Suchergebnisse

Δεν παρατίθεται περίληψη στα ελληνικά. ; The aim of the current study is an attempt to address the problem which emerged in the Hellenic Society during the years of the inter war as well as the first post civil war period, due to the change of the calendar. The introduction, from the Hellenic Church, of the new (Gregorian) calendar in 1924 created a strong reaction among the believers wich resulted to the creation of a new movement, named Greek Religions Community of Genuine Orthodox Christians (C.O.Ch.). This conservative minority, having had a great influence, insisted in the reinstatement of the old calendar and caused important conflict in the Hellenic society. The issue is examined from a political viewpoint, since the G.O.Ch. functioned as a pressure group towards the governments, demanding the free exercise of their religious duties. The governments appeared rather uncourageous in facing the problem, as they relied on G.O.Ch's vote. However, there had been systematic chasing persecutions against their clergymen, with them arrested or sent to the exile, facts which aggravated the problem. In this article, we also attempt to analyse the ideological stigma of the G.O.Ch. movement as their moved against all innovations of West-European origin and they declared their dedication to the traditional customs. Another aspect of the issue, concerns the so-called Macedonian issue and since the Church as well as many politicians considered the G.O.Ch. as being Serving the Yugoslav propaganda between the Slavonic-speaking minority of Macedonia, given that the Serbian Church maintained the old calendar. The C.O.Ch. Church attempted to defend itself against those accusations claiming that the change of the calendar served the political plans on the northern neighbours.

Δεν παρατίθεται περίληψη στα ελληνικά. ; Panayotis Stathis, Rethinking the 1821 Greek Revolution. A reading of Ni­kos Theotokas, The Life of General Makriyannis: History and Memoirs Nikos Theotokas' most recent book on Makriyannis is a characteristic specimen of new trends in the study of the Greek revolution of 1821, which shift emphasis from battles and politics to society. Theotokas uses as main analytical categories the antithetic notions of "tradition" and "modernity". However, Theotokas follows a less rigid and more sophisticated approach of this scheme. Instead of treating people of the traditional and modern world in a static way, he explores how they interacted, and emphasizes the dynamic nature of their relationship during the transitional period of the revolution. Theotokas' study on Makriyannis comprises a double venture. On the one hand it constitutes a historical biography of the General, while on the other it examines the long process of writing (1829-1852) his memoirs. Through this parallel narrative, Theotokas reveals how Makriyannis' changing attitude towards facts stated in the memoirs is modified by the specific historical conjuncture in which each of these facts is narrated by the author. The earliest parts of the text, written in the aftermath of the revolution, comprise a mixture of traditional and modern political discourse, in which the responsibility for both the negative developments of the war and of civil conflicts is often attributed to the traditional social elites. However, under the King Otto's reign, Makriyannis' expectations concerning his new position in the post-revolutionary society were gradually disappointed. Thus, in the latter parts of the memoirs Makriyannis clearly formulates a moralistic interpretation of the political developments, according to which the outlandish, selfish and warless politicians seized power and treated unfairly the pure fighters of the revolution who gave everything for its success.