​The Digital Management of the Archive of the Hellenic Institute for Byzantine and Post-Byzantine Studies of Venice has recently been completed and is already operating through the digital infrastructure of the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, making it accessible to a global audience. It offers free access to an invaluable treasury of materials—including registers, documents, heirlooms, icons, works of art, miniatures, manuscripts, and early printed books—and sheds light on the historical trajectory of the Greek diaspora from the 15th to the 20th century.

​As was emphasized during the events held following the completion of the project, the Archive of the Greek Community, and later the Archive of the Hellenic Institute of Venice, constitutes one of the most valuable cultural assets to have been digitized in recent years. The archival holdings date from 1498 to 1954 and document the history of the Greek Brotherhood in the city of the lagoons, as well as that of the broader Greek population under Venetian rule. These records, however, are far more than the documentation of routine administrative procedures—they are living history.

Thirteen years after the Fall of Constantinople (1453), the great wave of exodus from the Byzantine capital—a migration that would permanently alter the course of European history—carried thousands of scholars, philosophers, and theologians to the Italian peninsula. They brought with them precious ancient Greek manuscripts in what may be regarded as the first great “brain drain” to the West. They were followed by heirs of the Byzantine Empire, architects and mosaic artists, painters, craftsmen, aristocrats, members of the imperial court, descendants of noble families, former soldiers, and many others. Venice became their principal destination, owing both to its extensive maritime trade network and to the presence of an already established Greek confraternity. This community would soon develop into one of the most important strongholds of the Greek diaspora and the foremost center of Hellenism in Italy before the Greek War of Independence of 1821.

The formal establishment of the first Greek Community in Venice in 1498, at a time when approximately 5,000 Greeks lived in the city, and the construction of the Orthodox Church of St. George a few decades later, mark what historians describe as a milestone in the history of Hellenism. It was the first organized Greek community, founded some 333 years before the establishment of the modern Greek state.

The reconstruction of the Church of St. George began in 1536, on land purchased a few years earlier by the Greeks of Venice and was completed in 1577. The work was supervised by the architects Sante Lombardo and Zuanantonio Chiona, while the well-known architect Andrea Palladio was the consultant for the construction of the women’s balcony. The church was decorated with icons brought by refugees from Constantinople, such as the Grand Duchess Anna Paleologina Notara, but also from other regions, with works by important painters such as Michael Damaskinos, Emmanuel Tzanes Bounialis, Thomas Bathas and others. The illustration of the dome was entrusted to John the Cyprian, who worked under the supervision of the remarkable Venetian painter Jacopo Tintoretto.

For five centuries, the Greeks of Venice have maintained a continuous presence, preserving the language, the faith, the educational tradition, and the identity of Hellenism. From the late fifteenth century onward, they played an active role in every major period of the nation’s history. Following the end of the Second World War, the movable and immovable property of the Greek Community, together with its few remaining descendants, was transferred to the Hellenic Institute of Byzantine and Post-Byzantine Studies in Venice. Today, the Institute stands as the historical continuation of that Community, preserving its legacy across both time and place.
​

The Institute’s Digital Repository now presents to the world hundreds of its rare printed books, most of them in Greek (148), Italian (123), Latin (105), and French (81). As reported to the Athens-Macedonian News Agency (ANA-MPA), the program coordinator, Professor of the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Christos Arabatzis, stated that a total of 140,000 documented records are now accessible in high resolution and with thorough documentation to every student, specialized researcher, and interested citizen. This includes approximately 1,000,000 digital images, 10,000 items of images and ecclesiastical artifacts, 1,000 rare printed books, and 47 valuable Byzantine manuscripts. An important aspect of the program was the development of applications with a clear educational orientation. "Students and university learners no longer study copies or editions—they work essentially with the original sources themselves, in their physical form and chronological sequence." He added that "the completion of the project represents an important step in linking Greek cultural institutions with corresponding European programs that are gradually being integrated into Europeana."
​

​"The Digital Management of the Venetian Archive is a project of exceptional scholarly and national importance," Professor Stratos Stylianidis, former Vice Rector of the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, told the Athens-Macedonian News Agency (ANA-MPA). "It brings to light," he added, "through the use of advanced digital technologies, an invaluable archival heritage of Hellenism. It constitutes a unique testament to the historical memory, intellectual continuity, and cultural presence of the Greeks within the European world." According to Professor Stylianidis, a faculty member of the Faculty of Engineering at the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki and Vice President of the International Scientific Committee for Heritage Documentation (CIPA – Heritage Documentation), the digital management, documentation, and dissemination of the archive "are far more than a technological intervention. They represent an act of safeguarding our collective memory and an investment in future research, education, and the dissemination of cultural heritage."

​Occupying a place of distinction in the new digital portal—as in the cultural heritage of the Greek Community as a whole—is the Alexander Romance, the celebrated and uniquely illustrated fourteenth-century Byzantine manuscript by Michael Damaskinos, Theodoros Poulakis, and the Cretan School (Codex 5, Narrative of Alexander, Pseudo-Callisthenes). The manuscript contains 250 remarkable miniatures embellished with gold leaf, depicting—and imaginatively narrating—the life and legendary exploits of Alexander the Great. Comprising 193 parchment folios bound into twenty-three quires (measuring approximately 32 × 24 cm), the codex recounts the principal events of Alexander’s life. He is portrayed not merely as the ancient Macedonian king but as a Byzantine emperor and protector, embodying the cultural legacy of Hellenism while leading campaigns beyond the boundaries of his empire as both a military leader and a just ruler. The Alexander Romance is a work of imaginative literature that achieved worldwide renown and has been translated into eleven languages. The manuscript’s extraordinary illustrations vividly portray Alexander’s birth and upbringing, his military campaigns, battles, sieges, encounters with foreign rulers, and his death. It is also presented on the digital platform through an interactive application. The Institute also preserves a further forty-seven manuscript books, forty of them in Greek, all of which have now been digitized in their entirety.
​

At the top of the digitized and documented images and artifacts are the works of Michael Damaskinos, the distinguished Cretan painter of the 16th century, who managed to ideally combine the strict Byzantine tradition (maniera greca) with the innovations of the Italian Renaissance and the Venetian School (maniera latina) during the period he lived in Venice. The digital archive also presents the entire collection of Orthodox art inherited by the Institute from the Greek Community. This includes masterpieces of Byzantine iconography, such as the icons brought from Constantinople in the 15th century by Anna Palaiologina Notaras, as well as dozens of works by well-known painters: Georgios Klontzas, Emmanuel Lambardos, Victor (painter), Franghias Kavertzas, Theodoros Poulakis, Ioannis Moskos, and Emmanuel Tzanes and Konstantinos Tzanes, among others. This collection allows every visitor to follow the evolution of Cretan painting from the 15th to the 17th century and to be taken on a journey from Byzantium to Crete and Corfu during those centuries. Also available on the same website are impressive icons by unknown artists, such as The Descent into Hades (late 14th  century, unknown Constantinopolitan painter), The Dormition of the Virgin (second half of the 15th century, unknown painter from a Cretan workshop), and The Ascension (second half of the 15th century, unknown painter from Candia).
​

_____
GNA; AMNA; YT:ARL

The recent unanimous decision of UNESCO’s World Heritage Committee to inscribe the wider Olympus region as a mixed cultural and natural heritage site represents a significant development in the international recognition of Greece’s cultural and environmental patrimony. Announced during the Committee’s 48th Session in Busan, South Korea (taking place from July 19–29, 2026), the designation acknowledges the dual significance of Olympus as both a locus of ancient mythological tradition and an area of exceptional ecological value.

From a cultural perspective, Mount Olympus occupies a central position in the intellectual and symbolic landscape of ancient Greece. As the mythological residence of the Twelve Olympian Gods, the mountain has exerted a profound influence on Greek literature, religious thought, and artistic expression. Its presence in the Homeric epics, Hesiod’s Theogony, and subsequent classical texts contributed to the formation of a shared cultural vocabulary that extended far beyond the boundaries of the ancient Greek world. This cultural resonance persists today, informing contemporary artistic, philosophical, and scholarly engagement with the mountain.

The natural heritage of Olympus is equally distinguished. Declared Greece’s first National Park in 1938, the mountain constitutes one of the country’s most important biodiversity refuges. Its steep altitudinal gradients, proximity to the Aegean Sea, and geomorphological complexity have produced a unique ecological environment. Olympus hosts nearly 2,000 plant taxa — including 27 endemic species found exclusively on the mountain — as well as diverse populations of birds, mammals, reptiles, amphibians, and invertebrates. This concentration of endemic flora and fauna positions Olympus as a critical site for the study and conservation of Mediterranean biodiversity.

The inscription is the outcome of a sustained collaborative effort between Greece's Ministry of Culture, the Ministry of Environment and Energy, and the Natural Environment and Climate Change Organization. The nomination dossier, prepared through interdisciplinary cooperation, successfully met UNESCO’s stringent criteria for mixed cultural and natural heritage sites — a category reserved for locations where cultural significance and natural value are inseparably intertwined.

​With this designation, Olympus joins Meteora and Mount Athos as Greece’s third mixed cultural and natural heritage site, bringing the nation’s total number of World Heritage inscriptions to twenty‑one. The archaeological site of Dion, situated at the foot of the mountain, further reinforces the region’s cultural importance, providing material evidence of the ancient cultic practices associated with the Olympian Gods and forming an integral component of the broader cultural landscape. The inscription of Olympus underscores the necessity of integrated heritage management strategies that address both cultural and ecological dimensions. It affirms the mountain’s enduring role as a site of global cultural significance and as a vital reservoir of biodiversity. Moreover, it highlights Greece’s commitment to safeguarding its heritage through coordinated policy, scientific research, and sustainable development initiatives.

_____
HCRI; UNESCO; MINCUL.

By Stylianos Kavazis, Researcher
Translated into English and republished with the author's permission

There are historical falsehoods repeated so often that some begin to mistake them for truths. One of the most persistent is the claim that the Eastern Roman Empire — the so‑called “Byzantine Empire” — supposedly acted as the gravedigger of ancient Greek heritage.

Nothing could be further from reality.

If the Byzantine Empire had truly waged war against Greek antiquity, then how were Homer, Plato, Aristotle, Sophocles, Euripides, Aeschylus, Aristophanes, Pindar, Theocritus, Lucian, Euclid, Ptolemy, Archimedes, and countless other creators of the Greek intellectual tradition preserved?

Who copied their manuscripts generation after generation?

Who taught their works in the schools of Constantinople?

​Who commented on them, interpreted them, corrected them, and ultimately delivered them intact to fuel the Western Renaissance?

The answer is clear and unequivocal: The Byzantine Empire.

It's the uninformed and fringe critics who always invoke the same few isolated incidents [to prove their position that the Byzantines waged war against Greek antiquity]. Yet they deliberately ignore the larger picture. They overlook the thousands of monks who, in the quiet scriptoria of monasteries, devoted their lives to copying the works of the ancient Greeks. They overlook Saint Basil the Great, who urged young people to study Greek literature. They overlook John Chrysostom, the Cappadocian Fathers, Maximus the Confessor, and so many others who possessed a deep knowledge of Greek philosophy and used its language and concepts to articulate Christian theology.

They also overlook the fact that in the schools of Constantinople, students were taught Homer, the tragic poets, Aristophanes, Hesiod, rhetoric, dialectic, philosophy, astronomy, history, and geography.

They also overlook that Arethas of Caesarea preserved invaluable codices of Plato, Euclid, Aristotle, and many others. They overlook Eustathius of Thessaloniki, John Tzetzes, Maximus Planudes, Demetrios Triklinios, Thomas Magistros, and so many scholars who dedicated their lives to studying and safeguarding the ancient authors. In medicine, the works of Hippocrates and Galen were maintained. In mathematics, the studies of Archimedes and Euclid were revived. In philosophy, Plato and Aristotle never ceased to be subjects of rigorous study. In rhetoric, literature, art, architecture, and the sciences, the Greek tradition did not vanish — it continued to breathe.

The Byzantine Empire was not a museum of antiquities. It was a living civilization that did not preserve Greek heritage as a dead exhibit, but transformed it into the foundation of its own intellectual creativity. And for that reason, it succeeded in transmitting it to the generations that followed.

It is no coincidence that when Constantinople fell in 1453, its scholars carried hundreds of Greek manuscripts to Italy, playing a decisive role in the Renaissance. Europe rediscovered ancient Greece through the very books that the Byzantine Empire had safeguarded. The true destruction of our cultural heritage did not come from the Byzantine Empire, but from those who plundered Constantinople in 1204. The Crusaders burned libraries, destroyed monuments, and seized countless treasures — many of which still adorn Western museums and churches today.

​History is not written with slogans or ideological fixations. It is written with sources, evidence, and facts. The Byzantine Empire was not the executioner of Greece; it was the brilliant and indisputable bridge that connected the classical Greek world with modern Hellenism. It was the Ark in which ancient Greek wisdom was preserved while the rest of the world sank into darkness. Those who insist on portraying the Byzantine Empire as an enemy of Greek antiquity are not merely opposing a historical period — they are opposing historical truth itself.

_____
A note about the image of the famous 10th century manuscript of the Iliad which is currently preserved in Venice, Italy:

It stands as one of the most irrefutable proofs that the Byzantine Empire did not destroy ancient Greek literature, but copied it, studied it, commented on it, and passed it on alive to future generations — and through them, to all humanity.

