The local preservation of the Greek language at a global level has been elevated as a major political project supported by powerful institutions (the Greek state, the Greek Orthodox Church), communities, and universities. As a result, the interest in the “diaspora” or “omogeneia” (a misplaced term) intensifies among scholars working on the teaching of Greek as heritage language. This is a great development.
In this unfolding landscape, one observes several intersections as scholars working for years on diasporic education, sometimes in collaboration with colleagues in Greece, are joined by a new cohort of academics. The urgency to preserve the language is cast as of outmost importance in the service of Hellenism.
It is of interest to start reflecting on the various recent and forthcoming initiatives toward this purpose. In this relatively early stage, as a new cohort of colleagues enters the terrain, it is important to recognize that there is not a single but a variety of HellenismS. For those who follow the conversation, two paradigms, the so-called Helladic Hellenism and Diasporic Hellenism, represent two incommensurable narratives in understanding diasporic identity (work on this is forthcoming, but if you are interested there is an article on this topic by Dimitris Tziovas).
What we have seen recently in this process is two contradictory approaches.
First, there are meticulous studies attuned to diasporic realities; they attend to the ethical and political implications of bringing these realties into representation. One of their interests is to foreground diasporic understanding of Greek identities––not impose from above grand narratives. Diasporas are not exclusively framed in relation to Greece, but as historically and culturally specific negotiations with bilingualism and biculturalism in the new homeland. There is pedagogical interest in the intersection the cultural and civic dimensions that enter into the making of responsible diasporic ctitizens.
In contrast, one observes in the discourse a (renewed) embracing of ahistorical version of Hellenism––diaspora as Greece outside the borders; the Greek spirit; the metaphor of Greek immigrants as migratory birds; simplified renderings of diasporic connections with Greece––by academics; directly, or indirectly. This consent is rewarded in multiple ways by institutions promoting this ideology.
Form the point of view of scholars historicizing immigrant and diasporic expressions this is highly problematic. Frankly, disturbing. The “diaspora” of this ahistorical narrative into diasporic spaces obliterates their complexity, αποτελεί συμμόρφωση σε μια αντιεπιστημονική προσέγγιση.
For over two decades, our (necessary) interrogation of ahistorical narratives of diasporic identities has absorbed valuable energies, diverting us from creative projects. It is time to move forward based on the ethics of serious scholarship and the consciousness of what is at stake in its practice.
Yiorgos Anagnostou
13 November, 2025
