Sotirovic BALCANIA English Language Articles 2013

Vladislav B.
Sotirovi
BALCANIA
BA L C A N IA
Vladislav B. Sotirovi
SCIENTIFIC ARTICLES IN ENGLISH
BALCANIA
Scientific articles in English
Vilnius 2013
Scientific articles in English Publisher & editor YUGOSLAVOLOGY An Independent Research Centre for the Yugoslav Studies http://www.jugoslavologija.eu Cover & design Vladislav B. Sotirovi http://www.sotirovic.blog.com 2013 by Vladislav B. Sotirovi & YUGOSLAVOLOGY An Independent Research Centre for the Yugoslav Studies All rights reserved 50 exemplars First edition Printed by Lithuanian University of Educational Sciences Press Edukologija T. evenkos g. 31, LT-03111 Vilnius, Lithuania Paper book ISBN 978-609-408-473-7 Electronic book ISBN 978-609-408-474-4 UDK 949.7 So-121 Online book presentation http://balcanica.webs.com http://www.jugoslavologija.eu Contact sotirovic@jugoslavologija.eu
BALCANIA
Contents:
1. THE CULT OF SERBIAN PRINCE LAZAR HREBELJANOVI KOSOVOS GREAT MARTYR ____________________________________________________ p. 5
2. THE CROATIAN NATIONAL REVIVAL MOVEMENT (THE ILLYRIAN MOVEMENT) AND THE QUESTION OF LINGUISTIC-NATIONAL DETERMINATION OF THE SOUTH SLAVS, 18301847 ____________________________________________________ p. 27
3. THE IDEA OF A GREATER CROATIA IN THE 17th CENTURY ____________________________________________________ p. 61
4. THE NATO WORLD ORDER, THE BALKANS AND THE RUSSIAN NATIONAL INTEREST ____________________________________________________ p. 110
5. KOSOVO AND THE CAUCASUS: A DOMINO EFFECT ____________________________________________________ p. 130
6. NATIONAL IDENTITY: WHO ARE THE ALBANIANS? THE ILLYRIAN ANTHROPONYMY AND THE ETHNOGENESIS OF THE ALBANIANS ____________________________________________________ p. 142
7. THE BALKAN VLACHS AN EXTINGUISHING ETHNOLINGUISTIC GROUP ____________________________________________________ p. 189
______________________BALCANIA
THE CULT OF SERBIAN PRINCE LAZAR HREBELJANOVI KOSOVOS GREAT MARTYR

THE BATTLE AND THE NATION The consciousness of a distinct Serbian ethnic identity had been present among the Serbs since the times of the founder of independent mediaeval Serbian state, veliki upan Stefan Nemanja (11661196). These consciousnesses were further strengthened when Serbia became Kingdom in 1217 and with the establishment of an autocephalous Archbishopric in 1219 as a national independent church. However, the Battle of Kosovo (June 28th, 1389) which Serbs lost to the Ottoman Turks and the death of Serbian ruler, Prince Lazar Hrebeljanovi (13711389), during the battle had up to nowadays the most powerful impact to the Serbian consciousness about independent state, independent church and awareness of ethnic separateness from other members of South Slavic community. After the battle, tradition has developed the motif of heroism and the cult of Prince Lazar who was proclaimed by the church to be Kosovos great martyr and in the following centuries the crucial national task of the Serbs became to revenge to the Muslim Turks for the lost battle, independent state and the death of Prince Lazar. This consciousness of revenge for Kosovos tragedy is revived in recent times as Kosovo is still considered as occupied national soil of the Serbs, but now by Muslim Albanians. This feeling became more stronger after February 17th, 2008 when Kosovos Albanians unilaterally proclaimed states independence that is recognized by a part of international community. Nevertheless, in both cases when national revenge was directed towards Muslim Turks and now when it is directed towards Muslim Albanians (who settled Kosovo from Northern and Central Albania after 1689) the cult of Prince Lazar Kosovos great martyr had a crucial impact to the Serbian mind, national feelings, aims and pride. A real importance of Kosovos Battle, Kosovos Myth, Kosovos Legend and the cult of Prince Lazar for the Serbs can be seen from the fact that Serbs are dividing the whole period of national history into two parts: 1) before Kosovos tragedy and 2) after that.
______________________BALCANIA
Public announcement in Serbia by the Government and the Parliament to attent national protest-meeting against separation of Kosovo from the rest of Serbia under the slogan Kosovo is Serbia. The meeting was held on February 21st, 2008 in Belgrade in front of the House of Parliament and attended by 500.000 citizens
THE WRITTEN DOCUMENTS ABOUT THE CULT There are ten survived written documents upon the cult of Prince Lazar. All of them are originating between 1389 and 1419/20. They are: 1. The Prologue hagiography of Prince Lazar written by unknown writer; 2. The Letter concerning Prince Lazar written by Patriarch Danilo III; 3. The Hagiography concerning Prince Lazar written by unknown writer; 4. The Praise to Prince Lazar written by Jefimia; 5. The Hagiography and office of Prince Lazar written by unknown writer; 6. The Service to Prince Lazar written by unknown writer;
______________________BALCANIA
7. The Praise's letter to Prince Lazar written by unknown writer; 8. The Inscription on the marble column in Kosovo written by unknown writer; 9. The Letter concerning saint Prince Lazar written by Andonie Rafail; and 10. The Letter concerning Prince Lazar written by unknown writer.1 Unfortunately, Balkan historians from the 19th century (most of them have been romanticists) did not use these written documents as a historical source for the very reason that according to their opinion these documents presented a false chronology of real historical events. However, these documents as historical reports in fact are directly challenging their writings upon the Balkan history of the time during the Ottoman conquest of the peninsula (13541521). On the other hand, Russian writer Alexander Gilferding had the most severe criticism of these documents because, according to him, those documents had a lot of the locus comunis and the general phrases. He thought that chronology was totally absent in these documents.2 Mainly the same opinion about them had also and P. J. afaik, . Danii, V. Jagi and Lj. Kovaevi. Nevertheless, according to their common opinion neither Prince Lazar nor the battle against the Turks have not been satisfactory described and presented in the Serbian literature and Balkan historiography of their time. They urged that these ten written documents upon the cult of Serbian Prince Lazar had to be scientifically investigated and used as historical source. It is necessary to notice that these written documents, in general, did not use a historical chronology at all because the aim of their writers was not a historical detail or to give us detailed description of historical fact. However, they are of double validity: 1) for the events which they described; and 2) for the time when they are made. In this case, the validity of these documents is not of the same value for the time before and after the Battle of Kosovo (in the year of 1389 according to the Christian time-counting, in 6897 year according to the creation of the world time-counting,
1 . Trifunovi, Srpski srednjovekovni spisi o Knezu Lazaru i Kosovskom boju, Kruevac, 1968, pp. 451452; Slovo o svetom knezu Lazaru Andonija Rafaila, Zbornik istorije knjievnosti SANU, Vol. 10, 1976, pp. 147179. 2 A. F. Giljferding, Putovanje po Hercegovini, Bosni i Staroj Srbiji, Sarajevo, 1972, p. 241.
______________________BALCANIA
and in 879 year according to the Muslim calendar). The documents in regard with Prince Lazars cult among the Serbs did not trace and did not back the hagiographies dedicated to the saint Serbian ruling mediaeval familythe Nemanjis. Until the time of Grigorije Camblak, in hagiographies of the Nemanis there were not descriptions of the martyrs death. However, writers of the cults documents concerning Prince Lazar put the main stress exactly on Princes martyrs death which was the chief point of many literal works. Therefore, the cults written documents dedicated to Prince Lazar were in fact the martyrs hagiographies and based on the idea of a continuation of the Bible.1 Almost all writers of the cults documents dedicated to Prince Lazar were contemporaries either of him, i.e. of the Kosovos Battle or of the time of translation of the Princes relics after the battle. The last of these ten documents was written by Andonie Rafail (The Letter concerning saint Prince Lazar) in 1419/20. The rest of them were written earlier and they are more closer to the time of the Serbian-Turkish fighting in the Kosovo Field. The documents which are emphasising the Serbian military victory are oldest because the first reports with regard to the results of the battle were telling about the Serbian victory, mainly because of the death of the Turkish sultan Murat I during the battle. However, in the most recent documents, like The Letter concerning saint Prince Lazar by Andonie Rafail, Prince Lazar was also winner, but this victory had a spiritual meaning, but not the real military-political one.2 The oldest document, The Prologue hagiography concerning Prince Lazar telling us about the bright victory of Prince Lazar. The use of term bright victory revealing us primarily a spiritual meaning of the term. The most historically written document concerning the cult of Prince Lazar is The Letter concerning Prince Lazar by Serbian Patriarch Danilo III. In this document there are more historical events presented than in others. In the rest of the cults documents there were chosen only historical facts which are appropriate to the aims of the cult and its ideals. The most information given in this Letter, which are referring to the feudal families, can be used as historical truth for the sake that Patriarch Danilo was in very close and friendly relations to the court of Prince Lazar and his family.
1 D. Bogdanovi, Stara srpska biblioteka, Letopis Matice srpske, Vol. 408/5, 1971, pp. 408432. 2 . Trifunovi, Srpski srednjovekovni spisi o Knezu Lazaru i Kosovskom boju, Kruevac, 1968, pp. 365371.
______________________BALCANIA
It is very interesting note given by Patriarch Danilo that the Battle of Kosovo was finished in the way that both of the armies stopped to fight because they were totally exhausted. Patriarch Danilo is clearly telling us that the Lazarevis family originated from the Nemanjis dynasty, a ruling Serbias dynasty from 1166 to 1371. This information is partially correct because Prince Lazars wife (Milica) really traced her origin from Vukan, the oldest son of the founder of the Nemanjis dynastyStefan Nemanja (11661196). In comparison with Patriarch Danilos report, the origin of the Lazarevis family is so ambiguous in the rest of the cults written documents. The authors of the cults documents presented also and the Princes warship oration before the battle. This oration is preserved in three documents: The Letter concerning Prince Lazar by Patriarch Danilo, The Hagiography concerning Prince Lazar and The Letter concerning Prince Lazar. The last two of them are written by unknown authors. The longest warship oration is that one presented in the Patriarch Danilos work. In this work the crucial dramatical point is not the battle itself. It is the eve of the battle in which the Princes warship oration had the main role for the future national pride of the Serbs who are choosing the Heavenly instead of the Earthly Empire. We can conclude using the methodology of the text comparison that the authors of the Prince Lazars cults documents knew about the chronicles of Georgie Chamartol and Constantin Manas, as well as about The Alexandrida and The History of the Jewish War written by Joseph Flavius.1 It is obvious that the heroic sentences with regard to the warship orations in The Alexandrida, given by Alexander the Great and in The Letter concerning Prince Lazar, given by the Serbian ruler are very similar. From political point of view, the warship oration in the work by Patriarch Danilo belongs to Kosovos ideology. Generally, the number of real historical facts for the before-Kosovo epoch and for Kosovos Battle in written documents concerning the Prince Lazars cult are very modest. On the other hand, the cults documents are very appropriate sources for researching the states ideology, the cultural history and ethnic identity.
1 ibid., p. 343.
______________________BALCANIA
Crucified Kosovo in 21st c.
AN ESTABLISHMENT OF THE CULT The canonisation, or the solemn proclamation of the saints, was introduced in Europe in the 11th c.1 In the Roman Catholic Church a decision regarding the canonisation from the 17th century had to be given only by the Pope. However, the Greek Orthodox Church was allowing the canonisation of the local cults by bishops and metropolitans alongside by the Patriarch. In the Russian Orthodox Church the right for canonisation had both the Patriarch and the Emperor.2 However, the process of canonisation in the mediaeval Serbian state is not researched in historiography and we do not know exactly how this process was going on. In the mediaeval Serbia the church cult was reserved only for the ruling Nemanjis dynasty and for the church archpriests. The genealogies of the Nemanjis dynasty are presented in three
1 . Mitrovi, O pravu proglaavanja svetaca u staro doba, Istonik, Vol. XXI1718, Beograd, 1907, pp. 385390. 2 L. Mirkovi, Uvrtenje despota Stefana Lazarevia u red svetitelja, Bogoslovlje, II-3, 1932, p. 165.
10
______________________BALCANIA
important Serbian mediaeval monasteries: Graanica, Deani and in the headquarters of the Serbian Patriarchate Pe (in Turkish Ipek). All three of them are located in Kosovo a territory that is the creadle of Serbian state, culture and nation. We know from the sources that the last Nemanjis have been stressing that they originated from the holy roots. It is known that except the high church dignitaries who were proclaimed as the saints only the members of the ruling dynasty had hagiographies. However, after two centuries of Nemanjis rule in Serbia Prince Lazar was the first secular person out of the ruling dynasty who was declared to be the saint. The interesting question is why the Serbian Orthodox church never proclaimed as the saints two other Serbian mediaeval rulers who also were killed in another battle against the Turks the brothers King Vukain (13651371) and Despot Ugljea Mrnjavevi (13651371)? The battle in which they died, regarding the destiny of the Byzantine Empire and other Balkan mediaeval states, was even more important than it was Kosovos Battle. It was the battle in 1371 (6879 from the creation of the world) near the Maritza River in Bulgaria on September 26th. The answers could be that: 1. This battle was far from the ancient Serbian lands in comparison with the Battle of Kosovo which was in the core of the Serbian mediaeval state; and Prince Lazar was a ruler of the lands which were the core of Serbian Nemanjis state and in such a way exactly he was predestined to be a successor of the Nemanjis dynasty.
2.
However, probably the crucial reason why the Mrnjavevi's were not proclaimed as the saints was the fact that according to the false tradition they killed the last Nemanji Emperor Uro (13551371), who in fact naturally died in December 1371. Therefore, their destiny and murder in the Maritza Battle was in fact a punishment given by the Lord and consequently their dead bodies have been never found.1 It is important to say that for the establishment of the ones cult the martyr death was indispensable, but not necessary to be and heroic one. It was the main reason for the fact that in all written documents the martyr death of Prince Lazar was always emphasised. The awareness
1 Lj. Stojanovi, Rodoslovi i letopisi, Sremski Karlovci: Srpska Kraljevska Akademija, XVI, 1927, pp. 208209.
11
______________________BALCANIA
regarding Kosovos martyr and martyrdom is still very alive among present days Serbs when the whole region of Kosovo is crucified.
The Serbian orthodox monastery of Deani in Western Kosovo - Metohija (first half of the 14th century)
The Serbian well-known theologian and historian of the church, Lazar Mirkovi is in opinion that Prince Lazar with his martyr death was automatically involved into the order of the saints because the martyrs should not be declared for the saints or their saintness to be investigated, because of they are eo ipso what they suffered for Christ.1 In the other words, their martyrdom to the death was undoubtedly the crucial reason for their declaration for the saints. ore Trifunovi is in opinion that Prince Lazar became the saint without official proclamation by the Serbian church.2 The most dusputable question is was Lazars cult established as organised one by the church or it started spontaneously? In the other words, has been the canonisation of Prince Lazar made under church law or not? It is really beyond any doubt that according to the authors of the cults written documents
1 ibid., p. 166. 2 . Trifunovi, Srpski srednjovekovni spisi o Knezu Lazaru i Kosovskom boju, Kruevac, 1968, p. 204.
12
______________________BALCANIA
Prince Lazar became the saint on the base of his martyrdom to the death, but also on the bases of the facts that his relics were complete and spreading the holy smell (myrrh). The most significant fact with regard to the question of an establishment of the Prince Lazars cult is that the historical sources are strictly telling us about organised translation of Lazars relics. The translation was the crucial theme in both of Letter concerning Prince Lazar by Patriarch Danilo III and Letter concerning Prince Lazar by unknown author. According to several authors, the translation of Lazars relics was the decisive moment in the process of an establishment of his cult. Patriarch Danilo notified that a decision regarding the translation was made in the home of the Lazarevis. The solemn procession started in Prishtina (nowadays a capital of Kosovo) where Lazars relics were buried firstly. From the text of the document it is obvious that Patriarch Danilo was present in this process of translation and probably the whole process of translation of the body was organised and conducted by him.1 The solemn procession was accompanied by both Princes son-in-law Vuk Brankovi, feudal land-lord of Kosovo, and by Vuks wife MaraPrince Lazars daughter. On the road from Pritina to Lazars monastery of Ravanica in Central Serbia the procession spent a night in town of Brvenik where in monastery of Nova Pavlica the holy relics were put beside the graves of Lazars sister Dragana and their sonsStefan and Lazar. The procession was finished in monastery of Ravanica where Lazars relics were buried again, but now as the saints relics. In such a way, a wish of Prince Lazarto be buried in his endowment (memorial) monastery of Ravanica was fulfilled. It is known that for the process of translation only one of the cults texts was necessary. It is beyond any suspicion that the translation of Lazars relics was organised and directed by the state and the church. The Princes successors initiated this process and Patriarch Danilo III organised and conducted it according to the patterns of the former translations of the bodies of the Serbian rulers or the churchs archpriests and of course according to the churchs law. For the new martyr and saint patriarch Danilo made the cults text.2 The translation of the relics of saint Sava (died in 1235)a founder of the Serbian independent church in 1219, from
1 A. Vukomanovi, O knezu Lazaru, Glasnik Drutva srpske slovesnosti, Vol. 11, Beograd, 1859, p. 177. 2 R. Mihalji, Lazar Hrebeljanovi, Istorija, kult, predanje, Beograd: BIGZ, 1989, p. 152.