A characteristic example: the commentaries of Eustathius, Archbishop of Thessaloniki, on the Iliad are enormous, occupying nearly 4,000 oversized pages in a modern printed edition of the twenty‑first century, while his commentaries on the Odyssey approach 2,000 pages.

Greece is taking a historic step forward in preserving its revolutionary heritage. A landmark donation contract has been officially signed to establish the National Museum for 1821, a new cultural institution entirely dedicated to the Greek War of Independence.

The agreement was finalized by Minister of National Defence Nikos Dendias and Minister of Culture Lina Mendoni. The project is made possible through a generous grant from the Antonios E. Comninos Foundation, represented by its president, Antonios Comninos, alongside Olga Mentzafou, President of the Board of Directors for the National Gallery - Alexandros Soutzos Museum.

The museum will find its home inside a piece of history itself. The Comninos Foundation is providing an exclusive donation of up to €12 million to fully fund the necessary architectural studies and the complete restoration of the Old Military Bakery building complex, located within the Goudi Army Park in Athens.

Once completed, the National Museum for 1821 will serve as the premier sanctuary for the country's revolutionary legacy, bringing together public and private collections. Upon the successful completion of the restoration works, the operation of the museum will fall directly under the Ministry of National Defence.

​During the signing ceremony held on July 9, 2026, the leadership emphasized that this project represents a deep, cooperative effort to bridge Greece's defense, culture, and civic responsibility. National Defence Minister Nikos Dendias opened the remarks by highlighting the significance of the day, noting that a strong, permanent bond has now been forged between the Ministry of National Defence and the Ministry of Culture. He emphasized that this cordial, ongoing collaboration naturally extends from their joint work on the Archaeological Museum to a broader, strategic goal: connecting the nation's Armed Forces directly with Greece's cultural traditions.

Building upon this theme of connection, Minister of Culture Lina Mendoni explained that this initiative goes far beyond launching just another museum. Instead, it creates a permanent gallery dedicated exclusively to the Struggle of 1821, offering our collective memory a space truly worthy of the National Rebirth. For the first time, the visual history of the Revolution will be centralized to actively converse with the past, creating a vital point of reference for future generations.

This vision of preserving history for posterity was mirrored by Antonios Comninos, President of the Antonios E. Comninos Foundation, who stated that the contract lays the foundation for a shared commitment to protect one of the most important chapters of Hellenism. Speaking on behalf of the foundation, he concluded that safeguarding historical memory is not just a philanthropic goal, but a supreme responsibility that is both deeply national and intensely individual.

​This grand project ensures that the sacrifices of 1821 receive a state-of-the-art home, preserving Greece's fight for freedom for generations to come.

_____
HCRI; MINCUL; MINDEF.

The Turkish Ministry of Culture and Tourism has officially granted protected status to the legendary Granicus battlefield. This historic plain, located near modern-day Çanakkale in northwestern Turkey, sits within the ancient region of the Troad. It is the exact site where Alexander the Great won his first monumental victory against the Persian Achaemenid Empire in May 334 BC. The land has now been officially registered as a "Historical Site Area." This legal protection ensures that the ground where the Macedonian phalanx first entered Asia is permanently preserved for future generations, shielding this vital piece of shared Greek and global heritage from modern development, agriculture, and illicit excavation. 

The landmark decision follows years of intense field research by dedicated teams of archaeologists, geographers, and historians. These experts carefully mapped the terrain, analyzed soil layers, and cross-referenced old historical texts to confirm the precise boundaries of the clash. Turkish Culture and Tourism Minister Mehmet Nuri Ersoy praised the site's immense importance, calling the clash one of the true turning points that changed the entire course of world history. By locking down this area, researchers can now preserve the physical landscape exactly as it looked over two thousand years ago.

For history aficionados, the Battle of the Granicus represents an eternal symbol of military genius and a defining chapter in world history. It was here in the strategic theater of the Troad that a 22-year-old Alexander proved his unstoppable military strategy to the world. Serving as the supreme commander of the united Greek forces, he set out to liberate the Greek cities of Asia Minor and confront the Persian threat. Alexander led his forces to the banks of the Granicus River, where a massive Persian army waited on the steep, muddy banks opposite him. Although his generals advised caution, Alexander refused to wait, setting the stage for a daring and historic assault.

Alexander personally led his elite Companion Cavalry directly into the rushing waters, braving a fierce shower of arrows and spears. He fought hand-to-hand in the treacherous riverbed, nearly losing his life before his friend Cleitus the Black heroically saved him. This high-stakes assault successfully shattered the Persian lines and broke the long-standing myth of their invincibility. Ultimately, this hard-fought victory enabled the widespread expansion of Greek culture, language, and ideas throughout Egypt, the Middle East, and as far as India, paving the way for a Hellenistic period that lasted for centuries.

With its new legal protection, Turkey plans to transform the vast battlefield into an organized, world-class archaeological park. The government will install specialized visitor facilities, safe walking trails, and detailed informational signs explaining Alexander’s brilliant tactics and the movement of the troops. The Granicus plain sits near other iconic ancient sites across the historical Troad peninsula, including Troy and Alexandria Troas, creating a rich historical corridor for travelers. Historians believe this protection will spark major new archaeological digs using modern tools to find lost weapons, armor, and camp remains. Through this initiative, Turkey aims to attract Greek visitors alongside global travelers deeply interested in ancient Greek history, inviting them to walk the very fields where Alexander began his legendary journey.
​
_____
HCRI; TRMINCUL; HRYT

The history of Asia Minor (also referred to as Anatolia) during the Middle Ages represents a pivotal cultural and geopolitical transformation in Eurasian history. Over approximately four centuries, a region that had long served as the core of the Byzantine Empire (i.e. Eastern Roman Empire) gradually transitioned into the center of the Turkish and Muslim world. Despite being frequently implemented through force, Turkification and Islamization did not happen overnight just because of military victory. Instead, in certain regions of Asia Minor, this process was a complex, multi-layered transition shaped by military developments, demographic shifts, socioeconomic upheavals, and cultural interactions.

The catalyst for this transformation was the Battle of Manzikert in 1071, where the Seljuk forces under Alp Arslan defeated the Byzantine army. While this defeat did not cause the immediate loss of Asia Minor, it exposed profound internal crises within the Byzantine Empire. Subsequent civil conflicts, weakened defence mechanisms, and administrative inefficiencies allowed Turkish tribes to gradually penetrate eastern and central Anatolia. During the 11th and 12th centuries, large waves of nomadic Oghuz populations, known as Turkomans, settled across the Anatolian plateaus, introducing a new social and cultural paradigm rather than acting merely as military occupiers.

Prior to these migrations, Asia Minor was predominantly inhabited by Greek-speaking Orthodox Christians, Armenians, and other Christian communities, whose cohesion was maintained by the Byzantine administration, urban centers, and monasteries. As imperial authority waned, numerous rural areas became isolated from central administrative and military control. Consequently, the countryside evolved into a space of baseline coexistence and interaction between the indigenous Christian populations and the settler Turkish Muslim groups.

Assimilation policies were implemented unevenly across the landscape. Active resistance often resulted in systematic massacres, forcing many communities to choose between cultural capitulation and death. In regions isolated from Christian administrative centers, however, the dynamic was driven by a necessity for survival; lacking external support, these vulnerable populations had no choice but to comply with the ascendant Ottoman political order as a matter of sheer self-preservation. Consequently, the Turkish elite positioned incorporation into the Islamic institutional framework as a dual strategy: it served as a mechanism for group survival while unlocking exclusive socioeconomic privileges restricted to Muslim subjects, including:

• exemption from discriminatory non-Muslim taxes like the jizyah;
• exclusive access to state land distribution and military appointments;
• enhanced social safeguards based on the asymmetric and discriminatory principles in the Sharia (Islamic law);
• upward mobility into the new ruling class.

Although the cultural assimilation and religious transition of the indigenous Christian population began gradually in the aftermath of the Battle of Manzikert, the process accelerated after the twelfth century and was largely complete by the sixteenth century. Some of the last holdouts were brought to Islam through the active presence of Sufi orders and wandering dervishes, who established vital social, spiritual, and charitable networks across the rural landscape. By founding tekkes - analogous to Christian monasteries - in remote regions, these mystics created influential communal and spiritual hubs. Among these groups, the Bektashi order proved uniquely effective by offering a flexible, populist interpretation of Islam. Their integration of mystical elements, saint veneration, and localized customs rendered the new faith less alien to the remaining enclaves of rural Christians, who were otherwise deeply suspicious of Islam. While this cultural adaptation did not result in a theological fusion of Islam and Orthodox Christianity, it fostered social interaction and accelerated the long-term assimilation of the Anatolian populace.

By the late thirteenth century, Seljuk authority cratered under the weight of the Mongol invasions, giving rise to fragmented Turkish emirates, including the nascent Ottoman Beylik (i.e. principality). Centuries after the Battle of Manzikert, this emerging empire successfully utilized the demographic and cultural transformations of Asia Minor to establish a highly centralized imperial authority. Within roughly three centuries, the region had largely transitioned to a Turkish-speaking, Islamic population. Despite these deep systemic shifts, substantial Greek, Armenian, and other Christian communities endured. These minorities persisted across generations, remaining in the region until their near-total eradication during the genocidal period of 1914–1923.

Following the 1453 fall of Constantinople, centuries of rigid assimilation policies forced the majority in Asia Minor to conceal their ancestral identities. This cultural suppression outlasted the nineteenth-century Tanzimat reforms, which had attempted to modernize the Ottoman Empire. Decades later, Turkey’s 1961 constitution enshrined freedom of conscience, ultimately sparking a wave of ancestral exploration in the late twentieth century. This legacy remains visible today, accelerated by the Turkish government's 2018 decision to open its secret Ottoman-era archives. Through an online government portal, citizens could suddenly trace their lineage back to the 1800s. Within days, millions rushed to investigate their ancestral lines, crashing the database under the overwhelming traffic. For many, the registries revealed unsuspected Greek, Armenian, or other minority roots stemming from generations of forced conversions and assimilation. For others, the findings transformed family whispers into undeniable reality. Today, while many Turkish citizens are content to simply uncover these buried lineages, a small number are taking the profound step of actively reclaiming a Christian identity.

_____
​HCRI;

During a recent official site visit to the historic Kasta Tomb in Amphipolis, Greece’s Minister of Culture, Lina Mendoni, personally reviewed the rapidly progressing restoration efforts currently underway. For the very first time since archaeological excavation work initially began, the entire 497-metre perimeter of the tomb stands fully exposed to the elements. This major archaeological milestone, paired with the extensive clearance of the core 20-acre monument site, finally reveals the true, grand scale of this magnificent ancient complex to the world.

Themistokles Vlachoulis, the Director of Restoration of Ancient Monuments, alongside dedicated project supervisor Michalis Lefantzis, briefed the Minister on the latest technical milestones achieved by the preservation teams. Crews have already successfully restored the mound's original monumental geometry and securely stabilized the surrounding slopes to prevent future erosion.

​Furthermore, a substantial 105-metre section of the southern enclosure wall has now been largely rebuilt, seamlessly blending recovered ancient marble fragments with carefully crafted artificial stone to mimic the original masonry. ​Current civil engineering efforts on-site are heavily focused on reinforcing the western enclosure, which is being achieved through the meticulous rearrangement of its porous counter-structure.

Crete, like Mani, has always been a region with a strong tradition of struggle and rebellions. During Turkish occupation, Cretans participated in continuous uprisings against the Ottomans, gaining valuable military experience. Because Crete had not been incorporated into the first independent Greek state after 1830, many Cretans kept participating in struggles in other Greek regions that remained under foreign rule. This tradition of resistance and solidarity explains why their participation in the Macedonian Struggle (1904-1908) was inevitable.

The Cretan fighters, also known as the "chainides" (akin to "the malicious"), had developed special skills in guerrilla warfare, similar to those of the klephts (brigands) and and armatoles (armed militias) of mainland Greece. Their reputation as brave, daring and experienced warriors made them valuable to the organizers of the Macedonian Struggle. Pavlos Melas, one of the most important figures of the Struggle, had expressed his admiration for the Cretans, emphasizing their high morale and their effectiveness in battle.

The first Cretan fighters arrived in Macedonia in 1903, responding to appeals from Metropolitan Bishop Germanos Karavangelis, who had played an important role in organizing the Greek resistance in the region. Upon their arrival, they reinforced the Greek armed groups, especially in western Macedonia, where the activity of the Bulgarian komitadji bands was intense.

In total, about 3,000 Cretans participated in the Macedonian Struggle. Although official Greek government records indicate 136 dead, it is estimated by historians that the actual number of Cretan casualties was much higher. Many Cretans took on leadership roles, with 38 of them becoming captains and commanding armed groups. Their groups often numbered over 100 men, which allowed them to carry out organized attacks and sabotage operations.

Among the most famous Cretan Macedonian fighters was Giorgos Katehakis, who distinguished himself for his military ability and later assumed important political positions in the Greek state. Also, Giorgos Tsontos was active in the Kastoria area, while Giorgos Volanis participated in important battles and operations. Other notable fighters were Ioannis Karavitis and Giorgos Dikonymos, who was seriously injured, losing one of his arms.

The contribution of the Cretan fighters had a significant impact on the progress of the Macedonian Struggle. Their operations limited the actions of their opponents and strengthened the sense of security of the Greek population. At the same time, they caused concern among the Ottoman authorities, who closely monitored their actions and tried to neutralize them.

The acts of self-sacrifice of many Cretan fighters are particularly impressive. Some were tortured and executed, while others preferred to end their lives rather than be arrested. There were even cases of minors participating in the Macedonian Struggle, demonstrating the intense patriotic feeling that characterized the Cretans of that time.

​Overall, the contribution of the Cretans in the Macedonian Struggle was decisive. With their experience, courage and determination, they substantially strengthened the Greek struggle in Macedonia and contributed to shaping the conditions that later led to the liberation of the region during the Balkan Wars of 1912-1913. Their action constitutes an important chapter of modern Greek history and highlights the role of Crete as an "incubator" of fighters for the freedom of the Greek nation.

_____
Photo details:

Back row standing from left to right: Stavros E. Papaderos, Ioannis P. Giorgiakakis, Stavros I. Papaderos, Ioannis S. Vardoulakis, and Emmanuel S. Papaderos

Front row sitting from left to right: Iakovos N. Koumakakis, Theodoros G. Giorgiakakis, Dimitrios N. Bolierakis, Giorgios Vardoulakis

By Prokopis Pavlopoulos, former President of the Hellenic Republic

Prologue

Every Greek knows - or, at least, should know - that the Exodus of Messolonghi must remain in perpetuity a timeless source of inspiration for the fulfillment of our National Obligations. In this regard, the echo from Messolonghi, that harsh April of the Exodus, has not fallen silent. It will never fall silent. You can listen to it, hear it like a mournful bell or even like a wake-up call, as long as you let your soul be pure - as if coming from holy communion - to feel the secrets of its lagoon. To breathe, in the deafening silence, the air of its abandoned village, to smell, in the stillness of spring, the brine of its water. You will hear the cannons, you will hear the rifles, you will hear the cry of those in the Exodus, you will smell the smoke and the blood, without being afraid, without taking the path of flight. You will stay there and you will contemplate what it means to be Greek. You will meet, again and again, Freedom clasping mothers and children in her arms, nodding affectionately to the Fighters who raise the sword with a fierce eye, lamenting, like the Virgin Mary under the Cross, the curse of Byron. Messolonghi lives.

I. Historical notes on the path of Messolonghi through time

Based on these thoughts, let me at this point refer, even if only briefly, to the centuries-old History of the Holy City of Messolonghi, which was the Place worshipped by Lord Byron and the birthplace of five Prime Ministers of our Country, most notably Charilaos Trikoupis, as well as of our great poets, most notably Kostis Palamas.

Every corner - without exaggeration, every stone of this Place - is a part of a distant and glorious past, as is proven by the fact that in the northwest of Messolonghi there are the ruins of Pleuron, a city mentioned in the works of Homer. Pleuron participated in the Trojan War and was destroyed by Demetrius the Aetolian. The new city, which was built on the ruins of the old one, was one of the most important in Aetolia and had 30 towers and 7 gates. The ruins of an ancient theater survive from it today.

The name Messolonghi was first mentioned by the Venetian Paruta, who described the naval battle of Lepanto, near Nafpaktos. Several historical sources state that the name Messolonghi comes from the combination of two Italian words, Mezzo/messo and langi, meaning “a place in the middle of lakes” or “a place surrounded by lakes.”

From the settlement of the fishermen who lived there, a small naval center was formed, which within a few decades developed into an important commercial port. The fact that in 1726 a Venetian vice-consulate was established in Messolonghi - with the first consul, Spyridon Barotsis of Naxos - is impressive, as it highlights its importance as a commercial port at that time.

With the outbreak of the Revolution of 1770 (the Orlov Revolt), a temporary Revolutionary Government was formed in Messolonghi, under the leadership of Panagiotis Palamas. The consequences of this action were dramatic, since in April of the same year the fleet of Messolonghi was destroyed, the city was burned down and the people of Messolonghi were forced to abandon it and take refuge in the Ionian Islands. After the end of hostilities, the inhabitants returned, rebuilt their city and re-established their fleet, which was tested once again during the years of Ali Pasha.

II. The Chronology of the Heroic Exodus of Messolonghi

With the outbreak of the National Uprising of 1821, Messolonghi revolted on May 20, 1821. The importance of its geographical location was quickly realized by the local leadership of the Revolution. The Assembly of Western Greece was held in Messolonghi and, subsequently, it became the seat of the Administration of Western Greece, which was based, institutionally and politically, on the “Organization of the Western Mainland of Greece.”

In 1822, the city was besieged for the first time by the troops of Kütahı, who had defeated the rebellious Greeks at Peta, and by Omer Vrioni, who had completed the subjugation of Souli. After two months, the Turks ended the siege, having suffered serious losses. The following year, in 1823, a new Turkish army, led by Boushatli Pasha, headed towards Messolonghi, but was unsuccessful and halted due to the siege in neighboring Aitoliko. The Turks, after failing to capture Aitoliko, abandoned the plan to attack Messolonghi and withdrew.

We thus arrive at the dramatic, as well as uniquely heroic, events of the Third Siege of Messolonghi and the Exodus.

1. Specifically, in 1825 Kütahı gathered a large army in Larissa and headed towards Messolonghi. At the end of April 1825, he camped in the area and began the siege of Messolonghi. All of his attempted attacks against the city failed, as did his attempt to cut off its supplies by land and sea. The Besieged came to an understanding with Karaiskakis, who waged a war of attrition in the rear of Kütahı's army, forcing him to go into a defensive position in October 1825.
   
   
2. Meanwhile, the Sultan, foreseeing that the siege would be time-consuming and fearing that there would be developments to the detriment of the Ottomans since the European Courts, pressured by the Philhellenic movement of their peoples, had begun to recognize the existence of a Greek Question, wanted to reinforce the blockade of Messolonghi with additional forces from Ibrahim, despite the fact that this was not foreseen in his initial agreement with the Egyptian marshal.
   
   
3. For this reason, in early October 1825, naval squadrons of all the Ottoman allies, totaling 145 ships, consisting of Turkish, Egyptian, Algerian and Tripolitan transport and warships, as well as several warships under various European flags, sailed to Alexandria. At the same time, 8,000 Arab infantry, 1,200 cavalry and approximately 800 irregular Turks were gathered in that city, who were trained under the supervision of high-ranking French officers. This army also had at its disposal large quantities of food and ammunition, which had been sent from French ports. With all these forces, Ibrahim aimed both at subjugating the entire Peloponnese and at capturing Messolonghi.
   
   
4. With the arrival of this new stronger army, the siege of Messolonghi resumed more fiercely. Nevertheless, by February 1826 the Turks had not achieved any success. Andreas Miaoulis with his fleet managed to resupply Messolonghi and the defense of the Besieged remained strong.

However, from March the situation began to change, after the Turks occupied strategic islands in the lagoon, such as Vasiladi and Dolmas. Their inhabitants fled to Messolonghi, exacerbating the food problem of the City with this movement. On the other hand, of course, the Greeks managed to maintain control of the islet of Kleisova after a fierce battle, in which Ibrahim's troops suffered very heavy losses.

1. Nevertheless, the ability of the Greek Fleet to supply the City had become impossible, resulting in the defenders finding themselves in a very difficult position. Thus, the situation in Messolonghi became dramatic and hunger began to claim the inhabitants. Under these circumstances, the Council of the Commanders and the Nobility of the City made the decision for the Exodus of the inhabitants from it. The Exodus was set for the night of Lazarus Saturday and the dawn of Palm Sunday, between 10 and 11 April 1826.
   
   
2. On the night of 10 April 1826, the Besieged organized their forces into three bodies, under the leadership of Notis Botsaris, Dimitrios Makris and Kitsos Tzavelas, while in the middle of the triangle, which these forces would form, they decided to place the women and children. The plan of the Exodus was probably betrayed, probably by a foreigner, resulting in the Turkish-Egyptian response with a fierce attack, which was accompanied by a massacre. Thousands of Greeks were massacred or captured and only 1,500 managed to escape. These few reached the slopes of Zygos and from there to Amfissa.
   
   
3. The tragedy of the fall of Messolonghi and the Epic of the Heroic Exodus also lit the historical torch of the Philhellenic Movement in Europe. In France, Switzerland, Germany, England and other European countries, there were manifestations of unprecedented and sincere support for the Struggle of the rebellious Greeks. Tangible evidence was the publication of poems, plays, articles, speeches, as well as the holding of fundraisers and the undertaking of other diplomatic actions, with the aim of strengthening the Struggle of the Greeks against the Ottomans. In short, the Heroic Exodus of Messolonghi and the emotion it caused in the European Peoples, accelerated the procedures for reaching an agreement between the Great Powers for the final resolution of the Greek Question.

III. Messolonghi and the Success of the National Uprising of 1821

If one attempts to systematically evaluate the obviously decisive, according to its aforementioned result, impact of the Exodus of Messolonghi on the Greek National Uprising, one cannot but start from the observation that the centuries-old History of our Nation, which is lost in the depths of time, is made of mosaics, composed of two, basically, characteristics: The Spirit and the Blood.

The Spirit, because this is what always leads us to creation, which also shaped the timeless Greek Culture, which is at the basis of European Culture. And the Blood, which is intertwined with Freedom. Because, as every anniversary celebration of the heroic Exodus of the Messolonghi reminds us, Freedom was won with Blood. And for us, the Greeks, Freedom is a concept and a principle that is literally existential, since only as Free people can we live, defend our value and develop our personality.

In Messolonghi, something world-historical happened: In Messolonghi, the synthesis of Blood and Spirit took place. A synthesis that gave birth to Philhellenism and inspired the ideal of Freedom. Freedom as we know it today. We must not forget that the Exodus and the Sacrifice were not a necessity, they were a decision. A decision of people who wanted to show that they were and remained free until death. It's what Dionysios Solomos described in his epic “Free Besieged.”

Messolonghi is a source of inspiration. And not only for us, but also for Europe and for Humanity. When Messolonghi fell, beyond the mourning in Greece, there was a cry, a cry of anguish, throughout Europe. The art proved it, the literature of that time proved it. A cry of anguish, because the fall of Messolonghi and this sacrifice meant that the ideals, principles and values ​​of Europe had not yet been realized, at that time. I invite you to think that it is not at all coincidental that, since the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen of 1789 had not yet become a reality in France, it was mainly France, which, in terms of mobilizing the world, made known to all of Europe, aside from other Europeans such as Byron, what the fall of Messolonghi meant. Because the demand for Freedom has inspired Man in his deepest essence throughout time, speaking to the core of his existence.

Even today, therefore, both We and our Partners in the European Union must be inspired by Messolonghi. Here the principles and values ​​concerning Man and Solidarity were tested. Here the resilience of society was tested, the principles and values ​​on which our European edifice was gradually founded.

1. We, the Greeks, must be inspired by Dionysios Solomos’ “Free Besieged,” and specifically by the verse, “The eyes of my soul are always open, always vigilant.” Especially in these difficult times, we must have the eyes of our soul open and vigilant. At the same time, however, it is an inescapable necessity - our greatest and sacred duty towards our History, every aspect of which, and above all the tragic aspects of division, imperatively teaches us - to be united in the face of great and important things. With respect for the opinions of each one and their particularity, but united as one fist in the face of those that concern the course of the People and the Nation, and especially the defense of our National Identity and Heritage.
   
   
2. But our Partners in the European Union can and must also be inspired by Messolonghi, just as some of their distinguished ancestors who initiated and organized the Philhellenic Movement were inspired by it. In these times, we must know that what ensures the cohesion and unity of Europe is Solidarity, it is respect for Man, his Fundamental Rights, supported by Justice, and above all Social Justice. All Europeans must defend these values, bearing in mind that European Culture is par excellence anthropocentric. We must not, under any circumstances, allow our Continent to become a “dark continent” again, to recall the title of the relevant book by Mark Mazower concerning the History of Europe in the twentieth century. We must not allow the extremely dangerous formations of populism, which now even exceed the limits of racism, to threaten the European edifice. What I have previously stated is all the more true today, as it is now evident that International Law and International Legality are in a period of dangerous decline, which directly threatens the institutional and political pillars of Representative Democracy, and above all the Fundamental Rights of Man. And at the same time, it also directly threatens Man, Peace, Democracy and Justice, and above all Social Justice.

Epilogue

Let me end by saying that we, the Greeks, are a peace-loving people. A people who believe in good relations and cooperation with their neighbors. Therefore, we also convey to neighboring Turkey that the past should not divide us, but should teach us. However, in this direction, we make it clear, once again, that friendship, good neighborliness and the European perspective of Turkey - which we practically favor - have as an elementary condition the full and sincere respect for the whole of International and European Law. Recently, positions on International Law have been heard from high-ranking figures in the political hierarchy of Ankara that fluctuate between provocative ignorance and unprecedented audacity, in terms of questioning International Law. We therefore say to those who, with this audacity and ignorance, attempt to sideline International Law - but also European Law - that, as we have proven with our own History, we can both inspire and, if necessary, impose respect for International Law and European Law, thus rising, as always, to the height of our historical mission.

Part 2 of 2 articles

​The Turkish commander of Kalamata, Suleiman Agha  Arnautoglu, who, as was mentioned in Part 1 of this two-part series, received misleading information from Greek dignitaries that bandits were operating in the area. He approved of the plan that was discussed with him and officially requested reinforcements from Petros Mavromichalis. Thus, on March 20, a unit of 150 Maniot Greeks under Mavromichalis son, Elias, arrived in the Messinian capital to "supposedly" protect the city.

