|
|
||
 |
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||
|
Essays, Opinion, & Commentary |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
|
Abstract: The term ancient Greek tribalism is used here to denote the abstract, narcissistic notion that certain ancient Greek tribes (like the Macedonians) should be excluded from the Hellenic community, for they were considered to be inferior compared with the general Hellenic civilization. In the same sense, mutatis mutandis the term modern Greek (or European) nationalism signifies the general notion that modern Greek (or any European) nation is de jure culturally superior, for it is descended from ancient Greek (or any other European) race which was magnificent when other Europeans were still savages. Furthermore, modern Greek nationalists do not accept the ancient Greek view that the ancient Macedonians are an uncivilized barbarian Greek tribe. This is a typical way in which modern Greeks interpret their ancient Greek past. That is to say, a form of ancient Greek tribalism (manifested in modern Greek nationalism) is still present in modern Greece! The present paper analyses comparatively the social phenomena of ancient Greek tribalism and modern Greek nationalism in order to answer the following two questions: A). what distinguishes ancient Greek tribalism from modern Greek nationalism? and B). which model is the most appropriate for the modern Greek nation: the civic model or the ethnic model?
Modern Greek National Identity by Michael Bakaoukas, M.Sc., Ph.D.
I. A common way in which modern Greeks interpret their ancient Greek past: From ancient Greek tribalism to modern Greek nationalism Scholars agree that the majority of the ancient Greeks found it difficult to see beyond the horizon of the city-state or to overcome the limitations that slavery and other facts of their life imposed upon their sight. That is to say, the ancient Greeks did not reach the picture of a world-society in which not only those who enjoy Hellenic culture, not only the wise, but all peoples, or at any rate all civilized peoples, have a place [1]. These research findings explain why many ancient Greeks called the ancient Macedonians uncivilized barbarians [2]. According to Thucydides, Andriotis, Chatzidakis and Wilkes, in the eyes of many ancient Greeks, the Macedonians, the Epirotes, as well as the Boeotians and the Thessalians were barbarian, uncivilized Greek tribes. Thus, Andriotis also argues that the designation barbarian was attributed by ancient writers to other uncivilized Greek tribes, as well, such as the Epirote tribe of Chaones (Thuc. 2.80) [3]. Chatzidakis agrees on this asserting that as was the case with Macedonians, some included Macedonia and Epirus in Greece, while others did not. Thucydides speaks of the barbarian Chaones in B.80, while in 81 it is mentioned that the Thesprotians and the Molossi were also barbarians, according to Thucydides [4]. Chatzidakis affirms that the term barbarian Macedonian is not used in an ethnological sense, but with a derogatory cultural meaning. Admitting that, for some ancient Greeks, the Macedonians were an uncivilized Greek tribe, Chatzidakis says that for that reason many excluded certain tribes from the national community, for they were considered to be inferior compared with the general national civilization [5]. Chatzidakis and Andriotis also attempted to prove and defend the greekness of the ancient Macedonians. On the contrary, some scholars (like Vladimir Georgiev and O. Muller) supported that the ancient Macedonians were not Greeks [6]. However, the archaeological findings of the Greek archaeologist Andronikos in Vergina put an end to the scientific disagreement about the origin of the ancient Macedonians. Therefore, now it is certain that the ancient Macedonians were Greeks despite the fact that, in the eyes of many ancient Greeks, the Macedonians were a barbarian, uncivilized Greek tribe. Nevertheless, the debate about the origin of the ancient Macedonians is not over. Modern Greek nationalists and the (former Yugoslavian Republic of) Slav Macedonia nationalists (FYROM) will still quarrel about the origin of the ancient Macedonians. For FYROM nationalists, the ancient Macedonians were not Greeks, since they were barbarians, a fact which to their view makes the Greek Macedonia theirs. On the contrary, modern Greek nationalists usually say that the music-loving Macedonians who offered hospitality to Euripides and built a monument to honour him could not have been barbarians. Both of them do not understand the fact that what we think and know today about the Macedonians and what the ancient Greeks really thought about them are two completely different things. They do not like the fact that, for some ancient Greeks, the Macedonians were uncivilized barbarian Greeks. Modern Greek nationalists often misinterpret even substantiated research findings. The modern Greek nationalistic reasoning will not allow us to term the ancient Macedonians as barbarians, for this way we are playing into the hands of the Slav Macedonia (FYROM) and all kinds of enemies of Greece (who today claim the Greek Macedonia). This national argument is indicative of modern Greek nationalism, which regards as an enemy everyone who attacks the repute of the ancient Macedonians [7].
