Search results
; Jenkinson, 2016 , 2018 ). Meanwhile on the Eastern Front, at one point, one-third of the Serbian population was on the move along with hundreds of thousands of Italian and Greek refugees in the Mediterranean and Balkans. Farther north, equally great numbers of Jewish, Armenian, and Turkish refugees traveled along the Eastern European border with Russia ( Cabanes, 2014 ). Many of Europe’s refugees had become stateless through having been expelled by conquering armies, and as documentation linking people to countries was not common ( Cabanes, 2014 ; Ngai, 2004 ). By the
This book talks about the mass displacement of civilians, estimated to be 14 to 15 million, in the twentieth-century Europe during the First World War. It looks at the causes and consequences of the refugee crisis and its aftermath, and the attempts to understand its significance. Key sites of displacement extended from Belgium to Armenia, taking in France, Italy, Austria-Hungary, East Prussia, the Russian Empire, Bulgaria, Greece, Turkey and Serbia. The German army's occupation of Belgium, France, Poland and Lithuania prompted the mass flight of refugees, as did Russia's invasion of East Prussia in 1914. Jewish, Ruthenian and Polish civilians in the Habsburg Empire fled their homes or were deported by the military to distant locations. Following Italy's attack on Austria-Hungary in May 1915, the Habsburg authorities ordered around 100,000 Slovenian subjects of the empire to leave. The Austrian and Bulgarian invasion of Serbia brought about a humanitarian catastrophe as civilians and the remnants of the Serbian army sought safety elsewhere. However, mass flight of civilian refugees did not begin in 1914 nor did it come to an end in 1918. Muslim refugees fled to the relative safety of Anatolia in order to escape violent persecution by Bulgarian and other forces during the Balkan Wars on 1912-13. There were complex movements of population between Greece, Bulgaria and Turkey before 1914. The complex process of repatriation and resettlement affected soldiers and civilians alike and rarely took place in stable or peaceful circumstances.
to strengthen them. It did this, we suggest, not only to counter the spread of cholera, plague and other contagious diseases, but also to police regional commerce and shipping, to allow its own ships to move smoothly through Mediterranean at a time when quarantine was widely practised across the region, and to manage local problems such as smuggling from the mainland of Greece, the arrival of Greek refugees from the Ottoman Empire and local resistance to British rule. Indeed, local perceptions that the quarantine system was not working fed into broader Ionian
This volume aims to disclose the political, social and cultural factors that influenced the sanitary measures against epidemics developed in the Mediterranean during the long nineteenth century. The contributions to the book provide new interdisciplinary insights to the booming field of ‘quarantine studies’ through a systematic use of the analytic categories of space, identity and power. The ultimate goal is to show the multidimensional nature of quarantine, the intimate links that sanitary administrations and institutions had with the territorial organization of states, international trade, the construction of national, colonial, religious and professional identities or the configuration of political regimes. The circum-Mediterranean geographical spread of the case studies contained in this volume illuminates the similarities and differences around and across this sea, on the southern and northern shores, in Arabic, Spanish, Portuguese, Greek, Italian, English and French-speaking domains. At the same time, it is highly interested in engaging in the global English-speaking community, offering a wide range of terms, sources, bibliography, interpretative tools and views produced and elaborated in various Mediterranean countries. The historical approach will be useful to recognize the secular tensions that still lie behind present-day issues such as the return of epidemics or the global flows of migrants and refugees.
and Australia). 5 The magazine’s distribution across both sides of the Cold War does not only differentiate it from other Greek refugee publications but also discloses its editorial strategy and political aims: ultimately, to construct a collective national cultural subjectivity for its diverse readership of Greek émigrés in the 1960s. This chapter examines Pyrsos
-live-Kassenaerzte-Chef-Maskenpflicht-reine-Symbolpolitik.html (accessed: 3 May 2020). 7 M. Lavelle, ‘Growing calls to evacuate Greek refugee camps amid virus threat’, (19 March 2020), www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/growing-calls-evacuate-greek-refugee-camps-virus-threat-200319163512654.html (accessed: 26 May 2020). 8 ‘Polizeieinsatz gegen Geflüchtete in Suhl’, TAZ (18 March 2020), https://taz.de/Polizeieinsatz-gegen-Gefluechtete-in-Suhl/!5668971/ (accessed: 26 May 2020). 9 These observations are based on my ethnographic fieldwork (2015–2016) in Dunkerque (France), the Aegean island Lesvos, the Greek northern
indebted Greeks, refugees, or immigrant neighborhoods, than the interests of the Dutch people, [they are] seduced by an alternative and radical program which aims to overthrow the established order. 35 In the Netherlands this last category is represented by the Forum voor Democratie (Forum for Democracy) of Thierry Baudet, a philosopher-ideologue whose anti-immigrant party, which adheres to the theory of the “Great Replacement,” became in March 2019 the largest party in the election for the provincial parliaments. These “ideologues” and the new rich share the
light on a systematic interpellation of asylum seekers (via UNHCR chatbots) and their ‘voluntary’ work for generating a product which is considered of benefit to the refugee community (via RefuGIS). Since 2015, the Greek refugee context has progressively turned into a space of protracted confinement for women, men and children who seek asylum in Europe. For the migrants who
in the Erivan governorate, in Kars oblast , and in Akhalkalak uezd . 18 It lists 45,138 Armenian refugees (6,803 families), 6,379 Assyrian refugees (1,325 families), 8,886 Greek refugees (1,257 families), and 102 refugees of other nationalities (20 families), a total number of 60,505 (9,405 families) on 30 January 1915. 19 However, the report is only a snapshot of a rapidly changing situation. Newly arrived reserves enabled the Russians to counterattack and restore their positions in Sarikamish, and some of the displaced Armenians returned to their homes soon
assigned to Greek refugees from Asia Minor.48 Several other points of comparison can be made between the pre1912 refugees and those entering Bulgaria in 1913–19. Most of the refugees from Macedonia and Thrace before the Balkan Wars were not deprived of their rights and could either sell their properties or find a temporary occupant who could use the land until they returned. They v 269 v Nikolai Vukov were accommodated more easily as a compact group in places that they usually chose themselves and adjusted relatively quickly to the new living conditions. At this stage