DELIMITING EUROPE: GREEK STATE FORMATION AS BORDER MAKING

C. Hoffmann
{"title":"DELIMITING EUROPE: GREEK STATE FORMATION AS BORDER MAKING","authors":"C. Hoffmann","doi":"10.33458/uidergisi.1233983","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"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.","PeriodicalId":414004,"journal":{"name":"Uluslararası İlişkiler Dergisi","volume":"20 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Uluslararası İlişkiler Dergisi","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33458/uidergisi.1233983","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

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.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
划定欧洲:希腊国家的形成作为边界的制定
希腊总理在2021年对法国进行国事访问时,在卢浮宫欣赏了德拉克洛瓦的名画《希俄斯之战》,这意味着不止一种意义。他不仅和法国总统马克龙庆祝了1821年“希腊革命”的第二个百年纪念。他们还重申了两国在地中海东部长达200年的地缘政治联盟。两个视自己为欧洲文明发源地的国家结成联盟。当时和现在一样,颂扬他们的欧洲性超越了艺术描绘和象征主义。因此,通过与东方他者的具体斗争而创造的白色欧洲空间,不仅划定了希腊-奥斯曼帝国的边界,而且划定了欧洲东南部的边界。IR将其理解为“空间转向”,回归到强调边界和空间的制造,并在爱琴海发生。回顾希腊独立战争的意义,本文揭示,就像德拉克洛瓦画中的暴力一样,这种国际现代性的形成,远非仅仅是一种文明成就,而是血腥和种族灭绝。按照传统的东方主义理解,这幅画描绘了一个被东方占领军屠杀的欧洲白人。然而,仔细地将希腊独立斗争重新历史化就会发现,它有着高度特定的社会和地缘政治根源,不能归结为欧洲启蒙运动的蔓延。地方社会力量之间的联盟引发了一场斗争,这场斗争通过大规模暴力得到巩固。代表希腊的国际发明并不代表向自由国际秩序的转变,从而产生一个重生的雅典共和国。它代表了分裂的保守王朝之间的妥协,将他们的设计强加给这个年轻的国家。最后,本文将论证这一历史事件体现了欧洲边界制定的持续社会进程。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Introduction: Marxifying IR, IRifying Marxism Goodbye to Russia, Russia and Russia! : Finland’s New NATO Chapter Within the Framework of Shelter Theory Assessing the Impact of Turkey’s Quest for Status Since the 2000s on Foreign Policy Change: Transformational or Transactional? Politicization, Ratification of International Agreements, and Domestic Political Competition in Non-Democracies: The Case of Iran and the Paris Climate Accords The Role of Ideas and Identities in Shaping Economic Decisions: The Eastern Mediterranean Crisis and Turkey-Greece-Cyprus Triangle
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1