
Nations Divided: America, Italy, and the
Southern Question. By
Don H. Doyle.
Georgia Southern University Jack
N. and Addie D. Averitt Lecture Series
Number 10. Athens: University of
Georgia Press, 2002. 130 pages. $24.95
cloth.
The Southern
Question in this
Doyle
writes against a tendency among many
current scholars who view nationalism
as a fiction imposed by elites to
try to keep together people who would otherwise
be in conflict. Frequently, according
to Doyle, elites’ efforts to create national
unity by appealing to an old, shared
history fail. Instead, this book concentrates
on people’s often changing everyday
understandings of national identity
in topics such as religion, language,
education, holidays, and, significantly,
war.
The
United States emerged without old calls
for primordial ties among people with shared
identities based on common history.
Instead, it emerged as a new nation founded
on hope for a future based on representative
government. Italian nationalism
came later, through a complicated
series of military, diplomatic, and
political events that did not create today’s
understanding of Italy until 1870. Calls
for Italian nationalism came from various
sources, some emphasizing past greatness
in the Roman Empire or the Renaissance,
others stressing hopes for a liberal
republic, some hoping for some combination
of the two.
The
Southern Question has differed in the
United States and Italy. In the United States,
of course, the South tried to form its
own nation. In recent years in Italy, it has
been the Northern League that called for
secession from what its members see as the
economically parasitic southern regions
of Sicily and Naples. But there are strong
similarities as well. Both Souths seem,
in the consciousness of their nations, poor,
slow, and strange in both customs and
political organization. As Doyle writes of
19th-century Italy, "The idea of a civilized
North and a barbaric South took on
important meaning for the way in which
the former would govern the latter" (71).
In the U.S., issues concerning slavery and
free labor became central to broad demands
for American unity based on political
rights. The intriguing issue, in both
cases, was how Americans and Italians
could unify politically with people they
considered different in significant ways
and whose difference, in fact, helped sustain
some understandings of national unity.
This
book does not answer all of the big questions
it raises. No volume of about 100
pages could do so. But by tracing the parallel
stories of the American and Italian Southern
Problem, Doyle’s volume encourages
broad thinking about regional questions
in our global age. He ends with a brief
conclusion that contrasts the bitter and
violent divisions of contemporary Europe
with the difficulties but also the promise
of the American Civil War: separatism
fails, often with bloody results, but
inclusive visions of nationalism, no matter
how sloppy, how pragmatic, how intellectually
vague in definition, continue
to offer great potential. As Doyle begins
his final paragraph, "The American Union
that Lincoln struggled to preserve offered
a model of how peoples of remarkable
diversity might learn to live together
peacefully" (95).
TED OWNBY