Until recently, it was widely accepted that history textbooks played a significant role in cultivating ethnocentrism among children. However, with an increasing number of foreign students now attending Greek schools, one would expect this situation to have evolved. Textbooks in the 21st century should adopt an intercultural perspective, emphasizing the recognition and appreciation of otherness (Bonidis, 2004: 17).
A few years after its establishment, the Council of Europe incorporated the revision of school textbooks of the member states within its cultural agenda. Between 1953 and 1958, the Council organized six conferences in Germany, Norway, Italy, France, the Netherlands, and Turkey. These conferences primarily focused on the evaluation of school textbooks and teaching programs related to the teaching of history in member states. History was regarded as particularly significant “because of the effect it exerts on shaping the attitudes of young people towards other countries, races, and religions” (Bonidis, 2004, p. 26).
The Role of History Textbooks
History textbooks are expected to align with modern scientific and pedagogical advancements. However, as Agg. Palikidis (2013, p. 8) observes, contemporary history textbooks “are barely informed about the developments in the field of scientific historiography.” Specifically, they often fail to incorporate new epistemological approaches, instead adhering to an ethnocentric narrative rooted in positivist historiography (Kokkinos, 2003, p. 122).
In Greece, history textbooks are perceived as conveyors of official history and as vehicles for promoting the dominant ideology. Their production and distribution are strictly regulated by the Ministry of Education, which exercises significant control over their content (Palikidis, 2013, p. 9). Consequently, political shifts frequently influence the portrayal of history in schools.
Challenges in the Teaching of History
Students are often required to learn history through rote memorization of textbooks. This approach undermines the subject, reducing its teaching to a mechanistic process. As a result, students’ critical thinking, as well as their analytical and synthetic abilities, are diminished, and opportunities for meaningful engagement and constructive dialogue are lost (Palikidis, 2013, pp. 9-10).
More broadly, historical education in Greek schools fails to reflect the social changes occurring in Europe and globally. If it did, it would have adapted to the social realities of recent years, which, for Greece, notably include a significant rise in immigration (Koulouri, 2000, pp. 28-30; Kavvoura, 2011, pp. 33-37). Furthermore, the authors of school textbooks often exhibit selective memory in their portrayal of historical events. This selective approach occurs within the broader effort to emphasize national identity and reinforce the ethnocentric perspectives that dominate the teaching of history (Koulouri, 2000, pp. 28-30).
It is worth noting that, after 1990, Greek school textbooks underwent noticeable and positive changes concerning the portrayal of the “other,” largely due to criticism from organizations such as UNESCO (Milas, 2001). While the textbooks of the 1990s still exhibit elements of ethnocentrism, they no longer include strongly negative depictions of other peoples, as was often the case in older textbooks (Avdela, 1998).
A key factor influencing the content of school history textbooks is not the objective recording of historical truth, but their function as an ideological mechanism aimed at promoting national superiority. This is achieved not only through the idealized portrayal of the national self-image but also through the selective representation of “others” in ways that serve to reinforce the national identity. Often, this involves marginalizing or relegating the “other” to further emphasize the superiority of the national self (Avdela, 1998, pp. 159-160).
It is a common tactic to highlight national superiority by emphasizing the negative characteristics of other peoples. In some cases, this tactic also uses sources that lack historical reliability, such as philological sources. But these sources appear as historical events, as historical reality, causing confusion, especially for students who fail to understand the difference between fiction and historical research. This results in them considering that what is described in the fiction are historical events and have actually happened (Angelakos & Kokkinos, 2004: 135). The result of this approach is the creation of an emotionally charged narrative, particularly concerning the portrayal of the Greeks. This depiction not only deviates from the objectivity that should characterize historical narratives but often approaches the realm of the fantastic. Greeks are presented as a courageous people, with any past suffering—whether disasters or defeats—attributed solely to external forces, namely the “foreigners.” Moreover, Greeks are depicted as the originators of civilization, while other peoples are labeled as “barbarians.” This distinction is often exaggerated, reinforcing an idealized image of the Greeks in contrast to others (Koulouri, 1996, pp. 143-155).
As a result, history education often fosters and perpetuates prejudices, as it is tasked with “cultivating” national consciousness. To achieve this, the characteristics of the Greeks are consistently emphasized in comparison to those of other peoples, with the aim of showcasing their perceived superiority and reinforcing national pride among students. This approach leads to the silencing of the Greeks’ negative traits, while other peoples—particularly neighboring nations—are portrayed in a negative light. Such representations serve to further highlight the perceived differences and elevate the national image.
Editorial status of history school textbooks
When in 1937 the Organization for the Publication of Educational Books was founded (AN.N.952/37-Government Gazette 469 A), the absolute dependence of the school textbook on the state administration was officially established, both in terms of content and the ideology that it had to project (Palikidis, 2009:48). For the professor of pedagogy Polychronopoulos (1980: 473), it is an “invisible and effective mechanism that exercises social control”. In particular, the degree of centralization and authoritarianism of the government also determines the writing of school textbooks.
