the overall content of the article is referenced well enough for the moment, but I appreciate that those details need to be fixed. I'll do that as soon as I find the time. Lukas 09:52, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Remove POV from article.

This is wikipedia and the inforation shown in the article needs to have a certain standard and a Neutral point of View (see: NPOV), at the moment it doesn’t, this article is ridiculously biased, uncited and one sided and reeks of POV from top to bottom, instead of putting more detailed information about the underground schooling the auther chose to focus on several skeptics outlandish theories. The whole article needs to be rewritten/modified ASAP. Hopefully the original author and I can take turns at editing this! Lex Luther 04:56, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, if somebody can cite comparably reputable academic sources for the existence of secret schools. Right now, I'm not aware that any serious modern scholar asserts that they existed. To the best of my knowledge, the work of Angelou stands unchallenged. It's even the position reflected in the current Greek school books. But of course I could be wrong. Got sources? If not, I'll probably revert to the previous version. Lukas ^(T.|@) 08:35, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

P.S.: Just to make clear in advance where the debate is: I think it's pretty uncontroversial that there was schooling of a small-scale, privately organized, inofficial character. (Wasn't much different in other parts of Europe, or in Byzantium for that matter.) We can include that in the article if you like. Only there doesn't seem to be any evidence that these activities were illegal. The sentence you introduced states that as a fact, and that now really is an unsourced POV statement. Lukas ^(T.|@) 10:45, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lex Luthor, you are making very strong claims. You need to back them up with sources. LukasPietsch has supplied several good, recent sources published in reputable journals (some available on the Web), and moreover has provided much excellent content for many other articles, so I have the highest respect for his scholarship and open-mindedness. Now, it is true that the content of the article may be surprising to those of us who read Greek children's books -- I still have one with the Gyzis painting on the cover -- but that is no reason to call the article biased and one-sided. Have you read the articles he cites? Danos discusses the debate over Angelou's article in the Greek press, for example. Even the one scholar who thought there might be some truth to the Secret Schools lamented that there were no good sources for them! And everyone else agreed with Angelou.

Perhaps Angelou and Danos's articles are controversial or have been decisively refuted in more recent work. In that case, please add that information to the article. Please do not add unreferenced claims which contradict standard scholarship, for example that the Ottomans prohibited schooling "in the languages of Christian subject peoples". It is certainly not true as a blanket statement. After all, there were certainly Christian (and Jewish) schools in 19th century Thessaloniki; there were competing Greek, Romanian, and Bulgarian schools in Ottoman Macedonia during the Macedonian Struggle. Perhaps you can find evidence that it was true in earlier periods? If so, the claim should be properly sourced and qualified. --Macrakis 19:38, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It was written that "Orthodox church was responsible for most aspects of civil administration for the Christian population". I erased orthodox church and put "the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople" instead because there was no insitution called ""Orthodox church" (the Church of Greece was created in 1833).

I erased "It is widely believed in Greece today^{[citation needed]} that the Ottoman authorities prohibited education in the languages of non-Muslim subject peoples." nd put " "It is sometimes said in Greece today" because there is no evidence that this is " widely believed in Greece " : even great Greek nationalist historians or writters such as Paparigopoulos or Dragoumis, never focused on "kryfo scholio".

--

Angelou is a communist/leftist sympathizer known for his anti-hellenic sentiments. In writing this book he was also fulfilling a contract in exchange for certain priviledges. In contrast, George Kekaumenos' book destroys every single argument made by Angelou by using original ONLY sources not what another author has said/wirtten. Plus Anglelou's research is faulty since he selectively picked and chose sources that suited his hypothesis. Since Kekaumenos' book was published the officially accepted consensus is that the ottoman sultans did not issue an official decree prohibiting Greeks to attend schools, simply because they did not need to. The local turkish commanders had the liberty to impose their will and as Kekaumenos' book proves they usually denied Greek the priviledge to have schools, often using the Genissaries to carry out their will by murduring, pillaging, abducting kids and killing their families. It was pure terror and the only way for the enslaved Greeks to educate their children was by "inventing" a clandestine operation. Kryfo Scholio existed because Greeks had a need for something the turks did not appreciate at all: Education. And they achieved it at all cost!

