Nationalism in Eastern Europe by Peter F. Sugar; Ivo J. LedererReview by: R. V. BurksThe American Historical Review, Vol. 76, No. 3 (Jun., 1971), pp. 795-796Published by: Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Historical AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1851696 .

Accessed: 25/06/2014 02:55

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

Oxford University Press and American Historical Association are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize,preserve and extend access to The American Historical Review.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 185.44.78.76 on Wed, 25 Jun 2014 02:55:52 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Modern Europe 795

even to receive a papal legate in Sicily. Thus the papacy was compelled to use the Naples nunciature to exert whatever influence it could over Church matters in Sicily.

The Church-state relationship was not peaceful in Naples either, for that matter. There were various points on which the viceroyalty of Naples and the Holy See were at odds. The instructions Lorenzo Campeggi received upon his commission as nuncio amply illustrate the nature of these differences: he was told that his duty was the "maintenance and defense of ecclesiastical jurisdiction . . . and the collection of all incomes and benefits from vacant sees." The exercise of these func- tions was not easy, as the viceroy's government often violated the ecclesiastical immunity and other privileges claimed by the Church; even more often it interfered with the collection of ecclesiastical taxes. Under these circum- stances relations between the Holy See and the Spanish Crown deteriorated so much that both sides agreed to take some extraordinary steps in order to avert a major catastrophe. One such move was the appointment of Marquess d'Alcafiizas in 1578 as special envoy of Phillip ii to Gregory xiii. Thus an under- standing was reached about Church-state re- lations in the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies and in the state of Milan. There was relative peace for a few years after that, and the correspon- dence of the nuncios with the papal secre- taries of state dealt with only routine matters. But the climate changed again when the im- pulsive viceroy the Duke of Ossuna and the rigid Sixtus v clashed wits. Nuncio Giulio Rossini, who was also archbishop of Amalfi, was pressed between the financial interests of his local fellow ecclesiastics and the de- mands of Sixtus v, who ordered strict col- lection of the papal dues. For a time Sixtus appointed an apostolic commissioner of tax collection in Naples, but that practice ended in a debacle, as neither the nuncios and local churchmen nor the viceroys liked the idea.

The 769 letters that comprise these two volumes deal with everything from the prob- lem of bandits along the borders of Naples and the Papal States and the scandals in convents to the Spanish Armada and the canonization of saints. They provide invalu- able insight into the nature of European

diplomacy at a critical period in modern history.

In 1591, where the second volume brings us, relations between the papacy and the viceroyalty were calm, if not friendly. But an explosive situation soon developed when Clement viii pressed the issue of the Mon- archia Siciliae, and his confessor Caesar Bar- onius opened the question for public debate by the publication of his Tractatus de Mon- archia Siciliae. But for details of those events we will have to wait until future volumes appear.

CYRIAC K. PULLAPILLY

St. Mary's College, Notre Dame

PETER F. SUGAR and IVO J. LEDERER, editors. Na- tionalism in Eastern Europe. (Far Eastern and Russian Institute. Publications on Russia and Eastern Europe, Number i.) Seattle: University of Washington Press. 1969. Pp. Vii, 465. $15.00.

Despite its title and the overall introduction by Peter F. Sugar, the present work is not so much an analysis of nationalism in its East European settinig as it is a series of brief political histories that focus on the national element. The eight histories are of unequal length, running from twenty-three pages on Romania to seventy-three on Bulgaria, and are ordered alphabetically. While the Slovaks are granted separate, if scanty, treatment within the chapter on Czechoslovakia, as much cannot be said for the Slavo-Macedo- nians, the Montenegrins, or the Serbo-Croa- tian-speaking Moslems.