Based on the founding law, school textbooks are drawn up with a call for tenders. Until recently, the Ministry of Education announced a public competition, setting the conditions for the writing of the textbooks and, on the other hand, the monetary prizes for the first three books. The Supreme Council of Education judged the writings with the participation of a member of the Board of Directors of the Textbook Publishing Organization and chose the three best. These books, after the monetary prizes were paid to the authors, became the property of the Organization, which had the right to dispose of them as it saw fit. The circulation period for each textbook could not be “less than five years, and could be extended beyond that by a decision of the Minister” (Palikidis, 2009: 39).
During the period 1950-1976, these committees were formed and staffed directly by the Minister. For the years 1976-2000, the committees were initially composed and staffed by K.E.M.E. (1976-1985) and after that the Pedagogical Institute (1985-2000), i.e. by institutions managed by people trusted by the Minister (Palikidis, 2009: 49).
The respective Minister of Education effectively controls the process of publishing and writing school textbooks, since they are the ones who announce the competitions and select the authors who are assigned to write the books. This is because the members of the advisory bodies and the committees for the publication and approval of textbooks are, most of the time, persons chosen by the minister themselves and, consequently, are influenced by them (Noutsos, 1999: 162-163). Yes, there is a competition, but the committee that chooses the winners is under the influence of the respective minister.
Although the interventions of the Minister of Education in the work of the evaluation committees and the Pedagogical Institute were few, there was always the fear that the press, public opinion and the intellectual and educational world would react negatively to the books. Fear has often been a key criterion for the selection or rejection of History textbooks in the past, mainly after 2000, but also today, as will be seen below from reactions to school textbooks (Palikidis, 2009:49-50).
Today the authors of school textbooks are selected by the Institute of Computer Technology and Publications “DIOFANTOS” (ITIE – Diofantos) and specifically by the Directorate of Publications under Law 3966/2011.
The selection process for the committees responsible for history textbooks clearly reflects the government’s attempt to exert influence. Given the sensitive nature of history education and its role in cultivating national consciousness, efforts are made to present historical events in ways that avoid provoking public backlash. A characteristic example is the case of “Repoussi’s book,” which triggered intense reactions, leading to the matter being debated in the Hellenic Parliament. Notably, the controversy did not center on whether events, such as the Asia Minor Catastrophe, were accurately represented, but rather on the fact that the book challenged the way these events are traditionally embedded in Greek collective consciousness.
The public outcry was so significant that the book was promptly withdrawn, and Professor Ioannis Koliopoulos was commissioned to write a new history textbook aligned with the ideology of the ruling political party at the time. However, this decision also faced considerable criticism. A particularly notable reaction came from Professor Antonis Liakos, who condemned the Ministry of Education’s direct political intervention. Other critics accused Professor Koliopoulos of being a historian with conservative leanings, selected to counterbalance the reactions sparked by Ms. Repoussi’s work (Papamathaiou, 2008).
From the aforementioned, it is clear that the writing of history textbooks is influenced by government policy and public opinion, which is shaped by social and political reality. The reactions of public opinion therefore exert a significant influence since they are able to even abolish a school textbook as was evident in the case of Ms. Repoussi.
Previous Research on the Representation of Balkan Peoples in School Textbooks
The research conducted by Nikos Achlis (1983) examines the portrayal of Turks and Bulgarians in Greek history textbooks. To achieve this objective, a content analysis was carried out on textbooks used in the 2nd and 3rd grades of Gymnasium and the 2nd and 3rd grades of Lyceum up to the years 1981 and 1982.
The study concluded that Turks and Bulgarians are depicted as hostile toward Greece, often characterized by negative traits that portray them as inferior to the Greeks, who are presented as a virtuous and exemplary people. Specifically, the research highlights that Turks are described as warmongering, arrogant, inhumane, and uncivilized (Achlis, 1983, p. 53).
Avdela’s research (1998:47), which does not examine the Balkan peoples but provides important information on ethnocentrism in education, concludes that school textbooks reflect the level of ethnocentrism of educational systems, while they are a privileged field for investigating the representations of a nation. Avdela conducted her study starting with the first syllabus of 1881 and reaching up to 1977.
Flouris and Ivideli (2000) sought to provide a comprehensive analysis of how the Balkan peoples are portrayed, not only in student history textbooks but also in teacher’s manuals and the syllabi for all subjects in Primary School from 1985 to 2000. Their research concluded that both the curricula and the educational materials for teachers and students are ethnocentric, despite the increased references to Balkan peoples.
The researchers found that Turks and Bulgarians are predominantly depicted in the context of wars and conflicts, where the Greeks are consistently portrayed as justified, while the “others” are shown as antagonistic or in the wrong. Additionally, they noted that references to the culture and contributions of the Balkan peoples are sparse and, when included, are often presented negatively (Flouris & Ivideli, 2000, pp. 246-247).
The research of Angelopoulos (2000) focused on the image of Bulgarians in Greek school textbooks from 1950 onwards and found that the neighbor-Other contributed to the emergence of Greek national identity by constituting the negative pole in key conflicting concepts such as: life or death, freedom or slavery, existence or disappearance, continuity or interruption (Angelopoulos, 2000:333).
The research of Koullapis (2000) investigated the image of the Turks and the Bulgarians in the Greek textbooks of the history of the 5th and 6th grades published in the second half of the 20th century. The research found that the image of the most important “Others” underwent various changes, presenting a more positive image, which are inextricably linked on the one hand with the interpretation of the past and, on the other hand, with Greece’s relations with Bulgaria and Turkey in second half of the 20th century (Koullapis, 2000: 370).
For Millas (2001: 303), who studied school textbooks between 1834-1914, the Turks appear barbaric and wild and are considered a great threat to the Greeks. The Bulgarians are also presented as an enemy people, but only the Turks appear as eternal enemies (Millas, 2001:303). Furthermore, Greeks and Turks are trained to be competitive and adversarial. The negative image of the Turks in history textbooks is directly related to the national identity of the Greeks. According to the author, “Turkish rule is a national metaphor that has taken root in the consciousness of the Greek people. […] It is identified with old popular traditions […] and achieves social consensus” (Millas, 2001:393).
After 1990 and due to the pressure of international organizations, such as UNESCO, Greek textbooks present noticeable changes in relation to the image of the “other”, (Millas, 2001:307). However, according to Flouris and Ivideli (2000: 246-247, Millas, 2001:308) school textbooks still present historical events from a national perspective and do not encourage the creation of a spirit of universal awareness. In short, their perspective has not been freed from racial and ethnic stereotypes.
Conclusions
Textbook authors predominantly emphasize political and military history, which may explain the absence of references to the culture of other Balkan peoples. In contrast, various chapters extensively cover the culture, arts, and letters of Greece and Europe. Among the Balkan peoples, the Turks are the most frequently mentioned, consistently portrayed as a threat to the independence, cultural distinctiveness, and perceived superiority of the Greeks. The Bulgarians follow, though they are discussed in fewer instances, while the Serbs and Romanians are mentioned even less. Other Balkan peoples are not typically depicted as negatively as the Turks, though some cases of such portrayals do exist.
The Greek education system places particular emphasis on national history. Throughout the educational process, historical material is organized around a tripartite structure: ancient, Byzantine, and modern history. This approach is understandable, given that the history of the Greeks and the Greek state is a central focus of the curriculum.
Adam Papakonstantinou
Bibliography
Avdela, E. (1998). History and school. Athens: Nisos.
Angelakos, K. & Kokkinos, G. (2004). Intersubjectivity in the modern school and the teaching of history using sources. Athens: Metaichmio.
Angelopoulos, K. (2000). Proclaiming Greek national identity through dialectic in Greek secondary school textbooks from 1950 onwards” (319-334). In Kapsalis A., Bonidis K. & Sipitanou A. (eds.). The image of the “Other” / Neighbor in the textbooks of the Balkan countries. Athens: Print.
Achlis, N. (1983). Our neighboring peoples, Bulgarians and Turks, in Middle School and High School History textbooks. Thessaloniki: Kyriakidis Brothers.
Bonidis, K. (2004). The content of the textbook as an object of research: longitudinal examination of the relevant research and methodological approaches. Athens: Metaichmio.
Flouris, G. & Ivideli, M. (2000). The image of our Balkan neighbors in the syllabus, textbooks and teacher’s books of the Greek Primary school. In Kapsalis, A., Bonidis, K. & Sipitanou A. (eds.). The image of the “Other” / Neighbor in the textbooks of the Balkan countries. Athens: Print.
Kavvoura, D. (2011). Teaching of History. Science, teaching, learning. Athens: Metaichmio.
Kokkinos, G. (2003). Science, ideology, identity. The lesson of History in the constellation of supranationalism and globalization. Athens: Metaichmio.
Koullapis, L. (2000). The image of Bulgarians and Turks in primary school History textbooks of the period 1950-90. In Kapsalis, A., Bonidis, K. & Sipitanou, A. (eds.). The image of the “Other” / Neighbor in the textbooks of the Balkan countries. Athens: Print.
Koulouri, X. (1996). Fanaticism, dogmatism, identity construction in the discourse of school textbooks. Memory 18(1996), 143-155.
Koulouri, C. (2000). The two faces of discrimination in History teaching: perpetrators and victims. In Council of Europe. The misuse of History. Symposium on Facing misuses of History (Oslo, 28-30 June 1999). Belgium: Council of Europe Publishing.
Millas, H. (2001). Images of Greeks and Turks. Textbooks, historiography, literature and national stereotypes. Athens: Alexandria.
Law 3966/2011. Institutional framework of the Model Experimental Schools, Establishment of the Institute of Educational Policy, Organization of the Institute of Computer Technology and Publications “DIOFANTOS” and other provisions. Gazette A 118/24.5.2011.
Noutsos, X. (1999). Secondary Education programs and social control (1931-1973). Athens: Foundation.
Palikidis, A.A. (2009). The Role of Image in Secondary School History Textbooks (1950-2002). Thessaloniki: Kyriakidis.
Palikidis, A.A. (2013). Critical approaches to the Nazi phenomenon. From historiography and political theory to school historical learning. Thessaloniki: Kyriakidis Brothers.
Papamathaiou, M. (2008). They are rewriting history on a national level. The Step, 01/06.
