In recent years, the study of various aspects of the economic and social history of Ottoman Greece has brought to light evidence and interpretations that have improved our understanding of the economic and social mechanisms that were in operation at the time. The village of Ambelakia in Greece has stood out as the unique example of how a Greek community under Ottoman occupation flourished in the late 18th c. The Ambelakia phenomenon has been studied thoroughly by both economists and social historians in the last a hundred and twenty five years. However, a reexamination of the evidence and the interpretations concerning Ambelakia, brought to light irregularities and inconsistencies that needed fresh thought. This study is neither comprehensive nor final, as our research has shown that a complete examination of the trading operations of Greek merchants in the late 18th c. demands a thorough investigation in the Austrian Archives as well as comparative studies with other commercially involved communities in Ottoman Greece. [1]

Let us first have a look at what is the present scholarly view of the case of Ambelakia. The village of Ambelakia is located on the slopes of Mount Ossa, over the valley of Tempe in Thessaly, Greece and in the 18th c. was under Ottoman domination. In the second half of the l8th century merchants and artisans of the village decided to unite their small productive or trade units of dyed cotton, the main product of the village, in order to obtain better prices. The union resulted to the koine syndrophia (common association) in which everybody contributed capital, work or both [2]. The koine syndrophia, after changes, lasted until 1811 when it was dissolved due to a variety of reasons [3]. As the koine syndrophia was nothing more than a trading company, either in the form of a cooperative [4] or in the form of a capitalist commercial association [5] --depending on interpretation-- its members had set by-laws by which the syndrophia was directed. Only two sets of the by-laws survive and they are the only documents left by the association as a whole. The 1780 by-laws was first published in the 1910s [6] and the 1795 by-laws was published in French translation (the original is lost) by F. Boulanger in 1875 [7].

The study of the two by-laws along with letters exchanged by members of the Association as well as accounts of travelers who visited the village in the 18th century brought to light a number of historical problems. One of the major issues is the date of the formation of the koine syndrophia; a second is the economics of the brotherhood; a third is the inconsistency around the by-laws of 1795 and the renewal of the syndrophia; and a final one, is its social aspect and its character. [8]

The exact date of the formation of the koine syndrophia can not be determined as no documents exist to prove the assumptions scholars have made, using information from various sources. However, we do know that the thread trade in the area where Ambelakia is situated started around the turn of the 18th c. French consul Gournier reported to the French authorities on 13 July 1705 that "cloth, cotton goods in various colors and other good stuffs striped [...] are made in Tyrnavos [Thessaly] [9] and can be found in good prices." [10] Also, there were inhabitants of Ambelakia involved in the thread trade around the mid 18th c. and actually there was at least one syndrophia in 1771. This company was an association of two merchants. In the archives of the Doganis family the reading of a document reveals that two inhabitants of Ambelakia agree to dissolve in 1777 their commercial association founded in 1771:

Ambelakia 1777 With this letter [...] the undersigned make clear that on 15 April 1771 Mr Yoryis Totous agreed with count Drossinos to exercise together the craft of dyeing red. Count Drossinos went to Europe to sell the threads and Totou took care of the dye-houses here and any profit or loss the wealth-giving God sent them was shared equally. Today they considered their profits and losses and gave an end to their association [11]

It seems that such associations, between two or more inhabitants of Ambelakia, were common between 1750 and 1770. They were called syndrophies (associations), kompanies (companies) or oikoi (commercial houses) and consisted of small groups of relatives, friends or compatriots who were involved in the production and trade of dyed cotton. [12]. This leads one to believe that there were at least some merchants who had contacts with the European markets and had organized associations instead of competing with one another. This assumption is also supported by Felix Feaujour, the French consul in Thessaloniki, who reported to French authorities in the 18th c. that the koine syndrophia of Ambclakia was created in 1788 and it was the union of many different syndrophies which existed before. [13] More likely, the founding of the union was due to the great demand for dyed cotton threads in German markets in the late 18th century [14] and especially for the quality of cotton that was dyed in Ambelakia. [15] It has been argued though that the unification of the different small syndrophies took place in 1780 when the surviving by-laws of that year were drafted [16]. This point of view is supported by J. J. Bjornstahls, a Swedish traveler, who visited Ambelakia in 1779 and in his traveling account makes no reference to any koine syndrophia but he only writes of individual ventures:

Most of the inhabitants exercise the craft of dyeing red and have trade connections with Europe, especially with Viena and Leipzig where they have trade offices. I met here a lot who have spent many years in these cities and speak and write German fluently. There are also here wealthy merchants who have their own good manners. [17]

On the other hand, in the first article of the 1780 by-laws it is stated: "[we] have decided [...] to restore and reconstitute our association and brotherhood by reviving our ancient customs." [18] The reference is certainly made to a common association that existed before. Also, Bjornstahls may have just failed to mention the association/s because it/they did not exist in a formal form and the merchants would not reveal their trading practices to a foreigner. It has also been claimed that it is possible for the by-laws not to have come into being in Ambelakia until 1 January 1780 although the traders have been practicing its principles for years. "Several months or even years may have been necessary to work out the principles and the practical details" for a grand Ampelakia association. [19] Moreover, article 19 of the 1780 by-laws states that the association would operate in Ambelakia as of 1 January 1780 and in Vienna from 1 May 1780. [20] Thus, there are many conflicting evidence which leads to various interpretations about the exact date of the formation of the koine syndrophia. One can only assume that the koine syndrophia of Ambelakia was officially formed in 1780 but must have existed in principle or in the form of small-scale association/s from at least the middle of the 18th c.

Let us now have a look at the economics of the association. As it is stated in both by-laws, the syndrophia was formed by the union of red yarn merchants and craftsmen of the town of Ambelakia. [21] Each year a profit of 12% was given to each companion [22] and 10% to each orphan (this last provision appears only in the by-laws of 1795). [23] According to Beaujour in 1797 there were 24 dye-houses in Ambelakia, where 2,500 balls of dyed cotton were produced every year and each ball weighted 100 ocques. [23] Traveler Dodwell gives the selling price of 8 1/2 turkish piasters (money) the ocque (weight) for dark blue dyed and spun cotton and 12 piasters for red color cotton for the year 1805.[25] To compare these prices bear in mind that in Ambelakia Bjornstahls found that in 1779 life was very expensive and an ocque of bread cost 7 paras although wine cost only 1-2 paras. [26] On the other hand, Dodwell as well gives the following prices for main goods in Athens and for the year 1805: bread was 10 paras, oil was 26 paras and wine was 7 paras. [27] Nevertheless, the above data, no matter how indicative they may be, show economic prosperity. Every proprietor who wanted to become a member of the association could not contribute less that 5,000 or more than 20,000 piasters to the common fund. This technique prevented most of the shares from coming into the hands of the rich. [28]. The success of the association was such that the original capital increased in two years from 600,000 to 1,000,000 piasters. [29] Unfortunately that is all the available information on the financial condition of the koine syndrophia. Neither accounts or balance-sheets nor any other notes of a financial character have been preserved. [30] Therefore, as a working hypothesis, we may assume that the association prospered for at least a short time.

Lack of available information leads to lack of agreement, especially on the duration of the koine syndrophia of 1780. Furthermore, one of the great problems encountered during our investigation was the ambiguity over the date of the renewal of the koine syndrophia, which previous scholars took for granted that it took place in 1795, the year the second by-laws was drafted. Actually, the main problem is the by-laws of 1795 where it is stated that the red yarn merchants and craftsmen decided to renew their Society and Brotherhood [31] and one might think that the year of that decision was the date inscribed on the by-laws, that is 1795. On the other hand though, when Baujour visited Ambelakia in 1797 there was no koine syndrophia but it had already been divided into smaller companies two years before, in 1795 [32]. However, on 11 July 1795 Dimitrios Sphartz, a member of the association, wrote from Vienna to his uncle George Sphartz:

Because you [uncle] wrote that my coming to Ambelakia can not be justified because of the troubles in our syndrophia I shall stay till Easter, till I have news about the consolidation of the association. [33]

The suspicion that there were troubles in the association, is reinforced by the following letter sent to G. Sphartz from Crotaw on 25 August 1795:

Don't fear [George] anything concerning capital and human beings because you are supported by many [of us...]. When I was in Vienna Mr John Chronia [Drossinos?] told me about the new system and I like it. He told me that he is going to remain [a member of the association] and he wants no innovations any more. [34]

But the most striking evidence is the letter sent to G. Shartz from Hof on 3 September 1795:

Time has come to keep the syndrophia together for three more years with good laws. [35]

