Tweet
Pan-Slavism and Anti-Slavism
A Megali idea: some intellectuals in the 19th century and preceding WWI believed that the Slavic people should unite and claim territory as one nation.
Partially, reaction against inequalities between Eastern and Western Europe.
Anti-Slavism: grouping Slavic peoples together used as a propaganda tool by Hitler in Mein Kampf, which explained his plan to use the Slavic peoples as permanent slaves for the Third Reich.
Ironic?
From a strict definition, the Slavs are neither an ethnic group, nor a nation.
Although many common bonds, people who were historically “Slavic” have identities today that are so closely tied to their nationalism that would be difficult to unite.
Republic of Yugoslavia as bad example of this struggle between common and nationalist identities.
When considering early records, one must recognize the Byzantium Empire’s distance from the group identification going on to the north of them.
Common roots of Slavic peoples may not be as common as presupposed by Ptolemy and Jordanes.
Supported by lack of unity among Slavic nations and uncertainty as to what was common territory.
Some archeologists theorize that “Slavic” is simply a Byzantine invention.
Can an imposed identity be accepted and internalized by a group of people?
Katherine Barber
December 6, 2004
Languages and Nationalism
A Megali idea: some intellectuals in the 19th century and preceding WWI believed that the Slavic people should unite and claim territory as one nation.
Partially, reaction against inequalities between Eastern and Western Europe.
Anti-Slavism: grouping Slavic peoples together used as a propaganda tool by Hitler in Mein Kampf, which explained his plan to use the Slavic peoples as permanent slaves for the Third Reich.
Ironic?
From a strict definition, the Slavs are neither an ethnic group, nor a nation.
- Common history, culture, and religion in some cases.
- Bonds too weak since advent of nationalism to form a “Slavic nation.”
Although many common bonds, people who were historically “Slavic” have identities today that are so closely tied to their nationalism that would be difficult to unite.
Republic of Yugoslavia as bad example of this struggle between common and nationalist identities.
When considering early records, one must recognize the Byzantium Empire’s distance from the group identification going on to the north of them.
Common roots of Slavic peoples may not be as common as presupposed by Ptolemy and Jordanes.
Supported by lack of unity among Slavic nations and uncertainty as to what was common territory.
Some archeologists theorize that “Slavic” is simply a Byzantine invention.
Can an imposed identity be accepted and internalized by a group of people?
- However the grouping was invented, the group known as “Slavs” do share enough history, culture, language similarities, and religion across borders to have an identity group.
- In modern times, “Slav” is usually not a sufficient source of identity in itself, but may be a part of identity -> self-identification most important in determining someone’s ethnic group.)
- Many instances of propaganda designed to appeal to or bias against “the Slavs” or a “Slavic race”, pointing to the identity more as outside creation.
- However, incidences of similar themes in culture: birth, death, marriage, which may stem from common identity at some point in history.
- Additional splits over religions (Orthodox or Catholic?), alphabets (Cyrillic or Latin?), and nationalist movements (Yugoslavia? Serbia? Croatia? Bosnia? Macedonia?) make it difficult to appeal to a “Slavic identity” in modern times.
Katherine Barber
December 6, 2004
Languages and Nationalism