13
______________________BALCANIA
Trnovo in Bulgaria to Mileeva monastery in Serbia, the translation of the Simeon Nemanjas relics from monastery of Chilandar in Greece to monastery of Studenica in central Serbia and their attachment to the order of the saints have been very well known to Patriarch Danilo. He surely read The Hagiography of Saint Sava written by Theodosie in the 13th century and the texts concerning a canonisation of Simeon Nemanja written by Domentian in the same century.1 However, according to the opposite opinion, churchs council was not met and therefore there was not official proclamation of Prince Lazar as the saint. Nevertheless, unknown author of The Letter concerning Prince Lazar strictly mentioned churchs council held during the process of translation. We can think that probably this council held a session without all number of its members presented because of the fact that churchs councils in Serbia after the death of Emperor Stefan Duan (13311355) were held mainly as a rumpt councils. It can be concluded that probably in the case of Prince LazarKosovos great martyr, both the process of translation and the process of canonisation have been done at the same time.2
Crucified Kosovo today 1 V. orovi, Siluan i Danilo II, srpski pisci XIV-XV veka, Glas Srpske Kraljevske akademije, CXXXVI-72, 1929, pp. 95, 97. 2 ibid., p. 155.
14
______________________BALCANIA
Do not surrender! Kosovo is Serbia!
Usually and officially, a proclamation to be the saint was done after an exhumation. According to the opinion given by Belgrade University Professor Rade Mihalji, Prince Lazar was proclaimed as the saint at an end of the translation, just after the solemn procession came to Ravanica monastery and just before Lazars relics were again buried in his memorial monastery.1 After finishing both of processestranslation and canonisation, it was established an annual celebration of the new saint in the churchs calendar. According to those historians who are thinking that canonisation was done during the translation of Lazars relics, this procession of translation, proclamation for the saint as well as
1 ibid., p. 155.
15
______________________BALCANIA
canonisation of him were done very early after the Kosovo Battle, probably only one or two years after that, i. e. in 1390./1391. A SPREADING OF THE CULT UNTIL THE GREAT MIGRATION OF THE SERBS FROM KOSOVO TO HUNGARY(1690) The cult of Prince Lazar was established with an agreement between the family of the Lazarevis and a hierarchy of the Serbian Church. One part of the cults texts was made by Lazars son, successor of the Serbian throneDespot Stefan Lazarevi (13931427). The relatives of the Lazarevis dynasty have been spreading this cultthe cult of the new saint who did not trace his origin from the saint Nemanjis dynasty.1 For example, nun Jefimia, relative of the Duchess Milica who was a wife of Prince Lazar, wrote with a golden silk well-known The Praise to Prince Lazar. Even in the charter written by the Lazarevis in 1395/6. and 1400. issued for the Russian monastery in Athos, the Serbian Prince was mentioned as the saint Prince. Despot Stefan Lazarevi ten years later gave a new charter to the monastery of Chilandar on Athos in Grece and mentioned his father as my parent and gentleman saint Prince.2 The same attribute Despot Stefan used for his father in his well-known The Mine Law. The fraternity of monastery Rusik on Athos, according to the signed special contract with Despot Stefan, was obliged to give annual celebration to the saint Prince. The family of Brankovis, the rulers of Kosovo in the second part of the 14th c. and the beginning of the 15th c., have been mentioning Prince Lazar as the saint Prince particularly when the Princes daughter Mara was alive. However, after her death Lazar was mentioned in official documents issued by the Brankovis as saint Prince very rarely.3 In the official documents issued by Republic of Ragusa/Dubrovnik the Princes name was accompanied by the attribute saint, but only when those
1 Lj. Stojanovi, Stari srpski zapisi i natpisi, Zbornik za IJK SAN, I, 56, 175, Beograd, Sremski Karlovci, 19021926. 2 S. Novakovi, Zakonski spomenici srpskih drava srednjeg veka, Beograd, 1912, p. 462. 3 ibid., 223.
16
______________________BALCANIA
documents are sent to the Lazarevis, but even in this case not always.1 As an extraordinary event, an establishment of the Prince Lazars cult was expressed mainly in historical works: in genealogies and chronicles. However, for the authors of the older chronicles and genealogies Lazar was only Prince, Grand Prince or sovereign with some additional attributes, but not and with attribute saint. On the other hand, this attribute can be found in the texts which are telling us about translation of the relics, the act which happened just before a canonisation. The authors of the younger chronicles and genealogies used very often together with the name of the Prince and an attribute of saint regardless if they were describing time before or after the canonisation. The same case is and with some inscriptions. A spreading of Lazars cult can be presented and seen also and on the wall-paintings at that time or later on. The saint cult of Prince Lazar was cherished on the whole territory of the Morava (Central) Serbia and in several monasteries in the Athos during the time of the Lazarevis dynasty. However, at the time of the Lazarevis the portrait of Prince Lazar was wall-painted only once. It was in the endowment of Duchess Milica-a monastery of Ljubostinja. Also, in Serbian monastery Chilandar in Athos it can not be found portraits of Prince Lazar from that time. However, together with his portrait in monastery of Ravanica after his canonisation a signatura the saint was added.2 Serbian feudal lord Stefan Musi, a founder of Nova Pavlica monastery, did not forget to put attribute the saint to Prince Lazars title and name beside his portrait on the wall: Blagoastivi i hristoljubivi gospodin Stefan, sin elnika Muse i gospoe Dragane, sestre velikoga i samodravnoga gospodina Srbljem i Podunaviju, svetoga kneza Lazara i ktitor svetoga mesta ovoga.3 The title saint can be found in the church of saint Nicholas in Chilandar where a portrait of the Serbian Prince Lazar along with this signature was made in 1667. It was the first Princes portrait in one of several Chilandars monasteries.4 In some cases, alongside with the name of Lazar and
1 Lj. Stojanovi, Stare srpske povelje i pisma, I-1, Beograd, Sremski Karlovci, 1929, 1934, pp. 180, 182, 184, 186, 190193, 196, 200, 201, 216, 219, 224, 227. 2 G. Babi, Vladarske insignije kneza Lazara, Beograd, p. 66. 3 V. Petkovi, Starine, Beograd, p. 42. 4 D. Bogdanovi, Hilandar u srednjem veku, HilandarBeograd, 1978, pp. 46, 48; S. Petkovi, Kult kneza Lazara i srpsko slikarstvo XVII veka, Zbornik za likovne umetnosti, Vol. 7, Beograd, 1971, p. 90.
17
______________________BALCANIA
the attribute saint he was titled as well as the Emperor. For example, in the monastery of Gornjak it is written the saint Emperor Lazar, but it is well-known that Lazar had only the title of Prince (Duke), but never Emperor. In addition, he did not belong to the Nemanjis dynasty. According to the opinion given by M. Vasi, this inscription in the monastery of Gornjak dates very after the canonisation and in fact it is a product of the popular belief.1 With regard to the wall-paintings we can conclude that there was not any Princes portrait within the lands which were under his power for more than two centuries after the fall of Serbian lands under Turkish overlordship in the mid-15th c. It was the first Lazars portrait made in Russia. The next one was made in Orahovica in Slavonia (present day in Croatia) which at that time (1594) was under the Turkish rule.2 A revival of Lazars cult happened four centuries later, during the time of Serbian Patriarch Pajsije. He restored in 1633/34 a wall-painted genealogy of the dynasty of the Nemanjis. Beside the portrait of the first Serbian King Stefan Prvovenani (coronated in 1217), Lazars portrait was presented as well. After two or three years later the Princes portrait was wall-painted in the next monasteries and churches: Blagovetenje Kablarsko, in the village of Jeevica nearby aak in Central Serbia and in the village of Brezova nearby Ivanjica in South-western Serbia.
Burned Serbian house in Kosovo by Albanians on March 18th, 2004
1 M. Vasi, ia i Lazarica, Beograd, 1928, p. 112. 2 S. Petkovi, Kult kneza Lazara i srpsko slikarstvo XVII veka, Zbornik za likovne umetnosti, Vol. 7, Beograd, 1971, pp. 9495.
18
______________________BALCANIA
One of destroyed Serbian churches in Kosovo after June 1999
In the favour of a spreading and firming the Prince Lazars cult is telling us also and several attempts done in order to prove that some person or family could trace its own origin from the Serbian mediaeval ruling dynastythe Nemanjis. In this case Prince Lazar was the crucial link whose origin was also derived from the Nemanjis. For instance, the origin of the Serbian Jakis feudal family was traced back in their genealogy, that was made between 1563 and 1584, from Prince Lazar who was presented as originated from the saint Nemanjis family. This genealogy was made for the Russian Emperor Ivan the Terrible who wanted to connect his own origin with the ancient Serbian dynasty who had two Emperors ( and ). Prince Lazar and the Jakis should be the main link between two dynastiesthe Nemanjis of Serbia and Ivan the Terrible of Russia.1 It is not occasionally that this genealogy was made at the time when Lazars cult was established in Russia. During the realm of the first Russian Emperor Lazars portrait was drown in the Archangel Cathedral in Kremlin which was a mausoleum for the Russian Emperors. This church was painted in 1564/65. Among the portraits of all Russian rulers before Ivan IV
1 S. Petkovi, Ivan Grozni i kult kneza Lazara u Rusiji, O knezu Lazaru, Beograd, 1975, pp. 312314.
19
______________________BALCANIA
the Terrible, in this church were also presented portraits of the Byzantine emperor Michael VIII Paleologus, saint Sava of Serbia, his father Simeon Nemanji and the saint Serbian Prince Lazar. The Serbian Prince was presented in a clothing of the Russian rulers.1 For a spreading of Lazars cult the literacy was the main distributor of it, more important than any another one. To no one Serbian ruler who was proclaimed as the saint it was devoted so huge number of texts as it was the case with Prince Lazar. However, the real literal campaign in the glory of Prince Lazar started from the time of ruling of his son Despot Stefan Lazarevi. The main number of texts dedicated to Prince Lazar in order to firm and spread his glory and saintness was made as the liturgical texts. It is the case, for instance, with both Jefimias inscription and the inscription on the marble column. The second one, according to opinions by the historians of literature, was a work ordered by Despot Stefan Lazarevi. A famous Slavonic philologist Pawel J. afaik thought that the marble column was erected exactly on the place where Prince Lazar was buried immediately after his death. However, this column was not erected as a tombstone and also the inscription was not an epitaph.2 This column actually was erected on the place of the Kosovos Battle and its inscription was pointed against the Turks. It was the main reason for the fact that this column was very early destroyed by the Ottomans.3 One of the crucial literal texts with regard to the spreading of the cult was the Hagiography of Emperor Uro written by Serbian Patriarch Pajsije in the mid-17th century. It was in fact a revival of the cult from the literal point of view. In this work a short history with a genealogy of Prince Lazar is written.4 The most important detail is the fact that according to Patriarch Pajsije, the Serbian Emperor Duan adopted Prince Lazar as a son. At such a way, Prince Lazar was connected with the Nemanjis. The monastery of Ravanica, as the main endowment of Prince Lazar, was the crucial centre for spreading and further
1 ibid. 2 R. Mihalji, Lazar Hrebeljanovi, Istorija, kult, predanje, Beograd: BIGZ, 1989, p. 165. 3 L. Mirkovi, ta znai mramorni stub podignut na mestu kosovske bitke i ta kae natpis na ovom stubu?, Zbornik Matice srpske za knjievnost i jezik, IXX, 19611962, pp. 56. 4 Stare srpske biografije, Beograd, p. 146; S. Radojii, Portreti srpskih vladara u srednjem veku, Skoplje, 1934, pp. 50, 80.
20
______________________BALCANIA
firming of his cult. The relics of Kosovos great martyr of Prince Lazar were kept and preserved in this monastery for the three centuriesfrom 1390/91 till the Great Serbian Migration to Hungary in 1690. In the monastery of Ravanica ancient inscription devoted to Prince Lazar beside his portrait became more respected after his canonisation in the way that the attribute saint was added. Every year the church service devoted to its founder is held as the crucial obligation by the monastery towards its founder up today.1 One of the most important points in relation to the spreading and firming of Lazars cult is the oral tradition, namely the so-called "Kosovos Legend". This oral tradition is written in several texts as, for instance, in the Janiareve uspomene ili Turska hronika by Konstantin Mihajlovi from Ostrovica, or in the works by Benedikt Kuripei and Ludovik Crijevi Tuberon from Dubrovnik. The final version of Kosovos Legend is shaped in De Regno Sclavorum written by Mavro Orbin from Dubrovnik in 1601 that is a general history of the Slavs with particular accent to the history of the South Slavs with the claim that all Slavs are originating from the Balkans.2 Generally, the cult of Prince Lazar was more stronger during the Lazarevis than after the death of Despot Stefan in 1427. There are no literal works devoted to Prince Lazar after the time of Despot Stefan Lazarevi. During the first two centuries of Turkish overlordship in the Balkans genealogies and hagiographies are containing more facts concerning Prince Lazar as a ruler than as a saint. Also, in tradition, Prince Lazar was presented mainly as a hero. The longest period of interruption of a spreading the cult happened in the fine arts. For example, from the period of the Brankovis it was not saved any portrait of the Prince and Princes name was absent from the genealogies of this family. A revival of spreading of Lazars cult occured after the Great Migration of 1690.
1 S. Troicki, Ktitorsko pravo u Vizantiji i nemanjikoj Srbiji, Glas Srpska Kraljevska akademija, Beograd, LXVIII, 1925, p. 121. 2 M. Orbin, Kraljevstvo Slovena, Beograd, 1968, p. 101.
21
______________________BALCANIA
THE CULT AFTER THE GREAT MIGRATION 1690 UNTIL THE END OF THE 18TH C. Between the fall of the Serbian lands under Turkish overlordship in the mid-15th c. and the Serbian uprising against the Turks at the beginning of the 19th c. the Great Serbian Migration of 1690 was the crucial historical event in history of the Serbs. The immediate outcome of the Migration was a change of the ethnic structure of the lands south and north from the rivers of Sava and Danube. During this migration (1690) at least 60./70.000 immigrants (according to some historians even c. 100.000) passed the River Sava and settled mainly the lands of the southern part of Hungary (this part of Hungary is now part of Serbia under the name of Vojvodina).1 Written privileges for the Serbs given by the Habsburg Emperors who were at the same time and the Hungarian Kings provided and guaranteed them a freedom of the faith, churchs autonomy and the right to elect a local government. Along with a common language, faith and habits the Serbian immigrants within the Habsburg Empire were linked to each other in national point of view and also through a strong tradition with regarding to the same origins and history. In the process of national gathering of the Serbs in the Habsburg Monarchy, but also and in linking them with the Serbs south from the River Sava, Lazars cult had one of the most important roles. In fact, revival, new spreading and firming of the cult of the saint Prince Lazar was one of the crucial points in the process of making national awareness among the Serbs in all three foreign countries where they were living: the Ottoman Empire, the Habsburg Monarchy and the Republic of Venice. In this process autonomous Serbian Church in the Habsburg Monarchy (the Metropolitanat of Karlovci) played the most important role. During the Great Viennese War (16831699) between the Christian aliance and the Turks in 1690 the fraternity of the monastery of Lazars Ravanica in Central Serbia left their monastery. Altogether with other monastery valuables the fraternity took with them before they left the monastery also and the relics of Prince Lazar and brought them to the town of Saint
1 D. J. Popovi, Velika seoba Srba 1690., Beograd, 1954, pp. 32 - 51. About this migration see and: S. aki, Velika seoba Srba 1689/90 i patrijarh Arsenije III Crnojevi, Novi Sad: Dobra vest, 1990; R. Samardi (and others), Kosovo i Metohija u srpskoj istoriji, Beograd: SKZ, 1989, pp. 127142.
22
______________________BALCANIA
Andrea near Budapest in Hungary where they settled themselves. In fact, it was the second translation of Prince Lazars relics, which actually marked at the same time and revival of his cult among the Serbs. Lazar relics, after fraternity of the monastery of Serbias Ravanica came to Saint Andrea, were put in the newly built wooden church named also Ravanica.1 Saint Andrea at that time was temporary headquarters of the Serbian Church with the Patriarch Arsenije III arnojevi who led Serbian migraion from Kosovo and Central Serbia to Hungary.
Which kind of Serbia in the EU?
In May 1692 Austrian Emperor and Hungarian King Leopold I confirmed the possessions to the church of new Ravanica (in Hungary) and also put this church under imperial protection. At the same year one small delegation of this church went to Moscow with icons of Kosovos great martyr as the presents. They succeeded to get a charter from the Russian Emperors Ivan and Petar Aleksejevich according to which the
1 V. Petkovi, Manastir Ravanica, Beograd, 1922, p. 12.
23
______________________BALCANIA
fraternity of Ravanica had a right to collect donations in Russia every seventh year for Lazars endowment. In this charter issued in 1693 Prince Lazar was named as the saint by the Russian Emperors. Thus, the new memorial place of Prince Lazar in Hungary was completely identified with ancient one in Central Serbia through the cult of Kosovos great martyr. This delegation from the church of Ravanica in Hungary passing through Poland during their return trip to Saint Andrea received new donations for the endorsement of the saint Prince Lazar. This delegation probably visited and the Polish court.1 From that time is also wooden tablet (18,5 x 28,5 cm.) with portrait of Prince Lazar, but as keaoo (a person who is keeping in hands his own head)2 and a pilgrim.3 The typography was obviously well-known for the fraternity of Ravanica. At such a way they could spread the cult cheaply and firm it among the bigger number of believers. The relics of Prince Lazar have been for the third time translated to the new place in 1697 when the fraternity of the Saint Andreas Ravanica moved themselves to the Fruka Gora in Srem (today in Northern Serbia, but at that time it was in Southern Hungary). Here the fraternity found an abandoned monastery of Vrdnik which was now restored and renaimed into the Small Ravanica ( ). In historical sources those two names are identified through Lazars cult. However, during the next Austrian-Turkish war (17161718) the relics were again translated to the new placeto the monastery of Futog as well in Fruka Gora (the so called Serbian Athos). Nevertheless, after this new translation the relics were returned back to Small Ravanica or Vrdnik. Gradually, in the course of time, a tradition that Prince Lazar established the monastery of Vrdnik is made. In the mid of the 18th c. believers this tradition became a true story. This wrong tradition became a base for Serbian folk song the Building of Ravanica. With a restoration of monastery of Vrdnik at the end of the 17th and the beginning of the 18th c. and also with a restoration of the ancient Ravanica after the Passarowitz () Peace Agreement between Austria and Turkey in 1718 there were
1 St. M. Dimitrijevi, Graa za srpsku istoriju iz ruskih arhiva i biblioteka, Spomenik Srpske Kraljevske akademije, LIII, Beograd, 1922, pp. 213218. 2 During the Battle of Kosovo Prince Lazar was captured by the Turks and beheaded. 3 D. Davidov, Srpska grafika XVIII veka, Novi Sad, 1978, pp. 245246.