II. Modern Greek nationalism: The theories of Renan and Smith The question now is where modern Greek nationalism lies. It cannot be accounted for by ancient Greek tribalism, since the latter is a phenomenon of the ancient pre-modern society and does not apply to the modern society of the nation-states in the eighteenth, nineteenth and twentieth centuries. In other words, the ancient Greeks cannot be characterised as nationalists and racists under the current meaning of the terms. That would be an anachronistic interpretation, since modern nationalism and racism have nothing to do with ancient Greek tribalism, as expressed by the dichotomy between Greeks and barbarians. As Kyrkos and Hall note, in the 5th century BC the dichotomy between Greeks and barbarians had a political and not an anthropological dimension, i.e. the Greeks were considered superior, however not on an anthropological level, but only thanks to the superior form of political life they had established on their own, free from any coercion [8]. That is, ancient Greek ethnic groups were not ultimately natural, racial entities. In contrast, modern nationalism and racism (e.g. that of National Socialism) has a mostly anthropological meaning. The ideologies that animated modern racism are the following: a) a mythological-intellectual saga according to which the superior man comes from the Ideal Nordic race, b) a scientific, biological Darwinism which was the dominant influence on Hitler and c) a nationalist-conservative strain of thought which called for a strong state to be governed by a single individual. All three strains extolled German superiority and provided the force that linked leadership, party and the German people [9]. These modern strains of thought have nothing to do with ancient tribalism. In other words, despite any similarities, ancient Greek tribalism cannot account for modern Greek (or any other European) nationalism (and racism) by itself. To understand how and why modern Greek nationalism emerged (in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries), one must comprehend how and why the modern nation-state emerged in Europe during that same period. One of the most important explanatory models of nation is that of Renan. According to Renan (1823-1892), a nation is a soul, a spiritual principle. Man does not belong to his language or to his race. What makes a nation is not speaking the same language or belonging to the same ethnographic group. There is in humanity something superior to language; it is will [10]. In other words, the disparate (according to this view) bilingual ethnic groups, such as the Albanian-speaking Greek Arvanites (like Markos Botsaris, one of the chiefs of the Greek War of Independence) or the Romanian-speaking Greek Vlachs (like Rigas Pheraios, one of the spiritual leaders of the Greek revolt against the Ottomans) or the Slavophone Greeks, were not belonging to the same ethnographic group. That is, they were foreign to each other and had no connection to any common ethnic cultural background capable of unifying them into a single nation. Therefore, based on this view, modern Greek nation was formed on the basis of an idealistic will and not thanks to an ethnic umbilical cord that connected those ethnic groups. This theory has become quite widespread. It has deeply influenced such modern theorists of nationalism as Ernest Gellner and Benedict Anderson, who consider that the nation is an imagined political community and imagined as both inherently limited and sovereign [11]. This theory is quite convincing, but, as will be shown, applies only to the colonialist countries of the West and the subsequent colonial countries of the 20th century; it is not valid in the case of the Balkan, Greek nation. So, the question is what is the position of Renan in the international bibliography and why it does not apply in the case of the Greek nation. According to the current international thinking, there are two main models of nation: (a) the territorial and civic model and (b) the ethnic-genealogical model. The theory of Renan belongs to the western civic model, as per which a historic territory, legal-political community, legal-political equality, and common civic culture and ideology are required for the formation of a nation [12]. According to the alternative ethnic model, which is supported by one of the most prominent modern theorists of nationalism, Anthony Smith, nation as a community is based on the common predecessors, the common descent of the different ethnic groups and their native culture [13]. The question now is which model is the most appropriate for the Greek historical reality: the civic model of Renan, Gellner and Anderson or the ethnic model of Smith. In other words, which of the two types of nationalism (emanating from the two models) applies to the Greek nation: the civic model or the ethnic model? The civic model nationalism applies to nations with a colonialist or imperialistic past, such as Russia, China, Japan, Persia, Ottoman Turkey and Ethiopia, but also to non- western countries that made their first steps as colonies of foreign powers, such as the Gold Coast, the Ivory Coast, Nigeria, Egypt, Kenya, the Belgian Congo, India, Iraq, Burma, Indonesia etc. It would take a lot of imagination or we would have to invent many fantastic utopias or Atlantis to include the Greek nation in the above-mentioned colonialist or imperialist group [14].
