This book is written by Charles and Barbara Jelavich, and the eighth volume of "a history of East Central Europe" books, edited by Peter F. Sugar and Donald W. Treadgold for University of Washington. As the book's foreword states, the series of East Central Europe History aims "to identify geographical or political units that were significant during the period in question, rather than to interpret the past in accordance with latter-day sentiments or aspirations". Also, the target of the book is "to provide the scholar who does not specialize in East Central European history and the student who is considering such specialization with an introduction to the subject and a survey of of knowledge deriving from previous publications" In 19 chapters, modern history of seven Balkan states are recognized, starting from their Ottoman past. Jelavichs present their knowledge on Albanians, Bulgarians, Croatians, Greeks, Romanians, Serbians and Slovenes as the focus of the book.
The story starts with a slightly detailed Ottoman background of the Balkan countries. The authors mention about how those Balkan states had never indulged to Empire, and always favored their own independence. While considering so, there has been some antagonism among these Balkan states that deepens their will of freedom from Ottoman Empire . For example, in nineteenth century, other Balkan people acknowledged that Greeks are located in the most favorable positioning. Also, with the ongoing wars Greeks were very well kept handling their internal affairs, wealth and merchandise. Later in the book, as the first successful revolts against Empire, Serbian and Greek revolts are examined respectively. Greek revolution had a great impression on European diplomacy, whereas Serbian revolutions couldn't do so. In 1820s, it appeared as the main issue. The differences between these two revolutions have assessed in the Greek revolution part. Later two chapters analyze these newly autonomous states' formation processes. The authors very much focused on interventions of Russia in the revolt parts especially in Serbia. About the Greek part of the book, there is a critical review by Allan Cunningham from Simon Fraser University, which I am also on the same page. Cunningham says that, Greece has reviewed pretty badly in the book, since the Greek independence is told so much before; reader would be bored with the narration of the part. "The weakness of their account are certainly not imaginary, and the implausibilities of the cultural explanation for the revolt are still given precedence over the economic, which by now has an accretion of good, chiefly periodical, literature to be mined. " (Cunningham)
The book has a separated part for Wallachia and Moldavia before 1853. Again, authors mentions about the differences between previous two revolts and Romanian revolution. They emphasized Russian interventions and influence on Romanian revolt and their leaders as well as in previous chapters. Authors talks about the uniqueness of this revolution, and the narration of this part is really interesting. The importance of the Treaty of Kucuk Kainardji also stated directly. Since main aim of this book is to attract scholars who do not specialize in East Central European and students who are considering such specialization, this chapter involves intriguing information together with a lucid language. Actually, this part creates curiosity.
Following the chapters those focus on the Ottoman Empire Reforms from 1876, and the United Principalities of 1876, the chapter on the Bulgarian national movement in 1876 starts. In this chapter the context of the Bulgarian national movement has recounted and the religious aspect is also emphasized of this movement. Apart from Greek control, the first secular educational institutions were established and this was accepted as the biggest step of the movement as the book states. When Crimean War ends, with the defeat of Russia Bulgarian leaders saw that they should no more wait for ant foreign assistance. In authors' narration, leaders were very important in the case of Bulgaria. Later the crisis of seventies and the formation of autonomous Bulgaria in 1896 was analyzed. Also, the establishment of Albania has its own place in the book. Other than this Balkan revolution based and autonomous state oriented chapters, Jolevichs also talk about the cultural developments in Balkans, the First World War and its Post-war settlements. Another important chapter is that the expulsion of the Ottoman Empire from Europe. In this part, Macedonian Question, the Young Turk revolution, the Bosnian Crisis and two Balkan wars are also demonstrated.
Last part of the book after the conclusion, which the authors commented on these events of the Southeastern European history, and afterwards of the establishment of the states, is a detailed bibliography from where the authors establish this wide knowledge apart from their own. In every chapter of the book and in every single state they referred from various authors that previously wrote about the subject and some journals. The information are not new since this a book considers historical events, however surely authors enriched the existing information with their own interpretations and point of views. The comparison between the national movements, revolutions and formations of the Balkan states was intense actually.
Authors very much focused on the Western effect on the Balkan states' establishments. According to the book, the tension between Christians and Muslims who were living under the Ottoman and especially the Christian uprisings against Empire affected their nationalist feelings to become independent from Ottoman rule. As it is known, after the French Revolution in 1789 nationalism became wide spread, and eventually it expanded to multinational Ottoman Empire. Also European developments were influencing Balkan states perception of Ottoman Empire and it led them to question their future under Ottoman rule, which was an Empire close to European modernity and developments. It is not falsifiable that European powers favored the fall of the Empire and authors clearly suggested this fact in their book by showing the evidences from where they interfered to Balkan states' uprisings, movements, revolutions and finally the establishment of them. Therefore, as the authors claim it was inevitable for the Ottoman Empire to fall with so many enemies and being shelter for so many nations that want independence. In the book, authors also talks about the rivalry among newly established Balkan states. Another review of this book, by Philip Shashko from University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, states that the main issue between the Balkan states was the struggle between king and the prince, and also individual groups of prominent politicians. Most of the Balkan political parties established around a major political leader. The political leaders' perception of what is best is important in deciding about the state's future weather it is liberation or unification. They were willing to be expanded from their own borders as well. This will enables large armies, stable internal politics however problematic external relations. However, as authors mentions there is a backwardness and economic shortage, yet because of leaders being expansion-oriented these facts were ignored. (Shashko)
The book provides good evidences and knowledge from history of Balkans with Ottoman Empire. The comparisons that the authors made among Balkan countries are great sources for the main target of the book, which are the people who do not have extensive knowledge about Southeastern European history. However their stories could be examined more deeply and not only the comparison between states but also the comparison between 1990s and past could be useful. I believe that there were no biases in this book while telling the history, the authors were quite objective on the subject. The European involvement of the history of Ottoman Empire was well defined and recounted attractively. The authors explained more than one century in the book, and it would easily be used as a source for historical researches. Also, people who are interested in South East Europe and more generally history would enjoy this book.
