In the early nineteenth century, Slavic peoples from multiple empires in eastern and southern Europe began to pursue a movement to protect and organize Slavic culture. In 1848, this movement became more political. It gained a reputation and an attempt was made to unify all Slavic peoples. This movement became known as Pan-Slavism. Pan-Slavism appealed to many Slavs who felt nationalism towards their race. However among the Slavs, there were many different opinions. Some believed that there was a cultural, ethnic, and political connection among all Slavs. Others argued that there was no place for Pan-Slavic goals in the present empires.
Above all, the cultural and political issues in the debate over Pan-Slavism were nationalism for ones race and a quest for power. In 1871 Slavs occupied most of eastern and southern Europe. The Slavs came from many nations. They populated the Austro-Hungarian, German, Russian, and the Balkan Areas of the Ottoman Empires. However as a result of their geographic diversity, there was no single language or literature for the Slavic population. Slavs were so disunited that although they shared a common nationality, there was ignorance, hatred, and oppression of each other.
Slavic nationalists wanted to unify and form a free and content Pan-Slavic Empire. They believed that all Slavic peoples should maintain a close connection to one another. They were unhappy that among the Slavs, nationality came after humanity, while the opposite of this was true for other nations. In a lecture given by Bronislaw Trentowski in 1848, he stated that if he were ever a tsar, he would destroy the Ottoman and Austrian Empires, thus liberating the Slavic peoples and hence gaining their support. He would free Poland, along with every other Slav occupied country. Some people saw Pan-Slavism as the freeing of non-Russian Slavs from their Ottoman, German, and Austro-Hungarian rulers.
The Term Paper on Arabs In History People Empire Islam
Bernard Lewis is Cleveland E. Dodge Professor Emeritus of Near Eastern Studies, and Long-Term Member of the Institute for Advance Study, Princeton University. He was educated in the University of London, primarily but not entirely at the School of Oriental and African Studies, where He took both his B. A. (Honors in History) and his Ph. D.His B. A. degree was in History with special reference to ...
Not everyone agreed with the intentions of Pan-Slavism. Some people did not think that that the Slavs were one nation. Karel Havlicek, a Czech journalist shared this belief. He believed that nationality was not only determined by language, but also by customs, religion, government, and way of education. In 1848, he published an article called Slav and Czech, in which he stated that the name Slav is and should always remain a geographical name. Bulgarian poet, Christo Boter, who strongly believed that only small federations of Slavs, in accordance to location should be built, shared a similar yet different view.
This is because if only small federations of Slavs would be built, then the Slavs within these federations would share similar beliefs, culture, and political systems. As a result, no nationality would be offended. In addition, not every Russian wanted the uniting of other Slavs with Russia. In 1915, Gabriel de Wesselitsky, a Russian journalist, declared that that Pan-Slavism was supported by only the weakest and most oppressed. He argued that the supporters of Pan-Slavism would visit Russia to complain of their suffering and discrimination, and try to unsuccessfully provoke Russian sympathy. Many Russian rulers believed that it was their duty to unite their Slavic brothers. Russias motive for this was patriotism as well as expansion.
In his Manifesto, Tsar Nicholas II stated that faith, blood, and historical tradition united the Slavic peoples of Russia. He argued that Russia was always concerned with the fate of the Slavs. However many Russians claimed that Pan-Slavic goals involved life, independence, resurrection and liberty. But at the present time, there was no place for Pan-Slavic goals in the Russian Empire, where there was only mechanical obedience, labor, and death. There was also a lot of tension between the governments of the empires where the Slavs resided. In 1843, an editorial in Contemporary Austrian Review affirmed that in order for Austria to prevent Russian influence among the western and southern Slavs, it must to take control over the Slavs and promote their national development.
The Term Paper on Russian System Russia War Government
"Nothing short of war could have any impact of the Russian system of government." How accurate is this of the Tsarist system of government from 1800-1917. The Russian Tsarist system under the Romanov's was extremely resistant to change in all forms. Reforms were brought in only to preserve and little improvement resulted from these reforms. In this essay I will attempt to examine whether or not ...
It stated that if Austria did this, then they would destroy all illusions of a Russian Pan-Slav party as well as gain support among the Russian Slavs, who would no longer consider Austria a foreign ruler. During this time, there were also conflict between Austria-Hungary and Serbia. Russia supported the Slavic Serbs against Austria-Hungary, thus creating feelings of enmity between the Austro-Hungarian and Russian empires. Rulers from other countries were also beginning to fear the Pan-Slav party in Russia. They worried that Russia would create a universal monarchy. In a Viennese newspaper in 1873, Frantisek Palacky wrote that the Russians wanted to absorb and destroy everyones nationality.
Palacky was against a Czech republic or any other republic within the present boundaries of the Austrian Empire. He feared that if Russia took over, then the Austrian Empire would be divided up into a number of republics. Another concern was that because many Austrians were Slavs, they might develop pro-Russian tendencies during a crisis. This would increase the diversity of language and race in the Austrian Empire. Pan-Slavism was a nationalistic movement to unite the Slavic population of Europe. However this movement had both supporters and critics. Some waited for the day that the scattered Slavs would be unified as a whole, and could proudly say, I am a Slav. Others opposed Pan-Slavism and believed that it was a movement primarily to get rid of the rule of the present governments.
They believed that Slav was a purely geographical name. Since Slavs were very diverse, they argued that Slavism was not a nationality, because language, customs, and government determined a nationality. Nonetheless, Pan-Slavism led to hostility between Russia and Austria-Hungary, which then led to World War I..
