St Cross College, Oxford

Given as a Special Lecture on Greek and Balkan Cultural History, as part of the series
"Seminars and Special Lectures in Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies at Oxford" on 1 February 2001

By 1800, what is now Greece had seen considerable advances in both population density and in extent and types of cultivation. A network of Greek-speaking merchants had spread across central Europe, with representatives in the centres of Hellenism - Thessaloniki, Constantinople and Smyrna, and inland. Schools were established teaching European subjects, and a strong Greek character and culture was developing even under Turkish rule. However at this date it is not clear whether any sense of Greek national consciousness existed.

The first two decades of the century were turbulent years throughout Europe, with the upheavals caused by the Napoleonic wars and their aftermath; they were also years of social upheaval for Ottoman society, as the ideas of the Enlightenment crept in. Disruptive forces were felt within, while Russia, the British and the French vied for influence and possessions in the Mediterranean. The merchant class contended for a greater share of political power.

Ali Pasha, the ruler of Epirus, was a capable, clever and dynamic leader, keeping control locally while always seeking greater independence, or perhaps even full autonomy, from the Sultan. He aimed also at the territorial expansion of his power, and the amassing of wealth. These aims included keeping tight military control over his area, and to this end he removed the task of guarding the roads from Christian irregulars and entrusted it instead to his own men. The fact that, in consequence, law and order prevailed, facilitated trade and encouraged economic growth, which enormously enhanced his power and importance, even to the European naval powers; Britain and France both sought alliance with him. He was also able to buy up land until his family ruled the entire South Balkan Peninsula, and he possessed immense flocks as well as vast reserves of gold and jewels. He surrounded his capital Ioannina with powerful walls, adding further to his local prestige, but although immensely strong these were of traditional design and vulnerable to artillery.

The definitive rift between Ali Pasha and the Sultan occurred in 1820. The Sultan had appointed a new pasha, who laid siege to Ioannina in August. Ali Pasha barricaded himself inside the city, relying on its strength and on alliances with the local warlords (although his diplomatic ties with European powers came to nothing). It was to be a war of attrition. Thanks to his military might and his vast fortune, Ali Pasha held out for fourteen months, but as his allies fell away he gave up the city and retired to a final strong point. As long as he lived, he could still hope to buy off some of his besiegers and might even have managed to win back favour with the Sultan. Had he done so, not he, but at least one of his sons or grandsons could have become pasha in his place and everything could slowly have been rebuilt.

If Ali Pasha had won the war, would he have established an independent state? This would have needed not only international recognition, but an ideological foundation, a sense of nationhood. He appears to have thought of proposing a collective form of government, a kind of European constitution, yet at the same time he was trying to reconcile with the Sultan by offering to resign in favour of his youngest son Salih. When the Greek revolution broke out in 1821, however, the first thing the revolutionaries did was to address the European states, proclaiming the independence of the Greek nation. In other words, the ultimate aim was inherent before military victories made it apparent.

But it was politics, not military victories, that finally brought about Greek independence. The Great Powers of Europe had decided on independence, and quite naturally they imposed it. The Greeks proved their determination to fight for the right to freedom; and although in the short term the Sultan overpowered them, his victory was short-lived. The Greek struggle became part of the movement for nationalism, an international movement which was gradually to win over Europe and the rest of the world. Whether illusory or not, Greek ethnicity had the wind in its favour - and that is the major difference between it and Ali Pasha's rebellion.

Ali Pasha imagined himself as a Sultan, with Ioannina as a miniature Constantinople, with palaces surrounded by high walls. But despite his tolerance towards intellectuals and their activities, his plan did not allow for setting up printing-presses to spread Greek nationalistic ideas. By contrast, in Greek communities during or even before the revolution, on many levels ideology led society and even the economy. These two attitudes, of Ali Pasha on the one hand and the Greek-speaking merchant class on the other, define the situation. Ali Pasha's profits were transformed into buildings, castles, flocks and land. In contrast, the shared Greek language held the merchant class together, wherever they happened to live, and part of the profits from trade went into the creation of schools, libraries, books and periodicals. The flourishing of intellectual activity created a strong network which brought many more people together under the same roof, while the Greek language, the mother tongue of many merchants, almost automatically forged a bond between them and the European intelligentsia.

Alexis Politis
University of Crete
Hellenic Foundation Visiting Fellow