Talk:Fustanella/Archive 2

Highly controversial edit "It subsequently became part of the national dress of Greece as a consequence of extensive Albanian settlement in the region" from Rejnari.
I find this "It subsequently became part of the national dress of Greece as a consequence of extensive Albanian settlement in the region" highly controversial and POV-pushing edit for the reason that previously in the article has been established that "Archaeological evidence shows that the fustanella was already in common use in Greek lands as early as the 12th century." and that "Byzantine Greek warriors, in particular the Akritai, wearing fustanella are depicted in contemporary Byzantine art. This is also confirmed by akritic songs of the 12th century. The full-pleated fustanella was worn from the Byzantine Akritic warriors originally as a military outfit and seems to have been reserved for persons of importance." Also, I am a bit concerned from the above discussions with other users that Rejnsari is trying push a Albanian Nationalistic POV agenda to the article. My proposal is to delete this "It subsequently became part of the national dress of Greece as a consequence of extensive Albanian settlement in the region" line or reword it as "It has been thought" etc.. Thanks Othon I (talk) 09:35, 14 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Well first off, lets clarify something. Though i have done multiple recent edits to this article, the sentence which you refer too i had no part in writing it in that form. Othon, had you gone through the revision history to see the edits for this article, you would have come across this edit done by editor Devil wears Brioni regarding the sentence you refer to. Secondly, no one has disputed that the Byzantine elite or the military sector wore the fustanella kilt. There is no dispute there. The sources however do not state that the fustanella was a item of clothing worn by the everyday Greek speaking villager of that time. Its spread amongst this segment of the population is (by both Greek and other western scholars) attributed to a medieval Albanian presence entering these areas and/or their descendants the Arvanites making the garment popular after the Greek war of independence in the 19th century due to their participation in that conflict. Now unless you can show that these scholars are pushing "Albanian POV", they meet wp:reliable and wp:secondary. The onus is on you. So far your proposals there border more on wp:or and wp:IDONTLIKEIT.Resnjari (talk) 10:55, 14 June 2016 (UTC)


 * You probably didn't understand what I clearly wrote. I didn't question the scholars, I questioned the validity of the statement since in the previous sectors It has been established that fustanella is "Archaeological evidence shows that the fustanella was already in common use in Greek lands as early as the 12th century." which renders the statement that we discussing about obsolete. It looks like you and Brioni are editing the Greek section only to push your agendas. The discussions with various editors above can prove it. By the way as you can see your edit covers the nearly whole Greek sector including the controversial sentence. Othon I (talk) 11:07, 14 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Yes my edits to cover that area, but i had no part i writing that sentence of which you attributed to me personally. Nor am i pushing an "agenda". If some editors see that as so, then so are all those scholars too. You say you don't question the scholars, but you question the "validity" of the statement. But the sentence is based on that scholarship and that validity. Yes, the fustanella is in continuous use in Greece. However scholarship treats that continuous use to the Albanian presence that came later. The Byzantine state did not last in the 13th and 14th centuries in those areas for there to have been a elite or military class wearing the fustanella. Moreover scholarship clearly points to Greek speaking people abandoning other forms of (Turkish or other village) clothing and adopting the fustanella in the 19th century. You ought to read Welters whole chapter, she did field work in those areas and locals kept telling her that the fustanella was mainly associated with Arvanites, and the sigouni (and foundi for women). Note all of the scholarship on the fustanella refering to this matter has come after Morgon and not before.Resnjari (talk) 11:19, 14 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Wrong, the Despotate of Mystra lasted until 1460. That means that during the 13th and possibly 14th century there was the influence of the Byzantine attire which fustanella has been classified as. Don't forget that Arvanites have been identified from scholarship that they were part of the Byzantine Army and they were subjects of the Duke of Dyrrachium until the end of the 11th century and also, the Principality of Arbanon 11- mid. 12th (end) century has been mainly ruled from the Byzantine Gregory Kamonas and his wife Comnena Nemanjic. All that shows that even that when the Arvanites migrated southwards from Epirus Nova, the influence can be still attributed to the Byzantine Empire. Othon I (talk) 11:55, 14 June 2016 (UTC)


 * All of that is interesting and parts of that is also original research. Morgan attributes the fustanella being worn to the Byzantine elite and military class, not as being a clothing item of the Byzantine successor states or even those states created by Westerners such as the Catalans etc. As for the Arvanites being part of the Byzantine army, yes they were just like the other Albanian speakers in the area of today's Albania. Their migration into southern Greece occurred after Byzantine imperial power no longer existed in the area and mainly at the invitation of those successor states to fill up depopulated areas due to war, plague and pirate raids on coastal areas (See article by Oxford scholar and archeologist John Bintliff for such matters: ). Again what does this have to do with anything here? Do you have a source that says that the Albanian (speakers) in Arbanon adopted the kilt from the Byzantines while in the military service of the Byzantines or influence from them ? You need a wp:reliable and wp:secondary for that. So far its original research on your part. The earliest recording of the fustanella in Albania by the way was in the 12th century in the Lake Shkoder area of Albania.Resnjari (talk) 12:10, 14 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Since Arvanites have been identified by scholarship and primary sources (Attaliates) that they were subjects of the Duke of Dyrrachium (Leo Rhabdouchos, George Palaiologos, John Komnenos and other Dukes of the Theme of Dyrrachium which was part of the Byzantine Empire, to answer your question, It is common knowledge that Arvanites where Byzantine Empire citizens hence the fustanella. Othon I (talk) 16:05, 14 June 2016 (UTC)


 * That is interesting what you have there, but all you have cited is that Albanians were once for some duration under the Byzantine Empire. Albanians were the citizens of many states/empires over the centuries. What wp:reliable and wp:secondary sources however do you have that gives even as a hypothesis that the Albanian (speakers) of that medieval time in Arbanon borrowing and adopting the fustanella from the Byzantines ? Otherwise what you have there is still wp:or. Best.Resnjari (talk) 16:30, 14 June 2016 (UTC)


 * What you did just now is source misinterpretation and POV. The scholarship and the primary sources identified that "Albanoi as having taken part in a revolt against Constantinople in 1043 and to the Arbanitai as subjects of the Duke of Dyrrachium" since Arbanitai (Arvanites) were subjects of the Duke of Dyrrachium part of the Byzantine Theme of Dyrrachium it is common knowledge that the were Byzantine citizens hence the pleated fustanella except if for you the Theme of Dyrrachium was not part of Byzantine Empire. Have you got any source that identify Albanoi (Albanians) as subjects of Duke of Dyrrachium as well? Lets not forget the fact the Ghegs wore tight breeches. Thanks. Othon I (talk) 18:00, 14 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Othon some time ago a similar  discussion was had that had little to do with the premise of the article on the Arvanites talk page . Its going down that road again. The article is about the fustanella, not medaevil Albanians of the 11th century or around that time. Wrong article to be discussing this, if at all. I don't know what the Byzantine Theme of Dyrrachium and Albanian living has to do with the article, unless you have a scholar who discuses the fustanella, that geographical entity, Albanians and Byzantines. Otherwise this is just original research trying to conclude something that has not even been discussed in scholarship (unless you can show the contrary with a sources that links all as one). As for the Ghegs wearing tight breeches (tirq pants) yes they did and some Ghegs in the Shkoder area also still even in the 19th century wore the fustanella (in combination with tirq pants), as per Isa Blumi's article on highlander Albanian dress and is cited in the article. Are you disputing this ? If so what are your sources? Otherwise, this discussion is just about original research on your part.Resnjari (talk) 19:18, 14 June 2016 (UTC)


 * You still ignore what scholarship proved and that shows your motives. The article identifies fustanella is of Ancient Greek origin and subsequently of Byzantine. You support that it became popular in Greece because of the extensive Albanian which is wrong because it was Arvanite migration. What scholarship and primary sources prove is that "Albanoi as having taken part in a revolt against Constantinople in 1043 and to the Arbanitai as subjects of the Duke of Dyrrachium" since Arvanites were subjects of Duke of Dyrrachium, it is common knowledge that their dressing was according to the standards of a Byzantine Empire citizen. You ignoring scholarship when you are not feeling comfortable or its against Albanians and wp:IDONTLIKEIT and you cherry picking your sources that follow your agenda. Thats is a serious violation of wp:NPOV rules of Wikipedia and there are loads of people even in this article that have been accused you for these. I am going to change the terminology to Arvanite settlement from Albanian since the population that speak per se are the Arvanites and not the modern Albanians. Othon I (talk) 09:51, 15 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Othon, the fustanella's ancient origins are disputed amongst even Greek scholars. Skafidas is a case in point. This article outlines those different positions. There is no one definitive answer. I am sorry if this causes you discomfort but that is how it is. The matter about the Albanoi, i still don't see how that has anything to do with this article. Do you have a wp:reliable and wp:secondary source that links those Albanoi has having received the fustanella from the Byzantines. What is this common knowledge you refer too ? Your source is you ? Give me the title of a book, journal article some other scholarly work. Instead all you are continuing to do to use one bit of information which is interesting but has nothing to do with this article to infer something that is original research. Many people accuse me of many things and that is not new in Wikipedia, like you did regarding a sentence which i did not do (if anyone thinks i have broken any rules, please refer to me the appropriate noticeboards for the matter to be dealt with and to inform me of those proceedings). All sources i have used fit the criteria outlined by Wikipedia and its polices. I am not pushing an agenda. I went out of my way to locate additional sources at my university library and also more newer scholarship which has covered the fustanella as a topic/subject. I recommend you go out also locate these and read them (some are accessible through google books). I have added much to this article that has enhanced knowledge of the fustanella's use both in Greece and Albania. If you can find additional sources that touch upon the fustanella and the Albanoi, bring them here. Otherwise, all you are continuing to do is postulate on this topic through the prism of original research. That's nice for a everyday conversation when with friends over a coffee or if you are doing a piece of research, but here you need something that has been peer reviewed and published at the very least for it to enter the article. As for Arvanite or Albanian i am not fussed.Resnjari (talk) 16:28, 15 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Renjrari, Can you please stop twisting my words and be wp:civil? I am not following any original research of mine. I am referencing the literature, scholarship and primary sources that identified that "Albanoi as having taken part in a revolt against Constantinople in 1043" and "Arbanitai as subjects of the Duke of Dyrrachium". Since Arvanites have been identified as subjects of a Byzantine Duke and Albanoi not (except if you have a reference that identifies Albanoi as subjects of the Duke of Dyrrachium because I don't), It can be assumed that the fustanella is a Byzantine influence and not of Albanian. Along with all the other justification that exists on the article. Best regards. Othon I (talk) 12:14, 17 June 2016 (UTC)


 * The reason why i am stating that it is original research is this. You have cited one source that states that the Albanoi were citizens of the Byzantine state. No one disagrees with this. For the Principality of Arbanon page, the Albanians page, the origins of the Albanian page, or some other page that deals with Albanians or Albanian speakers in the middle ages that edit with accompanying source suffices and warrants its inclusion. In this article, what is its purpose? Does your (same) source state (or link) in addition to the Albanoi being Byzantine citizens, that they also adopted/borrowed or so on the fustanella from the Byzantines ? If it doesn't then the yes its original research. You are inferring and concluding that because the Albanoi/Albanian speakers of that time were at a particular moment in time Byzantine citizens that they borrowed/adopted the fustanella. It may be your personal view, but you need a wp:reliable and wp:secondary source/reference for there to be a sentence in the article on this. If you feel that i have interpreted the policy wrong on original research, i encourage you Othon to place this matter for a edit request were other uninvolved Wikipedia editors can have a look at the matter. Best.Resnjari (talk) 12:55, 17 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Once again wrong as typically WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT and source misinterpretation, you wrote an absolute argument from ignorance and you accused me on something that haven't even written here. What the reference says clearly is that "In History written in 1079–1080, the Byzantine historian Michael Attaliates referred to the Albanoi as having taken part in a revolt against Constantinople in 1043 and to the Arbanitai as subjects of the duke of Dyrrachium" In the contrary, I haven't written anything about Albanoi being subjects of Byzantine dukes by the time that they haven't been identified as such. However, Arbanitai have been as we see from primary and secondary references and also later, the Principality of Arbanon has been identified as autonomous principality within Byzantine Empire . All these are enough to support that fustanella that came with the migration of the Arvanites was of a Byzantine influence. Othon I (talk) 14:00, 17 June 2016 (UTC)


 * The last sentence (in conjunction with the other comments) you wrote there "All these are enough to support that fustanella that came with the migration of the Arvanites was of a Byzantine influence" sums up why i keep saying its original research. Which scholar has linked the fustanella, the Albanians speakers i.e Albanoi, Arvvanites etc) as receiving/borrowing/adopting the fustanella from the Byzantines all within the scope of one study ? If you feel that i have misinterpreted this matter, suggest a edit request. Best.Resnjari (talk) 14:12, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Propaganda about Fustanella.
Hello there, I don't agree with the fact that fustanella is shown as a Greek costume without talking about the Albanian elements in it. You show a Greek sculpture and you show us that Fustanella is a Greek dress. No that is not true, there are a lot of dresses all over the world, but it doesn't make them Fustanella. Fustanella its unique because it has 60 layers of lines unlike the Greek sculpture which has nothing like these lines. There are a lot of sculptures from Slovenia to South Albania dressed with Fustanella SHOWING these layers precisely. This dress is mentioned by authors who have passed in albania around 1100s and they talk about this "White Dress" of layers. I suggest you to change this text or i have to report this to WIKIPEDIA as biased text showing the untruth about Fustanella and making it greek for no reason just because a bunch of southern albanians went and called themselves "greeks". — Preceding unsigned comment added by DiKrena (talk • contribs) 13:51, 23 October 2017 (UTC)


 * User:DiKrena, consult the scholarship -citations and bibliography for more. The fustanella is a garment of ancient origins and various people have worn it at different times and has become part of their cultures. A lot of work went into fixing many issues with the article. For previous discussions on this subject, check the talkpage archive.Resnjari (talk) 13:58, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
 * User:DiKrena, your going down the road of possibly getting reported and blocked. Its unnecessary and not the best way to start on Wikipedia.Resnjari (talk) 14:00, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

A lot of work for nothing.
This is wrong and what you are describing there are different dresses but NOT Fustanella. Like I said, fustanella has 60 layers unlike these dresses you explain here. Fustanella its an Albanian dress which is wore by Albanians and Arvanites of Albanian origin in Greece. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DiKrena (talk • contribs) 14:04, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
 * User:DiKrena, the stuff on Arvanites is covered. Do you know who addressed those issues in the article. I did. The article had so many problems and i cannot be bothered going into it because its the past (see talkpage archive and also revision history part of the article) and edits based on scholarship were made to address those against many odds. Focus on something else, anyway there is heaps to do on Albanian related topics.Resnjari (talk) 14:11, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Resnjari Like I said there is no one here to stop me from addressing these mistakes. These are biased information, showing a man with a normal dress and addressing it as a dress which has 60 layers and called Fustanella(Albanian: Fus=Insert N'el=in a round shaped cloth. Ca shqiptari je ti ore, turp te te vije.
 * User:DiKrena, ti mire qe me kujton ketu per turp dhe pyet cfare shqiptar jam une, but look the garment known as a fustanella has emerged from similar garments of the ancient era. That is cited. It has entered different cultures who have made their own adaptations over the centuries while still viewing/defining it as fustanella. That too is cited. As i have said to past Greek editors who raised similar points to you but from a Greek perspective, Please read the scholarship. Best.Resnjari (talk) 14:37, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
 * User:Resnjari, O lale duhet te dish historine qe te shkruash kshu jo shkruan si te te doje trapi ty. We are talking here about FUSTANELLA which is an Albanian word for an Albanian costume, you think that only Greeks wore Grament? We need to include the fact that this is not a Greek dress but a dress which Arvanites of Albanian origin in Greece wore. Lale pik gjaku ske po tpakten nqs se sthua te verteten hik e mos fut hundet tek gjerat qe si di se greket kete duan, qe te thone qe ne ja morem atyre kurse gjyshrit e mi vdisnin me fustanelle nga greket, po dhe ti nodnje rrace muti si kte duhet te jesh dhe ti po he. Un e bera report ti si te duash. ––DiKrena (talk) 14:56, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
 * User:DiKrena, mire, mire duhet ta di une historine. Tani keshtu eshte puna, ku jane burimet shkencore nga ana jote? Hmm, ku? Di Krena, much has gone into this article, much had Albanian editors toiled over in making this page be neutral and encompass information as based on wp:reliable and wp:secondary scholarship. The talkpage archive more then shows for this and so does the revision history of the page. Either you bring something new to this discussion about some new scholarship etc, or frankly this is wasting everyone's time.Resnjari (talk) 15:11, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
 * User:Resnjari, Po mire o te qifsha pragun e familjes ashtu eshte greke o te qifsha gjakun e familjes qe ke. Ku eshte gabimi qe greket e moren pas luftes te pavarsise kete veshje kur arvanitasit u assimiluan? — Preceding unsigned comment added by DiKrena (talk • contribs) 15:15, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
 * User:DiKrena, well thats fine and dandy, dhe familia ime eshte Tosk me renje. The article is fine and based on scholarship. Best.Resnjari (talk) 15:22, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Sorry for interrupting but you both need to respect WP:SPEAKENGLISH. Either you are kind enough to translate your thoughts above or they will be soon removed.Alexikoua (talk) 18:12, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
 * To paraphrase my Albanian above i said to that editor that they ought to provide scholarly sources. A colouful comment by the editor was made to me about my heritage and i replied i was a Tosk.Resnjari (talk) 19:33, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
 * User:Alexikoua, Like I told to this guy above, If you talk about Fustanella you talk about the Albanian Fustanella with 60 layers which is still used in Albania. You are mixing the fact that Fustanella is Fustanella and these other dresses you talk about are different in Balkan, well the one who Arvanites use is the same because they were Albanians before so that makes perfect sens. You are mixing here also that, these dresses in Balkan are not the same as Fustanella, its like including Scottish Klit to Fustanella too. The sculpture which are shown in the Greek section of Fustanella doesnt have anything to do with Fustanella because that looks like a normal dress some fisherman from 200BC would wear, that was used all over the world at that time. I suggest everyone here to include the periode when Fustanella came to Greece and when it became the national costume for the Gard. What I readed here makes it Greek which is insane and biased because we all know that you guys adoped it after arvanites joined the war of indipendence. Even Greeks authors accept this as an Albanian costume and here is the link https://www. youtube.com/watch?v=DKSS4-sQAkM and you can skip it to min 4:15 the declaration of the greek historian that this is pure albanian dress. I am writing this because I want to correct mistakes. ––DiKrena (talk) 19:10, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
 * User:DiKrena, as i have said to Greek editors in the past in this article talkpage and now i say to you, Wikipedia is based on wp:reliable and wp:secondary scholarship. Youtube or something else is best avoided for article content and you wont get far anyway. Unless there is something new or you have something to add due to new scholarship coming out etc no need to waste everyone's time like this.Resnjari (talk) 19:33, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