Seven of the eight histories share an apolo- getic patina. Much attention is devoted to the career of Adamantios Koraes, for example, but there is no reference to his invention of Katharevousa. The key role played by the issue of the confines in producing the Polish uprisings of 1830 and 1863 is passed over in virtual silence. There is only indirect ref- erence to the annexation by Horthy's Hun- gary of northern Transylvania, Ruthenia, and southern Slovakia. The exception to the apologetic rule is provided by Stephen Fischer- Galati, who argues that the greater Romanian idea, combined with anti-Semitism, gave to Romanian nationalism a diversionary func-

This content downloaded from 185.44.78.76 on Wed, 25 Jun 2014 02:55:52 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

796 Reviews of Books

tion with respect to the problem of social re- form, as well as making it a useful platform for political and bureaucratic careers. Even the Ceausescu regime, Fischer avers, has not yet affected any basic change in this formula.

The weight of the presentations falls on the nineteenth century. Nationalism in its relationship to the Communist ideology, a central interpretive problem of our time, gets meager and not very helpful attention. Bela Kun earns passing mention without any suggestion that his regime constituted a plea for Bolshevik help in retaining the frontiers of St. Stephen's sacred kingdom. The short summary of the Romanian national deviation carries no reference to the issue of industriali- zation, across-the-board or otherwise.

There is also some failure to make use of more recent materials. Karl W. Deutsch's Nationalism and Social Communication: An Enquiry into the Foundations of Nationality (1953) is relegated to a footnote, although many political scientists regard it as funda- mental. Certainly our authors pay little heed to the phenomenon of urban migration, which Deutsch contends is central to the emergence of national consciousness on a mass basis. This would have been especially true in Eastern Europe, where cities were often multinational at the beginning of the nine- teenth century. The author of the chapter on Albania died before the appearance of Stavro Skendi's Albanian National Awaken- ing I878-I912 (1967). Nor is any use made of the public opinion polls now becoming avail- able, such as the rather sophisticated sond- ages of the Belgrade Institute of Social Sci- ences on the national attitudes of the Yugo- slav population (for example, Firdus Dzinic, ed., Yugoslav Public Opinion Concerning Cur- rent Political and Social Questions [1964]).

Nonetheless, it would be wrong to conclude that Nationalism in Eastern Europe is not a useful book. Seven of its nine authors were born and reared in the area and another has resided extensively there. The authors have, consequently, a native command of languages and cultures, knowledge that gives their common work great and undeniable strengths. They provide a rich bibliography of secondary sources in the area languages. They summarize and epitomize these works,

thus making their corpus available to all those who do not read the languages in question. And they often place already familiar trends, events, and personalities in a new and more meaningful light. A good example is Ivo J. Lederer's presentation of the privileges granted to the refugee Serbs by Leopold ii in 1690 as a transfer to Austrian circumstances of the Turkish conception of the millet. An- other, and better, is George Barany's treat- ment of forcible Magyarization as a fear re- action of the Hungarian gentry-fear of the national feeling emerging among their non- Magyar peasantry and fear of pan-Slavism and pan-Germanism as well.

Nationalism in Eastern Europe is the first in a series of publications on Russia and Eastern Europe projected by the Far Eastern and Russian Institute of the University of Washington. It represents a promising begin- ning.

R. V. BURKS

Wayne State University

LOVETT F. EDWARDS, edited and translated from the Serbian by. The Memoirs of Prota Matija Nenadovie. New York: Oxford University Press. 1969. Pp. xlvii, 227. $7.00.

The archpriest Matija Nenadovit was one of the leading participants in the "first Serbian insurrection" of 1804-13 against Turkish mal- administration. The translation of his mem- oirs and diary of his transactions during the Congress of Vienna should therefore render service to nonspecialists with an interest in wars of independence or in the Napoleonic era in an offbeat part of Europe.

The translator provides a useful introduc- tion. Readers should be warned, however, against his over-simple view of the origins of the insurrection, namely, that it was started by the district headmen, priests, and mer- chants, and originally lacked a popular basis. For other views, the nonspecialist may con- sult Stojan Novakovic's old study of this sub- ject (in German), Dimitrije Djordjevic's Rev- olutions nationales des peuples balkaniques

1804-1914 (1965), and an article by Wayne S. Vucinich entitled "Marxian Interpretations of the first Serbian Revolution" (Journal of Central European Affairs, 21 [1961]: 3-14).

This content downloaded from 185.44.78.76 on Wed, 25 Jun 2014 02:55:52 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions