Frary, Lucien J. Russia and the Making of Modern Greek Identity, 1821–1844 (review)

Abstract

SEER, 94, 4, October 2016 746 how the urbanization of the later nineteenth century complicated the ‘Little Russian’ issue. Because Poles and Jews contributed massively to urbanization in right-bank Ukraine, Ukrainians and Russians no longer had the field of play to themselves (or, to be precise, once again did not have the field of play to themselves). Whatever the racial predispositions of the tsarist government, in the context of urbanization St Petersburg was unlikely to take the dim view of non-Ukrainian inhabitants of Ukraine that it might have done if they had nothing to offer the economic well-being of the empire. Thus adherents of ‘Little Russianism’ among Ukrainians felt they were being sidelined. The effect was to sharpen their views. Some responded by becoming outright Ukrainian nationalists, some by becoming outright Russian nationalists. The latter turned into the Ukrainian variant of that well-known historical phenomenon, the centrist from the borderlands, the ‘outsider nationalist’ who was more royalist than the king. These were the unattractive ‘Russian’ nationalists (of Ukrainian provenance) who so disfigured the last years of the imperial Duma. Professor Hillis has made their ostensibly puzzling origins comprehensible. Perhaps it was always likely that some proponents of the Little Russian idea would turn into men of the right, for, with benefit of hindsight, one can see that Little Russianism was never likely to be more than a vehicle, a tactic, a transitional device. Confronted by the socio-economic changes of the later nineteenth century, it fragmented, turning those who had toyed with it into either lumpers (Russophiles) or splitters (Ukrainophiles). The splitters had the best tunes, but the lumpers — the integrationists, the Ukrainian Russophiles — seem a little less disappointing now that they have found their analyst. Newcastle University David Saunders Frary, Lucien J. Russia and the Making of Modern Greek Identity, 1821–1844. Oxford Studies in Modern European History. Oxford University Press, Oxford and New York, 2015. xv + 296 pp. Maps. Illustrations. Notes. Bibliography. Index. £60.00. The early birth of the Greek nation, in 1830, is a major milestone in the history of nation-building in general, and in the history of nation-states in particular. To illustrate, this case of nation-building is one of the only three cases of nation-building taught in some educational systems, prominently in Israel (alongside the German and Italian unifications). In many of the narratives and analyses taught and published about this process, Odessa and the Russian Empire serves, at best, as one of the scenes. That is why, I believe, the book under review is so important: it does not only illuminate the role REVIEWS 747 of the Russian Empire in the creation of the modern Greek identity, nation and state, but uses this case as an example to a wider range of issues which keep historians busy, such as the tension between tradition and modernity, the history of the Orthodox world and church and the relationship between Russia and the Middle East/Islamic World. Chapter one, ‘Russia and the Movement for Greek Independence’, surveys the history of the Greek revolutionary movement and Russia’s relations with the Greek population of the Ottoman Empire from its first contacts in the 1770s to the outbreak of the first rebellion in 1821. Frary successfully demonstrates the ‘strong links’ the Russian Empire had with the revolutionary movement, starting with its initial ‘intellectual stirrings’ (p. 53). Counting on varied sources and a good proficiency in the historiography, he shows how the empire, especially under Nicholas I, was involved in all aspects of Greek nation-building, including ‘government’, ‘church’ and ‘public education’ (p. 53). In analysing the post-1821 period, Frary, again supported by strong archival evidence, concludes that the Russian-Ottoman War of 1828–29, clearly sparked by the Greek War of Independence, was eventually what tipped the scales and allowed the Greek state to be formed (along with other major achievements on the Russian side, such as their sovereignty over Georgia and some areas of modern-day Armenia and the autonomy of Serbia). The second chapter looks at the creation of social and political institutions in the young state, focusing on Russia’s involvement in their formation. Even though during...