24
______________________BALCANIA
established proper conditions for a spreading of the cult on the wider territorynorth and south of the Rivers Danube and Sava. The Vrdnik monastery in fact became a centre of the cult in the Habsburg Monarchy while the original Ravanica monastery in Central Serbia had the same role within the Ottoman Empire. However, the Monastery of Vrdnik in Hungary became more important than the Monastery of Ravanica in Central Serbia with regard to a spreading of the cult because of the very fact that in Vrdnik the relics of Kosovos great martyr were saved till the beginning of the Second World War. Princes popularity was rapidly growing up in the 18th c. It can be traced in the fine arts as the best example of this fact. For instance, a portrait of Prince Lazar was presented on two reliquaries in the monasteries of Kruedol and Vrdnik in Southern Hungary. In the mid of the 18th c. a portrait of Prince Lazar was wall-painted in Kruedol along with the portraits of the Nemanjis, the Brankovis and Jovan Vladimir.1 Further, in Moscow two woodcuts were made in 1757 and 1758 for the Monastery of Chilandar in Northern Greece at the Mount Athos and for the Monastery of Studenica in the Southern Serbia. On the both of them Prince Lazar was presented along with the members of the holy Nemanjis dynasty. On the Studenicas woodcut the saint great Prince Lazar is holding a model of the church. A portrait of Prince Lazar can be seen also on the cooper tablet which was donated by Mojsej Luki from Novi Sad to the Monastery of Piva in 1766. The main part of Princes portraits in the 18th c. were made on the cooper tablets. After the Second Great Migration of the Serbs from Serbia to Hungary in 1737 Prince Lazar was pictured as the keaoop which was one of the special motives of the Serbian fine arts in the 18th c. The Serbian Patriarch Arsenije IV Jovanovi-akabenda, who was a national leader of the Second Great Serbian Migration in 1737 to the Habsburg Monarchy, ordered a cooper tablet in 1741 to Christofor efarovi and Toma Mesmer. This cooper tablet was used for a making of a special religious-political poster. This poster was sent to the Viennese court as a memorandum after the Second Great Migration. The name of this poster was: Saint Sava with the Serbian saints of home of the Nemanjis. However, several important members of this dynasty are excluded from the poster. At this cooper tablet the
1 D. Medakovi, Zidno slikarstvo manastira Kruedola, Zbornik Filozofskog fakulteta u Beogradu, XVIII2, Beograd, 1964, pp. 601616.
25
______________________BALCANIA
Prince is presented as the keaoop.1 At the same year it was made by the same authors and the Stematography that was in fact the first Serbian illustrated history and some kind of a schoolbook. Among 29 persons from the South Slavic lands two of them are specially mentioned: Jovan Vladimir and Prince Lazar. Both of them are presented as the keaoop-s.2 Among several other Princes portraits the next two are of a special importance. First of them, which is not saved in original version, is a woodcut with Prince Lazar in a parade uniform. It is made by Christofor efarovi in 1746. There is an opinion that the second one, woodcut made by Zaharije Orfelin in 1773 is completely the same with the first one.3 CONCLUSION The cults writings upon the Prince Lazar contain a number of facts relevant to the post-Kosovo Battle period of the Balkan history, above all concerning the ideology of the rulers and the state, the history of culture, and religious and ethnic relations. The mission of these writings did not end with the canonization of Prince Lazar. They preserved and spread the cult of the martyr of Kosovo far outside the borders of the former state ruled by Prince Lazar. What is the most important to say is that cult of Prince Lazar as Kosovos great martyr played for centuries together with the Kosovos Legend and Kosovos Myth a crucial role in national identification of the Serbs that is valid today too.
Deani Monastery in Metohija today
1 D. Davidov, Srpska grafika XVIII veka, Novi Sad, 1978, pp. 354371. 2 D. Davidov, Stematografija, izobraenije oruaj ilirieskih, Novi Sad, 1972, pp. 89. 3 D. Davidov, Srpska grafika XVIII veka, Novi Sad, 1978, pp. 135137.
26
______________________BALCANIA
THE CROATIAN NATIONAL REVIVAL MOVEMENT (THE ILLYRIAN MOVEMENT) AND THE QUESTION OF LINGUISTIC-NATIONAL DETERMINATION OF THE SOUTH SLAVS, 1830 1847
THE ORIGINS OF THE MOVEMENT The Croatian national revival movement, which was officially named as the Illyrian Movement, emerged with the name of Croatian national worker and politician of German origin1, Ljudevit Gaj in 1830. In that year Ljudevit Gaj published in Budim a brochure in two languages (Croatian and German) Kratka osnova horvatsko-slavenskoga pravopisanja/Die Kleine Kroatische-Slavischen Orthographie [Short Foundation of Croatian-Slavonic Orthography]). This publication marked the beginning of the Croatian national revival movement which is considered in Croatian historiography as the period of Croatian national renaissance. We can say that from 1830 starts a modern Croatian history, but also and modern Croatian nationalism and history of political thoughts. The brochure Kratka osnova horvatsko-slavenskog pravopisanja became the foundation for the further development of the national language of the Croats and reform of orthography among the Croats. The purpose of the book was of double nature: to modify Croatian orthography and to stress a literal unity of the Croats with other South Slavs, particularly with the Serbs who were speaking tokavian dialect. Gajs orthographic reform of Croatian writings was done according to the pattern of the Czech orthography. This new Croatian orthography, which was accepted by the Slovenes as well, became known as gajica.2 In the same year (1830) a protonotar (secretary) of Croatian Kingdom, Josip Kuevi published in the Latin language
1 His father, Johan Gay, was a German physician who came to live in northern Croatia (in Krapina) in 1786. Gajs ancestors from father side have been from Burgundy and Slovakia. Gajs mother was Juliana Schmidt. Gajs mother tongue was German (I. Peri. Povijest Hrvata. Zagreb, 1997, p. 151). 2 D. Pavlievi. Povijest Hrvatske. Drugo, izmijenjeno i proireno izdanje. Zagreb, 2000, p. 244.
27
______________________BALCANIA
one of the most important political works in Croatian modern history: Iura municipaliaThe book is upon the special political rights and constitution of the Triune Kingdom of Dalmatia, Croatia and Slavonia with the purpose to refute Hungarian claims that after 1102 (when, according to the Croatian historiography, the Kingdom of Dalmatia, Croatia and Slavonia joined the Kingdom of Hungary through the personal union in the person of Hungarian King) Croatia, Dalmatia and Slavonia (according to the Croatian standpoint, three historical provinces of the Croats) became ordinary province within Hungary without any special political status, rights or autonomy. In the other words, Hungarian politicians claimed that after the year of 1102 Croatia, Slavonia and Dalmatia lost any state or municipal rights and that historical lands of the Croats became partes subjectae (subdued parts) to Hungary. Contrary to such Hungarian claims, Kuevi argued that historical Croatian lands made a political union with Hungary and that after 1102 Hungary and Croatia were regna socia (united kingdoms) with equal political rights.1 This Kuevis program
1 The conflict between Croatian and Hungarian aristocracy over historical rights of Croatia in, according to the Croatian historiography, the joined Hungarian-Croatian political union (federation) is very similar to the conflict between Polish and Lithuanian aristocracy over the political position of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania within the Republic of Two Nations, i.e. PolishLithuanian Commonwealth after the Lublin Union on July 1st, 1569 (Rzeczpospolita Obojga Narodow). While Polish politicians claimed that Lithuania lost her statehood after 1569 and became an ordinary province of Kingdom of Poland without any special political rights, Lithuanian aristocracy claimed that the Lublin Union was a confederal union of two indepandent states in which the Grand Duchy of Lithuania preserved her statehood. About this problem see more in: Z. Kiaupa, J. Kiaupien, A. Kuncevius. The History of Lithuania before 1795. Vilnius, 2000, p. 282304; R. Bideleux, I. Jeffries. A History of Eastern Europe. Crisis and Change. London and New York, 1998, p. 114164; N. Davies. Gods Playground: a History of Poland, vol. I, The Origins to 1795. Oxford, 1981; S. Cynarski. The Shape of Sarmatian ideology in Poland, Acta Poloniae Historica, 19, p. 617; R. L. Johnson. Central Europe. Enemies, Neighbors, Friends. New York and Oxford, p. 105136; P. S. Wandicz. Laisvs kaina. Vidurio Ryt Europos istorija nuo vidurami iki dabarties. Vilnius, 1997, p. 127138. It became a common attitude of modern western historians of non-Polish ethnic origin to describe Republic of Two Nations as exclusively Polish due to the great extent of Polonization of Lithuanian society and culture. See for instance: A. Palmer. The Lands Between. A History of East-Central Europe since the Congress of Vienna. London, 1970, p. 4. However, there were Polish writers who claimed that the Grand Duchy of Lithuania became an integral part of Kingdom of Poland even before the Lublin Union, i.e. after the Union of the Act of Krve (August 14th, 1385). See for instance: Jan Vislicius. Bellum
28
______________________BALCANIA
became the first formulation of Croatian historical rights which later in the 19th c. became the foundation for the programs of several Croatian political parties. Among them, the most important was Croatian Party of Rights, established in 1861.1
A flag of the Triune Kingdom (Dalmatia, Croatia and Slavonia) from 1848 to 1852
The further development of Croatian national revival was marked by the year of 1832 when Ivan Derkos published in the Latin language in Zagreb Genius patriae super dormientibus sius filiis (The genius of the motherland above its sleeping sons). Derkos with this book tried to wake up the love toward the motherland among the Croats, but as well as to promote an idea of a single Crotian literal language composed by combination of three South Slavic dialects: kajkavian (spoken by the Croats in northern Croatia and the Slovenes, at that time known as Kranjci, in Slovenia), akavian (spoken only by the Croats in northern Dalmatia, Istria and Dalmatian islands) and tokavian (spoken by all Serbs and at that time by very small number of the Croats).2 However, Derkos was in opinion that all of these three South Slavic dialects were spoken exclusively by the Croats, i.e. that the Croatian language (vernacular) is consisted by kajkavian, akavian and tokavian dialects (speeches). This Derkos claim
Prutenum. 1515; M. Kromer. De origine et rebus gestis Polonarum. Basel, 1555. 1 A. Starevi. Izabrani politiki spisi. Zagreb, 1999; D. Pavlievi. Povijest Hrvatske. Drugo, izmijenjeno i proireno izdanje. Zagreb, 2000, p. 245; M. Gross. Povijest pravake ideologije. Zagreb, 1973. 2 . . . , 1997, p. 1350.
29
______________________BALCANIA
became from the mid-19th c. the main framework of Croatian linguistic nationalism which provoked Serbian and Slovenian reaction and finally alienated Serbs and Slovenes from the Croatian Illyrian ideology of Yugoslavism.1
Territory of the so-called Independent State of Croatia, which was existing from 1941 to 1945, partially based on the political ideology of the Croatian Illyrian Movement. The map is showing the borders after Italian capitulation.
In the same year, Croatian count Janko Drakovi published in Karlovac Disertatia iliti razgovor(Disertation or
1 About the issues of Croatian and Serbian linguistic nationalisms in the first half of the 19th century see: V. B. Sotirovi. Lingvistiki model definisanja srpske nacije Vuka Stefanovia Karadia i projekat Ilije Garaanina o stvaranju lingvistiki odreene drave Srba (Vuko Stefanoviiaus Karadiiaus lingvistinis serb tautos identifikacijos modelis ir Ilijos Garaanino lingvistikai suvokiamos serb tautos valstibs sukrimo projektas), Doctoral Dissertation, Humanitarian sciencies, Philology. Vilnius, 2002.
30
______________________BALCANIA
Talk) which was the first political book written in Croatian language. This work was actually the political program of both the Croatian national revival movement and the Croatian nation in which the author required political, economic, linguistic and cultural union of all Croatian lands into a single (united) national state of the Croats. His united Croatia Drakovi named as a Greater Illyria. The lands which should be incorporated into united Croatia, according to his project, have been: Croatia, Slavonia, Rijeka/Fiume, the Military Border, Bosnia, Herzegovina, Montenegro, Dalmatia and Slovenian provinces. Such united Greater Croatia would stay in political union with Hungary, but both Hungary and united Croatia would remain as the parts of the Habsurg Monarchy. In such united Croatia the official language would be Illyrian, according to Drakovi, Croatian language of tokavian dialect. Further, the supreme authority would be in the hands of the Ban (the Governor or prorex). Also, he required a modification of the Croatian feudal system and modernization of Croatian trade and economy. The mentioned writers are the founders of the so-called Illyrian Movement, which lasted until 1847 when, according to Croat authors, the national language of the Croats achieved a victory over Germanization and Magyarization in Croatia and Slavonia and when the Illyrian name (as the common name for all South Slavs) was replaced with the national name of the Croats. Basically, it is the crucial period of the Illyrian Movement, but in the larger sense of periodization the Croatian national revival movement can be subdivided into the following phases: 1. The period of the preparatory time from the end of the 18th century to 1830; 2. The first (early) period from 1830 to 1834; 3. The developed period from 1835 to 1842; 4. The period of the prohibition of the Illyrian name (18431845); and 5. The period of a replacement of the Illyrian name with the national name of the Croats (18461874).1
1 J. idak and co-authors. Hrvatski narodni preporod, t. I. Zagreb, 1965, p. 7.
31
______________________BALCANIA
THE ILLYRIAN MOVEMENT UNTIL THE CREATION OF THE POLITICAL PARTIES (1841)
Certainly, the publishing of Gajs Kratka osnova horvatskoslavenskoga pravopisanja/Die Kleine Kroatische-Slavischen Orthographie in 1830 marked the beginning of the Croatian national revival movement and made Ljudevit Gaj a leading figure of it. The crucial importance of this book is that Gaj proposed a creation of one literal language for all Croats. Actually, it was really revolutionary act at that time which was done, according to Gaj and other leaders of the movement, for the purpose to unify whole Croatian nation and Croatian lands, which should be, at such a way, united on the language-literal base what was the crucial precondition for the Croatian political unification in the future. Moreover, very soon after this step Gaj and his followers required that Croatian national language had to be accepted as the officialbureaucratic language in Croatia-Slavonia (two provinces under Hungarian political rule). At that time the official language in Croatia and Slavonia was the Latin, but Hungarian magnates required that Hungarian language should be only official language in Croatia and Slavonia.1 Ivan Kukuljevi Sakcinski was the first Croatian politician who openly required (on May 2nd, 1843) an introduction of the Croatian language in the Croatian feudal assembly in Zagreb (the Sabor). However, the Hungarian authorities who prohibited the usage of Latin language by Croatian representatives in Hungarian feudal assembly (the Dieta) rejected this Croatian requirement. Moreover, Hungarian Dieta issued in the same year a conclusion that after the next ten years only Hungarian language could be the official language within the whole territory of the Lands of the Crown of St. Istvn (i.e. historical Hungary from the Carpathian Mountains to the Adriatic Sea) including and Croatia and Slavonia (these two Croatian provinces were parts of Hungary while Dalmatia and Istria have been parts of Austria). This struggle over the language issue in Croatia and Slavonia became the initial bit of fire in Croatias society which very soon lead to political bipolarisation of it into two opposite political parties: narodnjaci (supporters of the Croatian national revival movement and Croatias independence in relation to Hungary) and maaroni
1 B. ulek. Hrvatski ustav. Zagreb, 1883, p. 80.
32
______________________BALCANIA
(pro-Hungarians who required closer links between CroatiaSlavonia and Hungary, i.e. Croatias total incorporation into the state of Hungary).