However, the developments for the beginning of the Revolution were already underway. On March 22, 1821, from the afternoon until dawn the next day, 2,000 armed men of the "Western Sparta" unit led by Theodoros Kolokotronis, along with the support of various powerful clans (i.e. the Mourtzinos, Kapetanakis, Koumoundouros, Kyvelos, the Christeas and other clans) and Panagiotis Venetsanakis, occupied the hills around Kalamata. As historian Dionysios Kokkinos writes, Kolokotronis held a long staff, had no weapons and wore the red robe of an officer of the Ionian battalions.

At the same time, Papaflessas approached from the other side of the city with Nikitaras and Anagnostaras. Turkish commander Arnautoglu, who had some suspicions until then, became very alarmed. He initially thought of fleeing to Tripolitsa, but Nikitaras and Kefalas had cut off the road to the center of the Morea (the Peloponnese). Only one Turk, a doctor and surgeon, fled Kalamata for Tripolitsa with his family, but was eventually killed. His widow, with her now orphaned children, returned to Kalamata. All the Turks gathered in the strongest houses of the city to defend themselves. However, when on the morning of March 23, 1821, the armed rebels entered Kalamata, the Greeks of the city welcomed Petros Mavromichalis with jubilant cheers. At noon on the banks of the Nedonas River, in front of the Byzantine church of the Holy Apostles in a festive atmosphere with bells ringing, 24 priests and hieromonks, after a moving doxology, blessed the Greek flag and the fighters took an oath to defend the nation.

Petros Mavromichalis took the oath first: "I will defend the homeland alone and with everything, and I will honor the sacred territories of the homeland." The other chieftains followed with their soldiers: "Let us not disgrace the sacred weapons, nor abandon the defenders, even if we are defeated."

As Dionysios Kokkinos explains: “The stubborn Arnautoglu, still confined to his house in Kalamata, learned of the events and as if all that had happened were not enough to convince him of the seriousness of the movement, he sent his men to Petros Mavromichalis and asked him what all this meant. He, laughing at the stupid question, replied that the Greeks had declared a revolution against Turkey.

Arnautoglu, fearing for his fate if he were forced to flee, immediately surrendered to Mavromichalis with one hundred and fifty armed Turks, whose weapons were divided among the Greeks who were assigned to the revolutionary body. Mavromichalis settled in the city and established a revolutionary committee, which he called the Messinian Senate in Kalamata."

On March 25*, Mavromichalis issued a statement to the Great Powers. A quoted excerpt of his statement is as follows:

​​There is disagreement about the date on which the above proclamation was written due to the many scribes who were employed at that time to make hand-written copies, intended for mass international dissemination. In an article published in August of 1821 (No. 3- 20/8/1821) in the first newspaper during the Revolutionary Struggle in Kalamata, the proclamation was dated “March 28, 1821.” Historian Ioannis Filimon, in his essay about the Greek Revolution (Vol. 3, pp. 28-29), dates it March 25. However, in 1963, one of the original texts of the statement was found in the Archives of the Foreign Office of Great Britain (found in the Zante file), which overturns the previous dates. It was dated: “1821, March 23. In Kalamata.” That is, the same day that the Maniot Greeks entered Kalamata.

Petros Mavromichalis sent a separate letter to the Emperor of Russia and also to Ioannis Kapodistrias informing them of the proclamation of the Revolution. Apparently Mavromichalis, as mentioned in the first article of this two-part series, still thought that Kapodistrias was the leader of the secret organization Filiki Eteria and that the Russians were inciting him. However, he had not been informed of the murder of his trusted friend Kyriakos Kamarinos who he had assigned to go to Russia with a letter outlining his concerns. By the time Mavromichalis eventually found out that Kapodistrias was not involved in the Filiki Eteria and, in fact, opposed the organization, and that there were no military or financial guarantees forthcoming from Russia, it was too late; the Greek Revolution was already underway.

It should be noted that the events of the early days of the Greek Revolution were not properly recorded, given the confusion on the ground and the fact that for many observers, this was yet another of many attempts (over 120 attempts) by the Greeks to revolt against the Ottoman Empire since the Fall of Constantinople in 1453. As such, there are three competing theories in regards to which city was the first to be liberated during the national struggle of 1821 between Kalamata, Kalavryta and Patras.

...this article is a continuation from the March 17 article about the Maniot Greeks declaring war on the Ottoman Empire.

By Stylianos Kavazis, Researcher
Translated into English and republished with the author's permission

In a report to Metternich on February 16, 1816, an Austrian bureaucrat recorded Kapodistrias's real intentions as follows:

"According to Kapodistrias, Greece should be unanimously declared by all Powers to be a country dedicated exclusively and solely to the sciences and the enlightenment of mankind, its territory to be declared inviolable from the outside, and internally to be kept far from any foreign interference. Situated between Asia and Europe, Greece will easily understand the meaning of the mystical life of the East, while on the other hand it will accept the refined spirit of the Europeans, thus creating a salutary balance for all humanity."

​This vision was not a utopia. Kapodistrias, having felt the consequences of the concluded revolution, sought to build a strong, organized and enlightened Greece. He established administrative institutions, formed a regular army and tried to limit the power of local rulers, so that the country could escape the anarchy and the factions that were overtaking it. The National Financial Bank was founded in 1828 (the forerunner of the National Bank which was founded 13 years later), while education and cultural infrastructure were placed at the center of the national renaissance. Greece for Kapodistrias was not just a state but a shining example of knowledge, justice and spiritual development, a bridge of education and culture between the East and Europe.

However, his vision encountered strong resistance. Local rulers felt their power was threatened, while foreign powers were concerned about a Greece that would become an independent center of political and cultural influence. His attempt to consolidate power and limit factions caused fear, hatred, and conspiracies. Ultimately, Kapodistrias was assassinated as a victim of the conflict between vision and personal interests.

Despite his tragic death, his legacy is priceless. The institutions he founded, the value he placed on education, and the idea of ​​a Greece that would combine Eastern wisdom with Western sophistication laid the foundations for the future of the modern Greek state. Kapodistrias showed that Greece could be more than a geographical or military space; it could become a beacon of knowledge, freedom and culture, which would inspire all of humanity, even through the dark days of confrontation and violence.

And yet, over 200 years later, his vision has not been fulfilled in the slightest; Greece is still being tested by the same power struggles and social imbalances that Kapodistrias wanted to overcome. His cowardly assassination did not allow his vision to flourish as it could have, and the bitterness for this remains alive in historical memory. Nevertheless, his legacy has not been lost, his ideas still light the way and show that Greece can dream again of a just, enlightened and united society. Perhaps his greatest teaching is that great visions do not die even if history stops them, while hope and knowledge continue to inspire and give birth to new dreams for the future.

By Stylianos Kavazis, Researcher
Translated into English and republished with the author's permission

The Greek Revolution of 1821 was not only an event of heroism and blood in the mountains and seas of Greece. There was also a silent, dark battle within Constantinople itself where a single signature could transform the city into a vast slaughterhouse.

When news of the uprising reached Sultan Mahmud II, his rage was relentless. He wanted to commence a general massacre of the Greeks of Constantinople as an act of revenge, and one that would set an example for others. But even in the Ottoman Empire, absolute power could not be exercised without religious legitimacy. A fatwa, that is the approval of the highest religious official of Islam, was required.

At that time, fortunately for the Greeks, the Şeyhülislâm (highest-ranking religious authority in the Ottoman Empire) was Haci Halil Efendi. A man known for his moderation, his theological training and his sense of justice, Haci Halil found himself faced with a dilemma that went beyond politics: to ratify the death of tens of thousands of innocent people or to stand up to the Sultan himself. His answer was clear and heavy, and one that would result in his demise. According to Islamic law, the collective punishment of innocent people for the actions of guilty people was expressly prohibited. Thus, Haci Halil refused to sign the fatwa. He did not invoke political expediency, but God and his own conscience.

Seeking time and evidence, he allegedly asked for clear proof that the entire Greek nation participated in the revolution. Within this context, he presented the Sultan with evidence of the well-known "excommunication" of Alexander Ypsilantis by Patriarch Gregory V, a text that in essence historically functioned as a protective alibi for the Christian populations of Constantinople.

Haci Halil's refusal angered the Sultan. The Şeyhülislâm was immediately deposed, exiled and essentially surrendered to his fate. While being transported, he suffered torture and ill-treatment. He never reached his place of exile. He died far removed from the dignity of his rank, but close to moral vindication. His sacrifice was not recorded with honors. He was not praised by the victors or the defeated. But his actions resulted in saving lives, preventing a large-scale massacre of the Greeks of Constantinople.

Shortly afterwards, the Sultan also turned against Patriarch Gregory V, who paid with his life, sealing this tragic period with his martyrdom as well.

Haci Halil Efendi was not Greek. He was not Christian. He had nothing to gain. And yet, he sacrificed himself to save the lives of people of a different religion and ethnicity. In a century that saw ongoing massacres, he proved that morality can stand higher than fear, power and fanaticism.

His person reminds us that history is not written only by weapons, but also by those who, in the moment of ultimate trial, refuse to betray their humanity. As long as there are people like Haci Halil Efendi, hope for humanity is not lost.

By Stylianos Kavazis, Researcher
Translated into English and republished with the author's permission

​Ali was born in Tepelena shortly after 1740, in a world where social advancement was not through education but through a weapon. Illiterate, but extremely intelligent, he was raised by his mother Hamko, a cruel and ambitious woman, who cultivated in him the belief that power is not given but conquered with your sword. At the age of fifteen, he pursued the path of robbery, forming an armed group of Labs (southwestern Albanians) and Tosks (central and southern Albanians). From a very early age, he showed that he was not a simple thug but a man with political instinct. Alliances through marriages, intrigues and his adaptation to Ottoman structures gradually led him to the administrative hierarchy of the Empire.

In 1788, he captured the pashalik (Ottoman province governed by a pasha) of Yanina (Greek: Ioannina). From there on, he essentially created a state within a state. His territory extended to Epirus, Thessaly, Central Greece and indirectly to the Morea, where his son Veli was appointed Mora Valesi (Pasha of the Peloponnese). His power was based on violence, but it was also accompanied by the administrative organization of roads, bridges, trade, the combating of robbery and he imposed relative security.

Ali Pasha was religiously indifferent. Although a Muslim, he did not show religious fanaticism. He fully tolerated Christians, used Greeks as scholars, doctors and soldiers, and surrounded his court in Ioannina with educated men, such as Athanasios Psallidas and Ioannis Vilaras.

His military also included young men who would later play an important role in the Greek Revolution: Georgios Karaiskakis and Odysseas Androutsos learned the art of war and administration under Ali's influence, either as apprentices or as military prisoners. Others such as Markos Botsaris and Kitsos Tzavelas were indirectly influenced by the political and military environment he created (especially Markos who had studied at the military school founded by Ali Pasha), but they did not serve Ali (with the exception of the alliance with him a year before his death against the sultan's troops) since they were his sworn enemies.

His conflict with Sultan Mahmud II was inevitable. Ali had accumulated excessive power and was now operating as an independent ruler. In 1820 he was declared guilty of high treason. The campaign to eliminate him, led by Hurshid Pasha, utilized massive Ottoman forces, leaving gaps in the Peloponnese that contributed to the outbreak of the Greek Revolution of 1821.

Ali Pasha was besieged for months. When he accepted a truce with promises of amnesty, he was transferred to the island of Lake Ioannina. There, in the Monastery of Saint Panteleimon, he received a firman (Ottoman decree) sentencing him to death instead of a pardon. Even though he was already old, around 80, his soul was young, and he fiercely resisted, but was shot and mortally wounded. He died on January 24, 1822. He was decapitated and his head was sent to Constantinople. His enormous fortune was never found in its entirety, creating legends and searches by would-be gold hunters to this day.

Ali Pasha was not a hero in the moral sense, but he was undeniably a historical force. Precisely because he was dark, cynical, ambiguous and authentic, he did not easily fit into national myths. His imposing figure did not lend itself to idealization. Thus, he was set aside, despite being the strongest political personality that the Albanian modern era has produced in recent times.

History, however, is not written only by bright heroes, it is also written by people who, without seeking it, changed the course of events and Ali Pasha of Tepelena was clearly one of them.

The Ministry of Culture of the Hellenic Republic held a press conference earlier this month presenting the photographs from the so-called "Heuer Collection" - including three depicting some of the most dramatic moments of the execution of 200 Greeks in Kaisariani by Nazi occupation forces on May 1, 1944 - and announcing the creation of a National Photographic Archive. At the press conference, in the presence of Minister of Culture Lina Mendoni, the participants included four experts who traveled twice to Belgium to meet Tim de Craene, a collector-dealer, in order to assess the authenticity and legal provenance of the collection, as well as its significance and value. The collection was purchased for €100,000 with funds from the Ministry of Culture.

Minister of Culture Lina Mendoni presented a historical overview, from the initial discovery of the collection - comprising 262 photographs, 16 documents, and four old banknotes offered for sale by a Belgian collector on an online auction site - to the transfer of ownership of the collection to the Ministry of Culture and the Greek state.
​

​National Photographic Archive

​Minister Lina Mendoni stated that “with a legislative provision, the Ministry of Culture will establish a National Photographic Archive. It will constitute a distinct body within the National Archive of Monuments and will be interconnected with the other databases of the Directorate for the Management of the National Archive of Monuments.” She emphasized that, beyond the photographs of exceptional importance from Kaisariani and the Heuer Collection, “there were many reasons why we wished to establish a National Photographic Archive. For example, there are the extremely significant photographic collections from Tatoi for our modern history; photographs of Greek refugees - archives that have already been handled by the Ministry of Culture and which will be housed in the Museum of Refugee Hellenism in Thessaloniki - as well as photographs from the historical archive of the Archaeological Service. The Ministry of Culture holds a large amount of material, and if the collections of the supervised institutions are also taken into account, there was every reason to create this distinct National Photographic Archive within the National Archive of Monuments.”

