DOCSLIB.ORG

Interconf» | № 53 the Impact of the Verona Conference

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Interconf» | № 53 the Impact of the Verona Conference SCIENTIFIC COLLECTION «INTERCONF» | № 53 Sadraddinova Gulnara Eldar Doctoral Candidate, Baku State University, Republic of Azerbaijan THE IMPACT OF THE VERONA CONFERENCE AND THE AKKERMAN AGREEMENTS ON THE GREEK REBELLION Abstract. At the Congress of Verona, held by members of the Holy Alliance in October 1822, Russia wanted to use it to carry out its insidious policy against the Ottoman state. Unable to do so, however, Tsarist Russia encouraged foreign powers to intervene in the Gr eek uprising. As a result, on October 7, 1826, the Akkerman Treaty was signed in an unfair political environment for the Ottoman state. This agreement represents an important stage in Ottoman-Russian political relations and in the formation of a map of the Balkans. However, this was a stage of development against the Turks and strengthened Russia's influence in the Balkans. Keywords: Congress of Verona, Akkerman Convention, Ottoman, Tstarist Russia, greek rebellion. The Ottoman Empire, weakened for internal and external reasons in the late 18th and early 19th centuries, faced political confrontation during the Greek uprising that began in 1821. The situation of the Ottoman state became even more tense as the rebels, who took advantage of the privileges granted to the Greeks by the Ottoman government, relied on the help of European states. Although the rebellion was organized by the Filiki Etherya Society, its secret leader was Tsarist Russia. Tsarist Russia, through the newly independent Greek state, wanted to strengthen its position in the Balkans and realize its plans for the Mediterranean. The interference of European states in the Greek question, which sought to thwart Tsarist Russia's intentions, led to the development of international relations. In October 1822, the 4th Diplomatic Meeting of the Holy Alliance was held in Verona, Italy. The Verona Congress was attended by Tsar Alexander I of Russia, Emperor Franz I of Austria, King Wilhelm III of Prussia, Italian officials and officials from other countries. It is clear from the British archives that the proposals put forward at the Vienna Conference on the Greeks were also put forward here. Greek rebels also sent representatives to the congress. They appealed to members of Congress to "get out of the power of the barbarians and build a motherland." Tsarist 343 INTERNATIONAL FORUM: PROBLEMS AND SCIENTIFIC SOLUTIONS Russia, which took every opportunity to stand up to the Ottoman state, made proposals to the Greeks at the Verona Congress: 1. The Ottoman state had to agree with the European states to ensure the former status of the Greeks. 2. The right of the Greeks to worship freely should not be taken away from them. 3. The security of life and property of the Greeks must be ensured. 4. The Ottoman state must take very serious measures to ensure peace in the region. 5. The Ottoman state must withdraw all its military forces from Aflak and Bogdan. 6. The Ottoman government must come to an agreement with Russia [1]. Austria, Prussia and France have said they have accepted the proposals to ensure peace. Wellington, the representative of the British state in the Congress of Verona, stated that it was wrong to interfere in the internal affairs of the Ottomans [2, p.28]. In the spring of 1823, Russia invited all European states to a conference in St. Petersburg. In January 1824, meetings of representatives of the great powers began in St. Petersburg. Britain intended to take new diplomatic steps to act together with other European countries. However, Tsar Alexander I made it clear that he did not want Greece to emerge as a powerful state with a plan to build a three-pronged, divided Greece. While protecting the Christian population in the Balkans, Russia wanted the Christians here to always be dependent on and in need of Russia [3, p.257]. The Greeks, who had turned their backs on Russia and Britain, turned to British Foreign Secretary Lloyd George and demanded Britain's support. They wanted Britain to send a leader who would wear the Greek crown and ascend the Greek throne. In this way, they would have escaped all kinds of pressure and attacks from the Ottoman state. The Greeks' inclination toward the British also encouraged Britain to intervene in the uprising. As a result of the efforts of Metternich and Bagot, Russia's plan was not accepted by the representatives of European countries (England, France, Prussia and 344 SCIENTIFIC COLLECTION «INTERCONF» | № 53 Austria) [4, p.106-107]. Finally, on April 7, 1825, certain decisions were made in St. Petersburg. According to these decisions, the Ottoman state had to give some privileges to the Greeks. However, representatives of the Ottoman state disagreed, saying that the sultan had decided to pardon the remorseful rebels and that there was no need to grant new privileges to the Peloponnese. However, seeing that the Turks did not retreat, the Russians decided to intervene directly in the Greek question. Thus, the Russo-Turkish war was approaching [5, p.149-169]. Canning first appealed to both sides in November 1825 to settle the dispute between Babiali and the Greeks. According to him, Russia's close involvement in the Greek issue by supporting the rebels was contrary to the principles of the Vienna Congress. If Russia's decisions in St. Petersburg were made, the Vienna Congress's Intervention System would be used for the first time to intervene militarily in the Balkans. Although Russia was reluctant to act alone, it became increasingly angry that its allies were blocking it. Stretford Cunning, who had previously served as Britain's ambassador to Istanbul before the Russians, wrote a note to Babiali in 1825 stating that Britain would not help the Turks if Russia attacked the Ottoman Empire. With this step, Britain wanted to bring the Ottomans to an agreement on the Greek issue. However, the harsh response of the Ottoman state to the Russian ultimatum given to the Turks after this note led to the threat of war. Concerned by Russia's growing pressure, Britain told Babiali that it wanted to mediate with the Russians. However, Sultan Mahmud II also rejected this mediation. Thus, this ultimatum, which called for the fulfillment of obligations to Russia under previous agreements, was unequivocally a diplomatic manifestation of the mutual interests of Britain and Russia [6]. While Russia continued to put pressure on the Ottoman state, Minchaki threatened Babiali in Istanbul that Russian troops would enter Bogdan if the Russian proposals were not accepted. Seeing its growing repression in the international political arena, the Ottoman state was forced to accept Russia's ultimatum for six weeks. The official answer was given on May 15, 1826, at the end of the term given by Russia. Sayyid Mammad Hadi Efendi, Kosa Ibrahim Efendi, Nafi Efendi as the first secretary, Najib Efendi 345 INTERNATIONAL FORUM: PROBLEMS AND SCIENTIFIC SOLUTIONS as the second secretary, Sirri Efendi, the translator of Divani Humayun as the first translator and Namik Efendi as the second translator formed a delegation of the Ottoman Empire to negotiate Russia's demands [7]. This delegation of the Ottoman Empire left for Vidin in early June 1826. It was decided to hold the conference on July 1, 1826, in Akkerman, at the beginning of the Dniester, in the lands of Bessarabia, which had previously belonged to Geneva and then to Bogdan, and later to Russia. The Russian government has given the task of participating in the talks to the Commissioner of Bessarabia, Vorontsov. Representatives of the Ottoman Empire demanded that the previous conditions not be changed when amending the Bucharest Peace Treaty before negotiations began. At the end of these meetings, in which most Russians had a political advantage, the Treaty of Ackermann was signed on October 7, 1826. This agreement, signed as a continuation of the Bucharest Agreement, consisted of 8 clauses and 2 additional documents. One of the documents belonged to Aflak and Bogdan, and the other to Serbia. The document on Aflak and Bogdan stated that the voivodes would be elected for a term of 7 years at a meeting organized by the boyars, and the result would be approved by Babiali. In the event of a dispute, the voivode would be appointed jointly by Russia and the Ottoman Empire. Taxes would be collected by the boyars and the Greeks would be allowed to trade freely. The terms of the agreement included a pardon for the Greek rebels [8]. Russia assured the Ottoman delegation during the Ackerman talks that it would not interfere in the Greek issue. The Ottoman representatives also conveyed this to Babiali. Decisions in favor of Russia were made by the Ottoman state only after that guarantee. Thus, one of Russia's main goals in excluding the Greek question from Ackermann was to be able to pass the decisions of the treaty to the Ottomans, while the others were not to take a political stand against Britain, not to violate the St. Petersburg Protocol and not to take any steps on the Greek question without Britain's consent. Arthur Wells Wellington, in turn, told Foreign Minister Cunningham that the main purpose of the agreement was not to interfere in the Greek uprising. Cunningham, who believed that the Ackerman agreement would avert the threat of war between the Ottomans and Russia, did not object to the agreement [9, p.173]. 346 SCIENTIFIC COLLECTION «INTERCONF» | № 53 Thus, the Ackerman Treaty was not an agreement between two equal states, but an agreement signed by a victorious state against a defeated state. However, in the absence of war or war, the Ottoman state accepted the terms of this agreement under the pressure of the general political situation.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 9781501756030 Revised Cover 3.30.21.Pdf