Population structure of Bosnia-Herzegovina a disputed land between the Serbs and the Croats according to the census of 1991: the Muslims (apropriated by both the Serbs and the Croats as the members of their own nationality) 44%; the Serbs 31%; the Croats 17%; and the Others 8%
The year of 1832 was one of the most important in the history of the Croatian national revival movement. Among other things, in this year Ljudevit Gaj asked the Habsburg autorities for permission to print Croatian national newspaper (hrvatske novine) and wrote in the same year a song Horvatov sloga zjedinjenje, which in the following years became the Croatian anthem. This anthem became popular under the name which was derived from the very beginning of it: Jo Horvatska ni propala, dok mi ivimo. In the same year, the Croatian assembly (the Sabor) elected Franjo Vlai for the Croatian Governor (the Ban) for the period from 1832 to 1840. He chose General Juraj Rukavina for the vice-captain of the Croatian-Slavonian kingdom. On this occasion, Rukavina gave a speech in the Sabor, but unusually not in the Latin, but rather in the Croatian language. An importance of this act is that it was the first speech in the national language in the Croatian Sabor. As it is mentioned above, in 1832 Ivan Derkos printed one of the most influential books of the movement, Genij domovine nad svojim sinovima koji spavaju (Genius patriae...), that was the first cultural and national program of the Illyrian Movement with
33
______________________BALCANIA
the purpose to create a single literal language of the Croats whose literature till that time was mainly written in akavian and kajkavian dialects. Josip Kundek promoted the same idea in his work Rec jezika narodnoga from 1832 where he emphasised the old national glory of the Croats.1 However, the full political program of the movement was framed by the work of count Janko Drakovi in the same year of 1832: Disertatia iliti razgovor, darovan gospodi poklisarom zakonskim i buducem zakonotvorcem kraljevinah nasihThis manuscript was written in tokavian dialect, regardless on the fact that Drakovi was kajkavian speaker (like Ljudevit Gaj) and the work was printed in the city of Karlovac where kajkavian dialect was spoken, but not tokavian. It should be said that the so-called Serbo-Croatian language (official name for the common language of the Serbs and the Croats from the time of both former Yugoslavias) is divided into the three basic dialects according to the form of the interrogative pronoun what: kajkavian (what = kaj), akavian (what = a), and tokavian (what = to). At the time of Illyrian Movement, kajkavian dialect was spoken in the northwestern parts of Croatia proper (around Zagreb and Karlovac), akavian in the northern coast area and the islands of the eastern Adriatic shore (Istrian Peninsula, area around Zadar, Rijeka, Split) and tokavian within the area from Austrian Military Border (presentday in Croatia) in the northwest to ara Mountain (on the border between Kosovo and Macedonia) in the southeast. The tokavian dialect (spoken in Serbia, Montenegro, Bosnia, Herzegovina and biggest part of the present-day Croatia) is divided into three subdialects (ekavian, ijekavian, ikavian) according to the pronunciation of the original Slavic vowel represented by the letter jat.2 Drakovis manuscript anyway became not only an extensive program of the Illyrian Movement, but also and political program of the Croatian people.3 His proposal upon creation of the Greater Illyria (i.e. Greater or united Croatia composed by
1 D. Pavlievi. Povijest Hrvatske. Drugo, izmijenjeno i proireno izdanje. Zagreb, 2000, p. 247. 2 V. Dedijer. History of Yugoslavia. New York, 1975, p. 103; B. Jelavich. History of the Balkans: Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries. Cambridge, 1983, p. 304308. 3 J. idak and co-authors. Hrvatski narodni preporod Ilirski pokret. Zagreb, 1990, p. 210.
34
______________________BALCANIA
Croatia proper, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Austrian Military Border, Dalmatian city of Rijeka, Dalmatia, Slavonia, Montenegro and Slovenia) on the bases of the Crotaian state rights (iura municipalia) became the offical program of the Illyrian Movement. At the same time, Drakovi supported Derkos idea of creation of the common literal language of the Croats, but differently to Derkos count Drakovi proposed only the tokavian dialect (spoken at that time by all Serbs and minority of Croats)1 as the standardazed language of Croatian literature. This language he called Illyrian according to the old Croatian tradition which accepted the Illyrian theory upon Croatian ethno-linguistic origin. This theory is traced back among the Croats to the humanist from Dalmatian city of ibenik, Juraj igori, who wrote a short history of his native city around 1477 (De situ Illyriae et civitate Sibenici). In this work the author undoubtedly stressed that ancient Balkan Illyrians were in fact ancestors of the modern Croats. According to his opinion, St. Jerome, a native from Dalmatia, was a Croat who invented the first Slavic alphabet. A half a century later this igoris idea of Illyrian origin of the Croats and all Slavs was further developed by Dominician friar from Dalmatian island of Hvar, Vinko Pribojevi in his public lecture De origine successibusque Slavorum given in the city of Hvar in 1525 and published in Venice in 1532. For him, Greek philosopher Aristotel, Macedonian King Alexander the Great, Roman Emperors Diocletian and Constantine the Great, St. Jerome, SS. Constantine (Cyril) and Methodius were Illyrians, i.e. the Slavs. At the same time, Pribojevi was the first to claim that three brothers, Czech, Lech, and Rus, were expelled from the Balkans and consequently became the founders of Bohemia and the Czechs, Poland and the Poles and Rus' and the Eastern Slavs. Like Pribojevi, Mauro Orbini, a Benedictine abbot from Dubrovnik who wrote an extensive history of Serbia (and to the lesser extent of Croatia and Bulgaria) under the title Il regno degli Slavi (published in Pesaro in 1601), saw the Slavs everywhere2 and the Illyriansas as the noble Slavic race. For him, the soldiers of Alexander the Great were the Slavs who spoke the same language which is today spoken by the inhabitants of Macedonia. The truth
1 . . O . I. , 2000, p. 324; . . . II. , 2001, p. 321326. 2 A. Schmaus. Vincentius Priboevius, Jahrbcher fr Geschichte Osteuropas. 1953, p. 254.
35
______________________BALCANIA
is that the Muscovite annals state that the Rus' are of the same race as have been the ancient Macedonians. Finally, Orbini advocated the idea that the first Slavic alphabet, called bukvica, i.e. the Glagolitic script (for him the second Slavic script the cyrillic was invented by the saintly brothers from Salonika, Cyril and Methodius), was invented by St. Jerome, who was the Slav, since he was born in Dalmatia.1 Orbini repeated the old Dalmatian tradition that three Balkan Slavic tribes, led by the brothers Czech, Lech and Rus, moved northward and established three new Slavic states, Bohemia (first ruled by Czech), Poland (first ruled by Lech) and Rus' (first ruled by Rus'). For Orbini, modern Czechs, Poles and Russians (i.e. the Eastern Slavs) likewise all South Slavs originated in the Balkan Illyrians. A century later the Croat Pavao Ritter Vitezovi went one step further: he claimed in 1700 and 1701 that all Slavs had a common progenitors in ancient Illyrians who were in fact ethnic Croats.2 Vitezovis main programatic idea upon unification of all Croatia (totius Croatia) became a century later an official political program of the leaders of the Croatian Illyrian Movement.3 It is important that St. Jerome (Hieronimus) from Dalmatia was as well appropriated as a Slav and later on exclusively as a Croat. Consequently, the Latin-language Bible, which was written by St. Jerome and used by all Catholic Slavs in Europe was recognized by Dalmatian Catholics as achievement of the Slavic Croat. Moreover, St. Jerome was unjustifiably proclaimed as an inventor of the oldest Slavic alphabet the Glagolitic one, named as well as Jeromes script and subsequently this alphabet became appropriated by the Croats as their own original and national script that became used and by the other Slavonic peoples.
1 M. Orbini. Kraljevstvo Slovena. Beograd, 1968, p. CXLIICXLIX. 2 Eq. Pavlus Ritter [Pavao Riter Vitezovi]. Croatia rediviva; regnante Leopoldo Magno Caesare. Zagreb, 1700. About historical development of Slavic idea among the Croatian Baroque writers see: J. idak. Poeci politike misli u Hrvata J. Kriani i P. Ritter Vitezovi, Nae teme, 16. 1972; T. Eekman, A. Kadi (eds.). Juraj Kriani (16181683): Russophile and Ecumenic Visionary. The Hague, 1976. 3 Lj. Gaj. Horvatov Szloga y Zjedinjenye, Danicza Horvatska, Slavonska y Dalmatinzka. January 7th, 1935. About the problem of ideas of national identification of the South Slavs from the 16th to the 19th centuries see: I. Banac. The Insignia of Identity: Heraldry and the Growth of National Ideologies Among the South Slavs, Ethnic Studies, Vol. 10. 1993, p. 215 237. About the ideological origins of the Illyrian Movement see: N. Stani (ed.). Hrvatski narodni preporod, 17901848: Hrvatska u vrijeme Ilirskog pokreta. Zagreb, 1985.
36
______________________BALCANIA
This first written Slavic language (named by the scholars as the Old Church Slavonic), and devised in fact by Constantine (Cyril) and Methodius in the middle of the 9th century1, became appropriated by the Croats in the Middle Ages and later on as the Croatian national and indigenous literal language. This belief founded ideological doctrine in the later centuries for claiming that all people (i.e. the Slavs,) who used this language virtually belonged to the Croatian ethnic community. In the late mediaeval times following a popular tradition about St. Jerome he was assumed as spiritual progenitor of the Croatian people who translated Hebrew and Greek holy writings (sacre scripture) to both Latin and Slavonic languages.2 Even the Roman Catholic Church accepted this popular opinion that St. Jerome was a founder of the Slavonic literacy. Derkos and Drakovi promoted tokavian dialect of the Renaissance and Baroque literature of the Republic of Dubrovnik as Croatian onean act which created among the Croats a national conscience upon Dubrovnik cultural heritage as a Croatian one. However, Serbian philologist Branislav Brbori is in opinion that tokavian literature of Dubrovnik belongs to the Serbian cultural heritage as this dialect is national Serbian language, but not Croatian one. According to his research, there are many documents in the Archives of Dubrovnik, which are written in the Latin language where the language of the people of Dubrovnik (tokavian dialect) is named as lingua serviana, but there is no one document in which this language is named as lingua croata.3
1 J. Fine. The Early Mediaeval Balkans. A Critical Survey from the Sixth to the Late Twelfth Century. Ann Arbor, 1994, p. 302. 2 V. tefani. Tisuu i sto godina od moravske misije, Slovo, XIII. 1963, p. 3436. 3 Yugoslav linguist Ranko Bugarski is in oppinion that in sociolinguistic sense the dialects are not a separate languages, but in linguistic sense they are. According to him, a dialect is a language which lost political battle, while language is a dialect which won political battle. In the other words, it is only political decesion if one dialect will be proclaimed as a language. For him, in fact the most important criteria which make a difference between the language and the dialect is a comprehensibility (R. Bugarski. Uvod u optu lingvistiku. Beograd, 1996, p. 238239). Serbian philologist and academic Ljubomir Stojanovi (18601929) was in opinion that around 20% of the South Slavic population can not be exactly classified to one linguisticnational group according to their spoken language because they are speaking mixture of dialects of two languages. Thus, there are transitional zones between the South Slavic languages (. . . , 11-I-1896.
37
______________________BALCANIA
B. Brbori claims further that for centuries the Dubrovnik people had some Serbian national consciousness and that their spoken language was/is Serbian. Among the Dubrovnik inhabitants there was no Croatian ethno-linguistic consciousness before the Illyrian Movement and before the time when Dubrovnik became included into the Catholic Habsburg Monarchy (from 1815).1 In the other words, from the time of Illyrian Movement the process of Croatization of Dubrovnik, backed by the Habsburg authority, started.2 Consequently, all Catholic Serbs from Dubrovnik became national Croats whose language was proclaimed by the leaders of the Illyrian Movement as Croatian language of tokavian dialect.3 Therefore, after 1830 the Croatian national workers considered the people from Dubrovnik exclusively as the Croats and Dubrovnik history and culture as the Croat one. As a result, from 1869 onwards it was published in Zagreb an edition of Stari pisci hrvatski (Old Croatian Writers) including and many Dubrovnik writers. This edition was criticized by the Serbs as a Croatian attempt to appropriate the Serbian cultural heritage of Dubrovnik with the final political aim to include the territory of Dubrovnik, which never was a part of Croatia, into united Croatian national state (what happened for the first time in 1941 and was verified in 1945). Two of the most fervent defenders of the Serbian character of Dubrovnik against the claims of the leaders of the Illyrian Movement that this city-state belongs to the Croatian history and cultural heritage were Serb Catholic, philologist, from Dubrovnik, Milan Reetar (18601942) and Serbian Orthodox priest, Dimitrije Ruvarac (18421931). M. Reetar concluded, after the extensive research in the Archives of Dubrovnik and as person who very well knew Dubrovnik literature, that: a) the people from Dubrovnik were and are the ethnic Serbs; b) their spoken and literal language is Serbian because they were speaking and mainly writing in tokavian
1 . . . , II. , 2001, p. 4344, 68. 2 About the genesis of the idea of Serbian national identity among the Catholic intelligentsia of Dubrovnik and Dalmatia in the 19th century see: I. Banac. The Confessional Rule and the Dubrovnik Exception: The Origins of the Serb-Catholic Circle in Nineteenth-Century Dalmatia, Slavic Review. American Quarterly of Soviet and East European Studies, Vol. 42, 3. Fall 1983. 3 . . . , 1997, p. 1341, 412 426, 466476.
38
______________________BALCANIA
dialect;1 c) the Dubrovnik citizens, however, did not feel themselves as the Serbs because for them the ethnic name Serbian was relating only to those who lived in Serbian state: as Dubrovnik never was included into Serbia for that reason the Dubrovnik people did not call themselves as the Serbians; d) they, however, did not call themselves as Croats as well as; e) usually the Dubrovnik people understood themselves as Dubrovani, i.e. as the citizens of the Republic of Dubrovnik; f) the Serbs and the Croats do not speak the same (Serbo-Croatian/Croatian or Serbian) language; g) Serbs and Croats are two different peoples.2 D. Ruvarac claimed that after Slavic migrations to the Balkans at the end of the 6th c. the Latin municipality (city) of Ragusium became Serbianized and as a consequence of this process the city changed its name into Slavic-Serbian Dubrovnik. He refuted as well Croatian claims advocated by the leaders of the Illyrian Movement that all inhabitants of Croatia, Dalmatia, Dubrovnik and Slavonia can be only ethnolinguistic Croats regardless on religion. However, Ruvarac had an opinion that
1 The spoken language of the people from Dubrovnik was always tokavian dialect, but their literature was written in four languages: Latin, Italian, akavian dialect, and tokavian dialect. The last two were domestic languages. akavian dialect was used till mid-15th century as the most fashionable literal language in the whole Dalmatia besides the Italian and Latin ones. However, from the mid-15th century the writers from Dubrovnik mainly wrote in tokavian dialect which became the language in which the most glorious Dubrovnik literature (the period of Baroque) was written. According to the most critics of the Slavic literature, probably, the tokavian Baroque literature of Dubrovnik gave the best examples of the Slavic Baroque literature. 2 M. . A . , 1894; . . , , 50 1940; M. Reetar. Die Ragusanischen Urkunden des XIIIXV. Jahrhunderts, Archiv fr slawische Philologie; M. Reetar. Die akavtina un deren einstige und jetzige Grenzen, Archiv fr slawische Philologie. 1891. However, during the time of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia (19181941) Reetar corrected his stand upon the Serbs and the Croats and their languages. Namely, under the strong influence of the official policy of the integral Yugoslavism Reetar became advocate of the idea that the Serbs and the Croats have been and are speaking the same language, and therefore they belong to the same people who just has two different names (see: . . . , 1930). Nevertheless, Reetar two years before died returned to his original idea that the Serbs and the Croats are two different peoples who spoke two different languages and that Dubrovnik literal heritage is definitelly Serbian but not Croatian one.
39
______________________BALCANIA
tokavian dialect is only Serbian national language which was spoken in Serbia, Dubrovnik, Slavonia, Dalmatia, Montenegro and part of Croatia by the Orthodox, Catholic and Muslim believers. Especially he refuted Croatian idea that Slavonia (the region between the rivers of Sava and Drava today included into the Republic of Croatia) is a part of Croatia because historically it was all the time a separate province with separate provincial name whose inhabitants were speaking Slavonian language (i.e. tokavian dialect), as it is recorded in many historical documents. However, the Illyrian Movement proclaimed that the Croatian people and language (i.e. kajkavian dialect which was spoken in Northwestern Croatia only by the Catholics) and the Slavonian people and language (i.e. tokavian dialect which was spoken in Slavonia by both the Orthodox and the Catholics) as one CroatoSlavonian people and language, which was very soon called by Croatian philologists as only Croatian people and language. Thus, Slavonians and Slavonian language became Croats who spoke Croatian language. For Ruvarac, the same strategy was implied by the Croatian Illyrians in the case of Dubrovnik people and their our or Slavic language (how they usually called their language). The final consequenses of such politics by the leaders of the Illyrian Movement was Croatization of Slavonia and Dubrovnik. D. Ruvaracs stands can be summarized into three points: 1. The Serbs are all South Slavs whose mother tongue is tokavian dialect regardless on their religion; 2. The Serbian and the Croatian languages, regardless on the fact that they are similar, are two separate languages; and 3. The Croats are speaking kajkavian and akavian languages (i.e. dialects), but not tokavian one.1 In fact, it should be stressed that according to the leading Slavic philologists from the end of the 18th century and the beginning of the 19th century (Serb Dositej Obradovi 17381811; Czech Pavel Josef afaik 17951861; Czech Josef Dobrovsk 17531829; Slovene Jernej Kopitar 17801844; and Slovene Franc Mikloi 18131891), whose works are historical source for that period, genuine Croatian national language was only akavian while kajkavian was originally only Slovenian national language, but in the course of time kajkavian speakers who lived in Croatia
1 . . , ! , 1895. This book is important because the author is dealing with ethnolinguistic division between the Serbs and the Croats.
40
______________________BALCANIA
accepted Croatian national feeling.1 All opponents of political ideology and national program of the Illyrian Movement (the Serbs and the Slovenes), concluded that the thesis of the Illyrian Movement that the Croats are speaking three languages (i.e. kajkavian, akavian and tokavian) should be refuted as wrong because the leading principle in the whole Europe from the end of the 18th c. onwards was/is that one nation can speak only one language, but not several of them.2
The Ottoman Empire and the Reliquiae reliquiarum of Croatia in 1683
Undoubtedly, I. Derkos and J. Drakovis works and patriotism framed the basic idea for requirement by the leaders of the Illyrian Movement: the political and cultural unification of all
1 . . , . , 1783; P. J. afaik. Slowansky narodopis. Praha, 1842; P. J. afaik. Serbische Lesekrner. Pest, 1833; P. J. afaik. Geschichte der slawischen Sprache und Literatur nach allen Mundarten. Buda, 1826; J. Dobrovsk. Geschichte der bhmische Sprache und Literatur. Wien, 1792/1818; J. Kopitar. Serbica. Beograd, 1984 (reprinted sellected works); J. Kopitar. Patriotske fantazije jednog Slovena, Vaterlndische Blter. 1810; F. Mikloi. Serbisch und chorvatisch, Vergleichende Gramatik der slawischen Sprachen. Wien, 1852/1879. 2 For instance: A. . , , ?, , 24, 25, 26. 1839; . . . , 1840.
