Anthony D. Smith was a British historical sociologist, and is considered to be one of the founders of interdisciplinary field of nationalism studies. His best-known contributions to the field are the distinction between ‘civic’ and ‘ethnic’ types of nations and nationalism, and the idea that all nations have dominant ‘ethnic cores’. While Smith agrees with other authors that nationalism is a modern phenomenon, he insists that nations have premodern origins.
One of Smith’s main theses is the idea that nations cannot be created ex nihilo; rather, nationalism necessarily appeals to a deeper, historical ethnic root, a fact which he insists should not be ignored. As previously mentioned, Smith holds that nations are still a fundamentally modern occurrence, but emphasizes the importance of these ethnic cores, or ethnies, in the genesis of nationalism. Smith identifies these ethnies as a group of people having, among other characteristics, a common word for themselves or their group, common historical memories, and a common historic homeland. Nationalism according to Smith is based on exploitation and propagation of these ethnies, and he posits that two different types of ethnies can be identified, lateral and vertical. Lateral ethnies he describes as ‘wide but shallow’, a machination of the ruling class that failed to permeate to the commoners. Smith asserts these lateral ethnies tend to produce ‘civic’ nations, such as France or England, where allegiance to the state is prioritized over ethnic ties. In vertical ethnies, on the other hand, all social strata share in a common heritage and culture. Smith gives ancient Greece as a prime example of a vertical, or demotic ethnie, where no matter their class or city-state, Greeks shared a common cultural and historic bond. Indeed, the Greek national and cultural identity is still alive and well today, which Smith sees as a testament to the staying power of vertical ethnies, considering that lateral ethnies contemporary with ancient Greece, such as Babylon or Assyria, were largely abandoned with the collapse of their regimes.
Another prime example of a vertical ethnie is the Kurdish nation, stretching throughout Turkey, Iraq, Syria and Iran. Despite being an ethnically distinct people, with their own unique language, culture, and history, the Kurds do not belong to a singular Kurdish state, and indeed exist as an often marginalized minority in the states they do inhabit. This is a clear example of nationalism transcending the border of any one state, thus we can emphasize the common cultural bond that Kurds share as the crux of their nationalistic sentiment. Many Kurds do actively campaign for the creation of a single, independent Kurdish state, while others fight for increased autonomy within their current states. One interesting insight into Kurdish nationalism is offered by the following documentary from The Guardian, which follows the Kurdistan football team as they enter a tournament for unrecognized nations. While the documentary mostly focuses on the tournament itself, the players also describe their feelings toward Kurdistan, how Kurds view themselves, and how they construct their own nationalism. They share how the football team gives hope to all of Kurdistan, how some wish above all else for Kurdistan to be unified under self-rule, and how the bond to their fellow Kurds is the strongest force in their lives.
Kurdistan Football Documentary
Questions
- Is Smith right to delineate between lateral and vertical ethnies? Is it possible for an ethnic core as such to be a combination of both concepts, or to escape the definition of either?
- Is it really possible to consider the ‘ethno-symbolic’ aspects of nations and nation building while not fully addressing how politicized national identities are? And the role that a clearly identified ‘state’ or ‘leader’ plays in establishing that identity?
Leave a comment