Greek Independence Research Articles

Delimiting Europe: Greek State Formation as Border Making

When the Greek prime minister admired Delacroix’ famous painting ‘The Battle of Chios’ in the Louvre Museum during a state visit to France in 2021, this was meaningful in more than one way. Not only did he and French president Macron celebrate the second centenary of the 1821 “Greek Revolution.” They also reaffirmed their 200-year-old geopolitical alliance in the Eastern Mediterranean. An alliance between two countries that see themselves as the birthplace of European civilisation. Then, as now, celebrating their Europeanness went beyond artistic depictions and symbolisms. The creation of a White European space by virtue of a concrete struggle against an Oriental other, thus, delimited not only the Greco-Ottoman, but also Europe’s South-eastern borders. What IR has come to understand as the ‘spatial turn’, a return to emphasising the (un)making of borders and space, took, and takes, place in the Aegean. Looking back at the significance of the Greek War of Independence, this article reveals that, much like the violence in Delacroix’ painting, this formation of inter-national modernity, far from merely being a civilisational achievement, was bloody and genocidal. The painting’s conventional Orientalist understanding sees a white European people massacred by an Oriental occupying force. A careful re-historicisation of the Greek independence struggle reveals, however, that it had highly specific social and geopolitical origins that cannot be reduced to a spreading European Enlightenment. An alliance between local social forces gave rise to a struggle that was consolidated by mass violence. The international invention on behalf of Greece didn’t represent a shift towards a liberal international order giving rise to a reborn Athenian Republic. It represented a compromise between otherwise divided conservative dynasties imposing their designs on the young state. Finally, the article will argue that this historical episode embodies a continuing social process of European border making.

Under the Yoke of Ottoman Domination: Slavery and Central European Philhellenism During the Greek War of Independence

Slavery remained a problem for Central Europeans after the defeat of Napoleon. Concerns over White, Christian enslavement animated German-speaking European responses to the Greek Independence movement. As most antislavery advocates turned their attention to the increasing volume of the slaves traded between Africa and the New World, as well as the persistence and entrenchment of New World slavery, Central Europeans turned their attention to the Christian, Greek subjects of the Ottoman Empire. The so-called ‘Barbary Problem’ ( Barbareskenfrage) became enmeshed with the Eastern Question as Greeks revolted in Ottoman lands. Central Europeans had long viewed the domination of Christians in Islamic North Africa as the central problem of slavery until increased German migration and involvement in the New World brought new tensions to the ideas surrounding slavery. Greek insurrectionists against the Ottoman Empire breathed new life into older ideas about Christians enslaved in Islamic portions of Europe and Africa. Greek Independence gave Germans a bête noir closer to Europe than that of slavery in the Americas. Much of this interest owes to an enduring German philhellenic tradition which has been seldom analysed. Indeed, as Sue Marchand has written ‘the obsession of the Schillerian German literary and scholarly elite with the ancient Greeks has become an accepted-if severely underanlaysed-cliché’. This paper uses archival documents to shed more light on how Central Europeans’ interest and participation in the Greek War of Independence helped to revive old ideas about Christian enslavement at a time when New World slavery became the central concern of a broader European humanitarian protest against servitude.

Fractal algorithms and RGB image processing in scribal and ink identification on an 1819 secret initiation manuscript to the “Philike Hetaereia”

Historical texts incorporate important characteristics that need to be assessed including genre, text structure and content. Often overlooked are characteristics of handwritten manuscripts commonly divided into legibility, readability and aesthetics. To determine the scientific feasibility of classification of handwritten texts an objective approach is developed to describe twenty handwritten pages of an 1819 Greek manuscript, that refers to the initiation to the Greek secret “friendly society” (Philike Hetaereia) organization, established as part of the Greek independence against the Ottoman Turks. It is investigated through a fractal and RGB image analysis approach. Fractal Minkowski Dimension was applied on the handwritten text and the RGB color analysis on the ink and paper and both were used as a non-invasive manner and revealed interesting results. The novel RGB image analysis and the fractal analysis of the manuscript identified respectively, five iron gall inks and four scribes from the ink content and handwritten styles, of the compact five lines text and whole text pages. The novel approach was verified with another old manuscript of known ink pigments, as well as with thirteen known handwritten texts of that period and four prints representing modern and similar period texts substantiating the findings of the novel methods.

