ABSTRACT
While Hugo was specifically referring to the ‘nationality’ of the educated, enlightened elite of artists and writers, his words evoke the multiple links between geography, culture and nationality which surround the enigma of European identity. Enigma because of the variables associated with each of the terms, and the numerous difficulties involved with any comprehensive analysis of identity across Europe. The term Europe itself can at the very least be used in two different ways: to describe the continent in general, although the eastern boundary has always been open to question, or alternatively to refer more specifically to the territory which has developed the institutional structure known as the European Union. In addition to a territory, be it simply geographic or political, ‘European’ may refer to any number of historic or cultural characteristics, which leave both of the key delineators of identity – self and other – fuzzy around the edges at best (see Pagden & Pocock, 2002: 33-54, 55-71). Even after establishing which Europe is being discussed, problems of chronology and measurement of the extent of a European identity remain manifold. One difficulty of such measurement, certainly from the second half of the twentieth century onwards, is the role of political bias. Under certain circumstances having a European identity may become conflated with being in favour of a greater degree of economic and political institutional integration. Debate surrounding the existence of a European administrative and political structure always forms the background of any discussion of European identity, and often the asking of the question itself presupposes a certain degree of political bias towards ‘Europe’.