Next steps

Regarding the next steps for the Heuer Collection, Mendoni provided the following information: “The Ministry of Culture, since it has now declared the photographs as monuments  that is, they constitute a material monumental relic protected under Law - has already begun to handle the collection according to the procedure required for monuments: protection, conservation, safeguarding, scientific documentation, and ultimately its promotion and wider public presentation. The aim is for it to be used, like all the evidence of our historical and cultural heritage, in public discourse and in education. Throughout the study, what I insist on and what I have requested is strict scientific documentation and testimony. The photographs are monuments of our modern history, and this is how we will treat them. This period requires study and specialists who can address it,” the minister emphasized.

​As was announced at the presentation, the first step for the collection, after care by the competent Conservation Directorate, is the digitization of all the material. “Digital copies, under certain terms and conditions, may be provided by the Ministry of Culture to specific recipients. A necessary prerequisite is the historical identification of subjects, places, people, and dates, as well as the integration of the collection into its historical context. Obviously, the photographs of the execution will receive special treatment,” the Minister of Culture emphasized, noting that the research work has already been undertaken by the National Hellenic Research Foundation, within the framework of the Cultural Development Programmatic Agreement with the Ministry of Culture, under the scientific supervision of Mr. Schneider and his colleagues at the Foundation. “The collection is in very good condition. However, it is more than 80 years old, so it will require special care. What concerns us now is conservation, digitization, and management in order to protect the collection in the future,” said Maria Mertzani, head of the Directorate for the Conservation of Ancient and Modern Monuments of the Ministry of Culture.
​

The Significance of the Collection

The head of the Directorate of Modern Cultural Heritage of the Ministry of Culture, Stavroula-Villy Fotopoulou, emphasizing the importance of the collection noted:

“We were certain from the beginning about the value, importance, and authenticity of the entire set of photographs, and thus - with the very decisive stance of the political leadership - we managed, within 13 days, to bring to completion a very difficult undertaking. We were very confident because we are historians and we know very well that these kinds of collections are photographs taken by soldiers of the Third Reich, the Wehrmacht, and the SS of Nazi Germany, which now circulate widely. We know what happened here. It is estimated that more than 40 million photographs were taken by Wehrmacht soldiers and over 2 million photographs by the propaganda units established by Joseph Goebbels.”

“It is important, first of all, that we study how these individuals were shaped within the context of war. The photographs taken by this particular sergeant, and by many others, are a study of how people are formed through violence. They are also a study of the power of propaganda. Goebbels created a propaganda machine not only with professional photographers from the propaganda units but also by encouraging everyone - soldiers and their families - to take photographs. Why? So that these photographs would return home and create an image of the successes of the Wehrmacht for families, so that in the future - because he was certain that Germany would win - there would be a vast album of memories from the Great War and what Germany had achieved in it. Of course, and fortunately, none of that ever came to pass,” she pointed out.

Photographer Stavros Mavrommatis noted that the “photographer” in quotation marks is completely untrained. “He has almost no instruction for documentation and is simply creating a personal album. He used a very good camera and excellent photographic paper that was circulating at the time - from this we understood the authenticity of the photographs at first glance. Nevertheless, his photographs are poor in photographic terms; that is, he had no instruction to document events. Rather, he had the instruction to create an album that would show the activities of the Third Reich. He takes the photographs completely detached from what he is seeing - in the album, next to the images of the executions, he places photographs of people swimming at Votsalakia Beach in Piraeus. This is precisely another reason why these photographs have particular value, because they show that they were taken not by explicit order, but in accordance with the spirit that prevailed among the occupation troops,” he said.

Valentin Schneider, historian and researcher at the National Hellenic Research Foundation stressed that “these are photographs that have a hybrid character, because on the one hand they are private photographs, documenting private life in the army and during the war. On the other hand, however, it seems that there may have been some low-level instruction, perhaps at the level of the military unit itself, to document the everyday life of the unit so that photographs could be exchanged after the war.”

Valentin Schneider presented several characteristic photographs from the Heuer Collection, including the 13 images from Kaisariani, three of which were the most dramatic, as they depict the moment of the execution and the minutes immediately afterward.

___
MINCUL

By Stylianos Kavazis, Researcher
Translated into English and republished with the author's permission

​The reason for this tribute was an older article written by the otherwise remarkable journalist Manolis Kottakis in the newspaper Estia, where once again I saw the name of Pilios Gousis being (perhaps unintentionally) incorrectly used as a synonym for betrayal. This article saddened and deeply troubled me because behind this name is not a traitor, but a man who fought, suffered and died for freedom. I therefore felt the need to pick up the thread of this old, but always open historical injustice, and to seek the truth through the facts and sources, beyond the stereotypes and traditions.

In our national memory there are figures who were stamped with indelible labels. Pilios Gousis is perhaps the most wronged of all. For almost two centuries, his name has been synonymous with betrayal, the man who “opened” the gate of the heroic Souli to the Turks in 1803. On the other hand, however, research, logic and historical documentation reveal a completely different truth, that Pilios Gousis was not a traitor, but one of the courageous Souliotes who fought, suffered and fell for freedom.

The story of the “traitor Gousis” begins from the pages of the not-so-reliable author Christoforos Perraivos, the first to record the fall of Souli. There, through personal confrontations and factional disputes between the major Souliote families, Perraivos mentioned Gousis as an accomplice of Ali Pasha.

Perraivos, however, seems not to have been particularly objective. As a loyalist of the Tzavelas clan, he passionately opposed the Botsaris clan, to which Pilios Gousis was loyal to. A year before the second edition of his book, at the Assembly of Corfu, Perraivos asked the Souliotes to appoint him as a proxy to a committee that would go to Vienna to seek the support of Emperor Alexander of Russia. According to historical sources, Pilios Gousis seems to have scolded him, telling him emphatically: “Perraivos, the Souliotes have a man to defend their rights!”

This seems to explain a lot about the [different] editions of Perraivos’ book. The first edition of 1803, at the same time as the events in Souli were taking place, mentions Giorgis Botsaris, Palaskas, Diamantis Zervas and the elder Koutsonikas as those responsible for the fall and destruction of Souli. Gousis' name does not appear anywhere in the first edition. His name was added "magically" only in the two subsequent editions, that of 1815 and 1857, that is, after the scolding at the Assembly of Corfu, suggesting that Gousis' "betrayal" was more likely the product of political and personal conflicts than a historical event.

According to established historical tradition, Gousis supposedly pointed out to the Turks an unguarded path leading to Kougi, betraying his compatriots in exchange for money. No evidence confirms this claim. On the contrary, modern historical studies show that the house in which the 200 Ottoman Albanians were fortified during the attack belonged to Gousis himself, who was fighting in Kiafa at that time. This “coincidence”, as historian Kougiteas notes, was enough to tarnish his name.

If he had indeed betrayed, the Souliotes themselves, known for their strict unwritten laws of honor, would have executed him immediately. Instead, Pilios Gousis remained active within the community, participating in councils, battles and missions, a fact that proves that he was never considered a traitor by his fellow soldiers.

His real name was Spyros Pousbos. After the capitulation of the Souliotes, he fled to Corfu, where he was initiated into the secret organization Filiki Eteria in 1819, an honor that no one "suspected" [of being a traitor] could ever enjoy. His membership there demonstrates the appreciation and trust shown to him by the most dedicated freedom fighters.

With the beginning of the Revolution of 1821, Gousis fought in Epirus and later in Messolonghi, where he wrote the final chapter of his life. Together with the Tzavelas clan, the Veikos clan and the other Souliotes, he stood at the forefront of the defense, fighting selflessly. Nikolaos Kasomoulis mentions him as one of the most unyielding fighters during the siege, noting Gousis' characteristic battle cry:

"We're not going anywhere! We'll die here, and whoever has the heart to bear it, let him start and see!"

In April 1826, Pilios Gousis fell fighting at the Exodus of Messolonghi. His name is today engraved at the Monument to the Fallen where he truly belongs among the heroes of Freedom.

It took almost two centuries for his name to be restored. Historians such as Kougiteas, G. Vlachogiannis and newer researchers have brought to light evidence that dispels the myth of betrayal. Society, however, still continues (mainly due to ignorance) to use the phrase "[he] became Gousis" as a synonym for traitor, an injustice that was transmitted from generation to generation.

History, however, is not a harsh judge; it is a living process of reparation. When evidence refutes legends, the truth must take its place and in the case of Pilios Gousis, the truth is now indisputable. Gousis did not betray, he fought, suffered and fell as a hero.

Restoring the honor of Pilios Gousis is not just a historical issue, it is an act of moral maturity of a people who respect the truth and their past. Instead of erecting statues and naming streets after divisive politicians like Ioannis Kolettis or Alexandros Mavrokordatos, figures that History itself has already judged as serving their own self-interests, perhaps the time has finally come to honor those who truly deserve it.

And if today, in modern Greece, some want to characterize a person as a "traitor" and liken him to someone from the past, let them search our history better, thank God, it is full of real traitors. We do not need to tarnish, out of ignorance or convenience, the memory of those who fought for our homeland and freedom.

Gousis name is engraved at the Memorial of Messolonghi where history is not written with lies, but with blood. That martyred blood was celebrated during the bicentennial of the most glorious day for the Greek Nation. Time, the unforgiving judge, has restored his memory. If we are not yet mature enough to give him the honors he deserves, let us at least do the minimum, to stop tarnishing his name because Pilios Gousis never betrayed. But it was through history that his truth was betrayed.

Part 1 of 2 articles

In January of 1821, at the secret meeting organized by the Filiki Eteria at Vostitsa (today Aigio), the Peloponnesian dignitaries and chieftains in attendance settled on March 25, 1821, as the day for the declaration of war against the Ottoman Empire.

One month later, in February of 1821, in the Danubian Principalities (modern day Romania and Moldova), Alexander Ypsilantis was forced to hastily declare the start of the revolution, as the plans of the Filiki Eteria were divulged to Ottoman authorities by traitors. His efforts in the Danubian Principalities were eventually suppressed, but the spark of revolution was lit.

As word spread south that Ypsilantis had declared war, the Greeks throughout mainland Greece and the islands were agitating to commence the war. With revolution in the air, the majority of the Maniot Greeks, no longer interested in waiting for March 25, officially declared war against the Ottoman Empire one week earlier on March 17, 1821.

The start of the Greek Revolution in Mani

In Mani, as in other areas of the Morea (the Peloponnese), there were disagreements about the appropriate time to begin the Greek Revolution. The Mourtzinos and Tzannetakis families were in favor of the immediate declaration of the Greek Revolution, while Petros Mavromichalis (also known as Petrobey as he held the title of Bey, that is the ruler, of Mani) and the conservative dignitaries were in favor of postponing it in order to secure the necessary assurances and guarantees.

Mavromichalis had been initiated into the secret organization Filiki Eteria without, however, the "Invsible Authority", that is, its leader, ever being revealed to him. He himself believed that its leader was Kapodistrias, who was incited by the Russians. In 1820, wanting to make sure of this, Mavromichalis assigned his friend and trusted advisor on Mani's affairs, Kyriakos Kamarinos, who came from Kalamata and who was also a member of the Filiki Eteria, to go to Russia carrying a letter for Kapodistrias in which the Mani ruler's concerns were expressed, mainly regarding the financial side of the preparations.

Kamarinos left Constantinople for Russia in order to meet Kapodistrias. The latter did not even accept to see him, according to some sources, however, he told Kamarinos that he had no connection whatsoever with the Filiki Eteria. In Saint Petersburg, Kamarinos was informed that the leadership of the secret organization had been assigned to Alexander Ypsilantis.

Mavromichalis' envoy managed to meet Ypsilantis in Chișinău (now the capital of Moldavia), who informed him that it had been decided to start the Revolution in the Danubian Principalities and that he was unable to offer financial assistance for the Revolution in the Morea. In an argument with Ypsilantis, Kamarinos came to the arbitrary conclusion that the Filiki Eteria had ceased to exist and that Ypsilantis' movement served nothing but his own purposes.

Because of his pointed questioning of Ypsilantis and his openly doubting the existence of the secret organization, Kamarinos was branded a dangerous person and, on the orders of the leadership of the Filiki Eteria, he was murdered while on a riverboat crossing the Danube by Karavias and Sfaellos who pretended to be sailors on the boat. His murder happened shortly before the start of the Greek Revolution and Mavromichalis' concerns were never addressed.

Despite the efforts of Perraivos and Kolokotronis to calm his concerns regarding the secret organization, Mavromichalis remained wary. However, when members of the Filiki Eteria hatched a very daring escape plan for his son Georgios, who was being held hostage as part of a "loyalty test" by the Turks, Mavromichalis began to warm to the idea. Georgios returned to Mani after his escape and openly expressed his enthusiastic support for the Revolution. The Turks were alarmed as Mavromichalis, as the Bey of Mani, had not obeyed their orders to arrest Kolokotronis and Papaflessas. However, to calm the Turks, Mavromichalis sent his young son Anastasios to be held as a hostage in Tripolitsa in another "loyalty test" and any suspicions that the Turks had were allayed.