A Thesis of the Impact of Greek Independence on International Relations in Europe

A Thesis of the Impact of Greek Independence on International Relations in Europe

Euphorion as an Aesthetic Body

Euphorion as an Aesthetic Body Heidi Grek At the end of the third act of Faust II, Euphorion attempts to fly only to fall to the ground and die. Fleetingly, the lifeless son of Faust and Helena, resembles an unnamed, familiar figure, as the stage directions describe, "man glaubt in dem Toten eine bekannte Gestalt zu erblicken" (one seems to recognize in the body a familiar face).1 His body vanishes, leaving behind the articles of a poet, clothing, and a lyre. The unnamed figure is, as Goethe made known, the deceased English poet, Lord Byron. In the elegy sung by the chorus that follows, Byron's life is prominently featured while Euphorion's fades to the background. The final stanza, however, ends with a cryptic message, followed by a more hopeful one—neither of which seems to speak to Byron or Euphorion individually: the misfortunate are bled to silence, but death renews poetry. The link between Euphorion and Byron is significant because Byron's death, in the spring of 1824, stimulated Goethe to finish act 3. The act, which was first published on its own in the fall of 1826, bore the title, "Helena, klassisch-romantische Phantasmagorie. Zwischenspiel zu Faust" (Helena, classical-romantic Phantasmagoria. Interlude to Faust).2 Byron in life embodied various identities, including poet and aspiring warrior, the conflict of which resulted in his death—and this fascinated Goethe. Byron's death served as the inspiration for Euphorion's life—a continuity best encapsulated by "phantasmagoria." Through Euphorion, Goethe demonstrates the possibility of a multidimensional body, and of the destructive and constructive power of synthesis. Lord Byron's death prompted Goethe to study the poet's life and, within a year of his passing, the figure of Euphorion had begun to take shape. Byron died on April 19, 1824, at the age of thirty-six from fever in Missolonghi, where he was preparing to take part in the war of Greek independence. Goethe received news of the death about one month after his passing but nevertheless backtracked in his journal to record, "Lord Byron stirbt"3 (Lord Byron dies).4 For the next two years, Goethe studied anything he could find written about Byron's life, particularly the events leading up to his death.5 At the end of 1824, he explained in a letter that the pain he felt over Byron's death had found poetic expression, "wenn die Muse selbst mich drängte, müßt ich ihr gehorchen" (if the muse herself urged me, I would have to obey her).6 In the spring of 1825, Goethe began to compose the final scene of act 3, "Arkadien" ("Arcadia"), in which Euphorion appears.7 [End Page 171] Reflecting in 1827 to Eckermann, Goethe asserted Byron's place in the same act as Helena, who serves as an homage to Homer.8 The idea for Helena had been part of Goethe's original conception of part 2 since he began working on part 1, inspired by the Faust legend. He already had in mind an ending for the "Helena Act," but, as he revealed to Eckermann, "Dann brachte mir die Zeit dieses mit Lord Byron und Missolunghi und ich ließ gern alles Übrige fahren" (Then time brought me this [event] with Lord Byron and Missolonghi and I happily let the rest go). Euphorion's presence carries the act 3,000 years forward, from Helena's ancient Greece and the fall of Troy to the siege of Missolonghi and the present. If Helena represents ancient poetry, then Euphorion, as an homage to Byron, represents modern poetry, "Ich konnte als Repräsentanten der neuesten poetischen Zeit niemanden gebrauchen als ihn, der ohne Frage als das größte Talent des Jahrhunderts anzusehen ist" (I could use no one as the representation of the newest poetic times but him, who without question is seen as the greatest talent of the century). As the son of Helena and Faust, Euphorion is heir to the romantic as well as the classical, he is the beginning of a new epoch, distinguishable only as "wie der gegenwärtige Tag selbst" (like the present day itself). Byron's character, specifically his"unbefriedigt[es] Naturell[]" (unsatisfied...