41
______________________BALCANIA
Croatian lands. However, this idea was inspired by the work of Croatian nobleman and professional writer of German origin, Pavao Ritter Vitezovi (16521713) who was the first among the Croats who advocated the concept of political unification of historical and ethnolinguistic Croatia and promoted the idea that ancient Balkan people the Illyrians, who lived in the central and western parts of the Peninsula at the time of ancient Greeks and Romans, were the real ancestors of modern Croats and moreover of all Slavs. In the other words, he championed an idea that the Croats are descendents of ancient Balkan Illyrians and that all Slavs originated in the Croats. His ethnonational formula was: Illyrian = Croat = Slav. Vitezovi devided the whole world into six ethnolinguistic, historical, cultural and geographical areas, civilizations and cultures: I) Germania, which embraced the whole Germanspeaking world: Holy Roman Empire of German Nation headed by Austria, Kingdom of Sweden (Sweden, Norway, Finland), Denmark, East Prussia, Curonian Isthmus (Kuri neria) with Curonian Bay or Courish Lagoon (Kuri Marios), Memel (Klaipda). However, Angliae regnum (Scotland, England, Wales, and Ireland) was included into Germania as well; II) Italia cum parte Greciae (Italy with the part of Greece) referred to the Apenninian Peninsula, Corsica, Sardinia, Sicily, Attica, Peloponnesus (Morea) and the main number of Aegean and Ionian islands, Malta and Crete; III) Illyricum that was the whole Balkans (except Attica and Peloponnesus with the adjoining islands), Wallachia (Dacia and Cumania), Transylvania and Hungary; IV) Hispania, which was composed by Spain and Portugal and their European possessions and overseas colonies in Africa, Asia, Latin America with Florida and California; V) Sarmatia that was the whole territories of PolishLithuanian Commonwealth (the Republic of Two Nations) with Moldavia and Muscovy (i.e. the Russian Empire); and
42
______________________BALCANIA
VI) Gallia that was France.1 The real ideological source for such a division of the whole world was the Slavic idea that decisively influenced Vitezovi who recognized that all Slavs belonged to a single ethnolinguistic community. Nevertheless, this idea of Pan-Slavism was methamorphosed by him eleven years later into the idea of PanCroatianism and the Greater Croatia. In fact, Vitezovi claimed that all Slavs are the Illyrians who were autochtonous inhabitats of the Balkan Illyricum. However, for him it was clear that ancient Illyrians in fact have been modern Croats and the ancestors of all Slavs. This ideology of Croatian-Slavic ethnogenesis Vitezovi developed in his work Croatia redivivathat was an outline for more ambitious general history of the Croats and Croatia, i.e. the entire Slavic population. In this work Vitezovi devided total territory of ethnic-historical-linguistic Croatia into two parts: I) Croatia Septemtrionalis (Northern Croatia); and II) Croatia Meridionalis (Southern Croatia). The boundary between them was the Danube River. The Northern Croatia encompassed the entire territories of Bohemia, Moravia, Lusatia (uica or uyca in Eastern Saxony and Southern Brandenburg), Hungary, Transylvania, Wallachia, Muscovy, Poland and Lithuania.2 The people who were living in Northern Croatia were divided into two groups: Northwestern Croats, called the Venedicos (Wends) and Northeastern Croats, named as the Sarmaticos (Sarmatians). The Wends consisted of the Czechs, Moravians, and Sorbs (Sorabi who lived in Lusatia), whereas the Sarmatians were living in Muscovy, Lithuania and Poland,3 i.e. have been the Rus', Lithuanians and Poles. Vitezovi found that ancestors of all Northern Croats Wends and Sarmatians were the White Croats (Belohrobatoi from the Byzantine historical sources) who lived in the early Middle Ages around the upper Dnester River and upper Vistula River, i.e. Galicia and Little Poland. Traditional name from the sources for White Croatia was the Greater Croatia or the Ancient Croatia. In the time of Vitezovis writing of Croatia redivivathis
1 P. E. Ritter. Anagrammaton, sive Laurus auxiliatoribus Ungariae liber secundus. Vienna, 1689, p. 69117. 2 P. Ritter. Croatia rediviva: Regnante Leopoldo Magno Caesare. Zagreb, 1700, p. 10. 3 P. Ritter. Croatia rediviva: Regnante Leopoldo Magno Caesare. Zagreb, 1700, p. 10.
43
______________________BALCANIA
territory was integral part of the Republic of Two Nations (PolishLithuanian Commonwealth). The Southern Croatia, or Illyricum (the Balkans), was subdivided into two parts: I) Croatia Alba (White Croatia). II) Croatia Rubea (Red Croatia). Croatia Alba was composed by Croatia Maritima (central and maritime Montenegro, Dalmatia and the Eastern Istria), Croatia Mediterranea (Croatia proper and Bosnia-Herzegovina), Crotia Alpestris (Slovenia and Western Istria) and Croatia Interamnia (Slavonia with part of Pannonia). Croatia Rubea consisted of Serbia, the northeastern Montenegro, Bulgaria, Macedonia, Epirus, Albania, Thessaly and Odrysia (Thrace).1 There have been Vitezovis frontiers of limites totius Croatiae (all Croatia) settled by the ethnolinguistic Croats.2 However, Vitezovi recognized that his Greater Croatia and PanCroatian national identity was not a unified whole. In the other words, he acknowledged differences in borders, names, emblems, and customs: cum propriis tamen singularum limitibus etymo, Insignibus, rebusque ac magis memorabilibus populi moribus.3 After all, he believed that these distinctions were of less importance than the common Croatian nationhood of all of these peoples and lands. His apotheosis of the common Croat name especially for all South Slavs (the Illyrians) with regional and historic differences was expressed in Vitezovis heraldic manual Stemmatographiawhere he presented all Croatian historical and ethnolinguistic lands in the Southeastern Europe like Serbia, Bulgaria, Romania, etc.4
1 P. Ritter. Croatia rediviva: Regnante Leopoldo Magno Caesare. Zagreb, 1700, p. 32. 2 P. R. Vitezovi. Mappa Generalis Regni Croatiae Totius. Limitibus suis Antiquis, videlicet, a Ludovici, Regis Hungariae, Diplomatibus, comprobatis, determinati, 1:550 000 (drawing in color), 69,4 x 46,4 cm. Croatian State Archives, Cartographic Collection, D I. Zagreb, 1699. 3 P. Ritter. Croatia rediviva: Regnante Leopoldo Magno Caesare. Zagreb, 1700, p. 32; P. Ritter. Stemmatographia, sive Armorum Illyricorum delineatio, descriptio et restitutio. Vienna, 1701. 4 P. Ritter. Croatia rediviva: Regnante Leopoldo Magno Caesare. Zagreb, 1700, p. 32; P. Ritter. Stemmatographia, sive Armorum Illyricorum delineatio, descriptio et restitutio. Vienna, 1701; I. Banac. The Insignia of
44
______________________BALCANIA
A flag of the Triune Kingdom (Dalmatia, Croatia and Slavonia from 1868 to 1918)
THE POLICY OF LANGUAGE AND POLITICAL PARTIES IN CROATIA TILL THE PROHIBITION OF THE ILLYRIAN NAME (1843) During the years 18321836 the Hungarian assembly (Dieta) hold its sessions in Pozsony (Bratislava, Pressburg), where the Croatian deputies, particularly count J. Drakovi, fought for introduction of the national language in Croatia instead of the Latin or Hungarian, as well as for the Croatian state-historical rights (the so-called Croatian pravice). At the same time, in 1834 Ljudevit Gaj received permission by the Habsburg-Austrian Emperor Francis I (18061835) to publish the first political newspaper in Croatia in Croatian language (i.e. in kajkavian dialect) as a consequence of the Slavic awakening within the Habsburg Monarchy.1 With the great support by Ljudevit Vukotinovi,2 Vjekoslav Babuki, Antun Maurani, Dragutin
Identity: Heraldry and the Growth of National Ideologies Among the South Slavs, Ethnic Studies, Vol. 10. 1993, p. 223227. 1 About national awakening of the Slavs in Austia in the first half of the 19th c. see: J. Brenger. A History of the Habsburg Empire 17001918. London and New York, 1997, p. 145147. 2 By ethnic origin he was a Hungarian from Croatia whose original surname was Farkas what means in Hungarian wolf. During the first years of the Illyrian Movement he translated his surname into Croatian Vukotinovi (vuk = wolf). The same happened with the most famous Croatian composer at that
45
______________________BALCANIA
Rakovac and Pavao toos, the first political national newspaper in Croatia was printed in Zagreb on January 6th, 1835 with the title Novine horvatzke. The magazine Danicza Horvatzka, Slavonska y Dalmatinzka was printed as a supplement to this newspaper with a motto People without nationality is like the body without bones. Both the newspaper and the magazine were printed in kajkavian dialect, what was a native language of the people from Zagreb likewise and of Ljudevit Gaj himself as well. In Daniza it was printed in kajkavian dialect on March 14th, 1835 (Dana 14. Szusheza 1835) in 10 the song Horvatska domovina, written by the poet and diplomat Antun Mihanovi, which became from 1891 the national anthem of the Croats under the name Lijepa naa (according to the first words: Lpa naa domovino, ).1 However, Ljudevit Gaj and his followers (among them the most influential vas Ivan Maurani whose mother tongue was akavian dialect) decided in 1836 to print both the Novine horvatzke and the Danicza in tokavian dialect, but under a new names the Ilirske narodne novine and Danica ilirska and a new orthography which was similar to the Serbian orthography at that time which was reformed by the most important Serbian philologist and language reformer Vuk Stefanovi Karadi (17871864). The first number of renamed newspaper and magazin was printed on January 8th, 1836. Officially, Illyrian name was chosen in order to spread these two editions in Slavonia, Bosnia, Herzegovina, Dubrovnik, Serbia and Slovenia2 for the purpose of cultural-linguistic unification of all South Slavs,3 but in fact, according to the Serbian philology from our days, for the purpose to Croatize all South Slavs.4 Undoubtedly, Croatian historiography from our days claims that the names Illyrian and Croat were only synonyms for Ljudevit Gaj.5
time Vatroslav Lisinski. His original familyname was Fuchs what is in German fox. However, he adopted Croatian translation of his original familyname Lisinski (lisica = fox) (I. Peri. Povijest Hrvata. Zagreb, 1997, p. 162. 1 D. Pavlievi. Povijest Hrvatske. Drugo, izmijenjeno i proireno izdanje. Zagreb, 2000, p. 248249. 2 D. Pavlievi. Povijest Hrvatske. Drugo, izmijenjeno i proireno izdanje. Zagreb, 2000, p. 250251. 3 G. M. Hrvatski jezik, Narodne novine. Zagreb, 1857, 241. 4 . . . , 1997, p. 2830. 5 D. Pavlievi. Povijest Hrvatske. Drugo, izmijenjeno i proireno izdanje. Zagreb, 2000, p. 250251; I. Peri. Povijest Hrvata. Zagreb, 1997, p. 157 159.
46
______________________BALCANIA
A Greater Croatia in Titoist Socialis Yugoslavia, 19451991
In the Yugoslav historiography (19181941; 19451991) Lj. Gajs decision to take Illyrian name and to chose tokavian dialect for Croatian national revival movement was explained by his wish to culturally and even politically unite all South Slavs believing that this was an ancient common name for all South Slavs, because he and the rest of the leaders of the Illyrian Movement considered the ancient Balkan Illyrians (or the Illyrs) as the South Slavic and even Slavic ancestors. However, this decision had very much deeper roots and totally different purposes than it was officially presented before. The fact is that Gaj chose the Serbian literal language for the literal language of the Croats. Gaj by himself recognized that the Croatian
47
______________________BALCANIA
leaders of the national revival movement accepted the Serbian literal language, which was reformed by Vuk Stefanovi Karadi, for the literal language of the Croats.1 However, the crucial difference between Karadis and Gajs reforms of their own national literal languages was that Karadi chose his own mother tongue, ijekavian subdialect of tokavian dialect, which was spoken at that time in the Eastern Herzegovina, Dubrovnik, Western Serbia etc., for the literal language of the Serbs. Nevertheless, Gajs mother tongue, as the language of Zagreb area, was not ijekavian subdialect of tokavian dialect, but it was kajkavian dialect. The Yugoslav philologist and linguist, Pavle Ivi, claimed that at the time of Gaj and Karadi within the territory of Croatia's post-1945 borders only the ethnic Serbs spoke ijekavian subdialect of tokavian dialect, and that among all Catholics of Serbo-Croatian language there was only 10% of those who spoke ijekavian.2 He also was in opinion that Croatian name started to be spread among the kajkavian speakers only from the second half of the 17th century.3 Among other specialists in Slavic philology, the German linguist A. Leskien and the Czech philologist P. J. afaik decisively claimed that only akavian dialect could be considered as national language of the Croats.4 The first specialists in the Slavic linguistics reduced at such a way Croatian national territory to the area of the akavian dialect what practically means to Istria, part of the Eastern Adriatic littoral and the Northern Adriatic islands. afaik advocated that there were only 801,000 ethnic Croats; by contrast, there were 1,151,000 Slovenes and 5,294,000 Serbs. The
1 Lj. Gaj. ije je kolo?, Danica ilirska, 31. Zagreb, 1846. 2 . . . , 1971, p. 186. 3 . . . , , 1990, p. 10. 4 A. Leskien. Grammatik der Serbo-kroatischen Sprache. 1. Teil. Lautlehre, Stammbildung, Formenlehre. Heidelberg, 1914. P. J. afaik in his work Slowansky narodopis. Praha, 1842 (reprinted in 1955) on pages 146147 named the language of Dalmatia as Serbian language. This opinion was severely criticized by Vjekoslav Babuki, one of the most prominent leaders of the Illyrian movement, who named the language of both Croatia and Dalmatia as horvatski (V. Babuki to P. J. afaik. Zagreb, 1842, National and university library in Zagreb, R 3992a).
48
______________________BALCANIA
Serbs were composed by 2,880,000 Orthodox population, 1,864,000 Catholics, and 550,000 Muslims.1 In the bigger Croatian cities (Zagreb, Varadin, Karlovac) there were founded many of Illyrian libraries between 1838 and 1842 as the seeds for the further spreading of the Illyrian Movement and the Croatian national ideology. The most important of them was the library which was opened in Zagreb. In this library as the most important cultural-national institution of the Croats in the 19th c. was established in 1842 the Matica ilirska, renamed in 1850 into Matica hrvatska as a society for publishing of literal and scientific works. In the summer of 1838 in the ancient theatre on the Marks square in Zagreb it was held the first great Illyrian concert with a speech given by Ivan Maurani. It was until that time the greatest Illyrian manifestation and celebration of national history and traditions. In the next year in the Hungarian assembly in Bratislava occurred one very important event for the final achievement of the national goals of the Croats proclaimed by the leaders of the Illyrian Movement. Namely, the Croatian deputy in the Hungarian Dieta, Herman Buzan, decisively emphasised that the Latin language is going to be surely replaced by the national language in Croatia in one day. It was the first official statement by the Croats in the Hungarian feudal assembly, which obviously indicated that introduction of the Croatian language as an official language in Croatia instead of the Latin one, was one of the furthermost political aims of the Croatian national leadership. In the same year the bishop of Zagreb and Croatian, Ban from 1838 to 1842, Slovak Juraj Haulik, proposed in the Hungarian Dieta that the Croatian language should become an official language of instructions in all High Schools (Gymnasiums) in Croatia, but also in the Orthodox (Serbian) Academy in Zagreb.2 Such proposal was in fact against Hungarian intentions to introduce the Hungarian language as official one in Croatia and Slavonia, but as well against the Serbian wishes that the language of instruction in the Serbian religious schools in Croatia and Slavonia, and especially in the Serbian Orthodox Academy in Zagreb, will be the Serbian language. This statement became soon transformed into an official political requirement by the Illyrian Movement: in 1840 the Croatian
1 P. J. afaik. Slowansky narodopis. Praha, 1955 (reprinted from 1842), p. 144150; I. Banac. The National Question in Yugoslavia. Origins, History, Politics. Ithaca and London, 1993, p. 8082. 2 I. Peri. Povijest Hrvata. Zagreb, 1997, p. 163.
49
______________________BALCANIA
feudal assembly (an assembly of the nobles) applied to the Habsburg Emperor Ferdinand V (18351848) requiring introduction of the pure national language (i.e. the Croatian one) in the Croatian secondary schools, as well as in Zagreb Academia, as an official language of instruction. In general, such Croatian requirements, on one hand made stronger Croatian national consciousness, but on the other hand definitely alienated the Serbs, and also the Slovenes, from the Illyrian Movement because both of them understood the movement only as the ideological-political instrument for realisation of the idea of the Greater Croatia. Especially the Serbs were not willing to replace their own national name by accepting the Illyrian name as the common name for all South Slavs. In fact, they realised that the main intention of the Illyrian Movement was to impose the Illyrian national name over all of those South Slavs who did not have still a separate national feelings, and later on just to replace the use of the Illyrian national name with the Croatian national one. For that reason, the Croatian leadership of the Illyrian Movement advocated an idea that the Croats and the Serbs had the same (i.e. one common) national language (the Croato-Serbian or the Illyrian one), which was in fact the tokavian dialect. However, from the mid-19th century an outstanding Croatian philologist Vatroslav Jagi (18381923) advocated an idea that the common Croato-Serbian language has two variants: 1. The Croatian tokavian, which was spoken and written in Latin alphabet by all Catholic tokavian South Slavs; and 2. The Serbian tokavian, which was spoken and written in Cyrillic alphabet by all tokavian Orthodox South Slavs. Consequently, all tokavian literal heritage written in the Latin alphabet, like in the Catholic Dubrovnik, Western Herzegovina and Slavonia, is proclaimed as Croatian one.1 The Serbian intellectuals, primarily philologists, reacted on these claims with the theory that all tokavian speaking population of the South Slavs and the literature written by them are only Serbian, but not Croatian. In the other words, all tokavian
1 V. Jagi. Izabrani krai spisi. Zagreb, 1948, p. 1998; V. Jagi. Djela. Zagreb, 1953.
50
______________________BALCANIA
population in the Balkans, regardless that they were of Orthodox, Catholic and Muslim religion, were in fact the ethnic Serbs.1 The beginning of a modern political life in the present-day Croatia started with the creation of the first political party in 1841. It was the Horvatso-ugarska stranka (Croatian-Hungarian Party), whose members and supporters had the pejorative nickname as maaroni, which was given by the members of the Illyrian Movement. An idea to create this party was born in 1839 with the purpose to oppose an ideological-political activity of the Illyrian Movement. The main number of the maaroni left the Illyrian libraries in Croatia until the summer of 1841. They established in Zagreb their own political-cultural club the Casino, as a forerunner of the later established the CroatianHungarian Party. The maaroni were requiring that the kajkavian dialect of Zagreb area had to be proclaimed as the official national and literal language of the Croats (as a real Croatian national language), but not the tokavian dialect (as a genuine Serbian national language) as the Illyrian Movement insisted. Obviously, the maaroni saw the tokavian dialect as the only Serbian ethnonational language, but not and as Croatian one. Furthermore, an important element of the political program of the maaroni was that Hungarian language will be proclaimed as an official administrative language in Croatia and Slavonia.2 The Croatian-Hungarian Party was organised exclusively against the Illyrian Movement and its political program. Particularly the Illyrian name was denied, as the name which had no any link with the national name of the Croatian people. The leadership of the Croatian-Hungarian Party fought for the national Croatian name instead of the artificial Illyrian one.3 However, on the other hand, the party fought for as stronger as political, economic and cultural relations between Croatia-Slavonia
1 For instance: . . . , , , 1. , 1849, p. 127; . . . , , LII. , 1896. See more about this problem in: V. B. Sotirovi. Nineteenth-century ideas of Serbian linguistic nationhood and statehood, Slavistica Vilnensis, Kalbotyra, Vol. 49, 2. Vilnius, 2000, p. 724. 2 J. idak and co-authors. Hrvatski narodni preporod Ilirski pokret. Zagreb, 1990, p. 134138; D. Pavlievi. Povijest Hrvatske. Drugo, izmijenjeno i proireno izdanje. Zagreb, 2000, p. 252. 3 J. Horvat. Politika povjest Hrvatske, vol. I. Zagreb, 1990, p. 7376.
51
______________________BALCANIA
and Hungary. This political party opposed the idea of the leaders of the Illyrian Movement to create the Greater Croatia which would have a special political status within the historical Hungary as the political-territorial corpus separatus with a protected and recognized special historical-political rights. The leadership of the Croatian-Hungarian Party was supported by the Hungarian parliamentary opposition in order to spread the idea of the Greater Hungary (from the Carpathian Mountains to the Adriatic Sea). In order to attract a higher popularity among the Croats the members of the party presented themselves as the ancient Croats. They mainly were supported by the petty peasant nobility, particularly from Turopolje area that is a part of Croatia around the Sava River. Initially, the political fight between the Croatian-Hungarian Party and the Illyrian Movement took place in the district assemblies (upanijske skuptine), but very soon this political struggle infected the Croatian feudal assembly (the Sabor) too. According to the Croatian historian Josip Horvat, the Croatian-Hungarian Party basically was founded by the Hungarian liberals who have been led by the outstanding Hungarian politician and national worker, Ferenc Deak. The main number of the members of this party was coming from the circle of the Croatian conservatives: for instance, it was the case with the party leaders like Aleksandar Drakovi, Aleksandar Erddy, barons Levin and Juraj Rauch, or Daniel Josipovi. All of them were united under the idea to struggle against the Illyrianism.1 Their crucial political justification for the fight against the Illyrian Movement was that the Illyrianism with its own political ideology and a program led Croatia and Slavonia either to the hands of Vienna or Moscow. In the first case, the whole Croatia and Slavonia would be transformed into the Military Border, which was governed directly by the Austrian supreme military authorities. In the second case, Croatia and Slavonia would become a part of the Russian Pan-Slavic empire rulled by the Russian Emperor. In both cases Croatia and Slavonia will be politically, economically and administratively separated from Hungary. That was the main reason for the requirement by the maaroni for as stronger as political relations between CroatiaSlavonia and Hungary, and for as faster as spreading of the Hungarian idea in Croatia-Slavonia and the city of Rijeka (Fiume).
1 J. . . , 1939, p. 65.
52
______________________BALCANIA
At the end of 1841 the Illyrian Movement founded its own political organisation: the Illyrian Party. The party, however, changed the name in 1843 into the Narodna stranka (i.e., in fact, Croatian national party). The change of the name was in accordance to the official program of the movement: politicaladministrative unification of all Croatian lands together with cultural unification of the South Slavs.1 The main political aim of the party was to struggle against the maaronis intentions to firmly include Croatia-Slavonia into Hungary and to Magyarize Croatia-Slavonia in the linguistic-cultural sense. The political program of the Illyrian Party was the same as of the Illyrian Movement: 1) to unite all Croatian lands into one state (the Greater Croatia), which would enjoy full autonomous status in relation to the Hungarian central government in Pest; and 2) to spread idea of cultural community of all South Slavs.2 Among the ilirci, who were named by the maaroni after 1843 as the narodnjaci (i.e. popolari), have been and some members from the noble strata. However, the strongest social base for the Illyrian Party was the bourgeoisie and intelligentsia which were basically the main supporters of the partys economic program and the linguistic policy. One of the most significant achievements by the illirci was an establishment of the Matica Ilirska in Zagreb in 1842 as the most important and representative national institution among the Croats. In the same year, Dragutin Rakovac issued the Mali katekizam za velike ljude in which he required usage of the national language, printing Croatian national literature, education in the Croatian language and the preservation of the Croatian state-historical (municipal) rights. The Illyrian adherent Ivan Svear printed in 1842 the first historical book written in the Croatian language with the title Ogledalo Ilirijuma (the "Illyrian mirror"). The first and one of the most important political struggles between the Illyrian Party and the Croatian-Hungarian Party occurred in the municipal assembly of the city of Varadin in 1841. During the session of the assembly, the leader of the CroatianHungarian Party, count Ivan Erddy proposed that the Croatian deputies for the Hungarian Dieta in Bratislava should be appointed by Hungarian authorities, but not by the Croatian Sabor
1 Ljudevit Farka wrote in his book Ilirizam i Croatizam in 1842 that Croatian political life is in Croatism, while Croatian cultural life is in Illyrism. 2 J. Horvat. Ljudevit Gaj - njegov ivot, njegovo doba. Zagreb, 1975, p. 179 185.
53
______________________BALCANIA
in Zagreb. In the case that such proposal would be accepted, Croatia-Slavonia will lose any autonomy within Hungary. However, this proposal did not pass mainly thanks to Matelo Oegovi who was from the Illyrian Party and who succeeded to convince the other deputies of the assembly that this proposal basically would nullify Croatian state-historical rights. After this political episode, the political fights in Croatia became intensified, particularly in Zagreb, until the prohibition of the use of the Illyrian name in 1843 by the Emperor.1 THE ILLYRIAN MOVEMENT UNTIL THE VICTORY OF THE NATIONAL LANGUAGE (1847) The Austrian Emperor, Ferdinand V (18351848), on January 11th, 1843 issued the order of prohibition of the using of the Illyrian name and the Illyrian coat of arms. The prohibition was officially justified with the explanation that such a measure was necessary for the purpose to restrain further political fight and attacks from the Illyrian Party against the maaroni and the Hungarians in Croatia and Slavonia. The Ottoman authorities required as well by the Habsburg Emperor to forbid the use of Illyrian name and to dissolute the Illyrian Party, because Croatian ilirci have been preparing Christian uprising in Bosnia and Herzegovia against the Ottoman government for the purpose to separate this province from Turkey and to include it into the united Croatia. The leaders of the Illyrian Party in order to continue their political struggle against the maaroni decided to change the party name into the Peoples Party. However, after 1843, the Illyrian name was gradually more and more replaced with the Croatian national name. Before that time the Croatian name was used only in a part of Croatia where the kajkavian dialect was spoken, but after 1843 the Croatian name was more and more spread in Slavonia, Dalmatia and parts of Bosnia and Herzegovina where akavian and tokavian dialects were spoken by the South Slavic Roman Catholics who used the Latin alphabet for the writing. In the course of time their national name became the Croatian one.2
1 J. Horvat. Politika povjest Hrvatske, vol. I. Zagreb, 1990, p. 6263. 2 . . . , 1997, p. 2830; J. Horvat. Politika povjest Hrvatske, vol. I. Zagreb, 1990, p. 7980; T. Macan. Povjest Hrvatskog naroda. Zagreb, 1992, p. 254.
54
______________________BALCANIA
The leadership of the Illyrian Party decided to change the name of its partys newspaper into the Narodne novine (the Peoples newspaper), which are still printed today under this name as an official herald of the Republic of Croatia.1 However, this newspaper became once again renamed on March 20th, 1844 into the Novine horvatsko-slavonsko-dalmatinske (the CroatianSlavonian-Dalmatian Newspaper) likewise its journal into the Danica horvatska, slavonska i dalmatinska (the CroatianSlavonian-Dalmatian Morning Star). One of the most crucial moments in deterioration of Croatian-Hungarian relations occurred on May 2nd, 1843 when in the Croatian Sabor was given the first deputys speech in the Croatian language by Ivan Kukuljevi who required that Croatian national language should become official one in Croatia and Slavonia. This requirement was pointed against Magyarization of Croatia and Slavonia likewise the requirement by the Croatian representatives in Hungarian Dieta in Bratislava in the years 1843 and 1844 to speak in Dieta in Latin language, but not in Hungarian one. However, their requirement after a long discussion was rejected by the Hungarian deputies in Dieta, what became the crucial reason for Croatian representatives to boycott the further sessions of the assembly. After they left the Dieta, the same assembly made a conclusion that Hungarian language had to be introduced in Croatia and Slavonia within the next ten years. Nevertheless, this decision was not recognised by the Hungarian King (who was at the same time and the Austrian Emperor) and therefore it did not receive a legal confirmation.2 The Illyrian Movement, now under the new name, achieved a great success in Dalmatia in 1844 when the newspaper Zora dalmatinska (the Dalmatian Dawn) started to be published in the city of Zadar. Its editor and publisher, Ante Kuzmani, chose ikavian sub-dialect of tokavian dialect, for the language of his newspaper, but not ijekavian sub-dialect in which the Serbian literal journal in Dalmatia was published already from 1838 in the city of Zadar under the title - (the Serbian-Dalmatian Journal), edited by Boidar Petranovi. In fact, Ante Kuzmani recognized the ijekavian sub-dialect as the
1 D. Pavlievi. Povijest Hrvatske. Drugo, izmijenjeno i proireno izdanje. Zagreb, 2000, p. 253. 2 J. idak and co-authors. Hrvatski narodni preporod Ilirski pokret. Zagreb, 1990, p. 156160; M. icer. Riznica Ilirska 18351885. Zagreb, Ljubljana, 1985, p. 187190.
55
______________________BALCANIA
Serbian national language (in which the best examples of Dubrovnik literature from the mid-15th century were written), while the ikavian he considered as the national language of the Croats. In any case, the publishing of Zora dalmatinska marked the beginning of spreading of the ideas of the Illyrian Movement in Dalmatia and later on Croatian national ideology in this multiethnic, multilingual and multiconfessional province. In the same year (1844) it occurred another important cultural event in Croatia related to the spreading of the Croatian national consciousness among the South Slavic Roman Catholics of tokavian dialect. In that year the Matica hrvatska, the crucial cultural institution of the Croatian national revival movement, published the best work of Dubrovnik epic Baroque literature the Osman of Ivan (Divo) Gunduli (15891638) with comments written by Ivan Maurani. This epic work was published in the original language in which it was written ijekavian sub-dialect of tokavian dialect. Subsequently, the leaders of the movement emphasized the Croatian national character of Dubrovnik history and culture. The political program of the movement was soon published in 1844 by Bogoslav ulek (a Croatized Slovak), in the booklet under the headline to namravaju Iliri? (What do Illyrs Want?). However, the decree upon the prohibition of the use of the Illyrian name was partially abolished on January 3rd, 1845 by the new imperial decree, according to which the Illyrian name could be used only in the literature, but not in the politics. The changes in Austrian policy towards the Croats can be seen and from the fact that the Emperor allowed a foundation of the Department of the Illyrian language and literature at the Zagreb Academy.1 At the same time the censorship in Croatia-Slavonia was downgraded. These changes in Croatia-Slavonia were closely connected with the new Austrian political course towards Hungarians: the Habsburg Emperor intended to attract the Illyrians to the Austrian side in the German struggle against the ruling Hungarian Conservative Party in Pest and to make use of open clash between two political parties in Croatia and Slavonia: the maaroni and narodnjaci. The most serious open clash between these two political groups occurred on July 29th, 1845 in Zagreb. After the maarons victory on the elections in Croatia-Slavonia, the fights on the streets between the members of two parties took place and after the intervention of the army they were transformed in the
1 T. Macan. Povjest hrvatskog naroda. Zagreb, 1992, p. 283.
56
______________________BALCANIA
bloodshed. Thirteen people were murdered and 27 wounded. The local inhabitants were embittered and immediately the maaroni and Ban Haller were accused as provocators of this bloody event. The funeral of the so-called Srpanjske rtve (the July victims) became transformed into a peaceful demonstration against the violence, but also against the current political regime in Croatia.1 The protesters required the church, cultural and political independence for Croatia-Slavonia. In the other words, they required that Croatian Archbishoprics will be established, likewise the national university and national independent government. Because of these requirements Ban Haller stepped back. Hungarian outstanding figure from the political scene, Layosh Kossuth, accused the Croats for the high (state) treason. These events from July 1845 became an introduction for the open war between the Croats and the Hungarians during the Hungarian Revolution and the War of Independence of 18481849.2 In the year of 1846 the Illyrian Movement won its the most important linguistic battle when the poem Smrt Smail-age engia, written by Ivan Maurani, was published in Zagreb in the tokavian dialect in the form of ijekavian subdialect, which became soon accepted by the Croatian intelligentsia as the literal language of the Croats (up today). It is important to say that the authors mother tongue was not tokavian, but the akavian dialect. However, the poem Smrt Smail-age engia presented a victory of the political aim of the leaders of the Illyrian Movement to promote the tokavian dialect as the official literal language for all Croats.3 Anyway, in the same (1846) year Petar Preradovi published the Prvenci, Bogoslav ulek published Pregled starije hrvatske knjievnosti and the most important composer of the Croatian national revival movement, Vatroslav Lisinski, performed the first national (Croatian) opera the Ljubav i zloba.
1 D. Pavlievi. Povijest Hrvatske. Drugo, izmijenjeno i proireno izdanje. Zagreb, 2000, p. 253254; J. Horvat. Politika povjest hrvatskog naroda, Vol. I. Zagreb, 1990, p. 8790. 2 About Croatian-Hungarian struggle in 18481849 see: L. Kontler. Millenium in Central Europe. A History of Hungary. Budapest and Szeged, 1999, p. 246261. 3 J. Horvat. Ljudevit Gaj. Njegov ivotnjegovo doba. Zagreb, 1975, p. 230.
57
______________________BALCANIA
Ivan Maurani
In the struggle for the introduction of the national language as the official language in Croatia-Slavonia, in the year of 1847 occurred the crucial turning point when on October 23rd, the last Croatian-Slavonian feudal assembly proclaimed the Croatian language as the official one in Croatia and Slavonia instead of the Latin. Also, in the same session of the assembly the deputies required an incorporation of the city of Rijeka into Dalmatia, establishing of the Zagreb Archbishoprics and finally the respectfulness of the Croatian historical-state (municipal) rights by the Hungarian government. As the Hungarian feudal assembly in Bratislava did not accept these decisions of the Croatian Sabor, a special commission was formed in order to solve the question of Croatian requirements. Layosh Kossuth became appointed as the president of this commission, which influenced the Hungarian assembly in Bratislava to issue the order upon the introduction of the Latin language as the official one in Croatia and Slavonia instead of Hungarian. However, the Emperor-King did not give a necessary sanction to this order and at such a way recognized the Croatian national requirements. It was the greatest victory of the Croatian national rights and struggles against Pest and against Hungarian policy of Magyarization of Croatia and Slavonia.
58
______________________BALCANIA
Subsequently, one of the most important requirements by the Illyrian Movement became materialized what marked the end of the movement itself, which in the following years accepted the Croatian national name. CONCLUSION The Illyrian Movement, 18301847, presents the most important period of the Croatian national revival movement, which was one of the strongest national revival movements that emerged in the Habsburg Monarchy in the first half of the 19th c. It expressed the cultural, political, linguistic and economic requirements and interests of the young Croatian liberal bourgeoisie, intelligentsia and partially of the Croatian feudal aristocracy, who used the movement for promotion of their own historical feudal rights. The Illyrian Movement focused its goals basically toward the respectfulness of the Croatian historical and national rights, but also and against the Magyarization of Croatia and Slavonia. The main requirements and goals designed by the leaders of the movement have been: o The introduction of the Croatian national language in Croatia and Slavonia as the official one; o The creation of a single literal language for all Croatians besed on the talks of the ordinary people; o The realization of the economic reforms; o The preservation and enlargement of the national statehistorical (municipal) rights and privileges; and o The political unification of all Croatian historical and ethnolinguistic territories into a Greater Croatia. However, the leadership of the Illyrian Movement promoted the ijekavian subdialect of tokavian dialect of the South Slavs as the Croatian national literal language a dialect which was spoken and written at the time of the movement by all Serbs and only minority of the Croats. At such a way, the Croats are using as their own literal language from the time of the movement in fact the Serbian literal language up today the fact recognised by the leader of the movement, Ljudevit Gaj, itself. Officially, the ultimate aim of such a policy was to create for all Southern Slavs the same literal language which will become the basic foundation for their cultural and political unification, particularly of the Serbs and the Croats. However, such a linguistic policy was attacked by eminent Serbian philologists, politicians
59
______________________BALCANIA
and historians in the 19th and 20th centuries as a policy of Croatization of Dalmatia, Dubrovnik, Montenegro and Bosnia and Herzegovina. Finally, one of the crucial achievements of the Illyrian Movement was the fact that the Croatian national name was spread and used from the mid-19th century by the majority of Roman Catholic South Slavs whose mother tongue and literal language was tokavian dialect and alphabet of writing Latin.
A Great coat of arms of the Kingdom of Hungary from 1867 to 1918 with the regional coat of armes of Dalmatia, Croatia, Slavonia, Rijeka (Fiume), Slovakia and Transylvania
60
______________________BALCANIA
T H E I D E A O F A G R E A T E R C R O A T I A I N T H E 1 7 TH CENTURY
Abstract: This article sets up to examine and clarify the ideological concept of the pan-Croatianism and the Greater Croatia created by the 17th century Croatian publicist Pavao Ritter Vitezovi. The particular reference will be pointed towards his understanding of ethnical origin of the Poles and Lithuanians and to his idea of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth as a country of Croatian national-historic statehood. The article has three parts. The idea of Slavic ethnic-linguistic kinship and reciprocity among the South Slavs in the 16th and 17th centuries is the topic of the first part. The second part of the article concentrates on the problem of transformation of the Pan-Slavic idea into the concept of the panCroatianism and the image of the Greater Croatia. The Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth was considered in the first case as a part of the Slavic world, whereas in the second case the common state of the Kingdom of Poland and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania was regarded as a constituent of the Northern Croatia that was in fact a component of the pan-Croatian state. Finally, the third part of the article deals with four pivotal questions in regard to the 17th century idea of pan-Croatianism with special focus on the problem of Polish-Lithuanian Republic and Polish and Lithuanian ethnicities. Keywords: Balkans, Slavs, South Slavs, pan-Slavism, Croats, Greater Croatia, Balkan nationalism, Poland, Lithuania.
THE SOUTH SLAVIC IDEA OF PAN-SLAVIC ETHNOLINGUISTIC KINSHIP AND RECIPROCITY Dalmatian and especially Ragusian (Dubrovnik) humanists in the 16th century accepted the old domestic thought that all Slavs originated in the Balkans and that the South Slavs are autochthonous inhabitants at this peninsula. More precisely, the entire Slavic population had their own forefathers in the ancient Balkan Illyrians, Macedonians and Thracians. Principally, the ancient Illyrians were considered as the real ancestors of the Southern, Eastern and Western Slavs. Consequently, according to this belief, the Eastern and Western Slavic tribes emigrated from the Balkans and settled themselves on the wide territory of Europe from the Elbe River on the west to the Volga River on the east [regarding the western borders of Slavic extension in the early Middle Ages see: Engel 1979, 36]. However, the South Slavs remained in the Balkans; the peninsula that was considered as the
61
______________________BALCANIA
motherland of all Slavonic peoples [ 1960, 224227]. Subsequently, all famous historical actors originated in the Balkans were appropriated as members of the Slavdom: Alexander the Great of Macedonia, Aristotle, St. Jerome (Hieronimus), Diocletian, Constantin the Great, SS. Cyril and Methodius, etc. Famous Ragusian humanistic poeta laureatus Ilija Crijevi (Aelius Lampridius Cervinus, 14631520), for instance, knew that inhabitants of his born-city were of both Roman and Slavic origins as he pointed it in his poem Oda Dubrovniku (Ode for Dubrovnik). Crijevi in his work Super comoedia veteri et satyra et nova, cum Plauti apologia (Apology for Plaut) called the language of the ordinary people from Ragusa/Dubrovnik as stribiligo illyrica (Illyrian solecism) or as scythica lingua (Scythian language), following the tradition that ancient Slavs are called among other names and as Scythians and Sarmatians. These two old Indo-European Iranian people lived during the time of ancient Greeks and Romans on the territory of the present-day Southern Ukraine and Russia (from Volga River to Danube River) and became in the Middle Ages synonyms for the Slavs [Hammond MCMLXXXIV, 3, 5; Westermann 1985, 11, 1415, 2223, 24; Fine 1994, 2526. Regarding the homeland of the Indo-Europeans see: Mallory 1989; Gimbutas 1985, 185202]. In the song Qui proavi solio et patrueli culmine regnas, written for Bohemian-Hungarian King Wadysaw II Jagiello (King of Bohemia 14711516 and King of Hungary 14901516), Crijevi termed Eastern Adriatic littoral as Illyrian coast [Franievi 1983, 310313; Banac 1991a, 29; Tadin 1903, 265278]. His contemporary, priest Mavro from Dalmatia, in his Glagolitic breviary from 1460 indicated the town of Salona nearby Dalmatian city of Split as the birthplace of SS. Cyril and Methodius, who were in fact the brothers from Salonika. Moreover, these two apostles of the Slavs, according to the priest Mavro, were descendents from the Roman emperor Diocletian, and pope St. Gaius: V Dlmacii Soline grd. roistvo svetago Kurila i brata ego Metudie. ot roda Doklicina csara. i svetago Ga papi [Panteli 1965, 133; Banac 1991a, p. 9]. St. Jerome from Dalmatia was as well appropriated as Slav and later on exclusively as Croat. Consequently, the Latin-language Bible, which was written by St. Jerome and used by all Catholic Slavs in Europe was recognized by Dalmatian Catholics as achievement of the Slavic Croat. Moreover, St. Jerome was unjustifiably proclaimed as an inventor of the oldest Slavic alphabet the glagolitic one, named as well as Jeromes script and subsequently this alphabet became
62
______________________BALCANIA
appropriated by the Croats as their own original and national alphabet that became used and by other Slavonic peoples.
Division of the Croats from the 6th century to the 9th century according to Croat historiography
63
______________________BALCANIA
Thus, this first written Slavic language (named by scholars as Old Church Slavonic), and devised in fact by Constantine (Cyril) and Methodius in the middle of the 9th century [Fine 1994, 302], became appropriated by the Croats in the Middle Ages and later on as Croatian national and indigenous literal language. This belief founded ideological doctrine in the later centuries for claiming that all people (i.e., the Slavs,) who used this language virtually belonged to the Croatian ethnic community. In the late mediaeval times following a popular tradition about St. Jerome he was assumed as spiritual progenitor of Croatian people who translated Hebrew and Greek holy writings (sacre scripture) to both Latin and Slavonic languages [tefani 1963, 3436]. Even the Roman Catholic Church accepted this popular opinion that St. Jerome was founder of Slavonic literacy. It is clear from the letter by the pope Innocent IV (12341254) to Philip, the bishop of Northern Dalmatian city of Senj: in Sclavonia est littera specialis, quam illius terrae clerici se habere a beato Jeronimo asserentes, eam observant in divinis officiis celebrandis [Jeli 1906a, 9]. The same pope confirmed twice, in 1248 and 1252, the usage of Jeromes script in the liturgy among Catholics in the area of Northern Dalmatia [Jeli 1906a, 910]. The Croats were granted once again with the right to use Jeronimska pismena (Jeromes script) in 1754 by pope Benedict XIV in his Ex pastorali munere. In this pastoral letter the pope named Croats as Illyrians [Jeli 1906c, 3940]. The same alphabet, which according to the local South Slavic tradition originated in Dalmatia, was used among Central European Slavs in the Meddle Ages too. Thus, king of Bohemia and emperor of the Holy Roman Empire of German Nation, Carlo IV (13461378) noticed that the church service in the monastery of Emmaus nearby Prague is to be served in Slavic language according to translation by St. Jerome: ob reverentiam et memoriam plorisissimi confessors Beati Jeronymi Strydoniensis Doctoris egregii et translatoris interpretisque eximii sacre scripture de Ebraica in Latinam et Sclavonicam linguas [Jeli 1906b, 5]. Still at the turn of the 17th c. some of the well-known Dalmatian publicists and scientists, like Dinko Zavorovi from ibenik/Sebenico (Domenico Zavoreo, 15401610), believed that the real creator of glagolitic script was the Slav St. Jerome from Dalmatia (Hieronymus Dalmatiae) [tefani 1963, 3839], while others, like Faust Vrani as well from ibenik (Faustus Verantius, 15511617) were sure that brothers Cyril and Methodius invented cyrillic letters, but not glagolitic ones. This opinion resulted in
64
______________________BALCANIA
logical conclusion that all Slavonic peoples who used either glagolitic or cyrillic alphabets in fact practiced Illyrian or Dalmatian or Croatian script. All of these three script-names became synonyms for the national language and alphabet of the Croats, i.e., Illyrians. As this language and alphabet was used among all Slavs, Croatian language/alphabet became one of the most used and important in the world. The principal and most influential protagonist of this doctrine became already mentioned historian and philosopher Faust Vrani who printed the book Dictionarium quinque nobilissimarum Europae linguarum, Latinae, Italicae, Germanicae, Dalmatiae & Ungaricae (Dictionary of the five most nobles European languages, Latin, Italian, German, Dalmatian & Hungarian) in Venice in 1595. He recognized that Illyrian, Croatian and Dalmatian names are acctually the synonyms [Verantius 1595; Vrani 1971; Banac 1991a, 31; Franievi 1983, 675; Cronia 1953; Dukat 1925, 102 136]. According to him, Dalmatian language was the purest Slavonic dialect [Banac 1991a, 39]. This ideology will be followed and further developed into the concept of Pan-Croatianism at the end of the 17th century by Croatian nobleman of German origin, Pavao Ritter Vitezovi who saw all Slavs, including and all inhabitants of Kingdom of Poland and Grand Duchy of Lithuania, as Slavonic-Croats who spoke Slavonic-Croatian language [Vitezovi 1700; Ritter 1689; Ritter 1696]. Dominican from Dalmatian Island of Hvar, Vinko Pribojevi (the 15th/16th century), did the first written systematization of the doctrine of Slavic origin in the Balkans and their kinship in his speech in the Latin language given for the local aristocracy in the city of Hvar in 1525. This apologetic speech of the glorification of the Slavdom was published in Latin in Venice in 1532 under the title De origine successibusque Slavorum (On Origins and history of the Slavs). Pribojevi suggested that all non-Hellenic well-known personalities from the Balkans in Antiquity were of Slavic origin, as the Macedonians Philip, Alexander, Aristotle, twenty four Roman emperors born in the Balkans and St. Jerome (Hieronimus). Finally, according to Pribojevi, three Dalmatian noble brothers Czech, Lech and Rus were the forefathers of modern Czechs, Poles, and Russians. Moreover, Pribojevi during his three years of living in Poland and traveling in other Slavic countries became convinced that all Slavic peoples spoke a single language. More precisely, according to him, the Russians were speaking Dalmatian tongue, and the Slavic appellation was younger than Dalmatian, i.e., Illyrian name
65
______________________BALCANIA
[Pribojevi 1951, pp. 6570; 1960, 224; Istorija Jugoslavije 1973, 129; Novak 1951, 947; Schmaus 1953, 243254; Gortan 1958, 149152; Barii 1961, 227257]. According to him, the mythical Illyrus was an ancestor of all Slavs. Thus, this famous Dalmatian humanistic and renaissance writer connected the history of the Slavs with the history of ancient Romans and Macedonians sugesting that current Slavic history is continuation of glorified history of the Roman and Macedonian Empires. The pan-Slavic doctrine of Pribojevi became more influential and known among the South Slavs and other European readers when his speech was translated into Italian language and published in Venice in 1595.
A territory of Croatia at the time of the King Tomislav I (in 930) according to the Croat historiography
This Pribojevis thought was followed by many various South Slavic writers among them the most important became the abbot of Benedictine congregation, a historian from Ragusa (Dubrovnik), whose family came to this city-Republic from Kotor (present-day a Montenegrin city), Mavro Orbin, Dalmatian
66
______________________BALCANIA
Thucydides (Mauro Orbini, d. 1611 or 1614). Orbin wrote the first and most influential general Slavic history published in Pesaro 1601 under the title Il Regno degli Slavi (The Slavic Kingdom) based mainly on the old popular tradition upon the origins of the Slavs. The book was translated into Russian by Sava Vladislavi who was a Serb retainer of Russian emperor Peter the Great, and published in St. Petersburg in 1722. Orbini further developed an idea that all Slavs spoke a common language named as Illyrian (Lingua Illyrica) and that their national languages were in fact only dialects of mutual Slavic inter-dialect (koine), which was called among Dalmatians and Ragusians simply as na/naki (our) or slovinski (Slavic) language. Orbin accepted the path of various mediaeval chronicles from Poland, as well as Pribojevi and pope Pius II (14051464) that the ancestors of the Czechs, Poles and Rus, i.e., the legendary brothers Czech, Lech and Rus, were actually natives of the Roman province of Illyricum, which was called in Pribojevi-Orbinis times as Dalmatia [Orbini 1601; Orbin 1968, 1162; Radoji 1950, 8082; Mati 1950, 193197; 1960, 227]. The notion that Dalmatia encompasses the main portion of the Balkan Peninsula was alive in Vitezovis time as well. Thus, a founder of Croatian critical historiography, Ivan Lui 16041679, a native from Dalmatia, issued a map entitled Dalmatia post Imperii declinationem in Croatiam, Serviam et Dalmatiam ipsam distancta (Dalmatia after the fall of the Empire divided into Croatia, Serbia and Dalmatia proper) claiming that Western and Central Balkans belonged to the province of Dalmatia. The canon Juraj Rttkay (16121666) in his work Memoria regnum et banorum regnorum Dalmatiae, Croatiae et Sclavoniae (Remembrance of the kings and bans of the kingdoms of Dalmatia, Croatia and Slavonia), printed in Zagreb in 1652, located the birthplace of brothers Czech, Lech and Rus in the Northwestern Croatia around the Krapina region that is only 50 km. far from Zagreb on the border with Slovenia. Both Orbini and Rttkay became familiar with personal experiences upon Slavic ethnolinguistic kinship of several South Slavic travelers who visited Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and Muscovy in the 16th and 17th centuries like: Ragusian physician and bishop Tomo Nadal Budislavi (15451608) who lived several years in Krakow (Cracow/Krakw) and Aleksandar Komulovi from Split who was working under direction of pope Clement VIII on organization of pan-Slavic military action against the Ottoman Turks to liberate the South Slavs and for that purpose he travelled to Polish-
67
______________________BALCANIA
Lithuanian Commonwealth and Muscovite Russia (15941598) [Reetar 1915, 136141; Gluck 1939, 150154; Bazala 1954, 255 259; Kolendi 1962, 211240; ic 1935, 162181; Vanino 1936, 4054; tefani 1938, 150; orovi 1993, 436]. A popular legend upon Slavic ethnic-linguistic kinship and common origin in the Balkans that became systematized by Mavro Orbin, had a strong influence among the 17th-century South Slavic writers and public workers. Thus, the most prestigious and celebrated South Slavic author from Dubrovnik, Ivo (Divo) Gunduli (15891638), praised in his poem Osman the Slavic victory of future Polish king and Lithuanian grand duke, Wadysaw IV Vasa (Vladislovas IV Vaza, 16321648), over the Turks in Chotin in 1621. Gunduli hoped that Wadysws army will cross Danube and liberate all South Slavic population under the Ottoman realm. Finally, Gunduli sugested to the prince Wadysw to re-establish mediaeval Serbian Empire and to take a title of Serbian emperor. Subsequently, Kingdom of Poland, Grand Duchy of Lithuania and Serbian Empire would be united by personal union in the name of Wadysw IV Vasa. Gunduli, like many others, followed the pattern of Pribojevi and Orbin that famous historical figures from the Balkans belonged to the family of the Slavs. For example, he called Alexander the Great of Macedonia as the Serb (Serbljanin) [ J, 227228; Samardi 1983, 94; Istorija Jugoslavije 1973, 193; orovi 1993, 436]. The awareness of existence of a mutual spoken language of all Slavs inspired greater number of South Slavic scholars in the 16th and 17th centuries to work on creation of a single South Slavic and pan-Slavic litteral language taking as a model the local South Slavic, i.e., Illyrian, dialects. The most succesful in this matter was Jesuit Bartol Kai (15751650), from the Dalmatian island of Pag who lived in Dubrovnik as well, and who was working for many years as a missionar among the South Slavs within the Ottoman Empire. He recognized that all Slavic subjects of the Ottomans spoke one language and thus he chose a tokavian (tokavski) dialect spoken in Bosnia and Herzegovina as a model for his common South Slavic grammer published in 1604 in Rome under the headline Institutionum linguae illyricae libri duo. Authore Bartholomeo Cassio Curictensi Societatus Iesu (Foundations of Illyrian language) [Cassio 1604; Kai 1997, 1575; repel 1890, 172201; Stojkovi 1913/1914, 19; Stojkovi 1919, 170263; Laszowski 1923, 2; Vanino 1934, 123127; Vanino 1940, 1144; Cronia 1952, 2237; Gabri-Bagari 1976, 5568; Gabri-Bagari
68
______________________BALCANIA
1984]. With much less success was an attempt to create a single South Slavic inter-dialect by the litteral circle around Slovenian protestant and reformer of Slovenian language, Primo Trubar (15081586), who called himself as Illyrian patriot. Their idea was to create a single South Slavic literal, i.e., Illyrian language, by combining all South Slavic dialects and latin and cyrillic alphabets into a single South Slavic language and alphabet [Istorija Jugoslavije 1973, 124134].