The revolutionary fervor in the Peloponnese since the beginning of March was evident. From the early days of the same month, the Turks began to send their families to the castles of the Morea for safety as they had heard rumors that the Greeks were up to something. The Turkish commander of Kalamata, Suleiman Agha Arnautoglu, called the prominent Greeks of the region to a meeting and expressed his concerns to them. To reassure him that the rumors of a planned revolt were false, some families even gave him their children to be held as hostages "to prove their loyalty." However, that was a ruse, albeit a very dangerous one. In a further act of deception fabricated by Papaflessas, the Greeks also managed to convince the commander that dangerous bandits were operating in the region, and that the 150 Turkish guards were not enough to protect all of Kalamata. Papaflessas reassured him that he asked for help from the Maniot Greeks in order to aid the Turks against the bandits. Since banditry was always an ongoing threat for Ottoman authorities, Arnautoglu believed the fabricated story.

In the same period, around the middle of March, a ship loaded with munitions that had been sent by members of the Filiki Eteria from Smyrna arrived at the port of Armiros in Mani. Papaflessas informed Nikitaras and Anagnostaras, who were lying in wait at the Prophet Elias monastery, of the arrival of the precious cargo and assigned them to transport it. Previously, he had managed to persuade Mavromichalis to grant permission for customs clearance of the cargo, thus exposing Mavromichalis himself to the Turks in case of its discovery. The Turkish commander was informed that armed villagers were transporting the cargo inland in the middle of the night and demanded to know what was happening and why were people armed. Greek officials lied to him and told him that the villagers were transporting oil and were armed out of fear of the bandits. In reality, they were armed in case Arnautoglu ordered his Turkish guards to personally inspect the cargo.

In the meantime, the Greek chieftains had gathered in Kitries and had convinced Mavromichalis to lead the Revolution. Thus, on March 17, 1821, in Areopolis (then Tsimova), all the Maniot chieftains gathered and they held a doxology for the Revolution in the church of the Taxiarches. According to local tradition, the flag that was raised at that time was made of white cloth with a blue cross in the center. On the upper side it read "Victory or Death" (not "Freedom or Death" like the motto in the rest of Greece because Mani was always considered free) and on the lower side the ancient Spartan motto "With Your Shield Or On It."

​
To be continued on March 23, the day of the Liberation of Kalamata...

The larger-than-life Greek revolutionary hero Grigorios Dikaios (known by the nickname Papaflessas) is one of the most contradictory personalities in modern Greek history. For some, he was an insubordinate cleric, impulsive and controversial; for others, one of the most ardent leaders of the Greek Revolution of 1821. His life, full of conflicts, ambitions and political intrigues, ended in a heroic death that sealed his fate in Greek historical memory.

Papaflessas, was born as Grigorios Dikaios in 1788 in Poliani, Messinia. From a young age, it was evident that he had a strong character and an insubordinate spirit. He was ordained a cleric and reached the rank of archimandrite, however, his behavior often caused reactions and scandals. Some historical sources state that his behavior resulted in his being defrocked.

Contemporary and later critics accused him of a restless life, of ongoing conflicts with the ecclesiastical hierarchy and of excessive ambition. These accusations - mainly coming from political opponents and prominent figures of the time - contributed to the creation of a negative image around his person.

Despite the criticisms, Papaflessas possessed rare energy and a strong personality, elements that brought him to the epicenter of the Greek revolutionary struggle of the early 19th century. In 1818 he was initiated into the Filiki Eteria, the secret organization that prepared the uprising of the Greeks against the Ottoman Empire. He very quickly emerged as one of its most active and ardent apostles.

Papaflessas toured many regions, trying to convince dignitaries and chieftains that revolution was inevitable. However, his persistence and the brutish manner in which he delivered the message often provoked reactions. Many dignitaries in the Peloponnese considered his plans premature and very dangerous. This confrontation culminated in the secret meeting at Vostitsa in January 1821, where local chieftains questioned his information about an impending uprising. Despite the doubts, the events of the following months ultimately led to the outbreak of the revolution.

During the early years of the struggle, Papaflessas assumed important political roles. He participated in the revolutionary assemblies and served as Minister of the Interior of the provisional Greek government. However, his strong personality brought him into constant conflict with other powerful figures of the revolution, at a time when internal conflicts and civil strife were weakening the struggle.

In 1825 the revolution reached a critical point. The Egyptian army of Ibrahim Pasha of Egypt landed in the Peloponnese with strong forces, causing panic among the revolutionaries. Faced with the Ottoman-Egyptian advance, Papaflessas decided to organize a defense in Messinia. Despite the fact that his forces were limited, he chose to confront the enemy.

His final clash took place at the Battle of Maniaki in May 1825. Papaflessas fortified himself with a few hundred men against a much stronger army. The battle was fierce but short. The Greek forces were surrounded and almost annihilated. Papaflessas himself was killed fighting to the very end. According to contemporary accounts by Greek revolutionary and author Fotakos, even Ibrahim was impressed by the resistance and ordered that his dead opponent be honored. Ibrahim silently admired the impressive stature of the dead Papaflessas and kissed his forehead, stating:

Vasos Mavrovouniotis (born in 1797 as Vaso Brajović), a Montenegrin Serb from Bijelopavlici, Montenegro, was one of the most important personalities of the Greek revolutionary and Kapodistrian periods, as well as during the early period of the rule of King Otto. He was the founder of an important military family with notable descendants who participated throughout the Greek struggles of both the 19th and 20th centuries.

The Montenegrin soldier was a particularly important figure of the period in which he lived. He is a typical example of one of the many groups of Christian Balkan captains who emerged from the Struggle for Greek Independence and succeeded in integrating, through a common Christian identity, into the country he chose as his new homeland. He thrived in the newly formed Hellenic Kingdom (as a lieutenant general - commander of the Mountain Guard Corps, royal aide-de-camp and as the most powerful political figure in eastern Central Greece) while always serving the state.

​The military action of Vasos Mavrovouniotis was significant as he participated in battles in Euboea, in one of which he was wounded, while he also participated in battles against Ibrahim in the Peloponnese, against the Grand Vizier Reşid Mehmed Pasha (also known as Kütahı) in Roumeli, and finally against the Kiaya-Bey (deputy of the Pasha) in eastern Central Greece.

In February and March 1826, against the wishes of the provisional Greek government as Messolonghi was in the midst of the very bloody third siege, Mavrovouniotis, along with Dalianis, Kryezotis and others, and with 2,000 men, departed with 14 ships and headed towards Lebanon in an attempt to bring to fruition a secret plan hatched in 1824 (but thereafter abandoned by the provisional Greek government) for an alliance between Greece and Lebanon. The plan was to liberate Lebanon, parts of Syria and Cyprus, and to reinforce the Greek revolution with 200,000 Lebanese fighters. Although they occupied a very small coastal area, the planned revolt did not materialize, and they retreated back to Greece.

In July 1826, Mavrovouniotis was placed under the command of Georgios Karaiskakis and participated in battles at Liosia, Elefsina and Chaidari, while he clashed again with Kütahı at Kamatero, Thebes and Keratsini. He actively participated in the reconquest of Central Greece during the period when Kapodistrias was in office.

In 1834 he was appointed Colonel-Inspector of Attica and Boeotia and in 1836 commander of the Mountain Guard Corps of Phthiotis. In 1843 he was promoted to Major General and assumed command of the Mountain Guard of Locris, while in 1846 he was appointed aide-de-camp to Otto.

In 1841 King Otto named him Grand Commander of the Royal Order of the Redeemer, in 1845 the French government awarded him the decoration of Officier de la Légion d’ Honneur as well as the decoration of Commandeur de la Légion d’ Honneur. In 1847 the King of Bavaria awarded him the Cross of the Order of Merit of the Bavarian Throne.

Vasos Mavrovouniotis died on June 9, 1847, at the age of 50 from pneumonia.

His sons Generals Timoleon and Alexander Vasos, as well as his grandsons, also Generals, Nikolaos T. Vasos and Konstantinos T. Vasos, followed in the family's military heritage and participated in the wars of the Greek state from 1897 to the Balkan Wars (1912-1913), World War I on the Macedonian Front (1917*-1918) and the Asia Minor campaign (1919-1922).

​Vasos Mavrovouniotis constitutes an outstanding example and proof of the transnational scope and prestige of the Greek revolution, as well as of the attraction that the Greek revolution had exerted on the Christian populations of the Balkans and, furthermore, his case highlights the close historical relations and deep cultural affinities of the Balkan peoples, as they were forged during their common Ottoman past.

* Note: although WWI started in 1914, Greek participation started in 1917 due to the National Schism

_____
MFA, EKATH; Revised

By Stylianos Kavazis, Researcher
Translated into English and republished with the author's permission

At the mouth of the Evros River, in the ancient city of Ainos (today Enez, Turkey), a woman was born in 1783 whose fate would not only see her simply live, but will see her write her own history with courage and blood. Domna Visvizi, a proud Thracian noblewoman, captain and fighter, would become the “Woman of the Seas,” the woman who would not fear any wave, any enemy, any loss.

​In 1808 she married Hatzi-Antonis Visvizis, a shipowner and member of the secret organization Filiki Eteria. With him she embarked on sea voyages, following him on his revolutionary missions. When in February 1821 the flame of the Greek Revolution was lit in Moldavia, Hatzi-Antonis equipped his best ship, the “Kalomira,” with 16 cannons and a crew of 140 sailors, and rushed into battle. Domna, along with their five children, took an active role in the crew and in the administration, next to her husband, keeping the flame of freedom alive.

From the first days of the Revolution, the Visvizi family transported weapons and ammunition from Constantinople to Mount Athos, supporting Emmanuel Pappas in his incitement of the Greeks in Macedonia. After the failure of the revolution in Halkidiki, they participated in operations further south, in Central Greece, and in the naval battles of Athos, Lesvos, Samos and Agia Marina in Lamia. Domna was there, organizing the crew, protecting her children, but also fighting bravely alongside her husband. In early 1822, the "Kalomira" supported the operations of Dimitrios Ypsilantis, Odysseas Androutsos and Nikitaras on Olympus and in Agia Marina, preventing Mahmud Dramali Pasha from descending to Central Greece. The letters of the chieftains, such as that of Odysseas Androutsos, testify to her decisive role; her ship provided cannons and support, saving thousands of lives and ensuring the success of strategic operations.

When on July 21, 1822, Hatzi-Antonis was killed in the naval battle of Evripos, Domna took full command of the "Kalomira," demanding that her dead husband be taken down to the cargo hold and continuing the siege without interruption. For three years, alone, and a widow with five children, she crossed the Greek seas, transporting troops, munitions and hope to every city and island that thirsted for freedom.

The "Kalomira" was renamed "Domna" and continued to take part in naval battles and transport military material. When the ship was worn out by the continuous battles, it was handed over to the people of Hydra in 1824 to be converted into a fire ship. Despite the wear and tear, the same ship continued on its glory, with Admiral Pipinos eventually using it to blow up the Turkish frigate which was guarding the Sultan's treasure.

Despite her heroic deeds, however, Domna lived the last years of her life in absolute poverty. Losing a child in the famine of 1826, she settled with her other children in Nafplio and later in Ermoupolis on the island of Syros, where she was exploited by swindlers and abandoned by the state. A letter she sent to Governor Kapodistrias captured her despair and anguish, asking for the slightest help to save her children from starvation. In a portion of the letter she wrote:
​

By Stylianos Kavazis, Researcher
Translated into English and republished with the author's permission

Born in 1782 in Mavrommati, Karditsa (there is also a rumor that he was born in Skoulikaria, Arta), as the illegitimate son of revolutionary Gogos Bakolas' first cousin, Zoi Dimiski, who later became a nun (which is why he went down in history as the "son of the nun"), Georgios Karaiskakis grew up in difficult circumstances, but with an unyielding soul and a fiery spirit. From an early age, he showed his courage and military ability, earning respect not only among the Greeks, but also among foreign observers of the time.

​His foul-mouthed outspokenness filled with words of courage, his use of irony and his having a strong sense of humor, became the reason for some modern "so-called Greek historians" to underestimate him, and who in recent years have tried to reduce his stature and tarnish his reputation by focusing on his outspokenness and not on his contributions. But anyone who knew Karaiskakis or read his history knows very well that his foul-mouthed outspokenness was the color of his soul, the power of honesty, the popularity of a hero who was not afraid to tell the truth neither to the enemy nor to the friend.

Deeply religious, Karaiskakis often turned to the Monastery of the Virgin Mary of Prousiotissa in the most critical moments of the Revolution. He dedicated his three medals, his silver stars, and made an offering of silver and gold to cover the icon of the Virgin Mary, while praying for strength for the freedom of the Nation. His faith was a guide in every battle and every decision, and his actions showed how deep his devotion to the Fatherland and Orthodoxy was.

A strategic genius and a natural leader, Karaiskakis distinguished himself in the battles of Roumeli and Central Greece. Despite his illness (severe tuberculosis since 1823), his exile from Aitoliko in 1824, and the political betrayals of Mavrokordatos, he managed to gather his soldiers again and continue the fight. Even when he was forced to leave on a stretcher with only 80 men, his fame and bravery brought new fighters to his side, quickly reaching 1,500 men who followed him faithfully until the end.

His death in Faliro, on April 23, 1827, on Saint George's day, remains controversial to this day. Some testimonies and information from that time suggest that the shot that hit him may have come from Greek hands, perhaps organized by political opponents such as Mavrokordatos. Nevertheless, until his last moment, Karaiskakis thought of the Fatherland and not himself:

“I am dying, but you must be united and support the Fatherland,” he told his men.