This is very strange because according to the by-laws of 1795 the syndrophia was created to last for at 1east 16 years. [36] Why then in September 1795 would a member of the syndrophia claim that it was time for it to be renewed? On the other hand Boulanger who studied the association in the late 19th century claims that although the syndrophia was created for the first time in 1795, [37] new by-laws was drafted in 1797. Confusion continues when Dimitris Garavelas wrote to G. Sphartz on 23 December 1796, almost two years after the drafting of the 1795 by-laws: "You have not written to me what has been done with the syndrophia; has it stayed as it was or you have changed it ?" [39]

In 1803 J. L. S. Bartholdy, a German traveler, wrote that a few years before he had visited the village, the koine syndrophia had been divided into five main associations.[40] This piece of information was confirmed three years later by William Leake who traveled through Ambelakia in 1806 and wrote the following:

Not many years ago the manufacturers of Ambelakia, or in other words the whole town, formed a single company [...]. They are now divided into five or six companies conducted upon the same principles, but by no means with an equal degree of advantage. [41]

Therefore, it is more likely to assume that the koine syndrophia of 1780 did not last until 1811, as many have belived, but perhaps only until 1795. Then, it was divided into five or six different syndrophies and one of these associations, which was in business "upon the same principles," [42] was that of which the by-laws of 1795 was found and published by Bulamger. What supports this assumption is that the by-laws of 1795 states that the koine syndrophia consisted of two separate associations: that of the Brothers Sphartz and that of Efthimios Demetriou. [43]

Another historical problem of the koine syndrophia of Ambelakia is its social character. In 1779 Ambelakia comprised 310 houses [44] and in 1797 Beaujour speaks of 4,000 individuals, a result of the tripling of the population during the previous fifteen years. [45] In 1801 merchants told traveler Edward Clark that the village included 400 houses [46] and in 1803 Bartholdy was informed that the village had already 5,000 inhabitants. [47] In 1805 Dodwell confirms the above information by stating that Ambelakia had 5,000-6,000 inhabitants [48]. Cultural expansion in Ambelakia is shown by the use of foreign languages. In 1779 Bjornstahls noted that the merchants he met talked among themselves in German [49] and in 1803 Bartholdy also mentioned that more than 200 inhabitants of Ambelakia could speak German [50] and some of them Italian too. [51] The large number of inhabitants who spoke foreign languages is not amazing if one takes into account that in both by-laws there are provisions for those wishing to enter the merchant profession to be sent abroad to learn foreign languages and trading techniques. [52]

The above mentioned social aspects of the association led to a debate over its character. There are three different modern interpretations of the phenomenon of Ambelakia. There are those who consider the phenomenon of Ambelakia a) as a new system without any previous model; b) those who claim that the association was a veritable cooperative association; c) and those who believe that it was a capitalist commercial association.[53] Beaujour, who was astonished by the organization of the association is the advocat of the first interpretation. [54] Koukidis, a student of the cooperative movement in modern times, believes that Ambelakia was the first cooperative association in the world [55]. However, Kordatos, a 20th c. socialist historian, claims that as both women and children worked in the association (according to Beaujour [56]) and as in both by-laws there is no article making reference to these workers and their shares, one can not speak of a cooperative association but of a capitalist commercial association.[57] He also believes that this "legend of cooperativism" was invented by Boulanger, who was influenced by the ideas of Fourier, and by Drossinos whose memoirs Boulanger had used. [58] Bulgarian historian Nicolai Todorov, a student of Balkan society under the Ottoman domination, agrees with Kordatos and adds that this phenomenon reappeared in Bulgaria in the second quarter of the l9th century. [59] Richard Clogg, on the other hand, views the example of Ambelakia as an isolated one in 18th c. Ottoman Greece. He claims that the orientation of the activities of the Greek merchants towards the Balkans and Central Europe in this period, made them fulfill the role of a mercantile middle class in the areas where they lived. [60] In the 1930s, Ambelakia was viewed as a "red" village by bourgeois intellectuals. In 1930 writer Kostas Ouranis visiting Ambelakia wrote that in this village "communism" had flourished years before its establishment in Russia. [61]

The scanty evidence and sometimes the political inclinations of the students of Ambelakia have led to historical anachronisms. It seems that the shareholders of the Association/s were actually whole families, represented by the father or eldest member, instead of plain individuals who formed a joint venture in the modern sense. This explains why women and children, but orphans, are not mentioned in the by-laws of the association as they were represented by their "protector," the father. Ambelakia, was neither a cooperative in the modern sense, as it lacked state protection or special taxation, nor a capitalist association as there is no indication that the laborers worked under conditions similar to those that existed in the English mills of the 18th and the 19th centuries. On the contrary, the Ambelakia phenomenon must be viewed as an attempt of the local merchants to increase their profits by division of labor. It was impossible for a trader to oversee the product making at home and at the same time travel in Western Europe in order to sell the produce. As it seems that some of them were good at supervising the manufacturing process at home while others at dealing with the Western European buyers, especially in the Habsburg Empire, there was an attempt to unite forces and satisfy the high demand of their product in the German markets in the second half of the 18th c.

