Neophotistoi and Apostates: Greece and Conversion in the Nineteenth Century
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Greek historiography no longer ignores the massacres of non-Christians during the Greek War of Independence, but little thought is given to the fate of those Muslims and Jews that survived or how their presence, as non-Christians or as new converts, impacted the new state, its ideology, structures, policies or laws. This article begins to address this gap and attempts to highlight the seriousness with which Greek governments, both in the revolutionary and post-independence periods, confronted this issue. Using a variety of sources such as wills and dowry contracts, court cases, government records and revolutionary memoirs, the article attempts to show that modern historiography has underestimated the numbers and significance of converts and conversion, and that in this regard Greece and the Ottoman Empire share remarkable similarities in their treatment of conversion, the conflicts it generated, and the use of religion to shore up political weakness. As in the Ottoman Empire, conversion was a thorny issue for the early Greek governments that were trying to establish their legitimacy in the international arena. At the same time it provided opportunities for Greece to assert its influence far beyond its physical capacities, presenting itself as the defender of Orthodox Christians, a role previously monopolised by the Russian Empire.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".