Advertisement

The Dodecanese and the Aegean Issue: Historical Background

  • John Papadimas
Part of the International Political Economy Series book series (IPES)

Abstract

Since ancient times, the Dodecanese islands of the Aegean Sea have played a significant role in the history of the Hellenic world. Evidence of the interrelationship between the archipelago and the Greek mainland can be traced in ancient and medieval sources spanning almost two and a half millennia. Clustered around the southeastern part of the Aegean, the Dodecanese straddle the gateway to the sea lanes in the Eastern Mediterranean. Accordingly, from the Trojan War in the thirteenth century to the Peloponnesian War in the fifth century to the present, the Dodecanese represented the ideal base for city-states, kingdoms, and empires that struggled to maintain their hegemony over the southeastern Mediterranean.

Keywords

Great Power Aegean Island Greek Government Greek State Balkan State 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 1.
    I am indebted to Eudoxia Ioannides for making available to me her unpublished master’s thesis entitled British Policy towards South Eastern Europe and the Restoration of the Dodecanese Islands to Greece (MA thesis, McGill University, Montreal, 1992). For a good synopsis of the Ottoman conquest and administration of Balkan territories see George G. Arnakis, The Near East in Modern Times, vol. 1 (New York: Pemberton Press, 1966), 57–87;Google Scholar
  2. Stanford Shaw, History of the Ottoman Empire and Modern Turkey, Volume I, Empire of the Gazis: The Rise and Decline of the Ottoman Empire, 1208–1808 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1976), 170–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 2.
    Joseph Braddock, The Greek Phoenix (New York: Coward, McCann and Geoghegan, 1973), 49.Google Scholar
  4. For a good overview of the drive for Greek independence see Richard Clogg, The Movement for Greek Independence 1770–1821 (London: Macmillan Press, 1976).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 3.
    One of the best diplomatic narratives on the evolution of the Greek state is Douglas Dakin, The Unification of Greece, 1770–1923 (London: E. Benn, 1972).Google Scholar
  6. 4.
    For a thorough summary of the impact of the Megali Idea on the early development of the Greek state see Elie Skopeta, To Prototypo Vasileio kai H Megali Idea (Athens: Poly Typo, 1988).Google Scholar
  7. 5.
    Domna Dontas, Greece and the Great Powers 1863–1875 (Thessaloniki: Institute of Balkan Studies, 1966), 1–10, 40–50;Google Scholar
  8. T. A. Coloumbis, J. A. Petropulos, and H. J. Psomiades, Foreign Interference in Greek Politics: An Historical Perspective (New York: Pella, 1976), 1–33;Google Scholar
  9. Alan Palmer, The Decline and Fall of the Ottoman Empire (London: J. Murray, 1992), 65–70, 105–25;Google Scholar
  10. and A. J. P. Taylor, The Struggle for the Mastery of Europe, 1848–1918 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1954), 176–86.Google Scholar
  11. 6.
    Victor Papacosma, The Military in Greek Politics: the 1909 coup d’état (Kent: Kent State University Press, 1977), 8–17, 70–5.Google Scholar
  12. For a thorough analysis of the Venizelist era see Alastos Doros, Venizelos (London: Lund Humphries, 1942);Google Scholar
  13. Thanos Veremis and Odysseas Dimitrakopoulos, Meletimata Gyro apo ton Venizelo kai tin Epohi tou (Athens: Filippoti, 1980);Google Scholar
  14. and Giannis Mourelos, ‘O Venizelos Opos ton Eidan E Xenoi, 1916–1917’, Symposio gia ton Eleftherio Venizelo (Athens: E.L.I.A., Benaki Museum, 1988), 235–43.Google Scholar
  15. A critical analysis of Venizelos’ relationship to the British is put forth by C. Theodoulou, Greece and the Entente: August 1, 1914-September 25, 1916 (Thessaloniki: Institute of Balkan Studies, 1971).Google Scholar
  16. 7.
    Richard Bosworth, Italy, The Least of the Great Powers: Italian Foreign Policy Before the First World War (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979), 10–15, 20–7, 34–40, 60–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. An excellent diplomatic narrative on the rivalry of the Great Powers is Robert K. Massie, Dreadnought: Britain, Germany and the Coming of the Great War (New York: Random House, 1991).Google Scholar
  18. For a military analysis of the strategic interests of the Great Powers see David G. Herrman, The Arming of Europe and the Making of the First World War (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1996).Google Scholar
  19. 8.
    Georges Michon, The Franco-Russian Alliance 1891–1917, translated by Norman Thomas (New York: Howard Fertig, 1969), 197–261;Google Scholar
  20. Stanford Shaw, History of the Ottoman Empire and Modern Turkey, ii: Reform Revolution and Republic: The Rise of Modern Turkey, 1808–1975 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1976), 181–4; Palmer, The Decline and Fall of the Ottoman Empire, 65–70, 105–25, 210–16; Bosworth, Italy, The Least of the Great Powers, 10–15, 20–27, 34–40, 60–65, 165–175;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. and N. Petsalis-Diomidis, Greece at the Paris Peace Conference 1919 (Thessaloniki: Institute of Balkan Studies, 1978), 29–32, 125–35.Google Scholar
  22. 11.
