INTRODUCTION (ENGLISH VERSION)

When considering the linguistic and cultural policies of European states, the historian might expect to find plenty of concrete material: guidelines and orders, debates and treaties, recommendations from experts. Such sources do exist of course, but it very soon becomes obvious that the situations exceed the written evidence. The internal linguistic and cultural policies of states are fairly easily defined. For a long time language and culture have been considered as a cement that binds the state: to make laws and take measures to promote linguistic unity or to mark a respect for local cultures and languages was a legitimate and even natural instrument of the exercise of power. External policies, on the other hand, are far more vague. The era of the official promotion of national languages and cultures beyond borders is, in fact, very recent. A quick look at the dates when the cultural institutes of different countries were founded is enough to convince us. The Alliance française (1883) and the Società Dante Alighieri (1889) are looked on as pioneers. It was especially between 1930 and the beginning of the 1950s that the movement really got going: the Balassi Institute was created at the beginning of this wave (in 1927), before the British Council (1934), Pro Helvetia (1939), the Danske Kulturinstitut (1940), the Svenska Institut (1945), and the Goethe Institut (1951). The late 1980s and 1990s saw the movement to found linguistic and cultural institutes reach its peak with the Instituto Cervantes (1991), the Istituto Camoes (1992), the Icelandic Language Institute (1985), and the Österreich Institut (1997).

Naturally the diffusion of language and culture does not come down to the existence of such institutions. Nevertheless, they are a sign of the existence of a policy that is systematic and endorsed – and especially one that is accepted and recognized as legitimate by the countries that accommodate them on their soil. It is hardly surprising therefore that the period after the Second World War – a period of peace, prosperity, territorial stability, and hope of a common European future – should be a privileged period in this context. But what about previous periods?