Page 250 - Beholding Liberty!

20. [Foreign Office], Papers relative to the affairs of Greece, 1826-1830. Protocols of Conferences held in London, Harrison, London s.d.,
pp. 256-277; [Foreign Office],
Papers relative to the affairs of Greece, 1826-1832, pp. 118-156; Skoufos, Collection of Treaties,
vol. 1, pp. 138-147, 152-159; Recueil des Traités, pp. 8-14; Hertslet, The map of Europe, vol.
2, document no. 142; Driault & Lhéritier, Histoire diplomatique,
vol. 1, pp. 430, 433-445; Christou, The borders of the Greek state, vol. 1, pp. 139-140, 146-150.
21. René Albrecht-Carrié, A diplomatic history of Europe since the Congress of Vienna, Methuen, London 1965, σ. 46-47; Hertslet, The map of Europe, vol. 2, document
no. 144-145; Fleming, John Capodistrias and the Conference
of London, pp. 95-102; Dakin,
The Greek struggle, pp. 340-346; Christodoulides, Diplomatic history, vol. 2, pp. 85-86.
22. Foreign Office, British and foreign state papers, 1829-1830, vol. 17, pp. 191-195, 201-204; [Foreign Office], Papers relative to the affairs of Greece, 1826-1830, pp. 307-316; [Foreign Office], Papers relative to the affairs of Greece, 1826-1830. Protocols of Conferences held in London, pp. 186-198; Skoufos, Collection of Treaties, vol. 1,
pp. 169-177; Recueil des Traités, pp. 21-27; Hertslet, The map of Europe, vol. 2, document no. 149· Photini Constantopoulou (ed.), The foundation of the modern Greek state. Major Treaties
and Conventions, 1830-1947, Kastaniotis, Athens 1999,
pp. 29-33; Christou, The borders of the Greek state, vol. 1,
pp. 164-170.
23. Correspondance du comte J.
Capodistrias, vol. 4, pp. 1-5; Fleming, John Capodistrias, pp. 113-141; C. W. Crawley, John Capodistrias. Some unpublished documents, Institute
for Balkan Studies, Thessaloniki 1970, pp. 38-42; Foreign Office, British and foreign state papers, 1829-1830, vol. 17, pp. 218-220; Skoufos, Collection of Treaties,
pp. 178-197; Evangelidis, History of Ioannis Kapodistrias, pp. 275- 372; Apostolos E. Vakalopoulos, History of modern Hellenism, vol. 8, Herodotus, Athens 2007, pp. 511- 530; Christou, The borders of the Greek state, vol. 1, pp. 170-199.
and France. With this, the three Powers effectively accepted the recommendations of the Poros Ambassadorial Conference and agreed that the autonomous Greek state would include the Pelo- ponnese, Central Greece, Euboea and the Cyclades. They also stipulated that the tribute which the Greeks were to pay to the Sultan, would amount to 1.5 million Turkish Kuruş. Finally, they specified that the Greek state would be monarchical, with a hereditary Christian ruler, who would not come from the royal houses of the three Powers and would be elected with the consent of the three Powers and the Porte.20
The Ottoman government seemed unwilling to accept any compromise solution and rejected
the Protocol out of hand. However, very quickly, under the tumultuous developments of the Rus-
so-Turkish War, it was forced to radically change its attitude. In the summer of 1829, the Ot-
toman defeat became definitive, as Russian troops advanced as far as Adrianople. There, on
2/14 September 1829, the Russo-Turkish Treaty of the same name was signed, on the basis of
which the Porte declared that it accepted both the Treaty of London of 1827 and the Protocol
of London of 1829. Therefore, for the first time, the Sultan officially recognised the existence of
an autonomous Greek state, and indeed with an extended northern border along the Amvraki-
250 BEHOLDING LIBERTY!
kos-Pagasitikos line.
21
The signing of the Treaty of Adrianople again reinforced British concern about the possibility of increasing Russian influence in the Mediterranean. To prevent such a development, British diplomacy resorted to recognising Greek independence. On 22 January/3 February 1830, Great Britain, Russia and France signed another protocol in London. By it, they recognised Greece as an independent state for the first time. The positive development for Greek interests on the issue of independence was accompanied by a negative one on the issue of borders, as the land boundaries of Greek territory were drawn along the Acheloos-Spercheios line, thus leaving out the coast of Acarnania and a large part of the rest of Sterea Ellada (the Greek mainland). Euboea, the Cyclades and the Northern Sporades were also included in Greece. By a separate Protocol signed on the same day, Prince Leopold of Saxe-Coburg was appointed ruler of the newly created kingdom.22
The London Treaty settlement, although it provided the Greeks with the longed-for independence, provoked their opposition because of the territorial mutilation it clearly provided for. The Greek government, however, could only accept the Protocol, since the Porte had already done so. At the same time, however, Kapodistrias was determined to engage in an intense diplomatic push to secure the enlargement of the Greek land borders. To gain valuable time, the governor told the three Powers that the final acceptance of the Protocol was not his responsibility but that of the National Assembly, which was the only legally competent body for its final ratification. It was in fact a manoeuvre, since the National Assembly had long ceased to function, and it was therefore practically impossible for it to take any decision. Moreover, knowing the great bargaining value of the territorial fait accompli, Kapodistrias refused to advocate the withdrawal of Greek troops from the disputed areas of Central Greece, citing the fact that the Ottomans had not completely evacuated Attica and Euboea, either. Finally, attempting to use all the means at his disposal, he urged Leopold to make the extension of the frontier a condition for his final acceptance of the Greek crown.23
Leopold endorsed Kapodistrias’ views on the issue of borders and worked zealously to overcome the objections of the Great Powers. However, the intransigent British attitude finally led Leopold to resign from the Greek throne on 9/21 May 1830.24 This development was enough to put the