Modern Greece and the Macedonian Heritage – Part 5 - Why did the Europeans need a Greece?

By Risto Stefov

rstefov@hotmanil.com

February 1st, 2009



In the first four parts of this series we established that the people living in the southern region of today’s Greece in the early 19th century were predominantly Albanian, Vlach and Slav immigrants who had settled there over the centuries to replace the population void created by the disappearance of the so-called “Ancient Greeks”. Given the fact that this new population was predominantly not Greek, 18th century authorities decided to label it Greek anyway in an effort to connect it with a culture that once existed on those lands a long time ago. In this part we will explain why there was such a need to create a Greece and how it benefited Europe.



It is not my intention here to delve into the various details or the rational involved in creating a Greece so I will present the reader with only a general overview to show why 18th and 19th century Europeans needed a Greece and how they proceeded in creating one.



The reader must keep in mind that when 18th and 19th century authorities were contemplating the creation of Modern Greece and writing its history there were several overriding criteria that needed to be addressed. These were:



1. The belief that God created the world and that the world was no more than 5,000 years old.

2. The human race had descended from Noah’s Ark which was believed to have landed in the Caucasus after the great flood.

3. History began at the point when the world was created by God. No history was acceptable before that.

4. The history of a nation had to be based more or less on a “national myth” designed to support the “nation”, its people and particularly its rulers.

5. The writing of a nation’s history was usually sponsored by those in authority who during the 18th century were predominantly monarchs.



So, as one can see, the history of a nation or of the world for that matter had to be written to fit the above criteria as well as to suit the desires and approvals of its sponsors.



In order to understand why Europeans chose “Ancient Greece” after which to model their own culture, we need to examine Europe’s late 18th and early 19th century political, cultural and economic situation.



The first and foremost reason for Europeans choosing “Ancient Greece” as their model to build on is because Ancient Greece was part of Europe. It was important for Europeans to show that the most “enlightened” civilization in the world originated in Europe.



Europeans at the time were involved in all sorts of ventures including the occupation and colonization of various regions of Africa, Asia, Australia and America. They were also involved in enslaving people from Africa and Asia in order to obtain free labour for building their cities and transportation routes, operating their farms, serving as domestics, etc. All these “doings” had to be justified as “moral” and appropriate not only to the world but also to the European masses which supported the political systems and those in power.



One way to justify them was to show examples of other civilizations doing exactly that; that it was okay to take other peoples’ lands and enslave them for the benefit of this new European civilization. In order to convince the world, particularly their own people, the Europeans needed a practicing example which they found in the “Ancient Greeks”.



Europeans also needed precedence to show that they were not the first to condone imperialism and slavery and at the same time maintain the image that they were civilized. It was one thing to say that a “Greek” civilization existed 2,500 years ago in a savage world full of Barbarians however it would have been more convincing if such a civilization existed today, in this world.



As mentioned in a previous article, certain Europeans, later referred to as Philhellenes, convinced that such a civilization could be re-created, decided to instigate an uprising against the Ottoman Empire. Believing that if the Greeks of today could be freed from the Ottoman yoke they would be politically and culturally capable of quickly progressing to the level of the so-called “Civilized Ancient Greeks” of some 2,500 years ago.



Be it by chance or by design, once the Western European Public found out about the merits of this so-called “Ancient Greek Civilization” it began to look up to it and accept it not only as a source of enlightenment but as a guiding light for Europe’s future.



As it happened, the first step in re-creating this old civilization was to popularize it abroad among intellectuals and academics, especially in Britain and France.



With the publication of the Childe Harold’s Pilgrimage and Lord Byron’s work, the British and French audience was quick to catch on and became very open to the idea of “bringing back the Ancient Greeks”.



Once popularized, a movement started forming giving the “idea of re-creating Ancient Greece” life and impetus and later moral, financial and military support. The movement caught on much easier and faster in Western European countries than it did inside the Ottoman Occupied Greek Regions but with persistence from the Great Powers and British gold, Hellenism was reborn.



Once the European public was in support of such a venture, it was time to convince the people living on the lands where once the so-called “Ancient Greeks” lived. Unfortunately, convincing the “locals” became a harder task than convincing the European public but in the long run persistence paid off and today we have pure Greeks, descendants of the Ancient Greeks.



The primary reasons why Europe wanted a Greece can be summarized as follows;



1. Europeans needed to justify the use of slavery as a moral deed for the greater good of a superior and moral Modern European civilization. Because of its intellectual capacity, the so-called “Ancient Greek Civilization” was considered both superior and moral which not only condoned slavery but practiced it. As I have shown in previous parts of this series of articles, more than half of Ancient Athens was populated by slaves who served the ruling elite.



2. Europeans needed precedence to justify their acts of colonization and imperial land grabs and found it in the so-called Ancient Greeks, particularly in the imperial ventures of Ancient Athens.



3. Besides 1 and 2 above, Europeans needed a “model” on which to build their own civilization and to show that European “knowledge” and “culture” were genuinely European and not imported from any of the “other” lands from which slaves were imported. They found this “model” in Ancient Greece and took from it what they deemed appropriate and discarded the rest.



In other words, late 18th and early 19th century Europeans found in Ancient Greece a civilized people with a superior culture and intellect which at the same time practiced slavery, fought for booty and colonized other peoples’ lands; a behaviour worthy of emulation.



What is most interesting, little known and needs emphasis is the fact that the so-called “Greek Uprising of 1821” was not at all a “Greek Uprising” but an uprising instigated by non-Greek Europeans outside of Greece. Also, another little known fact is that this uprising was mostly financed by Great Britain and fought with the help of Western European volunteers.