III. The ethnic model nationalism The nations with an ethnic or genealogical basis seek to expand so as to include the ethnically kin populations that are beyond the current borders of the ethnic nation, along with the territories where they live, or aim for the creation of a much larger ethic-national state, merging into other culturally and ethnically kin states. This is the case of the pan-nationalism of the unredeemed and all other kinds of pan-nationalisms [15].The characteristics of the genealogical nationalism of the unredeemed fit the Greek nation almost perfectly. Greeks will still talk about the "The Great Idea" and the unredeemed Hellenism (e.g. that of northern Epirus), even though these ideas have fortunately faded after the Asia Minor Catastrophe. However, what is happening today and what happened in the nineteenth century, when the Greek nation was built on the basis of the unredeemed-ethnic-genealogical nationalism and much less on the vision of Renan , are two completely different things.
IV. Conclusion In other words, the example of the Greek nation substantiates Smith's theory. That is to say, the modern Greek nation is not an entirely modern formation, for it is based on much older cultural groups (ethnies). Greek ethnies (like Arvanites, Vlachs, Slavophones etc.) present "permanent cultural attributes" such as memory, value, myths and symbolisms. Greek ethnies present a common cultural origin descending from ancient Greece and Byzantium. For example, all Greek cultural groups believe in the myth of "Gorgona" who seeks to find Alexander the Great. That is to say, the modern Greek nation (in the beginning) was not "a community of citizens" but a "cultural" group [16]. Thus, as Smith points out, "the challenge for scholars is to represent more accurately and convincingly the relationship of ethnic, cultural (Greek) past to modern (Greek) nation" [17].
NOTES: 1. H.C.Baldry, "The Idea of the Unity of Mankind," in C. Swhalb, H. Diller, O. Reverdin, W. Peremans, H.C. Baldry, A. Dihle, Grecs et Barbares, Six exposes et discussions, Entretiens sur l antiquite classique, tome VIII, Geneve, 4-9 Sept. 1961, pp. 176-177, 188-189. Return 2. See G. Chatzidakis, On the Greekness of the ancient Macedonians, Karavias, Athens, pp. 5, 10 (in Greek). Return 3. N. Andriotis, On the language and the Greekness of the ancient Macedonians, Macedonian Popular Bibliotheque, Thessalonike, 1952, p. 22 n. 18 (in Greek). Cf. J. Wilkes, The Illyrians, Odysseus, trs. in Greek Ava Peppa, Athens, 1999, pp. 143-144. Return 4. Chatzidakis, Macedonians; greekness, pp. 5, 10. Return 5. Chatzidakis, Macedonian greekness, p. 13. Cf. C. Swhalb, H. Diller, O. Reverdin, W. Peremans, H.C. Baldry, A. Dihle, Grecs et Barbares. Six exposes et discussions, Entretiens sur l' antiquite classique, tome VIII, Geneve, 4-9 Sept. 1961, 69-82, 169-204 passim. Return 6. For the disagreement about the origin of the ancient Macedonians, see O. Muller, Ueber die Wohnsitze, die Abstammung and die altere Geschichte des Macedonischen Volkes, Berlin, 1825 - V.I. Georgiev, Die Trager der kretisch-mykenischen kultur, ihre Herkunft und ihre Sprache, Sofia, 1937 - Chatzidakis, Macedonian greekness, p. 7 ff - Andriotis, The Greekness of the ancient Macedonians, p. 12. Return 7. See my articles: 1). "The History of the Greek Barbarians," Fortnightly Independent Political Review Anti 692 (1999), pp. 26-31, 2). "What did the barbarians mean to ancient Greeks?" Historia Illustrated, 385, 2000, pp. 34-39 and 3) "Greek Arvanites and Albanians: two different ethnies" Kyriakatiki Avgi, 17th Dec. 2000. In these articles I explained the reason why the ancient Macedonians were called by many ancient Greeks barbarians. A nationalistic reply to my articles was published in Historia Illustrated, (389, 2000, pp.126-127) in which it is argued that by calling the ancient Macedonians barbarians we provoke FYROM to claim Macedonia. Also a left wing political reply to my article was published by the daily communist Greek newpaper Kyriakatiki Avgi (Eleni Perdikouri, Arvanites and Albanians, 31 Dec. 2000). Return 8. B. A. Kyrkos, The Ancient Greek Enlightenment and the Sophistic Movement, Athens, 1993 (2nd ed.), p. 73 (in Greek); Jonathan Hall, Ethnic Identity in Greek Antiquity, Cambridge, 1997, passim. Cf. W.C.K Guthrie, The Sophists, [Cambridge Univ. Press, 1971], tr in Greek Dam. Tsekourakis, MIET, Athens, 1989, pp. 204-205. Return 9. See Eric H. Viler, The Ideological Roots of German National Socialism, Peter Lang Publishing, 1999, passim. Return 10. Ernest Renan, "What is a Nation?" in Eley, Geoff and Suny, Ronald Grigor (ed.), Becoming National: A Reader, New York and Oxford, 1996, pp. 41-55, 52-54. Cf. Herman Brauer, The Philosophy of Ernest Renan, PhD Thesis, Reprinted from the Bulletin of the University of Wisconsin, Philology and Literature Series, Vol.2, No.3, pp. 205-379, Madison, Wisconsin, Oct. 1903, passim. Return 11. Benedict Anderson, Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism, London-New York, 1991, 1991, p. 5. Return 12. Anth. D. Smith, National Identity (1991),tr in Greek Eva Peppa, Odysseus, Athens, 2000, p. 27. Return 13. Smith, National Identity, ibid. Return 14. See Smith, National Identity, pp. 123, 145-155, 155 ff. Return 15. See Smith, National Identity, pp. 123-124. Return 16. See Dominique Schnapper, Community of Citizens: On the Modern Idea of Nationality, trs Severine Rosee, Transaction Publishers, 1998 (trs in Greek by Despoina Papadopoulou, Gutenberg, Athens, 2001). Return 17. A. D. Smith, Gastronomy or geology? The role of nationalism in the reconstuction of nations, in Nations and Nationalism 1, No (1994), p. 18 - Smith, National Identity, pp. 51, 236-237. See also Ernest Gellner, Do nations have Navels?, in The nation: real or imagined?, Nations and Nationalism 2, no. 3 (1996), pp. 367-368. Cf. my article Barbarians are the people who believe in barbarism, Fortnightly Independent Political Review Anti 2000 (718-719), pp. 56-61. Return
Dr. Michael Bakaoukas is teaching philosophy at the University of Piraeus, Greece and at the Technical and Vocational Teacher Training Institute (SELETE), Greece. He studied Ancient and Modern Philosophy at the University of Ioannina, Greece, receiving his Bachelor's degree in 1993. He received his Master's in Philosophy from the Philosophy Department of the University of Edinburgh in 1995 working with Dr Theodore Scaltsas at Project Archelogos. He obtained his PhD in Ancient Greek Philosophy from the Department of Methodology, History and Theory of Science of the University of Athens, Greece. He has published numerous papers in Greek and in English. The English written papers are the following: "Gorgias the Sophist on What is not: How to interpret Gorgias," The Radical Academy (Oregon), The Philosophy Resource Center, 2001, 1-11 (www.radicalacademy.com); "Gorgias the Sophist on Not-Being: A Wittgensteinian Interpretation," Sorites, ISSN 1135-1349, Issue #13 - October 2001, Pp. 80-89, (www. Sorites.net); "Solon`s Forgotten Genealogy," Electronic Antiquity, Vol. 6, nu. 1, 2001, 1-7 (http://scholar.lib.vt.edu); "Understanding Ancient Greek Biographies, or Solon`s Forgotten Descent," Pomoerium. Studia et commentarii ad orbem classicum spectantia, vol. 4-5, 2002-2003 (http://pomoerium.com); "Solon`s Salaminian Descent," Ancient/Classical History, http://ancienthistory.about.com/library/bl/uk_bakaoukas1a.html; "The Ancient Greek Concept of Non-Being," Ancient/Classical History, (ancienthistory.about.com/) (not yet published); "A Concise Critical History of Presocratic Philosophy: A Gorgiantic Approach," Ancient/Classical History, ancienthistory.about.com (not yet published). He has recently published the following books: The Presocratic Philosophers, A Concise Critical History of Presocratic Philosophy: A Gorgianic Approach, Helias I. Bartzoulianoy Publishing Co., Athens, 2002, ISBN: 960-87255-0-X, (in Greek with an extended summary in English); Nothing Exists: A History of the Philosophy of Non-Being, Xlibris, Philadelphia, USA, 2002, ISBN 1-4010-6910-X (not yet published). Enrich Your Life With A Book About Politics & Current Events 
Enrich
Your Life With A Politics & Current Events
Magazine
|
|||||||
|
Politics Resource Center Main Page |
|||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
|
||
|
|
||
[Homepage] [Newsletter] [Search] [Support the Academy] [Link to Us] [Contact the Academy] [Citing Articles from Our Website] [Privacy Policy & Disclaimer]
Copyright 1998-99, 2000-01, & 2002-03 by The Radical Academy. All Rights Reserved.