Konstantinos Oikonomos and Russian Philorthodox relief during the Greek war for independence (1821–1829)

Abstract After the Archipelago expeditions of the Russian Navy in 1769–1774 and 1805–1807, thousands of Greeks fled the Ottoman Empire and resettled in the province of Novorossiia (southern Russia). Among the migrants were prominent merchants who strongly supported the Philiki Etaireia (Friendly Society) and the cause for Greek independence. Although Tsar Alexander I could not openly support the insurrection that broke out in 1821, Russia provided invaluable material assistance to the Greek refugees, who arrived in Russian cities such as Odessa and Kishinev. Special committees under Russian officials distributed funds gathered from private donations and public sources all over Russia. The famous Greek cleric Konstantinos Oikonomos also arrived in Odessa with his family. His speech at the funeral of Patriarch Gregory V (whose relics were buried in Odessa) helped solidify the image of the patriarch as an ethno-martyr. Oikonomos served as a mediator and advisor to the Ober-procurator of the Russian Holy Synod, Alexander Golitsyn, who was responsible for gathering information about Greek clergymen among the refugees. Oikonomos also played an important role in distributing donations for the families of the Greeks displaced after the massacre on Chios in 1822. The documents from Russian archives presented in this essay demonstrate the network of Oikonomos and the pivotal role that he played between the Russian high officials and Greek intellectuals, the Greek merchants, and his poorer compatriots. This chapter features an annex with the unpublished correspondence of Oikonomos as evidence for one of the largest humanitarian actions of the nineteenth century.

The New Greek Companies Act – Greek Company Law: Made in Greece or in Europe?

Abstract Greek Company Law has its origins in the French “Code de Commerce” of 1807, which, although never legislated in Greece, applied as a Greek law to the business transactions even before the Greek Independence (1830). The German influence took over progressively early in the 20 th century. Such influence is visible in the important Law on SAs (1920), the chapter of the Greek Civil Code on the contract of society (1946) and more recently in Law 4072/2012 on commercial partnerships. The list of business associations available in Greece includes the usual business forms (general and limited partnerships, silent partnership, and capital companies) provided in continental Europe. Recent legislative developments include a new law on SAs (2018) and a new company form, the Private Company (2012), which is mostly used by small and medium entreprises. The Greek Sarl is fading out. The introduction of a new entity has been envisaged (but not yet adopted), imitating the “individual enterprise with limited liability” of French law.

Travel to Greece and Polychromy in the 19th Century: Mutations of Ideals of Beauty and Greek Antiquities

The article examines the collaborations between the pensionnaires of the Villa Medici in Rome and the members of the French School of Athens, shedding light on the complex relationships between architecture, art, and archeology. The second half of the 19th century was a period during which the exchanges and collaborations between archaeologists, artists, and architects acquired a reinvented role and a dominant place. Within such a context, Athens was the place par excellence, where the encounter between these three disciplines took place. The main objective of the article is to render explicit how the revelations of archeology, actively disseminated by the members of the French School of Athens—the “Athéniens”—had an important impact on the approach of certain pensionnaires of the Villa Medici in Rome. Particular emphasis is placed on certain pensionnaires, who decided to devote their envois to ancient monuments of Greece. In parallel, the article intends to shed light on the methods that helped the pensionnaires-architects of the Villa Medici in Rome appropriate archaeological discoveries concerning Greek antiquities. The article takes, as a starting point, the following hypothesis: to better understand the figure of the architect-archaeologist, of whom Jacques Ignace Hittorff is an emblematic example, it is pivotal to bear in mind that before the second half of the 19th century neither the figure of Hellenic archeology nor the figure of the architect had yet acquired their autonomy. Taking into account that Johann Joachim Winckelmann, in the middle of the 18th century, forged an ideal Greek model, which was criticized during the second half of the 19th century, the article also sheds light on the fact that the revelations of archaeologists have called into question the Winckelmannian image of Greece. Another aspect that is explored in the article is Jacques Ignace Hittorff’s studies concerning the polychromy of ancient Greek monuments, paying special attention to his Restitution du temple d’Empédocle à Sélinonte ou l’Architecture polychrome chez les Grecs. The article also explores how the shifts of the status of philhellenism are related to the mutations of the meaning of travel to Greece. In parallel, it investigates the impact of Greek independence on the ideals of beauty and nature in arts, as well as how Greek independence is related to the intensification of the interest in the excavations of Greek antiquities.

