Patrick J. GearyReviews

Egyfelől A nemzetek mítosza „pusztán” egy remek könyv arról a történelmi fekete lyukról, ami a Nyugat-Római Birodalom felbomlása és a nagy keresztény államok megjelenése között ásítozik legtöbbünk fejében. Ez az a periódus, amikor az ilyen-olyan barbárok közösségei gyökeret vertek Európában, kereszténnyé váltak, és nekiálltak betölteni a latin civilizáció összeomlása után keletkezett hiátust. Nos, nagyon tanulságos, most legalább tudom, kik is azok a vandálok – azon túl, hogy édesapa szerint ők karcolták össze a kocsink ajtaját. De ettől azért még nem dobnék hátast. Másfelől viszont…

Geary az egész elé rittyent egy frenetikus bevezetést, amivel tudomásomra hozza, mik azok a kortárs jelenségek, amelyek egészen konkrétan ezekből a zűrzavaros évszázadokból vezethetők le. Olyan első harminc-negyven oldal ez, hogy halleluja és heuréka – végig az volt az érzésem, mintha Geary helyettem beszélne, megfogalmazná azt, amire magam is mintha gondoltam volna, csak épp nem tudtam eddig világosan megfogalmazni. Adomány az ilyen szöveg, bár illik ilyenkor megvizsgálni, nem csak én látom-e a szövegbe azt, amiről olvasni akarok. (Amúgy: azt hiszem, nem.) Aztán persze jön a masszív értekezés a római polgárságról, a barbár gensről, átláthatatlan népmozgásokról, de ekkor már érdekelve vagyok. Figyelek.

Elképesztően aktuális téma ez. Ma, amikor az iszlám gyökerű vallási intoleranciára a nyugati államok paradox módon nem vallási, hanem nacionalista intoleranciával felelnek*, érdemes szem előtt tartani, mennyire egy tőről fakad ez a két jelenség. Egyikük a Koránból, másikuk valamiféle nemzeti őstörténetből merít ideológiai igazolást – de hasonlítanak abban, hogy legfeljebb közvetett kapcsolatban állnak azok valódi tartalmával. Mindketten előnyben részesítik a kézzelfogható tények helyett a szubjektumokat, így hatástalanok ellenük a racionális érvek. És végezetül: mindkettejük végső érve a terrorizmus. Úgyhogy jó lesz figyelni.

* Még azok az államok is – most nem jut eszembe a nevük –, akik nincsenek közvetlen kapcsolatban a terrorizmussal.

A fairly good beginning medieval history reader. Should be combined with Brian Tierney's work for best results.

Patrick Geary's The Myth of Nations has only become more relevant in the fifteen or so years since its first publication. In this short, lucid, but highly thought-provoking book, Geary explores how the period between the third and ninth centuries have been appropriated by nationalists and racists who claim to find in that period a definitive origin of contemporary European peoples. Geary dismantles these myths and shows instead that the names of ethnicities are less descriptors of biological continuity than they are representative of shifting claims over time. Rather than pinpointing the ethnogenesis of European peoples as a thing that happened at some fixed point in the early Middle Ages, Geary argues that it is a process, beginning in Late Antiquity and continuing through to the present day. This should be accessible to the interested lay reader, and also of use in the college classroom.

I definitely liked it, and it pretty much shook my entire perception of peoplehood - reading the brief section on the Bulgars and how they had split from the Avars is totally and utterly unlike anything I was taught in school in terms of the origins of the Bulgars. Being Bulgarian, this really caused me to reconsider everything I was taught about our historical continuity as a people - a concept which really is quite ridiculous. Geary does a great job in describing the fluidity of identity and how ethnicity or peoplehood is a construct, that "peoples" are heterogenous units, constantly evolving and amalgamating, sometimes disappearing altogether in the course of history.

The writing was excellent, and I felt the book was an appropriate length. What I would have liked to hear more is how exactly the notion of nationhood was formed in the 18th and 19th centuries, and how historians manipulated and reinterpreted history for their political purposes. But I guess he indirectly tells us that, because the peoples of the Late Antiquity themselves invented genealogies and histories to consolidate and validate their political power. In reality this has always happened and will continue to happen, and it is important for us Europeans (and all peoples, really) to realize the mechanics of ethnogenesis and not to be fooled by nationalist rhetoric. Not that I necessarily have a quarrel with nationalism as such, but I do object to the politicizing and manipulation of history as is so often observed within such political groups.

This book also reminded me why history and the study of history is important - history means a lot in terms of our self-identification, and it's important to be informed when political leaders use and abuse history for their own aims. It's important that historians speak out on issues such as these and break down illusions of the past that can be extremely harmful.

The reason I'm giving a 3.5-star rating and not a 4-star, is that I found the middle section a bit dull, to be honest. The fusion of barbarians and Romans was described in too much detail for a layman like me, and I had difficulty keeping up sometimes. What that really tells me is that I should step up my game and learn some more about my history - something which this book has inspired me to do. (less)½

An essay dealing with the problems that arise when attempts to discover the origins of the modern national European States become too identified with the "Barbarian Warbands" that collapsed the Roman structure in Western Europe. There is a lesson here for us all.½

This book was published 15 years ago, but it has only gotten more relevant. The warning about the impermanence of 'nations' is a good alternate view to much of the campain noise we have been hearing in recent elections.

I was also delighted to get a rather clearer view of the 'Völkerwanderungen' than I had ever seen before.½

The period between the fall of Rome and the emergence of medieval Europe gets short shrift in the popularly available literature. This book fills that gap, and in doing so show just how overdrawn is the "fall of Rome" view of European history. Geary shows convincingly that late Roman ways and relationships persisted for centuries, gradually evolving into what we recognize as early medieval culture. Or at least they did in the place that is very much the author's focus: Merovingian France. (The title may be somewhat misleading: this book is almost entirely about what went on to the west of the Rhine). In France, a Gallo-Roman provincial aristocracy persisted and remained powerful after the Franks established control over much of what is now France and the Low Countries, and late Roman culture persisted along with that. Moreover, the Franks themselves had been heavily Romanized, serving in Roman armies and becoming subject to Roman law. The Merovingian kings worked with the Gallo Roman power structure rather than attempting to supplant it. Given just how few Franks there may have been (Geary cites a "guess" of 150-200,000 spread out in a Gallo-Roman population of 6-7,000,000) they probably had little choice. The author ends with a chapter summing up the importance of the Merovingians, and argues convincingly that much of their poor reputation (les rois faineants) may be due to Carolingian propaganda.

All in all, this is an illuminating and enjoyable read. There is one section on the later Merovingian kings where the number of unpronounceable names becomes a real stumbling block, and the genealogical chart in the Kindle edition is not much help -- it appears to have been divided in two. But I learned a lot, and enjoyed doing so.½

Geary looks at relic thefts in Western Europe between about 800 and 1100, seeking to categorise them but also to understand why they were carried out. Comprehending the motives of relic thieves can be puzzling for a modern audience, particularly when it comes to understanding why their actions were not automatically condemned. In this slim, clearly-written book, Geary does a good job at unpicking the rationalisations which were in vogue during this period of the Middle Ages. Relics, particularly those which were the bodies of saints, were 'alive' in some way, subjects and not objects; therefore, if they were 'stolen' it could only be because the saint had personally sanctioned it. To say otherwise was to deny the relic's mighty power. The stolen relics were used to provide a firm financial foundation for new monasteries, to create communal prestige, or to calm religious turmoil, amongst other reasons. There are perhaps places where Geary could have expanded his analysis further, or read his sources in more depth, but this is a useful starting point.½

The Myth of Nations presents an interesting premise: that historical nations are not the descendants of the peoples of the classical era (as they would almost all like to claim) but rather are constructs that evolved in the middle ages -- roughly from the decline of Rome in the 5th century until sometime around 500 years later, depending on the region.

Geary's style is readable and clear. If I had one difficulty with the book, it was that it was too much a "lay summary." Geary tells the story as conclusions-only, but doesn't cite much evidence for how he got them. The reader would have to do his own research to make a decision on their correctness.

I'd like to see this book updated to address developments of the last half-decade or so, particularly in genetics. There is another way to tell the history of peoples, and that is through their genome. It has revealed that many populations that think of themselves as nations are in fact genetically distinct -- the Basques, for instance -- and the history of many others can be read in their DNA. The population of England's eastern half, the Danelaw of the Middle Ages, shows definite genetic links to Scandinavian populations. It would be interesting to see how the generic underpinnings of ethnic identity support or detract from Geary's thesis.

The long transition from the mature Roman Empire to medieval Europe is something that has long intrigued me. "Before France and Germany" is an excellent guide to this evolution. It traces the internal and external changes that influenced life, war, health, and the economy.

For anyone interested in this time in European history, this book is an exceptional starting place. Highly recommended.

http://bassoprofundo1.blogspot.com/2010/07/before-france-and-germany-by-patrick-...

Geary manages to present the decline of Rome, migrations and emerging Merovingian and Carolingian powers in just 200-odd pages. So, there's a lot of content, and paragraphs need to be digested in unhurried manner. For a layman, this very interesting phase in history is largely unmapped, as it lacks major historical figures that school books tend to cherish.

Geary suggests that Rome was not really conquered by barbarians. The Gallo-Roman aristocracy sustained Roman culture all the way to the medieval times. The warrior elite of Franks merged into this aristocracy. Of course, over the centuries what is considered Roman evolves.