O te qifsha scholarshiping tend ore fisqir. Greket thone eshte shqiptare ti thua eshte greke o te qifsha vorio-epiriotin qe merr pension ngq greket o te qifsha rracen ty dhe grekve — Preceding unsigned comment added by DiKrena (talk • contribs) 19:40, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Well don't be surprised then if you get blocked or banned, and no i don't have a Greek pension, and neither does anyone in my family. They are Tosks who emmigrated from what is today the Republic of Macedonia, (then communist Yugoslavia) nearly 50 years ago to the West.Resnjari (talk) 19:53, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Fustanella. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060515153424/http://library.thinkquest.org/04oct/01181/the_new_state.htm to http://library.thinkquest.org/04oct/01181/the_new_state.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 18:54, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

Should we remove Crete from this article? what you say
Do you find necessary to mention Crete in this article? in any case i will transfer more accurately what the source saying about Crete in the article...and maybe we can remove the sentence that mentions Crete completely, because it's really insignificant and Irelevant.W5ry3 (talk) 12:11, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Its ok having it in the article, after all fustanella usage gets covered in the topic as well. Best.Resnjari (talk) 13:16, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

Unexplained edit
An explanation about the removal of this sentence:, which is sourced with: , should be provided. Also the position of the countries in alphabetical order is WP:NOPOV, a reasonable argument should be given for another order. – Βατο (talk) 21:04, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
 * It's not an example of fustanella but this might be fine to stay as part of the origin section as a fustanella-like garment. Also per chronological criteria the current order shouldn't change. There is not rule to present a strict alphabetical order especially when we deal with the history of the subject.Alexikoua (talk) 20:07, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
 * No, it is the same as the information about the Byzantine evidence. – Βατο (talk) 20:10, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
 * That section includes a series of countries where the garment is used, it is not an "Evolution" or "History" section. The subsections should be in alphabetical order as per nopov. – Βατο (talk) 20:11, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
 * The fustanella in Albania and Greece has the same importance. As the article says, it is disputed which ethnic group started to use the fustanella earlier - and as far as I can see, those that say it was used in Greece in the Byzantine period are more than 50 years old compared with recent sources that say that Greeks took the fustanella from Albanians. Alexikoua, you have used the "alphabetic order" argument elsewhere so you can't argue against it here ( and many other examples can be cited). Ktrimi991 (talk) 22:18, 10 May 2022 (UTC)


 * (edit conflict) Comment: Sections are ordered geographically to avoid POV debates about which section is more important. The article needs a cleanup as many garments which are not related to the fustanella, which is a pleated skirt, are discussed as if they are close to a fustanella. A chiton is not a skirt, nor was it ever pleated in the same way as a fustanella.--Maleschreiber (talk) 22:26, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
 * In the Greece section there are two views mentioned, one which has a source from 1942 and another which is supported by multiple modern sources. Shouldn't they be re-ordered per WP:UNDUE?Botushali (talk) 02:16, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
 * After the recent content additions made by Bato, the article shows that the usage of the fustanella by Albanians centuries before the Ottoman period (centuries before the 14th century means not later than the 12th century) is not disputed, while the usage of the fustanella by Greeks before the Ottoman period (as early as the 12th century) is disputed by scholars. Furthermore, all 21st century sources present in the article say that Greeks took the fustanella from Albanians. So even "chronological" arguments say that the first subsection should be that of Albania, then that of Greece. Which subsection is the first one is not important for the reader, but what attracted by attention here is the fact that Alexikoua has used the "alphabetic order" argument elsewhere but is opposing the same argument here. Ktrimi991 (talk) 23:29, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

Not truly pan-Balkanic
Despite the opening of the article, the Fustanella is not worn by men outside Albanian, Greek and Aromanian communities. It is not a pan-Balkanic piece of wear. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.57.70.95 (talk) 04:18, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Fustanella
The content is based on a reliable academic source, published by a reputable publisher as part of an international academic conference. The articles are written based on what reliable sources say, not on editors' own conclusions. Read WP:RS and WP:OR. Ktrimi991 (talk) 20:29, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

No it's not, in fact you are using an Albanian author, "the spreading of the Albanian fustanella is well recorded by historians", these so called "historians" were mostly travelers during the 19th century and their accounts include dozens of inaccuracies, they made guesses that probably fustanella came from the Albanians, they didn't had actual proof.. and also by using this author and the way it is rephrased on the article is as if the whole academic community has accepted this view (his hypothesis) and somehow is legit because he expressed it in a conference!!! This is purely historical negationism and a very case of how terribly made this article is. The way it is phrased gives a totally wrong impression to an ignorant reader and makes the rest of the article to look broken and controversial, such as the rest of hypothesis and sources BASED on Archaeological findings (not assumptions), because you already concluded about its origins through of what this author stated and of which the international academia doesnt include in its conclusions about the origins of the attire. You are amateurish, the least, on writing an article properly, no wonder wikipedia is so unpopular nowdays. 2A02:85F:F865:3500:E45E:B8C0:4F71:DA25 (talk) 01:44, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

False wording
The Albanian fustanella was greatly favoured among the Balkan peoples, and it was imitated by many other peoples. The spread of the Albanian fustanella among other neighbouring peoples such as the Greeks as well as the Turks, is documented by the historians of the time.[21]

The above is presented/worded in such a way that it gives the impression that the international academic community have already concluded about the spread of the attire, while in reality is an assumption/hypothesis, a thesis presented by an author (of Albanian nationality) in a conference and doesn’t represents any of the conclusions of the exact conference. Essentially, in the way is worded, gives a wrong impression, makes the rest of the article to look inconsistent and confuses the reader of the article. *** 2A02:85F:F865:3500:D1FF:32C0:71F9:BFA0 (talk) 02:05, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Additionally
The Albanian fustanella was greatly favoured among the Balkan peoples, and it was imitated by many other peoples. The spread of the Albanian fustanella among other neighbouring peoples such as the Greeks as well as the Turks, is documented by the historians of the time.[21]

The above was a thesis/hypothesis, statement during a social sciences conference, as a mean towards the European orientation of the Albanian state and does not reflect any conclusion of the academic community, humanities or the conference itself. The way it is worded and placed within the current article is inconsistent and atrocious, confuses the reader, undermines the rest of the article, its sources and creates the illusion that the attire is of indisputably of “Albanian origins”.

Best regards, Stamatios Argyres PhD Byzantine & Modern Greek studies, King’s college. 2A02:85F:F865:3500:D1FF:32C0:71F9:BFA0 (talk) 02:35, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Fustanella
"The spread of Albanian fustanella" was a well recorded subject by historians.. This is false, it was assumed by some travelers and not historians and the accounts of the travelers as a whole include erroneous informations for several things, eg they speak of people wearing fustanella in the island of Hydra or locations of Mani and we know with accuracy that these locations had no fustanella as their attire but bracca. And the Illyrian kilt was not "albanian". Proto-Albanian and Illyrian languages are not the same (this is a linguistic fact), the albanian ethnogenesis occured in AD times, possibly in Moesia superior. We should use well established sources and not low key theories and debunked hypothesis, for the love of God, this is supposedly a free encyclopedia, not a battleground for nationalists who constantly changing the article and add their own things. 2A02:85F:F865:3500:9929:12D7:C3E0:F23F (talk) 17:45, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
 * The content is based on a reliable academic source, published by a reputable publisher as part of an international academic conference. The articles are written based on what reliable sources say, not on editors' own conclusions. Read WP:RS and WP:OR. Ktrimi991 (talk) 20:29, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
 * The reliable source states that the Albanian fustanella, which was a specific type of fustanella, spread among other peoples in the region. Historians and writers of the time documented the fact that the specific type of fustanella was not originally in usage among some groups of people, but later it was adopted by them as well. The rest of your comment is offtopic and irrelevant (WP:NOTFORUM). – Βατο (talk) 08:29, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Controversial addition
Per wp:BRD this addition needs a good explanation []: bad English, tortured prose, pov-pushing which is supposedly cited by 19th century books .Alexikoua (talk) 16:36, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Alvanos
@Demetrios1993 if in Katharevousa Greek both Alvanos and Arvanite means "Arvanite". What is the term for Albanians? We can add both of them though.RoyalHeritageAlb (talk) 15:14, 18 June 2023 (UTC)


 * Both terms were used interchangeably to describe Albanian-speakers; including Arvanites. The thing is that based on the context, we are certain that Koryllos (1903) described Arvanites when he used the term Alvanoí (singular Alvanós); he even described the disregard they had for their language, and the process of their assimilation. I don't think both terms are necessary; it would be redundant. This isn't limited to the case we are discussing. Likewise, we don't include Greek in the captions of the photographs that present Sarakatsani; i also wouldn't use it with other Greek-speaking groups, who wore fustanella, but aren't even mentioned in the article. I would only opt for a clarification if the term was ambiguous; e.g. Macedonians and Greek Macedonians. Demetrios1993 (talk) 00:15, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

Outdated Theories
Hey @Βατο, noticed your new edits here. Since you're working on the article, I'd like to suggest looking at the following sections:

Both of these passages use outdated sources from the mid-1900's. It seems that modern scholarship attributes a rather certain Albanian origin for the fustanella, although I believe you are more familiar with the topic than I am. If this is the case, would it not be possible to include the fustanella's Albanian origin in the lede and to assert the fact that it is an Albanian traditional dress throughout the whole article in general? Botushali (talk) 00:22, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes, it shlould clarify that in modern times (18th and early 19th centuries) it was a specific Albanian garment that characterised Albanians and distinguished them from other Balkan peoles. That's a historical fact documented by all scholars and travellers who visited the Balkans. As for the mid-20th century hypotheses, if they are not supported in current scholarship, they should be removed. Also, the theories that relate the pleated skirt with classical tunics are very conjectural and should be presented with caution, those garments are completely different types of clothes. – Βατο (talk) 10:18, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
 * The lede on Albanian usage only says: In Albania it was worn by the Royal Guard in the interbellum era. This is misleading as it gives the impression that fustanella became important for Albanians only at that time, and that the Royal Guard are the reason for the importance. Can anyone reword it? Ktrimi991 (talk) 11:54, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
 * also, Weller (1903) is an outdated source, and Kyrou (2020) has been misinterpreted, indeed he states:, in particular: . He does not propose an origin theory for the fustanella, or an early attestation of the usage of the fustanella, he talks about a classical tunic (chiton) wore in a particular manner in a specific context. – Βατο (talk) 12:21, 19 June 2023 (UTC)


 * The Albanian dress (not only the fustanella) was firstly adopted in 1810 by a British regiment. Primary accounts refer that it was clearly distinct from that of the Maniots:, also being part of that regiment. , the article does not reflect current scholarship and historical facts. In the 18th and early 19th century the fustanella was regarded as a specific factor to distinguish an Albanian from other ethnic groups. The spread of the Albanian fustanella, which is a very peculiar multi-pleated skirt, is documented from all the contemporary writers. The most clear proof is the order to adopt it in the above mentioned British regiment in 1810, an information which btw was previously misused in the article. The Albanian dress that spread throughout the Balkans was not only the fustanella, but as you can see from the pictures, the whole clothing, from the head to the feet. It obviously was not an adoption of the clothing from "Roumeliotes (Greeks of the mountainous interior)" as reported now in the article contrasting with the whole bibliography, it was expressly reported as an adoption from the Albanian dress. I am curious to see a late 18th century or early 19th century primary source, better if discussed by a secondary source, that reports and describes the fustanella and the rest of those garments as a "Roumeliote/Greek" dress. Otherwise, appropriate weight should be given to the speculations that contrasts historical accounts and present-day scholarship. The article needs rewording, but I don't have time to work on that right now. – Βατο (talk) 18:28, 19 June 2023 (UTC)


 * Of course, more recent sources are ideal and can be added, but considering that there is no consensus even in current scholarship about the ultimate origin of the garment, i don't think it is unreasonable to include views from the 1970s; they are not that old. Kostas Romaios (1977) for example, an academic, who isn't yet cited in the article, supports the ancient Greek hypothesis, and there are also references to his work by more recent publications. I don't have access to it now, but plan to get a copy of it. There are also more recent sources that favor the Roman hypothesis; the one initially proposed by Keramopoulos (1953). However, the hypothesis about the Celtic kilt should be removed in my opinion; whichever way we look at it, it is erroneous. There are also sources that associate the initial use of the garment with Balkan pastoral groups, in general.
 * A source i am aware of, discussing primary sources, is the article Η παράσταση της ελληνικής φορεσιάς στα χαρακτικά των ευρωπαϊκών περιηγητικών εκδόσεων (15ος-19ος αι.) (1989) by Aphrodite Kouria; though, i haven't read it yet. According to Konstantina Bada (1995), the primary sources from the late 18th century onwards, connect fustanella with Albanians, Souliotes, Vlachs, Klephts, the army of Ali Pasha, etc. She also refers to Dupre's illustrated chronicle from 1825, where both Albanians and Greeks are dressed in fustanella. She also adds that Greek sources (memoirs, biographies, documents, etc.), even though sparse in relevant information, also paint a picture of a garment that was associated with different ethnic groups, during the pre-revolutionary and revolutionary periods.
 * Regarding the dress of the Roumeliotes. The source doesn't refer to the dress chosen by the British regiment, but to the dress chosen by the Greek state, after it was established. The fustanella of the Roumeliotes was much shorter, and it could even be used to differentiate the ethnicity of the wearer. For example, Konstantina Bada writes, among other things:
 * Ως πιθανές διαφοροποιήσεις που θα μπορούσαν να προσδιορίζουν σχηματικά την εθνότητα μπορούμε να θεωρήσουμε το μήκος της φουστανέλας. Οι λίγες ενδείξεις μας φανερώνουν ότι η κοντύτερη, (στο γόνατο) φουστανέλα συνδέεται με τους Έλληνες και η μακρύτερη με τους Αρβανίτες.... Πληροφορούμαστε π.χ. ότι όλοι οι μισθοφόροι του Αλή Αρβανίτες και Έλληνες φορούσαν φουστανέλα: κάτω από τα γόνατα οι Αρβανίτες και την κοντή (φουστάνι μπι γκιου χαϊντούσε, όπως έλεγαν οι Αρβανίτες), την «κλέφτικη» οι Έλληνες. Διάφορες ωστόσο ενδείξεις μας δείχνουν ότι το μήκος της φουστανέλας αποτέλεσε και σημείο απόδοσης της ηλικίας (οι νέοι φορούσαν κοντύτερη φουστανέλα), τοπικής προέλευσης (οι Ρουμελιώτες φορούσαν κοντύτερη έναντι των Πελοποννησίων), θέσης στην εσωτερική ιεράρχηση των κλέφτικων ομάδων (οι οπλαρχηγοί φορούσαν μακρύτερη και οι στρατιώτες (παλλικάρια) κοντύτερη). [As possible differences that could schematically determine the ethnicity, we can consider the length of the fustanella. The few indications show us that the shorter (knee length) dress is associated with the Greeks and the longer one with the Arvanites.... We are informed for example that all of Ali's mercenaries, Arvanites and Greeks, wore fustanella: below the knees the Arvanites and the short one (fustan mbi gju hajduçe, as the Arvanites used to say), the kléftika by the Greeks. Various indications, however, show us that the length of the fustanella was also a sign of age (the young wore a shorter fustanella), local origin (the Roumeliotes wore shorter than the Peloponnesians), position in the internal hierarchy of the klephts' groups (chieftains wore longer and soldiers (palikars) shorter).]
 * Regardless of the above, we do have depictions of young Greeks wearing long fustanellas as well. Demetrios1993 (talk) 01:36, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
 * I removed your addition about the 18th and early 19th century "evolution", it is obviously an erroneous conjecture, the Albanian fustanella was already established and widely known at that time. – Βατο (talk) 02:21, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
 * which primary sources? As for Dupre, it is too late, at that time the Albanian fustanella had already gained popularity. not true, the knee length fustanella was widely worn by Albanians, also appearing on an engraving by Fauvel dating as early as 1782. – Βατο (talk) 02:33, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Even if fustanella was known during the 18th and early 19th centuries, i don't see how this contradicts the hypothesis that it evolved from poukamisa (knee-length shirt) during that period. Bada actually expands on the hypothesis, and her reasoning is convincing. At least two more scholars i checked support her views; Droulia (2001) [1999] and Macha-Bizoumi (2021). Something should be included. The engraving by you referred to, looks more like a poukamisa (knee-length shirt) than a pleated skirt. So do other depictions from the period; such as Vanmour (1700–1737), Choiseul-Gouffier (1782), and Hobhouse (1809–1810). Demetrios1993 (talk) 03:32, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
 * I would agree about the 18th century evolution of the garment, but in the 19th century it is out of question. But note, it concerns the evolution, not the origin of the garment. The engraving by obviously is a type of fustanella. Also the one worn by this Albanian of Greece in 1813, the one worn by Souliotes, this one in 1827, and especially the one adopted in the British regiment in 1810. If the sources you mention refer to the evolution of the fustanella and the whole notorious Albanian traditional warrior dress, which later was dressed also by the non Albanian warriors of the revolution, it most probably emerged among the rich Cham Albanians (note that another name for the fustanella is tsamika) or during the years of the Albanian dominion under Ali Pasha. For what concerns the adoption from the "Roumeliotes", this dress and the others reported in the pictures above, were not "Roumeliote" dress, they are identical to the Albaninan warrior costume worn by Byron as you can see in the picture above. Regardless of the presumable usage of some types of fustanella among the pepole of the region, the article should clarify the historical documented fact that the Albanian warrior dress was adopted in its entirety by other populations, including the Greeks. The subsequent imitation and evolution among the different Balkan populations during the 19th century should also be clarified. – Βατο (talk) 10:13, 21 June 2023 (UTC)


 * I would propose this wording to add before "In modern times" in the lead section, summarising the crucial historical events about this garment:

"The Albanian traditional costume with fustanella had identified the special troops that Albanians constituted within the Ottoman Empire. Their bravery in combat became renowned, especially in the era of the Ottoman Albanian pashas Ali of Yanina and Muhammad Ali of Egypt. In the 1810s the Albanian warrior dress was adopted by a British regiment in the Ionian Islands. In the 1820s it became a principal visual symbol of Philhellenism, and during the Greek War of Independence it was dressed by the revolutionary fighters. At that time its notoriety as a symbol of male bravery and heroism grew considerably across the Ottoman Empire and spread throughout Europe. Following the Greek indipendece, fustanella and associated embroidered jackets were adopted by the nascent Greek army. In 1835 it was proclaimed the official court costume and eventually it became the Greek national dress. The Albanian-Greek attire thereafter acquired popularity among peoples who wanted to dress in a courageous heroic manner."


 * I tried to write it as balanced as possible according to current bibliography, especially to most recent publications like and . Before adding it, thoughts and proposals for reformulations would be welcome. – Βατο (talk) 20:53, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
 * The first sentence contains "Albanian" twice, which is redundant.
 * Too much WP:PUFFERY ("bravery", "male bravery and heroism", "courageous heroic manner").
 * I don't see why its adoption by a single British regiment in the Ioanian islands is lede worthy.
 * Khirurg (talk) 23:31, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
 * The first sentence contains "Albanian traditional costume" and "Albanians", it is not reduntand.
 * "bravery", "male bravery and heroism", "courageous heroic manner" are the words used by scholars, and they are essential for the explanation of the spread and popularity of the costume. If you could propose some other terms without loosing the meaning of the information, it would be great.
 * Its adoption by the British regiment in the 1810s is relevant, because it was the first time the traditional costume was officialized as a military dress, being imposed to different ethnic groups of the regiment (keep in mind that before the revolution the traditional costume of the Maniots, who also were part of that regiment, was completely different), and because it immediately preceded major Philhellene activities (which promoted the Albanian costume), and the Greek War of Independece (when the costume was already widespread among revolutionary fighters). – Βατο (talk) 00:23, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Regarding your previous comment, Bada describes the origin of the garment as an evolution of the poukamisa, which wasn't just worn by Albanians, and associates it with the phenomenon of brigandry, that was mainly exercised by pastoral groups. Again, this should be added under § Origins, as it represents a different point of view in current scholarship, which is based on thorough analysis. As for the fustanella already existing in the late 18th century, i believe so as well, but regarding engraving, it doesn't really show a fustanella (pleated skirt); we are not even sure if it shows a skirt. The Albanian of Greece is actually from 1814, and does indeed appear to be showing a fustanella. Regarding your proposition, here is a slight rephrasing:
 * In short, i merged the first two sentences, added commas, corrected indipendece to independence, and changed dressed to worn. Demetrios1993 (talk) 03:05, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
 * I don't agree about the first two sentences, your proposal does not merge them, it completely removes one of them: "The Albanian traditional costume with fustanella had identified the special troops that Albanians constituted within the Ottoman Empire." which is what bibliography says. A possible merging without losing information could be: "The Albanian traditional costume with fustanella had identified the special troops that Albanians constituted within the Ottoman Empire, whose military prowess became renowned, especially in the era of the Ottoman Albanian pashas Ali of Yanina and Muhammad Ali of Egypt." I also replaced "bravery in combat" with "military prowess".
 * I think engraving shows the Albanian traditional warrior costume with fustanella, identical to that depicted by Pouqueville in his voyage (1798–1801); the burden of proof is on those who unreasonably consider it a distinct dress. Anyway it's not so important, before the turning of the century the costume with the pleated skirt was already widespread among Albanians, with enough documentation from westerners. As for adding that hypothesis under § Origins, it is not a "different point of view in scholarship", different types of fustanella existed (otherwise we have to remove this one because it does not resembles a typical foustanella as well), and the multi-pleated skirt typical of the Albanian costume was already established in 1800. Badas' hypothesis, if it concerns the 18th century, could be added about an evolution explanation, but an origin in the 19th century, contrasting with historically documented facts and mainstream present-day scolarship can not be added. As for the claims made about the 18th century without historical evidence, or contrasting with the documented one, they would be highly conjectural and should be treated with caution. Also, this part you cited above by the same author:  includes so many inaccurate and WP:EXTRAORDINARY claims that it borders WP:FRINGE, especially this one:  Also, I do not understand why does this author refer to Ali's mercenaries as "Arvanites and Greeks", in Ali's era "Arvanites" as used in present day scholarship did not exist yet, they were all Albanians. And Ali's era lasted several decades, in the earliest ones Greek soldiers have not yet adopted the Albanian warrior costume, at that time, and at least until 1810, it was strictly associated with Albanian soldiers. Out of context information is useless. – Βατο (talk) 10:47, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
 * I think engraving shows the Albanian traditional warrior costume with fustanella, identical to that depicted by Pouqueville in his voyage (1798–1801); the burden of proof is on those who unreasonably consider it a distinct dress. Anyway it's not so important, before the turning of the century the costume with the pleated skirt was already widespread among Albanians, with enough documentation from westerners. As for adding that hypothesis under § Origins, it is not a "different point of view in scholarship", different types of fustanella existed (otherwise we have to remove this one because it does not resembles a typical foustanella as well), and the multi-pleated skirt typical of the Albanian costume was already established in 1800. Badas' hypothesis, if it concerns the 18th century, could be added about an evolution explanation, but an origin in the 19th century, contrasting with historically documented facts and mainstream present-day scolarship can not be added. As for the claims made about the 18th century without historical evidence, or contrasting with the documented one, they would be highly conjectural and should be treated with caution. Also, this part you cited above by the same author:  includes so many inaccurate and WP:EXTRAORDINARY claims that it borders WP:FRINGE, especially this one:  Also, I do not understand why does this author refer to Ali's mercenaries as "Arvanites and Greeks", in Ali's era "Arvanites" as used in present day scholarship did not exist yet, they were all Albanians. And Ali's era lasted several decades, in the earliest ones Greek soldiers have not yet adopted the Albanian warrior costume, at that time, and at least until 1810, it was strictly associated with Albanian soldiers. Out of context information is useless. – Βατο (talk) 10:47, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