The Greek Fire: American-Ottoman Relations and Democratic Fervor in the Age of Revolutions by Maureen Connors Santelli, and: Newest Born of Nations: European Nationalist Movements and the Making of the Confederacy by Ann L. Tucker

Reviewed by: The Greek Fire: American-Ottoman Relations and Democratic Fervor in the Age of Revolutions by Maureen Connors Santelli, and: Newest Born of Nations: European Nationalist Movements and the Making of the Confederacy by Ann L. Tucker Jay Sexton (bio) Greek rebellion, Nationalist movements, Independence, European revolutions The Greek Fire: American-Ottoman Relations and Democratic Fervor in the Age of Revolutions. By Maureen Connors Santelli. (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2020. Pp. 264. Cloth, $45.00.) Newest Born of Nations: European Nationalist Movements and the Making of the Confederacy. By Ann L. Tucker. (Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 2020. Pp. 272. Cloth, $45.00.) These two books belong to the fast-growing second generation of scholarship from the U.S. global turn. The first generation of this historiography, which often took the form of call-to-arms essays and overview sketches, sought to establish the significance of cross-border phenomenon to U.S. history. Second-generation scholarship, such as these two books under review, get on with the job of re-interpreting national history through a cosmopolitan lens. Under the microscope in these two fine studies are the contested responses of Americans to revolutions in Europe. Maureen Connors Santelli shows that the struggle for Greek independence from the Ottoman Empire in the 1820s became a popular sensation in America. Initially taking its cue from the romantic Philhellenism of Lord Byron, what contemporaries called "the Greek fire" quickly spread throughout the early republic, in the process taking a distinctive American form. Sympathy for the Greeks in the United States was widespread, not least because American observers came to see the rebellion in relation to their own revolution against imperial oppression in 1776. The Greek cause ignited interest from across the social spectrum: Elite intellectuals like Harvard's first professor of Greek literature Edward Everett might have been the most well-known American Philhellenes, but Santelli's meticulous research unearths significant interest in the Greek cause from those of all social ranks and geographic regions. It is here that the book takes an interesting turn, as we learn how the rhetoric and networks of the "Greek fire" eventually came to be repurposed by abolitionist activists, including David Walker and William Lloyd Garrison, as well as early advocates of women's rights. It is a testament to the range of The Greek Fire that Santelli extends her analysis beyond the transnational story of the reception of the Greek [End Page 165] rebellion in America to consider the trans-imperial and geopolitical dimensions of this episode. Here, the domestic "Greek fire" presented problems to American commercial interests and diplomats, who sought access to the Black Sea and a commercial agreement with the Ottoman state. This was the unfolding of a different legacy of the American Revolution than that of simply equating the Greek rebels with the American Founding Fathers. The United States zealously attempted to break down Ottoman commercial barriers, to secure access to markets, and to achieve parity with the British and European empires in the region. Ottoman officials were open to cutting some type of deal with the United States, but not if the nation supported the insurgent Greeks. The Monroe administration was of two minds about how to proceed, with the president sympathetic to the Greeks and Secretary of State Adams inclined to prioritize a commercial agreement with the Ottomans, building on the informal U.S. commercial bridgehead that had been established in Smyrna. In the end, officials pursued a compromise policy: The U.S. state would not recognize Greek independence but would do nothing to inhibit legal actions of private groups of American Philhellenes, who redoubled efforts to extend humanitarian aid to the struggling Greek rebels. As with so many compromise policies, the result alienated both sides—with Greek rebels disappointed in the lack of U.S. support and Ottoman officials complaining of the allegedly pro-Greek tilt of U.S. policy. Nonetheless, the United States eventually saw its desired objectives come to fruition. By the early 1830s, the United States had a commercial treaty with the Ottoman Empire, and Greece had earned its independence (though Santelli acknowledges that this outcome had little to do with U.S. private...

A revolution of one’s own: Elizabeth Edmonds translates the Greek War of Independence

In the wake of a ‘crushing sorrow’ at the age of 50, Elizabeth Edmonds (c.1821–1907) turned to Modern Greece for a solution. After four months’ stay in Athens in 1880, she returned to London a confirmed Philhellene. Her connections in Athens saw her engaging with the emergent Athenian generation of the 1880s; Palamas, Karkavitsas, Drosinis, Xenopoulos and Vizyinos were published in English translation long before they became figures of the Greek establishment. Edmonds’s links to Oscar Wilde and the diplomat Ioannis Gennadios put her in a fine position from which to promote the Greek cause in Britain. It is widely known that the Cretan Insurrection generated a ripple effect that prompted writers to return to events of 1821. My argument is that Edmonds did so with more subtlety than most. By translating Greek poetry and writing detailed articles, as well as publishing her own fiction inspired by the earlier revolution, Edmonds began to drip-feed a Philhellenism more in keeping with her own times to a British audience. The lives of Rhigas Feraios, Theodoros Kolokotronis and Bouboulina all emerged in Edmonds’s writing, along with the warrior figure of the andreiomeni lygeri. This article traces the development of Greek independence in Edmonds’s writing, from early fiction to later translation work. Through a consideration of this material, and Edmonds’s own correspondence, the article explores how the War of Independence served belatedly to give Edmonds a sense of voice and vocation.

Seeking Greek Independence in the Aegean: an Unsuccessful Venture in 1822

The aim of the present study is to discuss one of the first episodes of the Greek War of Independence that took place in the Aegean Sea in 1822, which ended at the devastation of Chios Island and the defeat of its inhabitants. In this framework the organization of the campaign is examined, the course of the military operations and the final outcome. The importance of the study lies in the fact that it examines the events not in the light of the local history of Chios island but in the broader context of the Greek Revolution and the impact the events had on European public opinion.

History and Foreign Policy: Franco-British Cooperation towards Greek Independence 1828–1830

On 6 July 1827 the Treaty of London committed France, Britain, and Russia to working together to mediate the question of Greek independence. This was one of the first examples of Franco-British cooperation after the Napoleonic Wars. Although officials on both sides of the Channel publicly celebrated Franco-British cooperation over the Greek affair, behind closed doors policy makers remained suspicious of each other's intentions. This article explores how the memory and experience of the Napoleonic conflict influenced French and British policy making during the Greek independence struggle between 1828 and 1830. It argues that the memories of these conflicts fostered cultures of Franco-British rivalry that were discernible in the highest levels of policy making as well as in parliamentary and press opinion. These misgivings, embedded in notions of natural and historic rivalry, played an important role in mediating how policy makers viewed, judged, responded to, and justified their own and their counterpart's policies and policy motivations.