Apart from the debate over the character of the koine syndrophia, its decline has also become a controversial issue. Beaujour believes that directors became very rich and demanded more. Former poor laborers, he claims, also became rich and did not want to obey the directives of the managers. Thus, everybody wanted to direct and the association was eventually dissolved in 1795. [62] Clarke, a British visitor in 1801, wrote that Ambelakia declined as they felt the effect of the preference that was given to English cotton because of its low price and good quality achieved by steam machines that were introduced around the turn of the 19th c. [63] In 1806, traveler Leake noted that the syndrophia was in trouble because the florin, in which most transactions were executed, had lost its exchanging value in Vienna. [64] David Urquhart, a 19th c. economist and traveler, believed that disunity among Ambelakiotes and the exclusion of the workers from the administration and sharing in the profits caused the final decline of the association. [65] Greek historian Constantinos Pagarigopoules has claimed that one of the reasons for the economic decline of the village was that Ali Pasha (ruler of Epirus) had in mind to subjugate Ambelakia and sent troops from time to time, disrupting production and trade. [66] However, this view must be rejected as the Ambelakiotes paid the annual sum of 60,000 piasters to Ali Pasha, regularly. [67] The dissolution of the koine syndrophia has also been associated with the Napoleonic wars as in 1811 the Bank of Vienna went bankrupt and the deposits of the association were lost. [68] What is more, in 1814 no fewer than 20 persons died every day because of the plague that hit the village. [69] It seems that the decline of the village as a prosperous community must be associated with the political and economic instability in Central Europe caused by the Napoleonic Wars. The defeat of the Habsburg Empire resulted in a sharp decline of the demand for the products of Ambelakia as well as to an annihilation of its capital, and must have caused a quick shrinking of the associations' income and prosperity.

This preliminary study and review of the case of Ambelakia, has revealed some of the difficulties in the study of the economic and social history of Ottoman Greece. It has shown that lack of data as well as lack of reliable evidence can not lead to safe conclusions and a scholar can arrive, at best, at temporary working hypotheses. Our reexamination of the economic and social history of the village of Ambelakia has shown that the local traders used in the second half of the 18th c. a joint venture technique, which resembled but was not the same as that of a modern cooperative, in order to satisfy the high demand for dyed cotton in the German markets. At least twice, in 1780 and 1795, their association/s took a legal form and operated successfully with high profits as long as there was political and economic stability in Western and Central Europe. Ambelakia must be viewed as a phenomenon encouraged by the economic circumstances of its era which was, however, disrupted by the changes brought about as a result of the revolutions and wars of the late 18th and early 19th centuries and their impact on both the Western European States and the Ottoman Empire.

1. For example, some documents referring to the village of Ayia in Thessaly reside
 in the Archives Department of the National Library of Greece in Athens.

2.Felix Baujour, Tableau du commerce de la Grece, Paris 1800, Greek ed. (Athens: Tolidi,
  1974), p. 143 claims that the association was formed so that the traders would obtain better     prices.

3. Christos Anagnostiadis, The economic structure and the legal form of the Ambelakia 
   cooperative, in greek, (Athens: Sakoulas, 1973), p. 43.

4. Constantine Koukidis, The cooperative spirit and Ambelakia, in greek (Athens: 1948),
   p. 168.

5. Yiannis Kordatos, Ambelakia and the myths around their cooperative, in greek (Athens:
   Stathis, 1955), p. 43.

6. Neos Ellinomnimon, 14 (1917-1920) : 381-384.

7. Francois Boulanger, Ambelakia, in french (Paris: Guillaimin, 1875).

8. Some of the problems were also detected by Ilias Georgiou, History and Association
   of Ambelakia, in greek (Athens: 1951), p. 21.

9. Tyrnavos is 49 klm away from Ambelakia via Larissa.

10. Quoted in Serafeim Maximos, The dawn of Greek capitalism: Tourkokratia 1685-1789,
    in greek (Athens: Stochastis, 1973), p. 44.