    Ibid., 45. ‘From the moment Italy decided to embark on an imperialistic policy in the Mediterranean, she was bound to become the bitter antagonist of Hellenism.’ William Sodomone, Italy in the Giolittian Era: Italian Democracy in the Making 1900–1914 (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, Second Edition, 1960), 86–101. Michon, The Franco-Russian Alliance 1891–1917, 197–261.Google Scholar
  23. 12.
    Bosworth, Italy, The Least of the Great Powers, 10–15, 20–7, 34–40, 60–5, 165–75, 300–36; Palmer, The Decline and Fall of the Ottoman Empire, 65–70, 105–25, 210–16; Paulos Petrides, Xeni Exartisi kai Ethniki Politiki 1910–1918 (Thessaloniki: Paratiritis, 1991), 116–25, 128–31, 138; and Michon, The Franco-Russian Alliance 1891–1917, 197–261. According to Bosworth France, Germany, and Austria-Hungary were not particularly impressed with the Italian military campaign in Africa and they did not believe that Italy could mount an effective war effort. Furthermore, Lloyd George’s relationship with Venizelos had an important effect on British strategic planning in the southeastern Mediterranean. After the Greek success at the end of the Balkan wars, particularly in the Aegean Sea, Lloyd George was convinced that Greece could become a significant maritime power and the bulwark of British interests in the region.Google Scholar
  24. 14.
    The best reference on the Great Powers and the Balkan Wars remains Ernst Christian Helmreich, The Diplomacy of the Balkan Wars, 1912–1913 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1938). See also Petrides, Xeni Exartisi kai Ethniki Politiki 1910–1918, 116–25, 128–31, and Bosworth, Italy, The Least of the Great Powers, 10–15, 20–7, 34–40, 60–5, 165–75, 300–36.Google Scholar
  25. 15.
    David Fromkin, A Peace to End All Peace: The Fall of the Ottoman Empire and the Creation of the Modern Middle East (New York: H. Holt, 1989), 28–9.Google Scholar
  26. For an excellent analysis of Greece in the First World War see George Leon, Greece and the Great Powers, 1914–1917 (Thessaloniki: Institute of Balkan Studies, 1974).Google Scholar
  27. 17.
    E. Driault and M. Lheritien, Histoire Diplomatique de la Grèce de 1821 a nos jours, 5 vols. (Paris: Presses Universitaires, 1921), vol. 5, 113.Google Scholar
  28. 24.
    In a early draft response to Venizelos’ written demands for the Paris Peace Conference, the British conceded that the ‘Greek claim justified as regards Dodecanese and Aegean islands’, H. Nicolson Curzon, Peacemaking, 1919 (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1933), 230–50.Google Scholar
  29. 26.
    A thorough analysis of Greek foreign policy in the late 1920s and early 1930s is provided in Kosta Karamanli, O Eleftherios Venizelos kai Oi Exoterikes Mas Sheseis 1928–1932 (Athens: Papazisis, 1995), 37–72, 170–6.Google Scholar
  30. See also E. Melas, ‘O Venizelos kai ta Dodekanesa’, Dodekanesiaka Chronika, 4(4) (1977), 330–4.Google Scholar
  31. 27.
    The best analysis on the impact of the Treaty of Lausanne on Greece and Turkey is Harry Psomiades, The Eastern Question: the Last Phase; A Study in Greek-Turkish Diplomacy (Thessaloniki: Institute of Balkan Studies, 1968).Google Scholar
  32. See also Spyros Loukatos, ‘E Zoi kai E Drasi ton Ellinon sta Dodekanesa kai stin Kypro’, Moria tou Ellinikou Ethnous (Athens: Ekdotikis Athinon, 1978), 460–72;Google Scholar
  33. Konstandinos P. Kalligas, ‘E Exoteriki Politiki tou Eleftheriou Venizelou Meta The Sinthiki tis Lozanis’, Symposio gia ton Eleftherio Benizelo (Athens: E.L.I.A., Benaki Museum, 1988), 297–319; and Karamanli, O Eleftherios Venizelos kai Oi Exoterikes Mas Sheseis 1928–1932, 37–72, 170–6.Google Scholar
  34. 30.
    The most explosive incident between the two nations was in 1923, after a series of clashes over the Greek-Albanian border. See James Barros, The Corfu Incident of 1923 (London: Oxford University Press, 1965). Relations improved only after Venizelos signed the Greek-Italian Treaty of Friendship in 1928.Google Scholar
  35. 31.
    Karamanli, O Eleftherios Venizelos kai Oi Exoterikes Mas Sheseis 1928–1932, 37–72, 170–6. As in the First World War, the Dodecanese would play an important role in the Italian and British campaigns in North Africa during the Second World War. The Italians would use the islands to harass the British in the Mediterranean and to hamper their efforts in Egypt. During the occupation of Greece the British tried unsuccessfully to capture the islands from the Germans (see Andre Gerolymatos, Espionage and Guerrilla Warfare in Greece 1940–1944 (New York: Pella, 1992), 298, n. 88.Google Scholar
  36. 32.
    Manos Iliadis, Ta Mystika Arheia to Germanikou Ypourgeiou Exoterikon Kai tou ‘Foreign Office’ Gia tin Tourkia (Athens: Labyrithos, 1996), 17–50.Google Scholar
  37. 33.
    B. Kondis, H Aggloamerikaniki Politiki kai to Elliniko Provlima (Thessaloniki: Institute for Balkan Studies, 1992), 85–90, 158–64.Google Scholar
  38. 34.
    Alexis Alexandris, ‘To Istoriko Plaisio ton Ellinotourkikon Sheseon’, Oi Ellinotourkikes Shesis 1923–1987 (Athens: Gnosis, 1988), 115–17.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Palgrave Macmillan, a division of Macmillan Publishers Limited 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • John Papadimas

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations