The article reviews the book "History in Exile: Memory and Identity at the Borders of the Balkans," by Pamela Ballinger

Neyzi, Leyla

English

Sabanci University Research Database

BOOK REVIEWLey la NeyziSabanci University, IstanbulPamela Ballinger, History in Exile: Memory and Identity at the Bordersof tbe Balkans. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2003, 368 pp.H istory in Exile: Memory and Identity at the Borders of the Balkans concernsa little-known region: the border zone between Italy, Slovenia andCroatia known as the Julian March. Historically part of the Austrio-HungarianEmpire, this region became part of Italy after World War I. At the end of WorldWar II, the Julian March was partitioned by Italy and Yugoslavia, followed bythe exodus of the majority of the ethnically Italian population. After thebreak-up of Yugoslavia, the region was divided between Slovenia and Croatia.Today, ethnic Italians form a minority amongst a largely Slavic population.The book narrates the history of the Julian March during the course of thetwentieth century, focusing in particular on violence associated with warwhich is variously silenced or voiced in different periods by different actorsand groups. The study is centered in particular on a comparison between theethnic Italians who left the Julian March for Trieste after World War II and theremaining Italian minority.Ballinger, who conducted multi-sited archival, ethnographic and oral his-tory research in the Julian March in 1995-1996, focuses in her study on howmarginal populations located in transborder zones experience and narratethe processes of state formation and break-up. She asks, what is the relation-1029Pamela. Ballinger's History in Exile: Memory and Identity at the Borders of the Balkans.ship between national(ist) history and the history and identity of local groups?How is the history of violence silenced/voiced in official/individual narratives?The organization of History in Exile demonstrates the meticulous historicalresearch conducted by the author on the region. In Part I, "Making andBreaking States," she examines how the history of the Julian March at threeimportant junctures. World War I, World War II, and the break-up ofYugoslavia, is narrated by different local actors and groups. She shows howdifferent groups narrate differently their experiences of war and violence. InPart II, "Making Memory," Ballinger relies in particular on oral histories todemonstrate how different groups create narratives of suffering and victim-ization based on claims about purity or hybridity. She shows how local groupslink their more marginal histories to national histories in order to makeclaims for reparations in a contemporary environment in which the term"genocide" is increasingly used to resuscitate silenced histories of violence.In an intricately layered narrative, Ballinger shows how different andopposed groups mutually construct a story of their own victimization. Morespecifically, Italians in Trieste focus on the violence perpetrated by the parti-sans against the ethnic Italians, whereas the Slavic population in the JulianMarch accuses the fascists of committing violence against the non-Italian pop-ulation. As Ballinger shows, in the course of time, ideological oppositions (fas-cist vs. communist) give way to ethnic oppositions (Italian vs. Slavic orEuropean vs. Balkan) as each group attempts to portray itself as autochtho-nous and therefore justified in its claims for reparations.This study is an important contribution to the anthropology of Europe, tothe study of displacement, and to the literature on memory. By focusing onboth displaced populations and the interior displacement of the populationsleft behind, Ballinger contributes to our understanding of the complex rela-tionship between space and identity. Ballinger shows how, while depictingthemselves as victims, ethnic Italians at the same time maintain an oppositionbetween the "European" (read "civilized") Italians and the Slavs/Balkans. Mostimportantly, privileging neither local nor official history, she demonstratesthe constructivist nature of both memory and history. She shows the complic-ity of the historian, the local actor and of the anthropologist in their variousattempts to narrate the history of the Julian March. In her analysis of theregional, supranational model of identity put forth by the ethnic Italians whoremained in the Julian March, she incisively shows how a discourse of cos-mopolitanism can nevertheless remain rooted in notions of territorially basedautochtonous cultures. This insight has important implications for contempo-1030LEYLA NEYZItemporary analyses of an enlarged European community where, it seems,some citizens remain more "authentic" and therefore the possessors of a"higher" culture, than others.One of the consequences of Ballinger's primary focus on ethnic Italians inthe Julian March is that we learn less about the Balkan part of the equation:the Slovene, Croatian and other populations of the region are viewed largelyin terms of their construction by the Italians as the non-European Balkan"other" rather than in their own terms. Given the complex history of theregion, it would also have been useful for the author to provide a brief sum-mary or chronology of the main events discussed in the text in the introduc-tion or in the form of an appendix. All in all. History in Exile is a formidablepiece of scholarship that will enrich the ethnography of Europe and the liter-ature on memory.1031

History in exile: memory and identity at the borders of the Balkans

http://research.sabanciuniv.edu/752/1/3011800000276.pdf

History in exile: memory and identity at the borders of the Balkans

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Sabanci University Research Database