The aim of this venture was not just to free the people from the Ottoman yoke but to turn them into something they were not. And thus the curse of Hellenism was born.



Hellenism may have been viewed as “something wonderful” by outsiders who yearned to see the “Ancient Greek Civilization” re-born but it was a nightmare for the people directly involved who were asked to give up their true identities for something alien, foreign and long dead; to which they never belonged. Ninety-two years later, the Macedonians of Greek occupied Macedonia were asked to do the same; become Hellenes, something foreign and alien. One-hundred and seventy years later we are re-living the curse of Hellenism as the Republic of Macedonia is attempting to assert its identity.



In the book “Entangled Identities Nations and Europe” edited by Atsuko Ichijo and Willfried Spohn on page 109 we read “It should be strongly emphasized, however, that this new image of classical Greece was constructed in Europe and was imported to the new born Greek state (Tsoukalas 2002). Modern ideas touched the general Greek population only marginally, if at all.”



After the Greek state was created for the first time in 1829 it was incapable of governing itself and was placed under foreign rule and a foreign administration. On page 110 of the book “Entangled Identities Nations and Europe” we read “Greece was governed by an imported young monarch, Prince Frederic Otto of Wittlesbach, the seventeen year old son of King Ludwig of Bavaria.”

“The three men regency council which in fact was to rule [Greece] was also Bavarian and protestant. What came to be called ‘the protecting powers’ exercised such an influence on the newly-born state that the first political parties were named appropriately ‘the English party’, ‘the French party’ and ‘the Russian party’. Supporters of these parties represented nascent class structures in Greek society but above all these parties represented corresponding foreign influences and interests.”



As we continue to read the book “Entangled Identities Nations and Europe” on page 111 we find “The political parties which existed, as we mentioned earlier, reflected the interests and the antagonisms of foreign powers.”

“In reality, however, this utopian, irredentist idea [which the Greeks developed on their own] served as a smoke screen for corruption and severe socio-economic problems faced by the government and as an excuse for the even greater blatant intervention of the Great Powers in Greek affairs. (Clogg 1979: 76-79)”



In the book “The Greek Phoenix” by Joseph Braddock on page 137 we read “Colonel Napier was seeing a lot of his celebrated guest, and paid him every attention, realizing that Byron, as a representative of the London Greek committee, might have considerable influence both in Greece and London in helping him obtain military command. So it was arranged that Napier should be given leave to go to London, furnished with a letter of introduction from Byron to the London Greek committee. He arrived in January 1824, carrying a letter written on the 10th of December 1823 in which Byron advised that a loan of 500,000 pounds should be raised to provide an army for Greece to be commanded by Napier. ‘Of his military character it was superfluous to speak; of his personal, I can say from my own knowledge’ Byron wrote ‘that it is excellent as his military -in short a better or a braver man is not easy to be found. He is our man to lead a regular force or to organize a national one for the Greeks. Ask the army; ask anybody! He is, besides, the personal friend of Mavrocordato, Colonel Stanhope and myself; and in such concord with all three that we should pull together, an indispensable as well as rare point, especially in Greece at present.’

Alas, the London committee was too preoccupied to welcome Napier’s services. At the moment they were busy devising acrimoniously the menu for their next public dinner, and were more interested in making plans for the cultural regeneration of Greece than in hearing about Napier’s military virtues.”



In the “Encyclopedia of Ancient Greece” edited by Nigel Wilson, which so many Modern Greeks encouraged me to read so that I can “educate” myself on page 345 we read “Hellenization denotes the spread of Hellenic culture in non-Greek ‘barbarian’ society and the process under which ‘barbarians’ accept, adopt, and incorporate Hellenic culture.”

“The first modern appearance of the concept of Hellenism and Hellenization occurs in Geschchite des Hellenismus, G. Droysen’s great three volume work published between 1833 and 1843”



Hellenism, whatever purpose it was intended to serve should have died a long time ago along with Fascism, Nazism and slavery but unfortunately it has not. Instead, nurtured by the Powers that created it, it has flourished and swallowed and destroyed nations of people including part of my own; the Macedonians in Greek occupied Macedonia who to this day are struggling to get free.



What is this phenomenon called “Hellenism”? Whatever it is, it has different interpretations to different people but as Macedonians that have been touched by it, while refusing to yield to it, for us it has been a nightmare. Greece, after invading, occupying and annexing 51% of the Macedonian territories in 1912, 1913, in the name of Hellenism tortured, murdered and expelled all Macedonians who refused to become “Hellenes”. It then changed all peoples’ and place names to “Hellenize” them and make them Greek. If that was not enough, Greece then abolished the Macedonian language rendering it illegal to be spoken both in public and private, all this in the name of “Hellenism”. In other words, Hellenism for the Macedonians has been a relentless enemy whose aim has been to destroy what is real and replace it with something artificial which has no roots or a real past.



For those who are still not convinced that the Modern Greek identity is an artificial creation, please continue to read this series of articles.



Author’s note:



Dear Macedonians, one way to defend ourselves from the Greek onslaught and gain back our identity and dignity is to fight back to the level to which the Greeks have reduced us; that is to attack their identity as they have attacked ours. We need prove nothing to them except to expose them as the artificial identity they truly are and to uncover their design to wipe us out in order to usurp our Macedonian heritage.



To be Continued.



Many thanks to TrueMacedonian from www.maknews.com for his contribution to this article.