11. Elias Georgiou, New evidence on the history and the association of Ambelakia,
    in greek (Athens: 1950), letter 3, p. 18.

12. Dionysios Mavrogiannis, L' association cooperative d' Ambelakia (Athens: 1975),
    pp. 129-130.

13. Beaujour, p. 143

14. Apostolos Vakalopoulos, History of modern Hellenism, in greek (Thessaloniki: 1973),
    p. 533.

15. Beaujour, p. 150.

16. Georgiou, History, p. 24.

17. Jacob Bjornstahls, Briefe auf seinen auslandischen reisen (Leipzig: 1783), 6:204.

18. Full text in Anagnostiadis, pp. 72-83.

19. R. Louis and D. Mavrogiannis, "The advantageous and beneficial system of Ambelakia
    1780-1812" Cooperative Information, 2 (1975) : 25.

20. 1780 by-laws, art. 20.

21. 1780 by-laws, art. 1 ; 1795 by-laws, introduction.

22. 1780 by-laws, art. 3 ; 1795 by-laws, art. 4.

23. 1795 by-laws, art. 4.

24. Beaujour, p. 143. The following weights were used in the Ottoman Empire:
      1 kantar = 44 ocques
      1 ocque = 400 dramia
    (Beaujour, p. 246). 1 kilo = 1280 grm

25. Edward Dodwell, A classical and topographical tour through Greece during the years
    1801, 1805 and 1806 (London: 1819), 2:107-108. The following currency was used in the
    Ottoman Empire:
       1 turkish piaster (gross) = 80 aspra = 40 paras (Dodwell, 2:494)

26. Bjornstahs, 6: 204.

27. Dodwell, 2:498

28. Beaujour, p. 143.

29. Beaujour, p. 144.

30. Dionysos Mavrogiannis, "Ambelakia" Hydria Encyclopaedia, in greek, (Athens: 1978),
    7:147-148.

31. 1795 by-laws, introduction.

32. Beaujour, p. 145.

33. Geogriou, New evidence, letter 32, p. 32.

34. Ibid., letter 33, p. 33.

35. Ibid., letter 34, p. 33.

36. 1795 by-laws, art. 2.

37. Boulanger, p. 26.

38. Ibid., p. 53 & 90.

39. Georgiou, New evidence, letter 42, p. 39.

40. L.S.B. Bartholdy, Voyage en Grece fait dans les annees 1803 et 1804 (Paris: 1807),
    1:112.

41. William Leake, Travels in Northern Greece (London: 1835), 3:387-388.

42. Ibid.

43. 1795 by-laws, art. 7.

44. Bjornstahls, 6:203.

45. Beaujour, p. 142.

46. Edward Clarke, Travels in various countries of Europe, Asia and Africa (London: 1816),
    4:285.

47. Bartholdy, 1:104.

48. Dodwell,  2:108.

49. Bjornstahs, 6:206.

50. Bartholdy, 1:104.

51. Ibid., 1:103.

52. 1780 by-laws, art. 13 ; 1795 by-laws, art. 14.

53. Mavrogiannis, L' association, p. 151

54. Beaujour, pp. 142-145.

55. Koukidis, p. 168.

56. Beaujour, p. 142.

57. Kordatos, p. 127.

58. Ibid., p. 128.

59. Nikolai Todorov, La ville balkanique aux Xve-Ixe siecles (Bucarest: 1980), p. 278.

60. Richard Clogg, "The Greek Mercantile Bourgeoisie: Progressive or Reactionary?"
    in R. Cloog, ed., Balkan Society in the Age of Greek Independence (Totow: Barnes
    & Noble, 1981), p. 93.

61. Kostas Ouranis, "Ta Ambelakia me ta ereipomena palia archontika," Eleftheron Vima,
    26 April 1930, p. 1.

62. Beaujour, p. 145.

63. Clarke, 4:287 - Vakalopoulos, p. 543.

64. Leake, 3:388.
65. David Urquhart, Turkey and its Resources (London: 1833), p. 51.

66. Constantine Paparigopoulos. History of the Greek Nation, 1860-1871, in greek,
    rpt. (Athens: Galaxias, 1971), 12:141.

67. Dodwell, 2:108 - Anagnostiadis, p. 44.

68. Anagnostiadis, p. 45.

69. Mavrogiannis, L' association, p. 171.

Back to Cover