Kolokotronis and other fighters mourned him with tears and rifle shots in the air, but his memory remains alive. Karaiskakis was not just a general but the living proof that the Greek Revolution was made from the innermost souls of the Greek race, a hero who combined strategy, outspokenness, faith and devotion to the Nation in such a way that no traitor or petty historian can question.

Eternal is his memory. Eternal is his example of courage, faith and love for Greece. Under Her Shelter, the Homeland has Karaiskakis and his soul continues to fight for Freedom.

Alexander Ypsilantis was one of the early heroes of the Greek War of Independence of 1821. As the leader of the secret organisation Filiki Eteria, he played an important role in planning and preparing the war against the Ottoman Empire, as his ill-fated campaign in the Danubian Principalities (located in today's Romania and Moldova) preceded and paved the way for the declaration of the Revolution in mainland Greece.

Family and early life

​Ypsilantis, of Pontic Greek origin, was born in the city of Constantinople on December 12, 1792 (N.S.), (1 December O.S.), to a prominent Phanariote family. The Phanariotes - who took their name from Phanar, the Greek quarter of Constantinople - exercised great influence in the 18th-century Ottoman Empire as administrators in the civil bureaucracy.

His grandfather, Alexander Ypsilantis (1726–1807), was a Greek Voivode (Prince) of Wallachia and Moldavia (i.e. today's Romania and Moldova) in the late 18th century. His father, Constantine (1760-1816), was Grand Dragoman (similar to a deputy foreign minister) of the Ottoman High Porte (1796–99) and Hospodar (Lord) of Moldavia (1799–1802) and Wallachia (1802–06). His mother was Constantine’s second wife, Elisabeta, who came from the Văcărescu family, one of the oldest families of boyars (high-ranking nobility) in Wallachia.

Alexander was the eldest of seven children; two of his brothers would also go on to play an important part in the Greek War of Independence: Demetrios (1783-1832) as a military leader, who would be named field-marshal by Greece’s first head of state, Ioannis Kapodistrias, while Nikolaos (1796-1833) as the head of the “Sacred Band” at the fateful Battle of Drăgășani (city in Romania).

In 1806, Constantine Ypsilantis was deposed as Prince of Wallachia due to his involvement in the Russo-Turkish War of 1806–1812 on the side of the Russians; he escaped with his family to Imperial Russia, while his father, Alexander the elder, who lived in Constantinople, was arrested by the Ottoman authorities and executed. The young Alexander had received a thorough education, and was fluent in Greek, Romanian, Russian, French and German. He was presented to the imperial court in Saint Petersburg.

Russian military service

Upon graduating from military school, Ypsilantis entered the prestigious Chevalier Guard Regiment in April 1808 with the rank of cornet (second lieutenant), and was promoted to lieutenant two years later. He fought in the Napoleonic Wars (battles of Klyastitsy, Polotsk and Bautzen), reaching the rank of captain in 1813. He was transferred to the Grodno Hussar Regiment as lieutenant colonel; he lost his right arm fighting either in the Battle of Dresden or the Battle of Kulm, and was subsequently promoted to full colonel.

Having earned the sympathy of Tsar Alexander I, he was appointed as his aide-de-camp in early 1816. In late 1817, at the age of 25, he became a major general and commander of the 1st Brigade of Hussars of the 1st Hussar Division.
​

Involvement in the secret Filiki Eteria

Involvement in the Filiki Eteria The Filiki Eteria (also transcribed as Philiki Etaireia or Philike Hetaireia, meaning “Society of Friends”) was a secret political organisation, founded in Odessa, Russian Empire (located in today's Ukraine), in 1814, that for years planned and then coordinated the launching of the Greek War of Independence against the Ottoman Empire. Following years of preparations, the founding members were looking for a respected and highly recognizable figure to take over the society’s leadership. They approached Count Ioannis Kapodistrias, the de facto Foreign Minister of Russia at the time, who repeatedly refused, deeming the goal of Greek liberation very honourable but entirely unachievable.

In 1820, the position was offered to Ypsilantis, who assumed leadership of the Filiki Eteria in April of that year (under the leadership title of “Commissioner General”). He requested a two-year leave of absence from the Tsar and began active preparations for the revolution. In July 1820, he left St. Petersburg, Russia, to meet with the various branches of the Filiki Eteria in Moscow, Kiev and Odessa. In early October 1820, he called a council in Izmail (in Russian Bessarabia, modern-day Ukraine), to draw up a final plan for the revolution.

Τhey initially intended to begin the revolution in the Morea (historic name of the Peloponnese) in November or December, with another revolt breaking out in the Danubian Principalities (Moldavia and Wallachia), in the hopes of taking the Ottomans by surprise and driving them to split their forces – and ideally even managing to involve Russia in the ensuing conflict (since Ottoman troops were not allowed to enter the Principalities without Russia’s permission). However, they had to postpone the date for the spring of 1821.
​

Uprising in the Danubian Principalities - the first attempt of the Greek Revolution in 1821

In February 1821, there was fear that secret documents of the organisation had fallen in the hands of the Ottoman authorities. Ypsilantis thus decided to precipitate the uprising; on 22 February (O.S.) accompanied by several other Greek officers in Russian service, Ypsilantis crossed the Prut river at Sculeni and marched into Moldavia.

Two days later, on 24 February (O.S.), he raised the first flag of the Greek Revolution at Iaşi (located in today's Romania) and issued a proclamation titled “Fight for faith and country,“ a passionate call to arms addressed to all Greeks; in it he claimed that the insurgents were battle-ready, that they had the support of the Serbs, that the “enlightened peoples” of Europe favoured their struggle for freedom and that “a major power” would also defend the rights of the Greeks, clearly alluding to Russia.

Count P. D. Kiselyov, then Imperial Russia’s chief of staff of the Second Army in the Ukraine, would write in a letter, “Ypsilantis, in crossing the frontier, has already given his name to posterity. The Greeks, reading his proclamations, will cry and flock under his banner in jubilation.” In a letter to the Tsar, Ypsilantis submitted his resignation from the imperial army and requested the Russian Emperor’s support in the upcoming war.

In March 1821, Alexander Ypsilantis would establish the Sacred Band (Hieros Lochos, named after the Sacred Band of Thebes, an iconic troop of select soldiers in Ancient Greece), the first organised military unit of the Greek War of Independence, formed by volunteers, mainly university students from the Greek communities of Moldavia, Wallachia and Odessa. This was the core of his army, which comprised about 8,000 men, including 2,500 cavalry and 4 cannons.

However, Ypsilantis’ plans did not progress as envisaged; on hearing about it - while at the Congress of Laibach - the Tsar unequivocally condemned the Greek revolt in the Danubian Principalities, and asked Ypsilantis to back down. Russia observed a strict neutrality, refusing any direct or indirect support to the rebelling Greeks, and allowed Ottoman troops to enter the Principalities. Besides, soon thereafter, the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople was forced by the Ottoman authorities to excommunicate the revolutionaries, under the threat of a massacre of the city’s Greek population - which would not, nevertheless, be averted.

Ypsilantis’ efforts to attract other Balkan Christians to his side also proved fruitless. He had hoped to join forces with the Wallachian Pandours, a group of irregulars who planned a revolt in Wallachia; the Filiki Eteria had initiated contacts with Tudor Vladimirescu, the leader of the Wallachian uprising which would eventually break out in early 1821. But Vladimirescu was intent on directing his revolt solely against the ruling class of the Hospodars rather than seeking a nationalist awakening, and thus the alliance fell through. The Serbs were also reluctant to become involved in hostilities with the Ottomans without support from Russia, while the absence of the anticipated Russian support would soon also make the boyars of Moldavia turn against Ypsilantis.

Ottoman troops entered the Principalities in April, with Russia’s consent. The first large-scale conflict between them and the Sacred Band was at Galați (located in today's western Moldavia), where the Greeks lost and the town was then subsequently sacked. The volunteers were largely untrained and many started to desert following the massacre, as well as a series of internal disputes. In May, there were further hostilities between Greeks and Ottomans, with no positive outcome on the Greek side.

The largest engagement took place on 7 June (O.S.) at the Battle of Drăgășani. The Ottoman troops were camped near the city of Drăgășani in Wallachia, and Ypsilantis planned on leading an offensive against them with the entirety of his forces. However, cavalry captain Vasilios Karavias led his men into an unplanned attack; the Sacred Band, headed by Nikolaos Ypsilantis, hurried to their aid, and were thus exposed and almost completely annihilated. The battle ended in a crushing defeat for Ypsilantis’ army, practically signaling the end of the first attempt of the Greek revolution in the Principalities. The army gradually dispersed and Ypsilantis himself retreated to the nearby Râmnicu Vâlcea (located in today's Romania).
​

Imprisonment and death

​After waiting for a few days to be granted entry into Austro-Hungarian territory, Ypsilantis, along with a few of his followers, finally decided to cross the border but was subsequently arrested by the Austrian authorities as the head of an illegal insurgence. He was imprisoned for seven years in Terezín (located in today's Czech Republic).

Following his release in November 1827, he retired to Vienna, where he died in extreme poverty two months later (19/31 January 1828) at only 35 years of age. It is believed he suffered from muscular dystrophy. As per his final wish, his heart was removed from his body after his death, and sent to Greece a few years later; it is now located at the Church of the Archangels of the Amalieion Orphanage in Athens.

​His body was buried at St. Marx Cemetery in Vienna; his remains were transferred by members of his family to the Ypsilanti-Sina estate, Schloss Rappoltenkirchen, in Austria in 1903. In 1964, they were transferred once more to the Pedion tou Areos in Athens, a public park dedicated to the heroes of the Greek War of Independence.

_____
GNA; Revised

"We are all Greeks. Our laws, our literature, our religion, our arts have their root in Greece"
-- Percy Bysshe Shelley, Author
​

The word "Philhellenism" derives from the Greek word "philos" (friend or an admiration of) and "Hellenism" (Greek language, culture and civilization). Hellenism was an intellectual movement of the 18th and 19th century, that flourished mainly in Germany and England and expressed itself through poetry, prose, sculpture and architecture. Philhellenes were inspired by the Hellenists’ idealized portrait of Greece. They associated ancient Greeks with the ideals of freedom and democracy, and their vision was to liberate Greece from the Ottoman Empire. The movement should also be seen as an organic part of the sociohistorical realities in Europe several decades before the eruption of the Greek War of Independence.

Dr Pallikidis, professor at the University of Ioannina, in his essay about Philhellenism, explains that the foremost intellectual constituents of this historical era in the West were:

• Liberalism - Despite Napoleon’s defeat in 1815 and the consolidation of absolute monarchy in European states, the democratic principles and the liberal ideals of the Enlightenment and the French Revolution continued to touch the people of Europe and beyond.
  
  
• Neoclassicism and Archeological Tourism - Already by mid- 18th century, the publication of works by J. Winkelmann and G. E. Lessing influenced the intellectual world in Europe, seeking a model for the organization of European society among the values and ideals of ancient Greeks. Many travelers, like James Stuart, Nicholas Revett, William Martin Leake and others visited Greece in order to admire or artistically depict Greek ancient monuments. During their journey, they also became acquainted with the hardship of modern Greeks living under the Ottoman yoke.
  
  
• Romanticism - The Romantic Movement developed in Europe on on the eve of the Greek Revolution. It was mainly expressed in literature and painting, and its structural features included the expression of strong feelings, unbridled imagination, unrestricted freedom, the denial of social conventions, heroic splendour and the return to the ancient cradle of civilization.

When the Greek War of Independence broke out, Liberals and Romantics from around Europe raised their voices in support of the Greek Revolution.

Although the governments of Europe were in the beginning unwilling to support the Greek revolution, Philhellenes from all over the world began coordinating their actions to provide assistance to the struggling Greeks.
​

American Philhellenes

​A very strong movement of Philhellenism flourished in the USA, and it may be safe to say that the outcome of the War of Independence would’ve been different without the support of its followers. We will note here only some of the American Philhellenes who came and fought on the Greeks’ side during the war and/or sent money and supplies that saved the lives of thousands of Greeks.

The American Revolution in 1776 was inevitably an inspiration for the enslaved Greeks to fight for their liberation. When the Greek Revolution broke out in 1821, American philhellenes began a lobbying campaign in the United States for the support of Greece.

​On May 25th, 1821, Petros Mavromichalis, on behalf of the Messinian Congress, sent a letter to the then Secretary of State John Quincy Adams, which was published in American newspapers, asking for moral support.

On December 3rd, 1822, US president James Monroe in his annual address to Congress said: “A strong hope is entertained that the Greeks will recover their independence and assume their equal station among the nations of the earth.”

Unfortunately, on December 2nd, 1823, President Monroe announced the “Monroe Doctrine,” which in essence excluded the United States from getting involved in European affairs.

Despite the government policy of neutrality many Americans gathered to support the Greek independence movement and established philhellenic societies throughout the United States.

• The first American volunteer who traveled to Greece to join the Greek War of Independence was George Jarvis, a New Yorker, who went to Greece in 1822. He joined Kleftes (guerrilla fighters) and became known as “Kapetan Zervos.” Jarvis participated in many battles and was repeatedly wounded. He died of natural causes in Argos on August 11, 1828. Jarvis became a model for other American volunteers.
  