Eπίσης, είναι λάθος να αναφέρετε το βιβλίο του Γ. Κεκαυμένου με λάθος τίτλο και ως έκδοση του 2008, καθώς η τελευταία και πληρέστερη είναι του 2012 όπου και καταρρίπτεται κάθε αμφιβολία σχετικά με το αν το κρυφό σχολειό ήταν μύθος ή πραγματικότητα. Ήταν πραγματικότητα διότι το επέβαλλε η αγριότητα των κατακτητών οθωμανών. Καλό είναι να το αναφέρετε, αλλιώς το άρθρο είναι ελλιπές, POV και biased. Και να μην σβύνετε ότι γράφω αν δεν εξηγήσετε το γιατί. Τα όσα έγραψα πριν συνεισφέρουν στην βελτίωση του άρθρου. Γιατί τα σβύνετε; Αφού τα στοιχεία για το βιβλίο του Κεκαυμένου που είχατε ήταν και είναι λάθος. Διορθώστε τα αντί να σβύνετε τα όσα προσπαθώ να σας συνεισφέρω. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.63.62.90 (talk) 06:41, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pro-kryfo-scholio sources?

i've added Gritsopoulos as an academic defending kryfa scholeia. Gotta say, having leafed through it, the tone of the paper is godawfully tubthumping and amateurish (evil Turks this, lust for knowledge that, half the paper spent on a rambling muse about greek education in antiquity and Byzantium), he places a lot of faith in that Feggaraki song, and he actually undermines himself by seeking to prove that Gennadius Scholarius continued greek higher education for the first couple of centuries. His only substantive argument at least in that paper is that there are placenames called Kryfa Scholeia near monasteries. If we can trust that the names were not cooked up in the 19th century, that is something that needs to be explained. But it certainly has not yet reversed the scholarly consensus. Opoudjis 09:12, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why is 19th century not acceptable. There were Greek territories still under turkish occupation until 1913 and to be 100% accurate 'till today. Your post since 2006 is so outdated and obsolete it's truly a shame. Read kekaumenos' book and then you will understand why your claims are laughable.

-- — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.63.62.90 (talk) 06:45, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for your addition. Have you got the publication year? He's quoted with a similar title, but in a different journal, on this ranting website: [1], that article was apparently from 1962.

Added both. And as has already been mentioned, the fact that much education was done informally, with monastic initiative, does not prove that there was a concerted Ottoman policy of suppressing education in Greek (which, given that the Rum millet ran itself day-to-day and the eminence of the Phanariots in Ottoman administration, would make no sense), or that the monks were secretly inculcating in their pupils an identity based on Hellenism, as opposed to Christianity. Opoudjis 23:35, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Krifo or Cryfo

The Greek word κρυφό has given an equivalent in other European languages, including English, which is, cryptic, not kriptik. Therefore should the English spelling be, Cryfo Scholio? Politis (talk) 08:12, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Krifo scholio. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 11:17, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dishonest edits

In October, User:Skylax30 made a number of tendentious edits to this article. This is, alas, fairly common and routine.

What is not common, and is rather disturbing, is that these edits reported dishonestly on the sources they cite:

The Veremis interview (which I found on YouTube, so I suppose we can consider verifiable) shows Veremis being pushed to concede that there were probably secret schools at isolated times and places of intense islamisation, but that normally the Ottomans simply did not care about the schooling of dhimmis. This is reported on as "Others believe that secret schools did exist during periods of intense islamisation."
The Noehden article talks about schools in Athens and in Milies (which had a famous library). This is reported on as "There are evidences (mostly in greek language) that the Ottoman authorities prohibited education in the languages of non-Muslim subject peoples in certain periods and places, in the frame of the islamic law of sharia." But not only does the article explicitly talk about several schools, but it never mentions prohibitions, or sharia. (Though it does mention that it is "remote from the jealous eye of the Turkish governor".) Also strange that this is in fact not a Greek-language source as you might expect from the article text.
The Puaux article mentions "the Greek schools at Argyrocastro". The writer is talking to the teachers of the local (non-secret!) school in Ottoman Epirus, and they mention that their schoolbooks must come from (Ottoman) Constantinople rather than Athens (in the Kingdom of Greece), and that they give "extra lessons in secret" where they teach Greek national culture, the Greek national anthem, etc. We can admire the teachers for their political courage, but this is certainly not "prohibiting education in the languages of non-Muslim subject peoples".

Editors who do not report honestly on the sources they cite undermine the trust and confidence we should all be able to have in each other. See WP:Honesty. --Macrakis (talk) 00:03, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I just noticed this post of yours, Mr. Macrakis. It seems that you psychoanalysed Prof. Veremis and you found that he "was pushed", but this is your conclusion. My opinion is that he was "pushed" indeed by the reality, as there are many written attestations of secret schools which he cannot discard as an academic. I already added in the article one (Oikonomou) and there are more to come. Nobody claimed that "there were no schools" (as establishments). The "secret school" is not the room or the class but the subject. Compare with the Secret Christians (Crypto-Christianity), that nobody dared to deny, although christian religion was not prohibited in Ottoman Empire.
I agree with your remarks on honesty. --Skylax30 (talk) 11:00, 23 February 2016 (UTC) Your characterization of my work as "dishonest" is abusive and I invite you to change the title of this section. Btw, thanks for verifying the Veremis' source. --Skylax30 (talk) 11:07, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Krifo scholio. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20060105034336/http://www.space.noa.gr:80/hellinomnimon/schools.htm to http://www.space.noa.gr/hellinomnimon/schools.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 10:55, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]