I am ok with your sentence as well. As for Bada's hypothesis, again, it has to do with the evolution of poukamisa (an elongated shirt with a waistband essentially, not a skirt) into the garment of fustanella (white pleated skirt), during the 18th–19th c.; though, she is essentially referring to 1700–1800. For example, she also writes about an account describing a special type of fustanella that was already worn by Arnauts in the 1799–1801 period; thus, i have no problem writing just 18th century. But again, i don't see any other more relevant section other than § Origins for this information. Regarding the quote you mention, she also includes a secondary source as a reference, but i don't have access to it; in any case, she spoke of possible differences. I was not planning to expand on this anyway. Furthermore, when she speaks of Arvanites, she is obviously referring to Albanians, as it is used in juxtaposition to Greeks; some Greek authors tend to write like that, in a historical context. Demetrios1993 (talk) 04:07, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
 * The legth of the fustanella is not related to the ethnicity of the wearer (unless we talk about modern times). We should see what the author suggests about the evolution of this garment, providing quotes here because I don't have access to the source, and then evaluating the more suitable place in the article. However, if the author specifically refers to the 18th and 19th centuries, the hypothesis can't involve the Albanian garment, because it was already established and imitated by others in the early 19th century. Also, I noticed the term poukamiso has been used to refer to a female garment; the usage of the term, its historical context and documentation should also be clarified. – Βατο (talk) 11:45, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Here are some relevant quotes:
 * pp. 133–134: Οι εικονογραφικές και άλλες πηγές σκιαγραφούν, για τις φτωχές αγροκτηνοτροφικές κοινότητες του ηπειρωτικού τουλάχιστον χώρου, μια απλή φορεσιά που αποτελείται, με ποικίλες τοπικές παραλλαγές, από μιά υφαντή ολόσωμη λευκή πουκαμίσα που φτάνει ως το γόνατο και δένει μ' ένα ζωνάρι στη μέση και από διάφορα είδη επενδυτών με μανίκια ή χωρίς αυτά.... Σε αρκετές εξάλλου αγροκτηνοτροφικές κοινότητες διατηρήθηκε μέχρι πρόσφατα αυτή η βασική μορφή της «πουκαμίσας», έστω και ως καθημερινό ένδυμα αλλά δεν συνδέθηκε, τουλάχιστον ονοματολογικά, με τη φουστανέλα. [Illustrative and other sources outline, for the poor agropastoralist communities of the continental area at least, a simple costume consisting, with various local variations, of a woven elongated white poukamisa (shirt) reaching the knee and tied with a belt at the waist, with various types of sleeves, or without.... In several agropastoralist communities, this basic form of the "poukamisa" was preserved until recently, even as a daily garment, but it was not connected, at least nominally, to the fustanella.]
 * pp. 134–135: Η παραπέρα διερεύνηση του θέματος μας έδειξε ωστόσο ότι θα πρέπει να δούμε τη γνωστή τυπολογία της «φουστανέλας», ως την εξελιγμένη μορφή της «πουκαμίσας» των ποιμενικών κυρίως κοινωνικών ομάδων που κινούνται στις οροσειρές των Βαλκανίων και να συνδέσουμε την εξέλιξή της με την ανάπτυξη του αρματολισμού και ταυτόχρονα στην κύρια πηγή ανανέωσής του, τους κλέφτες. Οι ιστορικοί αναφέρουν ότι οι παραπάνω κοινωνικές ομάδες, διαφορετικών βέβαια εθνοτήτων, λόγω της κοινωνικής τους οργάνωσης, της σχέσης τους με την ευρύτερη κοινωνία, τον τρόπο ζωής και σκέψης τους, συνέβαλαν στην ανάπτυξη του φαινομένου της κοινωνικής ληστείας, καθιστώντας μάλιστα τη ληστεία «συμπληρωματική λειτουργία» της ποιμενικής κυρίως ζωής τους. Θα λέγαμε λοιπόν ότι η φορεσιά της φουστανέλας σχηματοποιείται στα πλαίσια ανάπτυξης μιας στάσης και ενός πολιτισμού «ανταρσίας» που παράγεται στις συγκεκριμένες συνθήκες του 18ου-19ου αι. και αναπτύσσεται δίνοντας περιορισμένη σημασία στην έννοια της εθνότητας και της κοινωνικής συνείδησης. [Further investigation of the matter showed us, however, that we should see the well-known type of the "fustanella", as the evolved form of the "poukamisa" worn by the pastoral social groups that moved in the Balkan mountain ranges, and connect its evolution with the development of armatolism, and at the same time its main source of renewal, the brigands. Historians report that the aforementioned social groups, of course of different ethnicities, due to their social organization, their relationship with the wider society, their way of life and thinking, contributed to the development of the phenomenon of social banditry, indeed making robbery "a complementary function" of their mainly pastoral way of life. We would therefore say that the fustanella takes shape in the context of the development of an attitude and a culture of "rebellion" produced in the specific conditions of the 18th-19th centuries, and develops by giving limited importance to the concept of ethnicity and social consciousness.]
 * By the way, she isn't really dating the fustanella to the 19th century, but speaks in general of the conditions that were characteristic of the broader 18th-19th c. period, which includes the early attestations of the Albanian garment. Elsewhere, she acknowledges depictions/descriptions from the last decades of the 18th century as being related to fustanella. As for the name poukamisa, it could be mentioned, but it can also be omitted altogether; a mere description of it as an elongated shirt with a waistband, would suffice for now, without going into detail on the polysemy of the term; poukamiso is also the word for dress shirt in standard modern Greek. Demetrios1993 (talk) 04:17, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
 * It could be a hypothesis about the origin/evolution/usage of the garment, but its persuasiveness is weakened by the fact that at the turning of the 18th-19th century no brigands or klephts of ethnicities other than Albanian were described as wearing fustanella. In Epirus it remained a distinct Albanian feature until late, while in Morea, initially it was reported expressly as an Albanian/Arvanite feature, and in particular it was not worn by Maniot Greek klephts. These are some reasons why in current scholarship the garment which later spread widely among klephts and armatoles is regarded as specifically an adoption from the Albanian warrior dress. Also, we have historical documentation of the increasing adoption of the Albanian costume among other ethnicities in the early 19th century, but until 1810, when it was reported that Maniot warriors did not wear it yet, and when it was adopted as an official uniform within the British army, it remained a distinct feature of Albanian warriors. I dont' know whether Badas takes into consideration all these historical facts. Badas' hypothesis is strictly associated with the alleged dress of brigands of different ethnicities, but since the historical documentation does not support it, rather contrasts it, it remains a baseless conjecture, further explained with another speculation (poukamiso/shirt). I would prefer to exclude speculations based on further speculations as they constitute highly unlikely theories, but if we are to include it, we should clarify that at the turning of the century it was documented as a characteristic Albanian dress, which was increasingly adopted by others in the early 19th century. – Βατο (talk) 09:58, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
 * I just found a source which makes that hypothesis completely undue: . Before being associated with any klepht or armatole, it was already established as an Albanian mercenary dress within the Ottoman Empire before 1800. I already added something like that in the lede, but this source is even more clear. The 19th century context of 'culture of "rebellion"' is irrelevant for something already existent in the 18th century and not specifically related to 'rebellion' or 'brigandage'. – Βατο (talk) 10:40, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
 * , I've just noticed that the misleading content about the British regiment was added into the article based on Badas: . If this source does not even mention that also Albanians were in the regiment, that the dress of the Greek Maniots who were also recruited was different (without fustanella), and that the Albanian dress was officially adopted by the regiment also being imposed on other ethnicities, how could we regard its highly unlikely speculations that contrast with the documented evidence as worth of inclusion? – Βατο (talk) 20:18, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
 * I have been following this entire discussion - to me, it seems as though Badas' work is highly based on speculation and is full of inaccuracies. In all honesty, due to the fact that there are multiple inaccuracies and misinforming statements, I'm inclined to question whether her work is all that reliable at all, and if she really should have a place on the article. Botushali (talk) 00:31, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
 * The claim about the regiment is not really erroneous; it's just that the author didn't expand on it. Bada takes into consideration a number of primary and secondary sources; including a number of them that talk about the garment's early association with Albanians. Anyway, i don't see this going anywhere. Demetrios1993 (talk) 03:19, 25 June 2023 (UTC)


 * The picture of the Aromanian shepherd in traditional dress of the Manaki Brothers Archive seems not to portray a fustanella, it rather seems to be this typical Aromanian dress. It should be replaced with another picture that clearly shows a fustanella garment worn by Aromanians. – Βατο (talk) 09:49, 30 June 2023 (UTC)


 * , I noticed your recent edits, the article is structured with sections separated according to the geographical spread of the garment. While I would agree about the merging of sections like Crimea because people wearing the garment did not settle permanently there, I would oppose the removal of the section Egypt because a sizeable community wearing the fustanella as a traditional costume settled there permanently, mantaining their tradition for several generations. Alternatively another structure of the article should be proposed, for example naming the sections according to the population groups who wore the garment, but I think it would result more difficult to separate and include the content in those sections. – Βατο (talk) 11:28, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

The so-called 4th century AD figurine
Pardon me but this text: A terracotta figurine with a fustanella garment (i.e. a pleated skirt wore by a man) was found in Durrës, in present-day central Albania, dating back to the 4th century CE, which has been claimed as the earliest archaeological evidence of a fustanella is not supported by the source. The specific book claims that there is archaeological evidence that Illyrians wore Fustanellas from the 5th century BC.Alexikoua (talk) 03:40, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I slightly reworded it according to the source. As you can see from the picture provided in the book, it is the clearest archaeological evidence of a fustanella worn by a man in antiquity. But above all, that evidence is in agreement with both the Illyrian and Roman origin theories. – Βατο (talk) 14:19, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

Snodgrass: removal or not

 * As already explained, this content is completely incorrect, the costume was already worn by Albanian troops in the Ottoman Empire and parts of Europe since the late 18th century, specifically distinguishing Albanian warriors from others. – Βατο (talk) 22:39, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Actually it's not: many Albanian fighters did wore the Ottoman pants as shown in several depictions that time, while the Foustanella was part of the Greek military costume (among irregular unitsa).Snodgrass is RS, no need to proceed to disruptive removals. The concept that Foustanella was already in use among Albanians does not contradict this statement. Alexikoua (talk) 22:44, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Did you read the content of the well sourced article? See at least the lede section. POV pushing ahistorical narratives have no place here. – Βατο (talk) 22:54, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Snodgrass is among the top graded sources we have on the subject. Sure I have, and there is nothing to contradict this comment since the Ottoman pants were typical of Albanians guerilla fighters (and yes "turkish pants are worn in central Albania" even today []). Never claim that specialized scholarship is ahistorical only because it doesn't fit a specific POV.Alexikoua (talk) 03:39, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Snodgrass' publication is an encyclopaedia (WP:TERTIARY), and the limited information it provides is: There is extensive documentation that from the beginning of the 19th century it was already a widespread garment in all the Albanian inhabited territories, also being worn by Albanian warriors in different parts of the Ottoman Empire and in some parts of Europe. In the mid-19th century it was portrayed by Edward Lear as a traditional ethnic costume of the Albanians. Whether some people wanted to dress with pants or fustanella when it suited them is irrelevant. The source should have specified when and where did the replacement occur. From the wording of the source it seems that  in general, when it was not the case. Also the rough description  is inacurate and irrelevant for this article, there were several lengths of the Albanian garment depending on the geographical location and personal preferences as already explained by reliable sources. WP:CONTEXTMATTERS for the content to be added. – Βατο (talk) 09:03, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Edward Lear falls to wp:PRIMARY and he is one of several travelers that passed through the region. Snodgrass publication is specialized on the field of historical costumes and there is nothing that contradicts his claim especially when Ottoman pants were quite typical in Albanian society.Alexikoua (talk) 03:37, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
 * It seems you have not yet understood WP:PRIMARY. Primary sources have not been used into the article, they are all reliable WP:SECONDARY sources. As already explained, the single short sentence by Snodgrass that does not even provide a historical or geographical context is useless for this article. – Βατο (talk) 14:30, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

Ali Pasha's court in Ioannina located in... Albania
The selective use of 19th century abstract geographical terms should be avoided per wp:RS, I've replaced the citation with a reliable source []. For future reference Ioannina was that time Ottoman Empire and today is part of Greece. Claiming that is was in Albania using the title of 19th century drawing collection is far from wp:RS.Alexikoua (talk) 03:27, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
 * They are well sourced images, the court could be that of Tepelena, the image does not mention Ioannina, but above all, it does not mention a court but an "Audience chamber". Both the primary source and the reliable secondary source of which I provided citations support its inclusion in the section Albania. The personal opinions of one clearly biased editor are irrelevant, and this attempt of appropriation of Albanian history is unacceptable. User:Alexikoua has pushed his extreme POV in several articles. In this case it will not be tolerated. – Βατο (talk) 10:22, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
 * The image depicts the court located in Ioannina, source: [], in Greece. You simply provided 19th century material and presented it as RS. You know that's not even close to that, especially using it as an excuse to present as Albania cities that were never part of it.Alexikoua (talk) 17:28, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Since you insist, I clarified the relevant hisorical context according to the reliable sources, so you will no longer have any doubts about it. – Βατο (talk) 08:19, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
 * You need to provide full citation, a citation without correct url that claims that Ioannina was in Albania won't work [] (Inside the Air Force?).Alexikoua (talk) 20:28, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Done, that citation is now reachable, but there have been cited already several others. Also, since it appear you din't know it, see  Your feelings and original thoughts are irrelevant here. Janina was the capital of Ali's autonomous dominions officially referred to as "Albania" by him and his ruling class, and foreign states that recognised it and mantained diplomatic relations with it. That is a documented fact. Now, stop with unconstructive editing. – Βατο (talk) 20:52, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
 * You name that it was ... considered, referred but never official called that way southern Albania or simple Albania. Obviously some unofficial correspodence may called it that way or even some 19th century drawings (which you are citing now as RS), but it's straight wp:OR. The chamber of Ali Pasha was located in Ioannina and the reader needs to know the real political entity the city belonged and it didn't belong to Albania but to Ottoman Empire (and the subdivision was the local  Pashalik). Drawing descriptions by Artstor are not wp:RS in terms of historical geography and wp:RS. Alexikoua (talk) 21:12, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I see know you agree that the picture is in Ioannina, as such we agree to move it to the correct section, right?Alexikoua (talk) 21:22, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Nope, the image is strictly about Albanians and Albania, not Greeks and Greece. Your original opinions are irrelevant, informations provided by reliable sources (who have been extensively cited and quoted) are relevant. And Ali expressly considered his autonomous state as Albania. Now accept it and go to improve some articles. – Βατο (talk) 21:37, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

Lead Origin
It’s quite clear that the fustanella is of Albanian origin. All attributions to Ancient Greece and even the Celtic kilt are moot. The lead chronologically acknowledges that it was first worn by Albanians, and even the Greek usage section states that in wikivoice. It is the most popularly-held scholarly view and also the most credible according to scholarly research.

Sure, some Greek scholars and philhellenes may attribute it to Greek culture, but these claims are WP:FRINGE. Let’s call a spade a spade, the fustanella (the actual fustanella, not similar skirts worn many centuries ago that are not technically fustanella) is of Albanian origin and was introduced to the Greeks by southern Albanian tribes. This should be reflected in the first sentence of the lead. Botushali (talk) 03:29, 8 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Absolutely not. Nothing is "quite clear", "moot", or fringe. The lede doesn't "chronologically acknowledge" anything either. Khirurg (talk) 04:14, 8 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Poor argument. The fustanella’s use in Greek society in the lede is mentioned only after 1820, Albanian use predates that. So yes, it chronologically acknowledges that Albanian society has used the fustanella longer than Greek society.
 * The Celtic kilts are regarded as having been introduced in the Scottish Highlands during the 16th century CE. Claims tying the fustanella to the kilt are moot.
 * The Greek usage subsection clearly states that it was introduced by southern Albanian tribes. The fustanella in its current form originated from Albanian society.
 * It would be nice if you didn’t oppose things for the sake of opposing them just because they’re Albanian. Rather, you should read the article and then you would grasp that the general scholarly viewpoint is that the fustanella is of Albanian origin, or actually make valid arguments rather than saying “x isn’t y”. Your editing and the way in which you participate in TP discussions is disruptive. No sources, no points, no nothing. Botushali (talk) 05:12, 8 September 2023 (UTC)
 * There are plenty of sources in the article that state the origin of the Fustanella is other than Albanian. Read them. And stop casting aspersions and making accusations of bad faith (It would be nice if you didn’t oppose things for the sake of opposing them just because they’re Albanian.) while you're at it. It's not the first time, either. Do that again and I will seek admin intervention. Khirurg (talk) 14:37, 8 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Go ahead, seek admin intervention because you cannot point to specific passages from the article to actually support why you want to block this change. In fact, the article states, and also contradicts how the Celtic kilt hypothesis clashes with the introduction of the Celtic kilt in the Scottish Highlands in the past few centuries. By all means, the fustanella has expanded throughout the Balkans via Albanian populations, and that is covered in the article.
 * I also want to point out the irony of an editor who is well-known for casting aspersions threatening to report me for aspersions. Not only did you file a bogus “tag-teaming” report against me and a number of other editors which failed entirely, but you also decided to double down on those false accusations in user:Khirurg/Evidence. Nonetheless, that’s not relevant to this conversation - unless you can argue based on sources or passages in the article that the general scholarly consensus does not favour an Albanian origin, it should be re-added to the lead.Botushali (talk) 15:35, 8 September 2023 (UTC)
 * You keep saying the the article states, but the article is not a reliable source. You really should know by now that wikipedia articles are not reliable sources. An editor who is well known for casting aspersion is an aspersion in itself. Stop it. Khirurg (talk) 15:28, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Stop making this discussion about your behaviour. I use “the article states” in place of listing the vast array of sources which make it abundantly clear. Mesi /2019) states that the fustanella was used by Albanians centuries before Ottoman rule. Gjergji (2004) writes that the fustanella spread through Albanian-inhabited regions via Albanian populations.
 * The usage in Bulgaria from Baleva (2017) describes it as the Albanian traditional warrior costume. The usage in Egypt is linked to the Albanian who settled in Egypt. In Italy, the fustanella was spread by Arbëreshë populations. In Morth Macedonia, Gjergji (2004) elaborates that the spread of the costume seems to be linked to the Tosk Albanians. In Moldova and Wallachia, Mesi (2019) calls it the Albanian fustanella. In Turkey, it is linked to Albanian troops.
 * In the Greek usage section, the sources that talk about Byzantines and Greek society supposedly using the fustanella as we know it today are all from the mid 1900’s with the exception of Vroom (2014). As such, WP:AGEMATTERS applies, particularly when newer scholarship is more supportive of an Albanian origin. WP:FRINGE applies considering the fact that I see two sources (Notopoulos and Morgan) from 1964 and 1942 respectively supposedly linking older Greek populations to the modern fustanella.
 * Now, I count 11 sources in the article from recent years that actually state the fustanella was borrowed from the Albanians by the Greeks. Southern Albanian tribes introduced the costume to the Greeks - that is the scholarly consensus in the past two decades of scholarly research. The work of two authors from 1942 and 1964 cannot be considered reliable in this regard. It is very clear, then, that the scholarly consensus is that the fustanella is of Albanian origin. It should be readded to the lead, so perhaps you’d like to self-RV. Botushali (talk) 22:25, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
 * I have to agree with Botushali. The Fustanella is probably the most obvious Arvanitic influence on Greece. AlexBachmann (talk) 00:20, 10 September 2023 (UTC)

There is no Greek usage section; the sections are based on regions, not really on ethnicities. Furthermore, the lead, which is the result of consensus, focuses on the garment's recent history, but that doesn't mean that it isn't attested in earlier periods. Its ultimate origin is indeed disputed among scholars; besides the Ancient Greek and Celtic hypotheses that were mentioned, there are also the Illyrian, Roman, and Byzantine hypotheses, and they are not outdated. Albanians did indeed help spread the garment during the Ottoman era, but this doesn't concern its ultimate origin. Also, Mesi (2019) says that it was used by a large population living in the Albanian territories, centuries before the Ottoman occupation, but that is just a claim made in passing, and the author doesn't cite any actual evidence to support it. Albanians introducing their military costume (which includes fustanella) to Greece, and subsequently, it, being adopted by Greek populations and becoming part of the national dress of Greece is already mentioned in the lead, and it doesn't really negate the hypotheses that concern the garment's ultimate origin. The lead is fine as it is. Demetrios1993 (talk) 01:46, 10 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Yup, that is correct. There are plenty of recent scholarly sources that suggest that it has origins other than Albanian. For example, Papantoniou, Ioanna (2000). Greek Dress: From Ancient Times to the Early 20th Century. Εμπορική Τράπεζα. p. 208. ISBN 978-960-7059-11-6. Keramopoullos's theory that the fustanella was descended from the Roman military uniform seems to me more likely.. There is no scholarly consensus on this garment's origins, and any claims to that effect are simply not substantiated. Khirurg (talk) 01:56, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
 * I support as well maintaining the lead as is. It is perfectly neutral and will hardly cause disagreements in the future. I am sure a lot of sources suggesting a non-Albanian origin can also be amassed. Super Dromaeosaurus (talk) 22:33, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
 * The fustanella may have initially been based on a Roman or Illyrian garment, sure. However, the fustanella as a stand-alone garment is of Albanian origin. It may be derived or inspired by a different garment, but the garment as is originated in Albanian society.
 * I see a claim that a lot of sources claiming a non-Albanian origin can be amassed. Perhaps that’s true, but are they reliable and up to date? The sources discussing the spread of the Albanian fustanella in different societies are from the last two decades or so. One source addition from the year 2000 won’t change that. Botushali (talk) 01:32, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Sorry but Wikipedia won't state that the fustanella is of Illyrian Albanian origin unless there is a solid majority of reliable sources agreeing to this. Right now, there is no such academic consensus. For this reason, the editorial WP:CONSENSUS is to respect this and reflect on this by keeping the current lead version the others also told you about. --- ❖ SilentResident ❖ (talk &#9993; &#124; contribs &#9998;) 08:04, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
 * I didn’t say Illyrian origin. I said Albanian. The fustanella may be based on Roman or Illyrian garments, but the fustanella as a garment arose and spread with modern Albanian populations, something that is very well sourced. It would be best to actually read through the dispute and view the changes before getting involved in the discussion. Botushali (talk) 09:48, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
 * My apologies, I wanted to say "Albanian" but somehow ended up writing "Illyrian" without realizing it. This has been corrected. I insist in what I have said: an academic consensus is required for this to be reflected on Wikipedia. "Very well sourced" is different to having an academic consensus on the matter. Perhaps more scholars will shift to the one or the other view, but until then, no such a change may happen on lead.--- ❖ SilentResident ❖ (talk &#9993; &#124; contribs &#9998;) 18:16, 12 September 2023 (UTC)

Why is Janina mentioned as Albania, subsequently Greece in the caption under the portrait of Ali Pasha?
2A02:85F:E8AE:4155:6D1:3AFF:FECC:5BB5 (talk) 14:38, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Why is there no mention of Vlach Fustanella?
2A02:85F:E8AE:4155:6D1:3AFF:FECC:5BB5 (talk) 14:52, 30 October 2023 (UTC)


 * I dont know. If you find sourced information please add it. RoyalHeritageAlb (talk) 16:14, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

The developers should review the article there's many biased information coming from unknown accounts
. Marenguista di Napoli d&#39;Attica (talk) 03:31, 16 December 2023 (UTC)