Greek Independence Movement and Russian Decembrists

1821 senesinde Osmanlı Devleti’nden ayrılmak için başlatılan Yunan bağımsızlık hareketi, sadece Avrupa’nın siyasi haritasını değiştirmekle kalmamış aynı zamanda o dönemdeki pek çok liberal hareket için de model olmuştur. Bunun örneklerinden biri de Rusya topraklarında görülen Dekabrist harekettir. Adını Aralık 1825 tarihinde çıkan bir isyandan alan Dekabrist akım ya da başka ifadeyle Dekabristler, Rusya’daki çarlık rejimi karşıtı ilk örgütlenmedir. Çarlık rejiminin sert mutlakiyetçi politikalarına karşı oluşan bu yapı, Yunan isyanını çok yakından takip ederek, bu hareketin planlayıcısı olan Filiki Eteria derneği ile yakın ilişkiler geliştirmiştir. Bu nedenle pek çoğunun Filiki Eteria’nın üyesi olduğu Dekabristler, Osmanlı Devleti’ne karşı başlatılan Yunan isyanına destek olurken, diğer taraftan bu hareketten etkilenmiş ve ülkelerindeki değişim ve dönüşümün hazırlayıcısı ve uygulayıcısı olmak istemişlerdir. Bu bağlamda ilk olarak 1816 senesinde St. Petersburg’da Kurtuluş Birliği ardından 1818 senesinde de Refah Birliği adlı başka bir oluşum meydana gelmiştir. Ancak bu iki oluşum, Dekabrist akımın benimsediği hedeflere uygun değildir. Bu nedenle 1821 senesinde büyük çoğunluğunu subayların oluşturduğu ve birbirleriyle sıkı temas halinde olan iki örgüt meydana getirmiştir. Bu nedenle Refah Birliği’nin yerini St. Petersrburg’da kurulan Kuzey Derneği ve Tulçin’de kurulan Güney Derneği isimli örgütler almıştır. Bunlardan Kuzey Derneğinin görüşlerini Nikita Muravyev, Güney Derneğinin ise Albay Pavel Pestel temsil etmektedir. Dekabristlerin Rusya’nın geleceği ile ilgili tartışmaları devam ederken Kasım 1825 tarihinde Çar I. Aleksandr’in ölümü, Dekabristler için uygun bir ortam yaratmıştır ve subaylar isyan etmiştir. Ancak subayların hazırladığı birliklerin çok kısa sürede dağılması ile Dekabrist isyan daha ilk aşamasında başarısızlığa uğramıştır. Bu olay, Rus tarihinde ilk kez toplumsal değişme programına sahip seçkinler grubunun Rus otokrasisine karşı silahlı başkaldırısıdır. Fakat öncelikli amacı serfliği kaldırarak ülkedeki otokrasiyi, anayasal monarşiye çevirmek olan Rus anayasacılığı büyük bir yenilgi almıştır.

Julian Stander, Katerina Tzioli and Mario Cortina Borja: 200 years of Greek independence… and PMs

Abstract 200 years of Greek independence… and PMs.

The Role of Greek Merchants in European Capitalism and Greek Independence Movement

This article aims to understand the mostly-neglected role of the Greek merchants in the Greek independence movement by looking into their integration in European capitalist system. By doing this, we believe that we are able to move beyond the general tendency of romantic nationalist readings in the literature which focuses only on the Greek or European intelligentsia, as the first and foremost stimulating power behind the Greek struggle for independence. The Greek independence movement has a different place in international relations since it shows the crucial connection between the nationalist feelings and the nationalist economies. The claim in this article is that the emerging bourgeois class of the Greeks, which adapted quickly and successfully to the European capitalist system with its privileges in trade, sought independence from the Ottoman Empire in line with its economic advantages and interests. As they effectively got involved in international trade with the commercial advantages, they became wealthy and powerful enough to seek for their own nation-state that could be a strategic actor in European capitalist system. To this end, the accumulation of capital and the spirit of Europeanization encouraged them to become financiers of the emergence of the Greek intelligentsia and the formation of an ideological base in the struggle for an independent Greek state. The fact that the static and introverted empire economies that could not keep up with the dynamism of international capitalism were replaced by the nation-states explains why the enriched Greek merchant class moved away from the Ottoman Empire and turned towards European capitalism. Their successful involvement in capitalist development in Europe can be understood better when we look into the trade capacity of the Greeks at the European ports and their effective existence in international financial networks. In this context, based on the inference that there would be a link between joining international trade networks and seeking national independence, it was concluded that the Greek merchant class left the Ottoman Empire's control area and the enriched capital class became demanding its own nation-state.

The Greek independence revolution and beyond: the zooming of the albanian role and impact

The nineteenth century is generally considered a century which inspired many nations, both in the East and West, towards the path of independence. While their aims may have been similar, the approach, the overall struggles and management of their individual independence courses, were rather distinctive. One of the most striking examples was Greece. The ethnic Greeks may have had a great desire to obtain independence, but lacked strategy, commitment, and unwavering determination. Their independence fate, however, was destined to be heavy relied, upon their ancient neighbors, the Albanians. Indeed, the Albanians turned out to be the principal benefactor on the ground, conducive to Greek independence. The main aim of this research is to expose the Albanian role especially during the Greek independence revolution. A substantial part of the study delves in the Albanian leadership and responsibility (both military and political) during the respective revolution. The study also explores that thousands of Albanian soldiers from various factions took part in Greek revolution battles. In addition, the study addresses the fact that the Albanian soldiers resorted to fights, even, with their fellow Albanians, all related to the Greek independence. The key objective of the paper is exclusive reliability on the Western sources (British, American, German, Italian or French), vis-a-vis examined topics, to increase, as much as possible, the objectivity of the research outcome. Several distinct themes are examined, considering Albanian contribution to the establishment of the modern Greece, almost all of them, originating from the Western sources of the nineteenth century, the century when the revolution occurred. The paper also incorporates the descriptions of the accounts, of three Westerners (Thomas Gordon, British army officer, Samuel Gridley Howe, American Medical Doctor and George Finlay, a Scottish historian), who were part of revolution and witnessed the developments

Blood Brothers in Despair: Greek Brigands, Albanian Rebels and the Greek-Ottoman Frontier, 1829‑1831

In the last stage of the disastrous war for Greek independence (1829‑31), the suggested northern frontier line changed three times. The uncertain future of the region, the pressure of the central government to create regular armed forces and to safeguard security along the new border land brought the local Greek and Albanian military elites, after ten years of heavy fighting, in an awkward position. Their options were restricted and their welfare as mercenaries was threatened. The crumbling Empire and the soon‑to‑be Greek nation-state, were unpredictable in their responses either as allies or as enemies. Their choices of reaction varied, yet their method was uniform: to bargain tough before compromising, even if the given choice involved mutiny and extensive civil strife. Their opponents, on the other side, Governor Ioannis Kapodistrias and Grand Vizier Mehmed Resid had to show in the eyes of the Great Powers determination and improvisation, in order to gain the necessary prestige and win back the disputed territories. Eventually the making of the frontier forced both warlords and politicians to transform their tactics and reconsider their alliances.

Athens and the Anchoring of Roman Rule in the First Century BCE (67–17)

AbstractThe early Augustan Age witnessed an increase in building activities and overall interest in mainland Greece which has primarily been understood from the perspective of Roman appropriation of Greek culture, or from that of local Greek independence and “re-Hellenization.” Taking late Republican Athens as an extensive case study, this article shows that, when moving beyond either a top-down or bottom-up vision, developments in the late Republican and early Augustan Age can be properly contextualized as being part of a continuous strategy of Roman leaders and the Athenian elite to negotiate power and influence within a shared field of references.