    , , Edited by Christine D. Worobec For a list of books in the series, visit our website at cornellpress.cornell.edu. From Victory to Peace Russian Diplomacy aer Napoleon • Elise Kimerling Wirtschaer Copyright © by Cornell University e text of this book is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution- NonCommercial-NoDerivatives . International License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/./. To use this book, or parts of this book, in any way not covered by the license, please contact Cornell University Press, Sage House, East State Street, Ithaca, New York . Visit our website at cornellpress.cornell.edu. First published by Cornell University Press Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Wirtschaer, Elise Kimerling, author. Title: From victory to peace: Russian diplomacy aer Napoleon / by Elise Kimerling Wirtschaer. Description: Ithaca [New York]: Northern Illinois University Press, an imprint of Cornell University Press, . | Series: NIU series in Slavic, East European, and Eurasian studies | Includes bibliographical references and index. | Identiers: LCCN (print) | LCCN (ebook) | ISBN (paperback) | ISBN (pdf) | ISBN (epub) Subjects: LCSH: Russia—Foreign relations—–. | Russia—History— Alexander I, –. | Europe—Foreign relations—–. | Russia—Foreign relations—Europe. | Europe—Foreign relations—Russia. Classication: LCC DK.W (print) | LCC DK (ebook) | DDC ./—dc LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/ LC ebook record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/ Cover image adapted by Valerie Wirtschaer. is book is published as part of the Sustainable History Monograph Pilot. With the generous support of the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, the Pilot uses cutting-edge publishing technology to produce open access digital editions of high-quality, peer-reviewed monographs from leading university presses.
    [Show full text]
  • Congress System”: the World’S First “International Security Regime”1
    The “Congress System”: The World’s First “International Security Regime”1 © 2015 Mark Jarrett In his State Paper of May 5, 1820, British Foreign Secretary Lord Castlereagh argued that the post-Napoleonic alliance of great powers was never intended as a “union for the government of the world, or for the superintendence of the internal affairs of other states.”2 Notwithstanding Castlereagh’s powerful denial, was this new system, known to historians as the “Congress System,” an attempt at great-power supervision of the rest of Europe? Was it, as Professor Beatrice de Graaf has suggested, a new type of “security regime,” or as Dr. Stella Ghervas contends, a novel and innovative approach for the maintenance of peace after two decades of bloodshed? Was this new system, as Professor Brian Vick asserts, inextricably linked to constitutionalism—perhaps constitutionalism extended to Europe at large? A handful of scholars would deny that this system existed at all, or at least they would argue that its impact was negligible. Others go to the opposite extreme and see it as part of a new system of norms and self-restraint that replaced traditional balance of power rivalries.3 And still others would decry its existence as a repressive conspiracy of monarchs against their own peoples. My contention is simply that there was such a system. My focus will be on the set of concrete institutions created in Paris in November 1815, which loosely bound together the European great powers during the first decade after the Napoleonic Wars. The Congress System was indeed, despite Castlereagh’s later disavowal, an audacious attempt at multilateral world government, but it never developed a strong institutional basis and eventually foundered on differences between the powers over the question of counter- revolutionary intervention.
    [Show full text]
  • A Pilgrim of Historiography: Byron and the Discourses of History in Early Nineteenth-Century Britain
    A Pilgrim of Historiography – Ivan Pregnolato A Pilgrim of Historiography: Byron and the Discourses of History in Early Nineteenth-Century Britain Ivan Pregnolato, BA, MA Thesis Submitted to the University of Nottingham for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy September 2015 Page 1 of 363 A Pilgrim of Historiography – Ivan Pregnolato Abstract This thesis aims to understand Byron’s œuvre in relation to the discourses of history in early nineteenth-century Britain. As a contribution to the historicist critical approaches of the past decades, my dissertation discusses the different ideas surrounding the concept of ‘history’ in the first two decades of the 1800s, a period marked by change. As shown, these discourses of history were notorious for their heterogeneity and, by analysing Byron’s poetry and letters, it becomes evident that Byron engaged with these multiple interpretations as well. Roughly, three types of discourses of history are discussed below: the classical knowledge which was perpetuated in the educational system of the time and discussed in travelogues; the whig interpretation of history and the teleological concept of ‘liberty’ through time; and the idea of powerful forces that act ‘behind’ history, such as economics and the inseparability of power embedded in creating historical narratives. This thesis concludes that is impossible to speak of a single Byronic historical narrative and, rather, argues that Byron’s texts espouse pluralistic conceptualisations of history. Page 2 of 363 A Pilgrim of Historiography – Ivan Pregnolato To my mother ‘A fila anda…’ Page 3 of 363 A Pilgrim of Historiography – Ivan Pregnolato Acknowledgements Several people have helped me in the years that it has taken to write this thesis.
    [Show full text]
  • The Turks in Europe (1919)
    wmfni\ f/t 5 \ii'^/Mr<,'^/1''i i P 1 1, 1 f '' ' '^ li ^ ^1 THE TURKS IN EUROPE A 2 Qu'est ce que la Turqiiie ? La Turquie est le pays classique dea massacres. Son con- histoire se resume k ceci : pillages, meurtres, vols, cussions— sur toutes les echelles—revoltes, insurrections, repressions, guerres ^trangeres, guerres civiles, revolutions, contre-r^volutions, seditions, mutineries. ARsi:NE Perlant, Eternelle Turquie. " a is To murder a man is a crime ; to massacre nation a question." , Victor Hugo, 1876. THE TURKS IN EUROPE A SKETCH-STUDY BY W. E. D. ALLEN WITH A PREFACE BY BRIG.-GEN. H. CONYERS SURTEES, C.M.G., D.S.O. LONDON JOHN MURRAY, ALBEMARLE STREET 1919 f; All rights r«s«rved. DEDICATION To My Beloved Father— To you I dedicate this chronicle of men's savageness and meanness. To you, who brilliant so so faultless were so and simple ; your- tolerant of fault in others so self yet so ; gentle not kill a bird so kind that men that you could ; so that marvelled ; forbearing they thought you weak so that fool. ; generous they thought you You were so quick of comprehension, yet so patient of stupidity in others. You could always forgive, and always understand. Men wondered when you repaid vilest ingratitude with renewed kindness. You who so loved Music and Books and Art, and to roam in the wild places of the earth, and linger in its ancient cities, were for ever im- prisoned in an office. You began to work when to learn the best most boys begin ; you spent years of your life in drudgery, working often till mid- night.
    [Show full text]
  • The Great European Treaties of the Nineteenth Century
    JBRART Of 9AN DIEGO OF THE NINETEENTH CENTURY EDITED BY SIR AUGUSTUS OAKES, CB. LATELY OF THE FOREIGN OFFICE AND R. B. MOWAT, M.A. FELLOW AND ASSISTANT TUTOR OF CORPUS CHRISTI COLLEGE, OXFORD WITH AN INTRODUCTION BY SIR H. ERLE RICHARDS K. C.S.I., K.C., B.C.L., M.A. FELLOW OF ALL SOULS COLLEGE AWD CHICHELE PROFESSOR OF INTERNATIONAL LAW AND DIPLOMACY IN THE UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD ASSOCIATE OF THE INSTITUTE OF INTERNATIONAL LAW OXFORD AT THE CLARENDON PRESS OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS AMEN HOUSE, E.C. 4 LONDON EDINBURGH GLASGOW LEIPZIG NEW YORK TORONTO MELBOURNE CAPETOWN BOMBAY CALCUTTA MADRAS SHANGHAI HUMPHREY MILFORD PUBLISHER TO THE UNIVERSITY Impression of 1930 First edition, 1918 Printed in Great Britain INTRODUCTION IT is now generally accepted that the substantial basis on which International Law rests is the usage and practice of nations. And this makes it of the first importance that the facts from which that usage and practice are to be deduced should be correctly appre- ciated, and in particular that the great treaties which have regulated the status and territorial rights of nations should be studied from the point of view of history and international law. It is the object of this book to present materials for that study in an accessible form. The scope of the book is limited, and wisely limited, to treaties between the nations of Europe, and to treaties between those nations from 1815 onwards. To include all treaties affecting all nations would require volumes nor is it for the many ; necessary, purpose of obtaining a sufficient insight into the history and usage of European States on such matters as those to which these treaties relate, to go further back than the settlement which resulted from the Napoleonic wars.
    [Show full text]
  • British Foreign Policy Under Canning
    University of Montana ScholarWorks at University of Montana Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers Graduate School 2008 British Foreign Policy Under Canning Andrew Montgomery Endorf The University of Montana Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Endorf, Andrew Montgomery, "British Foreign Policy Under Canning" (2008). Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers. 160. https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd/160 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at ScholarWorks at University of Montana. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at University of Montana. For more information, please contact [email protected]. BRITISH FOREIGN POLICY UNDER CANNING By Andrew Montgomery Endorf B.A., University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio, 2004 Thesis presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts In History The University of Montana Missoula, MT Summer 2008 Approved by: Perry Brown Associate Provost for Graduate Studies Dr. John Eglin, Chair History Dr. Linda Frey History Dr. Louis Hayes Political Science i TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 1 CHAPTER ONE – CANNING THE POLITICIAN 12 Biography 12 Domestic Politics 16 CHAPTER TWO – REVOLUTION ON THE IBERIAN PENNINSULA 24 Spain 24 Portugal 36 CHAPTER THREE – LATIN AMERICA AND RECOGNITION 44 North America 48 Latin America 52 CHAPTER FOUR – GREECE AND THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE 66 Stalemate and Neutrality 68 Shifting Alliances and Intervention 77 CONCLUSION 86 BIBLIOGRAPHY 99 ii Endorf, Andrew, M.A., Summer 2008 History British Foreign Policy Under Canning Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • The European Pentarchy and the Congress of Verona, 1822 the Europeanpentarchy and the Congress of Verona, 1822
    THE EUROPEAN PENTARCHY AND THE CONGRESS OF VERONA, 1822 THE EUROPEANPENTARCHY AND THE CONGRESS OF VERONA, 1822 by IRBY C. NICHOLS, JR. North Texas State University MARTINUS NIJHOFF / THE HAGUE I 1971 @ 1971 by Martinus Nijhoff, The Hague, Netherlands All rights reserved, including the right to translate or to reproduce this book or parts thereof in any form ISBN-13: 978-90-247-1110-9 e-ISBN-13: 978-94-010-2725-0 DOl: 10.1007/978-94-010-2725-0 TO MY MOTHER PAULINE WRIGHT NICHOLS AND THE MEMORY OF MY FATHER IRBY COGHILL NICHOLS WHO INSPIRED ME TO BECOME A DISCIPLE OF CLIO CONTENTS PREFACE XI PART I GENESIS OF THE CONGRESS: FEBRUARY 1821-0CTOBER 1822 1 PROLOGUE THE DIPLOMATIC BACKGROUND OF THE CoNGRESS 3 1. The Congress is called 3 2. The Eastern Question 5 3. The Hanoverian Rendezvous 8 4. The Shift from Castlereagh to Canning 13 CHAPTER I THE ROAD TO VIENNA 19 1. The Castlereagh Instructions 19 2. The Wellington Mission 23 3. The Ascendancy of Villele 25 4. Franco-Spanish Relations, 1820-1822 27 5. The Villele-Wellington Interview 34 CHAPTER II THE VIENNA STALEMATE 40 1. The Conference Convenes 40 2. The Spanish Question 42 3. The Eastern Question 48 4. Italian Questions 54 5. A Retrospect 59 VIII CONTENTS PARTn THE CONGRESS AT WORK: OCTOBER-DECEMBER 1822 63 CHAPTER ill FROM VmNNA TO VERONA: PRELlMINARmS TO THE CoNGRESS 65 1. Exodus 65 2. The Canning Instructions 68 3. The Villcle Instructions 72 4. Reunion in Verona: The Congress at Play 75 5.
    [Show full text]
  • (1821-1827)1 I Henry Middleton of South Carolina Was Appointed United States Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary (T
    James J. F assolas An American Ambassador at the Court of St. Petersburg, Russia: Henry Middleton of South Carolina and John Capodistrias (1821-1827)1 I Henry Middleton of South Carolina was appointed United States Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary (the equivalent of present day Ambassador), to the Court of St. Petersburg, Russia, in the fall of 1820 and served at that post until the summer of 1830. During his ten-year diplomatic assignment to the Russian capital, he left A volumi­ nous correspondence of dispatches, letters, memoranda, notes, and vari­ ous papers and documents, covering the broad spectrum of Russian- American relations, European politics and diplomacy, and the Greek Revolution, beginning with Alexander Ypsilanti’s insurrection in the Romanian Principalities in March of 1821 and up to the conclusion of the Treaty of Adrianople and the recognition of Greece’s independence by the Sublime Porte in 1829 and later by the Great powers12. 1. In preparing this tudy, I would like to thank the International Research and Exchange Board (IREX), which provided A research grant to Romania and Greece in 1976-1977, and the School of Humanities and Fine Arts, Coastal CarolinA University - Conway-Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, for granting me A Sabbatical leave from my teaching duties in 1991. 2. Middleton’s diplomatic correspondence from Russia covers the period from February 2, 1820 through July 27, 1830. His correspondence is deposited in the U.S. National Archives, Microfilm Publications, Microcopy No 35, “Despatches from United States Minis­ ters to Russia, 1808-1906”, Rolls 8-11, Volumes 8-11 (The National Archives and Record Service, General Service Administration: Washington, 1953).
    [Show full text]
  • Jan 1219:30 Jan 1219:31 Jan 1219:31 Jan 1219:31 Jan 1219:31 Jan 1219:34
    THE VIENNA CONGRESS The defeat of France didn’t remove the threat of international revolution and 1) Riding the Tiger war. One major objective with the viennasettlement was to maintain peace and To those rulers who believed it would be impoissible to dam the forces of stability. The Austrian chancellor, Prince Metternich introduced the idea of revolution completely the solution would be to attract support for the some sort of league between European rulers which would maintain the government and weaken the revolutionary forces by making moderate reforms. settlement and police the continent (The Metternich system). It was to be in Britain in the 1820s­40s where this policy was most succesfully applied. A series of economic, social and political reforms enabled the To the ruling classes in Europe the French revolution had been an traumatic aristocracy to maintain the real power and attract the support of the middle­ experience and one concluded that once change started it would get out of classes. control and produce chaos, terror, military dictatorship and international war. The rulers came up with two possible responses to this situation; jan 12­19:30 jan 12­19:31 2) Stemming the Torrent ASSESSING WHETHER THE PEACEMAKERS IN 1815 WERE GUIDED BY The more conservative rulers on the contrary feared that reforms would NATIONAL INTERESTS OR BY IDEALS AND PRINCIPLES. trigger off revolution. An obvious alternative was to stop the whole process of change before it had a chance to start. Metternich was the main architect of this view. jan 12­19:31 jan 12­19:31 .A.
    [Show full text]
  • Byron Departs for Greece on July 16Th, Arriving in Cephalonia on August 3Rd
    1 BYRON’S CORRESPONDENCE AND JOURNALS 13: FROM GREECE, JULY 1823-APRIL 1824 Edited by Peter Cochran Abbreviations B.: Byron; H.: Hobhouse; K.: Kinnaird; Mu.: Murray 1922: Lord Byron’s Correspondence Chiefly with Lady Melbourne, Mr Hobhouse, The Hon. Douglas Kinnaird, and P.B.Shelley (2 vols., John Murray 1922). BB: Byron’s Bulldog: The Letters of John Cam Hobhouse to Lord Byron, ed. Peter W.Graham (Columbus Ohio 1984). BLJ: Byron, George Gordon, Lord. Byron’s Letters and Journals. Ed. Leslie A. Marchand, (13 vols. London: John Murray 1973–94). Gamba: Pietro Gamba. A Narrative of Lord Byron’s Last Journey to Greece, (John Murray, 1825). LJ: The Works of Lord Byron, Letters and Journals. Ed. R. E. Prothero, 6 vols. (London: John Murray, 1899-1904). Parry: William Parry, The Last Days of Lord Byron (Knight and Lacey, 1825). Q: Byron: A Self-Portrait; Letters and Diaries 1798 to 1824. Ed. Peter Quennell (2 vols, John Murray, 1950). Stanhope: Leicester Stanhope, Greece in 1823 and 1824 (Sherwood and Jones 1824). Codes: Names of writer and recipient are in bold type, with location from which sent, and date. (Source is given in round brackets beneath the title: “text from” indicates that the actual source has been seen). Where the manuscript is the source, the text is left-justified only. Where the source is a book, the text is left- and right-justified. [The address, if there is one, is given in square brackets beneath the source] “1:2” and so on indicates a page-turn on the bifolium. “1:2 and 1:3 blank” shows that not all the paper has been used.
    [Show full text]
  • READER! This Edition Gives You a Raw Version of Byron's Correspondence. As Far As Can Be Done in Linear Print, It Conveys What
    1 BYRON’S CORRESPONDENCE AND JOURNALS 16: FROM GREECE, JULY 1823-APRIL 1824 Edited by Peter Cochran Work in progress, with frequent updates [indicated]. Letters not in the seventeen main files may be found in those containing the correspondences Byron / Annbella, Byron / Murray, Byron / Hobhouse, Byron / Moore, Byron / Scott, Byron / Kinnaird, Byron / The Shelleys , or Byron / Hoppner . UPDATED March 2011. Abbreviations B.: Byron; H.: Hobhouse; K.: Kinnaird; Mu.: Murray 1922: Lord Byron’s Correspondence Chiefly with Lady Melbourne, Mr Hobhouse, The Hon. Douglas Kinnaird, and P.B.Shelley (2 vols., John Murray 1922). BB: Byron’s Bulldog: The Letters of John Cam Hobhouse to Lord Byron, ed. Peter W.Graham (Columbus Ohio 1984). BLJ: Byron, George Gordon, Lord. Byron’s Letters and Journals . Ed. Leslie A. Marchand, 13 vols. London: John Murray 1973–94. Gamba: Pietro Gamba. A Narrative of Lord Byron’s Last Journey to Greece , (John Murray, 1825). LJ: The Works of Lord Byron, Letters and Journals . Ed. R. E. Prothero, 6 vols. (London: John Murray, 1899-1904). NLS: National Library of Scotland. Parry: William Parry, The Last Days of Lord Byron (Knight and Lacey, 1825). Q: Byron: A Self-Portrait; Letters and Diaries 1798 to 1824 . Ed. Peter Quennell (2 vols, John Murray, 1950). Stanhope: Leicester Stanhope, Greece in 1823 and 1824 (Sherwood and Jones 1824). I am very grateful to John and Virginia Murray for permission to quote texts from Byron’s Letters and Journals , ed. Leslie A. Marchand (John Murray 1973-1994). READER! This edition gives you a raw version of Byron’s correspondence. As far as can be done in linear print, it conveys what he wrote and how he wrote it, before any editor got to it to neutralise him.
    [Show full text]
  • Great Powers European States System 1814–1914
    Bridge_ppr 2/8/08 12:40 PM Page 1 'This book has the hallmarks of success stamped through it: breadth of scope, SYSTEM 1814–1914 EUROPEAN STATES THE incisive analysis and a lightness of touch in the writing.' GREAT POWERS GREAT Professor John Keiger, University of Salford The Great Powers and the European States System, 1814–1914 is a full analytical narrative of the functioning of the European states system over the nineteenth century between the fall of Napoleon in 1814 and the outbreak of the First World War just one hundred years later. It examines the variety of devices, manoeuvres and feats of statesmanship by means of which decision-makers managed the interplay of their interests, common and conflicting – including the dangerous Eastern Question – without exposing Europe to the catastrophe of a general conflagration: AND THE ➤ systems of active co-operation, such as the ‘Congress system’ or the Concert of Europe ➤ periods of ‘international anarchy’ in which, if wars were endemic they were at least limited ➤ the stabilizing effects of the predominance of conservative status quo Powers in the Bismarckian era ➤ the dangerously polarised system that emerged on the eve of the First World War. At nearly double the length of the first edition, this book is a very major revision and update. It includes not only the results of the latest research, but also a body of THE additional information and a number of illuminating maps that will make the subject even more accessible to readers. GREAT POWERS F.R. Bridge is Emeritus Professor of Diplomatic History, . His SECOND many publications include The Habsburg Monarchy Among the Great Powers, EDITION AND THE 1815–1918 (1990).
    [Show full text]