  
• Samuel Gridley Howe, a Bostonian physician and abolitionist, after his graduation in 1824 traveled to Greece, enlisted in the Greek Army and for six years served as a soldier and chief surgeon. In 1827 he returned to the USA to raise funds and supplies for the suffering Greek people. He managed to raise about $60,000 which he spent on provisions, clothing, and the establishment of a relief depot for refugees near the island of Aegina. In 1866, during the Cretan Revolution, he returned to Greece with his wife Julia Ward Howe, to organize support for the new uprising of the Cretans against Ottoman tyranny and enslavement.
  
  
• Another American Philhellene was Jonathan P. Miller of Vermont, who arrived in Messolonghi on November 26, 1824. During the next two years, he rose to the rank of Colonel in the Greek military and served in Jarvis’s regiment. Miller quickly mastered the Greek language, adopted Greek dress and was fearless in battle. In December 1824, he participated in the proceedings of the convention in Anatolico, Aitolia (western Greece). Miller was in Messolonghi during its siege and in a letter to Edward Everett dated May 3rd, 1826, he described the heroic “exodus,” the subsequent fall of Messolonghi and the massacre of its population by the Ottomans. Captain Jonathan P. Miller returned to the United States in 1826 and through the efforts of the Greek Philhellenic Committee of New York, he was able to collect $17,500 worth of various relief supplies, which he took back to Greece onboard the ship “Chancellor,” on March 5, 1827.​
  
  

British Philhellenes

The uprising of the Greeks against Ottoman rule during the 1820s commanded a wide sympathy throughout the western world such as no government could ignore. As in most European countries, there was also in England a strong Philhellenic movement that played a significant role in the liberation of Greece.
​
In 1823 the London Philhellenic Committee (1823–1826) was established, to support the Greek cause by raising funds and by raising a major loan to stabilize the fledgling Greek government. The committee was established by John Bowring and Edward Blaquiere. Its early members included the reformer Jeremy Bentham and Lord Byron.

Lord Byron (pictured top of page) is considered the principal instigator and face of Philhellenism. Born in 1788, George Gordon Byron became the leading figure of British Romanticism at the beginning of the 19th century.

At the age of 21, Byron entered the House of Lords, and the following year he began his long journey to the Mediterranean, where he wrote one of his most famous poems, Childe Harold’s Pilgrimage, a description of the travels and reflections of a young man, who looks for distraction in foreign lands. Byron was also a strong opponent of Elgin’s removal of the Parthenon marbles. His poem “The Curse of Minerva” is a severe attack against Lord Elgin and his taking away from Greece the Parthenon sculptures.

​In April 1823, Byron agreed to act as agent of the London Committee, organized funds and supplies (including the provision of several ships) and in July 1823 he left Genoa for Cephalonia. He sent £4,000 of his own money to prepare the Greek fleet for sea service and then sailed for Messolonghi on December 29 to join Alexandros Mavrokordatos, leader of the forces in western Greece. Byron made efforts to unite the various Greek factions and took personal command of a brigade of Souliot soldiers, reputedly the bravest of the Greeks. The great Philhellene fell ill in February 1824 and died on April 19, 1824 in Messolonghi, at the age of 36. Byron’s death helped to create an even stronger European sympathy for the Greek cause.

Lord Byron became a national hero for Greeks and a symbol of pure patriotism. Dionysios Solomos - Greece’s national poet who wrote the National Anthem - composed a long ode in his memory. Byron’s poetry, along with Eugene Delacroix’s art, helped arouse European public opinion in favour of the Greek revolutionary cause to the point of no return, and led Western powers to intervene directly.

• George Finlay George was born in 1799 and spent most of his youth in Scotland. His idealism and his enthusiasm for liberal causes prompted Finlay’s first visit to Greece in 1823, where he joined Byron. He bought property near Athens and became actively involved in the development of the city, but his schemes for the improvement of the country met with little success. For many years, he acted as the special correspondent of the London Times.

His book "History of Greece," produced in segments between 1843 and 1861, did not at first receive the recognition it deserved, but it has since been given by scholars in all countries a place among works of enduring value, both for its literary style and the depth and insight of its historical views.

• Frank Abney Hastings (1794 –1828) was a British naval officer and Philhellene. He served in the British Navy from 1805 until 1819, fought at the Battle of Trafalgar and the Battle of New Orleans, and sailed for Greece on March 1822, where he joined the revolutionary forces and took part in Greek naval operations. In a memorandum to Byron, Hastings proposed the use of steamers instead of sailing ships, and of direct fire with shells and hot shot as a more effective means of destroying the Turkish fleet, however lack of resources prevented the implementation of his plans.
  
  
• Hastings, in co-operation with General Richard Church (commander of the Greek forces in the last stages of the Greek War of Independence), decided on an attack in western Greece, where the destruction of a small Turkish squadron at the Battle of Itea in the Gulf of Corinth (September 29, 1827) provoked Ibrahim Pasha into aggressive movements which led to the destruction of his fleet by allied forces (Britain, France, and Russia) at the Battle of Navarino. The Greek squadron at the Battle of Itea was led by the flagship Karteria, the first steam-powered warship to be used in combat operations in history. On May 25, 1828, he was wounded in an attempt to reclaim Messolonghi, and he died a few days later from his injuries in Zakynthos on June 1. Greece held a national funeral in his honor and he was laid to rest beneath the arsenal of Poros, today a Hellenic Naval Academy, and his heart is preserved in the Anglican Church in Athens.

_____
GNA; Revised

​The Greek Revolution of 1821 gave birth to figures who forever marked the history of the modern Greek nation. Among its leading protagonists were Theodoros Kolokotronis and Georgios Karaiskakis, two generals who, with their courage, intelligence and determination, contributed decisively to the fight for freedom from four centuries of Ottoman occupation and slavery. However, fate was cruel to them not only while they were alive, but also after their death. Their remains were haphazardly moved, interfered with and also desecrated, actions that create a painful historical paradox: that the people who fought for the freedom of the homeland and who endured unimaginable suffering while alive were also not able to find peace even in their graves.

Theodoros Kolokotronis, the legendary “Old Man of the Morea,” died in 1843 in Athens. He was initially buried there, but almost a century later, in 1930, it was decided to transfer his skeletal remains to Tripoli, the heart of the Peloponnese where he had commanded some of the most brilliant military victories against the Ottomans during the revolution. The transfer took place with honors and in the presence of political and military authorities as a sign of respect for the great fighter. However, the story did not end there.

In 1942, during the German-Italian occupation of Greece, an incident occurred that horrified the inhabitants of Tripoli. Italian soldiers hunted down and destroyed the monument where Kolokotronis' bones were kept and, according to testimonies, they took some of them away and scattered and kicked the rest around the area. This act was considered a deep insult to one of the nation's most important heroes. The city's residents gathered together and carefully collected as many bones as they could find and set them back in the monument, which today stands at the base of the general's equestrian statue in Areos Square in Tripoli, Arcadia.

The posthumous journey of Georgios Karaiskakis went through a similar ordeal. The fearless military commander was mortally wounded in 1827 at Faliro and buried on the island of Salamis. Despite his desire to be buried there, in 1835 the Greek state decided to exhume and transfer his remains to a monument in Faliro, near the place where he fell fighting. This government initiative received negative reactions from the residents of Salamis, who considered his grave part of their historical heritage.

The Greek state embarked on a second transfer of Karaiskakis' remains. In the 1960s, during construction work in the Neo Faliro area and around the current Karaiskakis Stadium, the burial monument was hurriedly and haphazardly removed. The hero's bones were placed in unmarked boxes and transported to various municipal warehouses. Some testimonies indicate that part of the bones may have been lost during the work and some accidentally mixed up with other bones in the various warehouses where the boxes were sent for safekeeping. This debacle with Karaiskaki's bones still causes sadness and concern today in Greece.

These stories do not diminish the glory of the two fighters. On the contrary, they illuminate a lesser-known side of history, reminding us that collective memory and respect for people who fought for freedom should not be taken for granted. Kolokotronis and Karaiskakis remain symbols of courage and self-sacrifice, regardless of the ordeals their remains have experienced.

Perhaps the most important message out of all this is the need for constant respect for historical heritage. The heroes of the Greek Revolution do not belong only to the past; they are a living part of the identity and memory of the Greek people. And that is why, even after two centuries, honoring them remains a duty owed by all Greeks.

"I have lost my husband. Blessed be God! My eldest son fell with his weapons in hand. Blessed be God! My second and only [remaining] son, fourteen years old, is fighting with the Greeks and will probably find a glorious death. Blessed be God! Under the banner of the Cross my blood will also flow. Blessed be God! But we will win or we shall seize to live, yet we will have the comforting thought that in this world, we did not leave behind us enslaved Greeks."

-- Rear Admiral Laskarina Bouboulina
​
​

By Stylianos Kavazis, Researcher
Translated into English and republished with the author's permission

​On May 11, 1771, in a dark, damp cell in Constantinople, Laskarina Pinotsi, the daughter of the Hydriot captain Stavrianos Pinotsis and Skevo Kokkini, was born. Her birth in a place of captivity foreshadowed a life full of trials and courage. At the age of 17, she married the Spetsiot captain Dimitrios Yiannouzas, and soon found herself a widow with three children when her husband fell in battle with pirates. With her second marriage, to Dimitrios Bouboulis, she had three more children and was forever called "Bouboulina" (i.e. Bouboulis' wife), who would seal the history of the Nation with her boldness and selflessness.

With immense wealth and unparalleled determination, Bouboulina became the ruler of the seas of Spetses. In 1820, she built the imposing ship “Agamemnon” which was 34 meters long and equipped with 18 cannons, the largest ship that took part in the Revolutionary Struggle. This ship was a symbol of the determination of a woman who did not hesitate to risk everything for Freedom.

As the National Uprising broke out, Bouboulina allocated her entire fortune to maintain her ships and support the troops on land. With the “Agamemnon” she participated in the blockade of Nafplion, supplied the defenders of Argos at her own expense and fought in every significant battle in Monemvasia, Nafplion and Tripoli. In a legendary moment, riding a white horse, she entered the besieged Tripoli and saved the harems of Hursit Pasha from the besiegers, proving that her heroic heart did not seek revenge, but honor and humanity.

Pain was not absent from her life; her son Ioannis fell in battle, her son-in-law was murdered, and she herself was expelled from Nafplion during the civil war. Despite personal losses and persecution, Bouboulina did not give up, she returned to Spetses and continued to live with dignity until the end. On May 22, 1825, she was fatally shot in a family dispute, a tragic and controversial moment that brought to an end a life full of courage and self-sacrifice. Her remains rest in the privately owned church of Agios Ioannis in Spetses, but her memory lives indelibly in history.

Bouboulina's name went beyond the Greek borders from the first years of the Struggle. In Europe, she was considered equal to Joan of Arc and other great heroines. Posthumously, Russia awarded her the title of Admiral, and in 2018, a full 193 years after her death, Greece honored her with the rank of Honorary Rear Admiral, the War Cross 1st Class and the Medal of Exceptional Deeds, recognizing her unparalleled heroism and devotion to the Nation.

Bouboulina was not only a captain, she was a symbol of courage, self-sacrifice and moral superiority. Within almost two years, she spent her vast fortune on the Struggle, while in return she experienced persecution and contempt. But her name remains eternal, a beacon of heroism and a source of inspiration for every Greek.

In Spetses, her mansion, now a museum, and her statue, remind us that Bouboulina was the captain of the heart and soul of 1821, a woman who, by her example, indelibly wrote her name in the history of Freedom.

By Stylianos Kavazis, Researcher
Translated into English and republished with the author's permission

​There are few people in history who have experienced the rot of power from within and dared to say “no” to it. Mustafa Geka was one of them. An Ottoman-Albanian Muslim by origin, he knew the tyranny and inhumanity of Ottoman rule, but instead of surrendering to the evil of the times, he listened to the voice of his conscience. His heart and sense of justice led him to the side of the Greeks, to stand in the fight for freedom, honor and truth.

​In Livadia, at Gravia Inn next to Odysseas Androutsos, in Magouliana with Ioannis and Panoutsos Notaras, and in Piraeus, where he was wounded twice, his presence stood out. He did not just fight for a people, he fought for the concept of justice and morality. His contribution was officially recognized by the Greek Administration, while his sacrifices were inexhaustible, spending personal funds for the struggle, without asking for anything in return.

His leading moment during the Greek struggle was his leadership of the Ottoman Centurion, composed of a group of thirty-one Ottoman Muslims coming together from Himara, Ayvalik, Mytilene, Zagori, Smyrna, Livadia and Thebes, that united with the Fifth chiliarch (regiment) of Nikolaos Krieziotis and under the guidance of Dimitrios Ypsilantis. As its captain and leader, Mustafa led these men in conflicts in eastern Central Greece, Livadia and Thebes, showing that faith in justice can unite people even beyond ethnic origins and religions.

His letter to the Greek Parliament, which survives in the Greek archives, is a resounding testimony of his soul, a man who chose to stand with the oppressed, who fought alongside the Greeks, who paid with his body and property for freedom. “I too have decided to die with the Greeks,” he writes, and these words carry the eternity of an ethos that transcends time.

His letter to the Greek Parliament was as follows:
​

​
​Mustafa Geka was not just a philhellene. He was the embodiment of the conscience that sees injustice and does not remain silent, that knows tyranny and condemns it with his example and action. His soul illuminates even today the darkness of injustice, reminding us that faith in truth, courage and justice can overcome every bond and every fear.

​_____
* Note: Groschen (kuruş in Turkish) was a currency denominated in silver coins, based on weight.