Probleme de datare a armelor balcanice din sec. XVIII-XIX aflate pe teritoriul actual al Romaniei / Issues Relating to the Dating of the Balkan Arms from the 18th–19th Centuries on the Current Territory of Romania

Probleme de datare a armelor balcanice din sec. XVIII-XIX aflate pe teritoriul actual al Romaniei / Issues Relating to the Dating of the Balkan Arms from the 18th–19th Centuries on the Current Territory of Romania

Russia and the Greek Revolution

Russia and the Greek Revolution Yanni Kotsonis Lucien J. Frary, Russia and the Making of Modern Greek Identity, 1844–1844 304 New York: Oxford University Press, 2015. ISBN-13 978-0198733775. $100.00. We do not have an obvious need for studies of Russian involvement in Greece in the decades surrounding the Greek Revolution of 1821. What became the Kingdom of Greece in 1832 was a small territory on the southern tip of the Balkan Peninsula, while Russia had strategic interests spanning three continents. The existing works of Grigorii Arsh, Norman Saul, I. M. Smilianskaia, Olga Petrunina, and Avgusta Stanislavskaia are careful and good. Together they cover the geostrategic, cultural, and institutional-religious importance of the region in this period, roughly 1770 to the 1840s. Russia became a Black Sea naval power under Catherine II and acted intermittently to extend that power in the Mediterranean. Russian armed forces intervened in the Morea (Peloponnese), where they stimulated the Orlov Rebellion of 1770–71; in the Ionian Islands in 1799–1807, where they evicted the French Republic and established the Septinsular Republic; and in different parts of Italy from the 1790s on, where they sparred with revolutionary and imperial France.1 We need a reason for further engagement. [End Page 661] Things do become interesting when we consider that Greek speakers at the time were extremely active in multiple regions of the world, pertained to flows and loci sooner than states and nations, and had very little respect for borders. The examples are myriad, from the Italian states to which Greek speakers and Orthodox migrated to study, soldier, and trade to France after 1789, where they joined the army and commanded forces in the Caribbean, at Waterloo, in Algeria, and later still in the Franco-Prussian War. In the Ottoman Empire after Greek independence Greeks owned most of the merchant marine, and the Greek-speaking, Orthodox Phanariotes continued to manage major aspects of the state, its moneys, and its foreign relations. They manned the fleets and irregular forces that defended the Porte against foreign attack, rebellions, and revolutions, Greek ones included.2 Russia, too, was a powerful magnet and had been since the time of Ivan III. A generation of scholars trained by the estimable Theofanis Stavrou have been documenting these movements with an emphasis on the 18th and 19th centuries. Lucien Frary is one of those scholars, and his book goes far in tracing networks of Greeks in connection with Russia from the time of the Greek Revolution to the 1840s. Most of Russia's Mediterranean diplomatic missions were manned by Greeks. Greek merchants were based as often in Odessa and Azov as in Cephalonia, Syros, or Piraeus, and behind references to Russian shipping were often Greek captains (and their Albanian crews) from all around the eastern Mediterranean.3 The Russian navy and the corsairs sponsored by Russia were stacked with Greek commanders. Lambros Katsonis was the most famous of the corsairs, and the military leader of the Greek Revolution in the 1820s, Theodoros Kolokotronis, had a spell as a pirate under the Russian flag before 1810. The regular army also attracted hundreds of Greek soldiers and officers like the Ypsilantis brothers, who later organized the Greek uprising of 1821—to the chagrin of Nicholas I.4 Greek theologians populated Russian seminaries and went on regular missions to St. Petersburg. Presumably the Russian emperors valued their language skills and trusted their Orthodox religion, while for a time their oath to the tsar trumped fears of nationalist parochialism. [End Page 662] What to call these people was not at all obvious and the multiple labels invite query. In Russia the terminology still includes greki (the catchall), pontiitsy (from the Black Sea region), ellintsy (from the country, Greece), and in earlier centuries grechane, with further subcategories for certain spaces in today's Caucasus region and Ukraine. In the Ottoman Empire, they called themselves Romans (Romioi), as many Greeks do today, while Turkish-speakers called them Rum, all in reference to the Eastern Roman Empire and the Orthodox Church it spawned. It was the category under which the Ottomans organized the Orthodox millet, no matter what language they spoke. Greeks arriving in the Balkans...