A Serbian Empire in 1355
69
______________________BALCANIA
A Croatian Jesuit student and forefather of the 19th century Slavophilia and pan-Slavism [Wandycz 1997, 86], Juraj Kriani (16181683), who devoted his life to bring together all Slavs predicting their glorified future succeeded finally to form a single Slavic inter-dialect, or mutual Slavonic literal language. Working on pan-Slavic ethnolinguistic unity of all six Slavic peoples (according to Kriani, the Rus, Poles, Czechs, Bulgarians, Croats and Serbs) he chose the speech of the Ozalj area in Western Croatia nearby Slovenia as a model for a single Slavic literal language (Slavic high German or Greek kione). His opinion was that spoken language of Ozalj area was the purest and the closest to the original pan-Slavic tongue in both grammar and accent. The reason for such opinion came from the fact that the spoken language of this area had inter-dialectical character, i.e., was consisting of three the most spread South Slavic dialects: tokavian, kajkavian and akavian (tokavski, kajkavski and akavski) [Kriani 1859, iiiiv; Golub 1976, 100103; murlo 1926, 34; murlo 1927, 321325; Teak 1996, 8594]. IDEOLOGICAL CONCEPT OF THE PAN-CROATIANISM AND THE GREATER CROATIA Croatian noblemen of German origin from Senj, Pavao Ritter Vitezovi (16521713), was a person who transformed Krianis pan-Slavic idea into the ideological concept of panCroatianism that included all Slavic population into the membership of Croatian nationality. Vitezovi, plemeniti i hrabreni gospn hrvatski i senski vlastelin (noble and brave gentleman and feudal lord from Senj) [Bogii 1970, 143], a Senjs delegate to the Hungarian feudal Parliament (Diet) in Sopron, a representative of Croatian feudal Parliament (Sabor) at the Imperial Court in Vienna, developed its pan-Croatian ideology in the next writings: Kronika, aliti szpomen vszega szvieta vikov (Chronicle, or a remembrance of all the times of the world), Zagreb, 1696; Anagrammaton, Sive Lauras auxiliatoribus Ungariae liber secundus (The second book of anagrams, or a laurel to the helpers of Hungary), Vienna, 1689; Croatia rediviva: Regnante Leopoldo Magno Caesare (Revived Croatia), Zagreb, 1700; and in Stemmatographia, sive Armorum Illyricorum delineatio, descriptio et restitutio (Stemmatography, or the Delineation, Description, and Restoration of Illyrian Arms), Vienna, 1701. The main political purpose of these four works was
70
______________________BALCANIA
to indicate to the Habsburg emperor Leopold I (16581705) the Croatian historical lands that should be united under the Habsburg imperial crown, but not to be divided between three Balkan powers: Republic of San Marco (Venice), Ottoman Empire and Habsburg Monarchy [Bratuli 1994, 74; Istorija naroda Jugoslavije 1960, 948949]. Especially his Croatia rediviva was a political protest against the Austro-Ottoman Peace of Sremski Karlovci (Karlowitz), which, according to Vitezovi, deprived Croatia of her ancient historical and ethnical territories [Ritter 1700; ii 1934, 44]. Vitezovi clearly pointed in his Kronikathat entire Roman province of Illyricum should be understood as a land populated by the Slavs [Vitezovich 1696, 6]. However, he implied the term Illyricum to the entire Balkan Peninsula that was settled by the Slavs including and Albanians who were considered as descendents of the ancient Illyrians. Moreover, taking into consideration the fact that the South Slavic Renaissance authors mainly applied the name Illyrians and Illyricum to the Croats and Croatia (but not absolutely), Vitezovi in fact called all descendents of Illyrians as Croats. Thus, the main portion of the Balkans, from the Istrian Peninsula and the Adriatic Sea to the Black Sea, Danube and the Aegean Sea belonged to the Croatdom. Vitezovi stressed that Illyrian-Slavic nationhood or the Croatdom was based on linguistic unity and community for the simple reason that all of these territories and their inhabitants spoke and wrote szlavni nas (i.e., Croatian) Illyrski aliti Szlovenski jezik (our glorious Illyrian or Slavic language) [Vitezovich 1696, 199; Blaevi 2000, see map on p. 225]. It must be said that Roman province of Illyricum was established during the time of Octavianus Augustus conquering the Western Balkans in the years of 35 B.C. A.D. 9. During the time of emperor Constantinus I (or Great, 306337) one of the four imperial praefecturas (largest administrative-territorial unites of Roman Emire) was Illyricum that covered almost the whole Balkans (except present-day Bulgaria and European Turkey) and part of present-day Hungary and Austria. The preafectura Illyricum was divided into the following dioceses: Achaia, Thessalia, Macedonia, Dacia, Moesia Prima, Epirus Vetus, Epirus Nova, Praevalitana, Dalmatia, Pannonia Prima, Pannonia Secunda, Savia, Noricum Ripense and Noricum Mediterraneum [Westermann 1985, 3839, 4243]. It partially covered the territories of modern Austria, Slovenia and Hungary and the whole Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Serbia, Montenegro, Greece (without
71
______________________BALCANIA
Western Thrace) and Albania. Nevertheless, in his Anagrammaton Vitezovi included the entire territory of the Balkans and the part of the Southeastern Europe into the Illyricum that was later described in his Croatia Rediviva as Southern Croatia [Ritter 1689; Ritter 1700]. Vitezovi acctually devided the whole world into six ethnolinguistic, historical, cultural and geographical areas, civilizations and cultures: I) Germania, which embraced the whole German-speaking world: Holy Roman Empire of German Nation headed by Austria, Kingdom of Sweden (Sweden, Norway, Finland), Denmark, Eastern Prussia, Curonian Isthmus (Kuri Neria) with Curonian Bay or Courish Lagoon (Kuri Marios), Memel (Klaipda). Angliae regnum (Scotland, England, Wales, and Ireland) was included into Germania as well. II) Italia cum parte Greciae (Italy with the part of Greece) referred to the Apenninian Peninsula, Corsica, Sardinia, Sicily, Attica, Peloponnesus (Morea) and the main number of the Aegean and Ionian islands, Malta and Crete. III) Illyricum that was the whole Balkans (except Attica and Peloponnesus with the adjoining islands), Wallachia (Dacia and Cumania), Transylvania and Hungary. IV) Hispania, which was composed by Spain and Portugal and their European possessions and overseas colonies in Africa, Asia, Latin America with Florida and California. V) Sarmatia that was the whole territories of Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (the Republic of Two Nations) with Moldavia and Muscovy (i.e., the Russian Empire). Finally, VI) Gallia that was France [Ritter 1689, 69117]. The real ideological source for such division of the whole world was the Slavic idea which decisively influenced Vitezovi who recognized that all Slavs belonged to a single ethnolinguistic community. Nevertheless, this idea of pan-Slavism was methamorphosed by him eleven years later into the idea of panCroatianism and Greater Croatia. In fact, Vitezovi claimed that all Slavs are Illyrians who were autochtonous inhabitats of Illyricum. However, for him was clear that ancient Illyrians were modern Croats and ancestors of all Slavs. This ideology of Croatian-Slavic ethnogenesis Vitezovi developed in his work Croatia redivivathat was an outline for more ambitious general history of Croats and Croatia, i.e., entire Slavic population. In this work Vitezovi devided total territory of ethnic-historical-linguistic Croatia into two parts: I) Croatia Septemtrionalis (Northern Croatia), and II) Croatia Meridionalis (Southern Croatia). The boundary between them was the Danube River. Northern Croatia
72
______________________BALCANIA
encompassed the entire territories of Bohemia, Moravia, Lusatia (uica or uyca in Eastern Saxony and Southern Brandenburg [The Sorbs in Germany 1998, 5]), Hungary, Transylvania, Wallachia, Muscovy, Poland and Lithuania [Ritter 1700, 10]. The people who were living in Northern Croatia were divided into two groups: northwestern Croats, called the Venedicos (Wends) and northeastern Croats, named as the Sarmaticos (Sarmatians). The Wends consisted of Czechs, Moravians, and Sorbs (Sorabi who lived in Lusatia), whereas the Sarmatians were living in Muscovy, Lithuania and Poland [Ritter 1700, 10], i.e., were Rus' (Eastern Slavs), Lithuanians and Poles. Vitezovi found that ancestors of all northern Croats Wends and Sarmatians were the White Croats (Belohrobatoi from the Byzantine historical sources) who lived in the early Middle Ages around the upper Dnester River and upper Vistula River, i.e., in Galicia and Little Poland [Engel 1979, 1011; Westermann 1985, 5051, 5455; Macan 1992, 1516; Klai 1971, 1822]. Traditional name from the sources for White Croatia was Greater Croatia or Ancient Croatia [orovi 1993, 34; Klai 1971, 21]. In the time of Vitezovis writing of Croatia redivivathis territory was integral part of the Republic of Two Nations (PolishLithuanian Commonwealth). The Southern Croatia, or Illyricum (the Balkans), was subdivided into two parts: 1. Croatia Alba (White Croatia), and 2. Croatia Rubea (Red Croatia). Croatia Alba was composed by Croatia Maritima (Central and Maritime Montenegro, Dalmatia and Eastern Istria), Croatia Mediterranea (Croatia proper and Bosnia-Herzegovina), Crotia Alpestris (Slovenia and Western Istria) and Croatia Interamnia (Slavonia with part of Pannonia). Croatia Rubea consisted of Serbia, Northeastern Montenegro, Bulgaria, Macedonia, Epirus, Albania, Thessaly and Odrysia (Thrace) [Ritter 1700, 32]. There have been Vitezovis frontiers of limites totius Croatiae (all Croatia) settled by ethnolinguistic Croats [Vitezovi 1699; Ritter 1699; Vitezovi 1997, 188215; Perkovi 1995, 225236]. However, Vitezovi recognized that both his Greater Croatia and pan-Croatian national identity have not been unified. In the other words, he acknowledged differences in borders, names, emblems, and customs: cum propriis tamen singularum limitibus etymo, Insignibus, rebusque ac magis memorabilibus populi moribus [Ritter 1700, 32; Ritter 1701]. After all, he believed that these distinctions were of less importance than the common Croatian nationhood of all of these
73
______________________BALCANIA
peoples and lands. His believe in common Croat name at least for all South Slavs (Illyrians) with many of regional and historic differences was expressed in Vitezovis heraldic manual Stemmatographiawhere he presented all Croatian historical and ethnolinguistic lands in the Southeastern Europe like Serbia, Bulgaria, Romania etc. [Ritter 1701; Banac 1993, 223227].
A map of Sarmatia Asiatica, a part of Sarmatia Europea, Ancient Albania, Iberia and Colchis
FOUR PIVOTAL QUESTIONS There are four pivotal questions of our interest in this article with regards to Vitezovis historical construct and political program of pan-Croatianism: Firstly, what ideological background and historical sources and writings used by Vitezovi were? Secondly, what the ultimate political purpose of his writings was? Thirdly, why he treated Lithuania as Croato-Slavonic land and Lithuanias inhabitants as Croato-Slavs? and
74
______________________BALCANIA
Finally, in which extend Vitezovis works influenced further development of Southeast European national ideologies? I) The ideological background of Vitezovis panCroatianism lies undoubtedly in the 16th-17th centuries developed Slavic idea mentioned in the first part of this article. Vitezovi accepted the main point of this idea that all Slavic peoples constituted in fact a single ethnolinguistic community. The basic elements of this assumption he found in the well-known and widely-read East Slavonic Povest vremennyh let or Nestors Chronicle (Primary Chronicle a compilation from the early 12th century, containing both oral and earlier written material) which main ideological construction, i.e., tradition of three Slavic progenitors brothers Czech, Lech and Rus, who originated in the Balkans and Pannonian Plain around Danube [Povest vremennyh let 1884, 4; Conte 1986, 1415] was further developed in the various mediaeval Dalmatian, Czech and Polish chronicles and Renaissance-Baroque Slavic histories written by South Slavic authors especially those from Dalmatia. On the first place he used information from four historical sources relating to the early history of the Slavs, their origin, ethnogenesis and their settlement to the Balkans: 1. Povest vremennyh let; 2. Letopis Popa Dukljanina or Barski rodoslov (Chronicle of the Priest from Dioclea or Genealogy from Bar a mid-12th century chronicle, possibly originally written in Slavic, but surviving only in Latin translation. The only survived copy of this manuscript can be found in the Manuscript Collection of Library of Vatican under the signature: Vat. Lat. 6958. The main part of this chronicle is based on oral tradition. It is the most detailed source for the early history of Montenegro and Herzegovina and important source on history of Bosnia, Croatia and Macedonia); 3. Historia Salonitana (History of Split, which is the most important, but baised historical source for the history of Dalmatian city of Split from the 7th to the 13th centuries. There is as well and expanded version of this work from the 16th century that is known as Historia Salonitana maior by Thomas the Archdeacon of Split who died in 1268; and 4. De administrando imperio (On governing of the state (this unfinished work is dealing with the foreign policy
75
______________________BALCANIA
of the Byzantium, diplomatic techniques, and sketches of the neighboring Slavic and non Slavic peoples), written by the Byzantine Emperor Constantine Porphirogenitus, 913959. In addition, Vitezovi became mostly ideologically influenced by three South Slavic autors who were the principal South Slavic champions of Slavic national and linguistic reciprocity: 1) Vinko Pribojevi, 2) Mavro Orbin and 3) Juraj Kriani, and as well as by 4) Georg Horn, the 17th century author who wrote in 1666 the so-called Georgii Horni, sive Historia imperiorum et regnorum, a conditio orbe ad nostra tempora. Suprisingly enough, but Vitezovi in his work reconciled the legend from Povest vremennyh let and information from Historia Salonitana that Croats (called in this latter work as Curetes) were living in the Balkans in the 1 century B.C. with the informations concerning Croat settlement in the Balkans that he found in Porphirogenitus De administrando imperio. Acctually, for Vitezovi the most interesting part of Porphirogenitus work was the chapter 30 where Byzantine emperor pointed out that the Balkan Croats lived in former time on the other side of Bavaria, where the White Croats can be found today [Klai 1972, 3]. Vitezovi from this information derived a conclusion that Croats lived out from the Balkans and divided all Croats into Transdanubian and Cisdanubian ones. Furthermore, combining information from Povest vremennyh let and those from Orbins Il Regno degli Slavi Vitezovi concluded that Czech, Lech and Rus' (i.e., Czechs, Moravians, Poles, Russians and entire population of Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth including and ethnic Lithuanians) were not only natives of Illyricum (i.e., Croatia) than all of them were actually ethnolinguistic Croats. He as well used Porphirogenitus text to claim that Serbs were Croats for the reason that the emperor wrote that Croats bordered on Slavic Serbs who are called Croats [Klai 1972, 3; see as well, Moravcsic 1949; Bury 1906]. The name Red Croatia (Croatia Rubea) from Letopis Popa Dukljanina [ 1967, 196] that was related to the mediaeval Montenegro (called Duklja or Dioclea, Doclea), Herzegovina and Northern Albania, Vitezovi extended to the whole territory of the Eastern Balkans populated by the Slavs (i.e., Illyrians or Croats), whereas the name White Croatia (Croatia Alba) from the same source [ 1967, 194195] that was related to the east Adriatic littoral, he extended to the whole portion of the Western Balkans.
76
______________________BALCANIA
From the sentence Clarius Constant. Porphirogenitus Imper. qui Sarmatas Belochrobatos, id est Albos, sive magnos, aut terram multam posidentes, appellat is clear that Constantine VII Porphirogenitus De administrando imperio served to Vitezovi to claim that all Western and Eastern Slavs, i.e., Czechs, Sorbs, Moravians and all inhabitants of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and Russia, originated in Belohrobatoi (White Croats) who are called also as Sarmatians. However, the author of Croatia redivivaaccepted old idea of Sarmatian origin of the Slavs, especially of the Poles, by reading at his lifetime very popular: 1. Polish historian Matthew Miehowitas Tractatus de duabus Sarmatiis Asiana et Europeana (Treatise about two Sarmatias-Asian and European), Cracow, 1517, for whom ancient Sarmatians were contemporary Russians; 2. Polish poet Ian Kohanowski (15301584); 3. Polish historian Martinu Kromers, De origine et rebus gestis Polonarum (Basel, 1555), who supported an idea of ethnic and linguistic Sarmatian-Slavic symbiosis telling that Slavic Sarmatians came to the Central and Southeast Europe from Asian Sarmatia (north from the Black Sea) [Cromer 1555; Cynarski 1968, 617]; and 4. Polish historian Matthew Stryjkowskis Kronika Polska, Litewska, mudzka i wszystkiej Rusi (Chronicle of Poland, Lithuania, emaitija, and all the lands of Rus'), Knigsberg, 1582. Vitezovi became particularily affected with Stryjkowskis association of Grand Duchy of Lihuania with the Polish Sarmatian Empire. Vitezovi accepted from these works of Polish Renaissance authors the notion that European Sarmatia encompassed Poland, Lithuania, Byelorussia/Belarus, and Ukraine, i.e., the lands under the scepter of the Polish Jagellonian ruling dynasty (in fact, this dynasty was of ethnic Lithuanian origin [Bumblauskas 2007, 172179]). The ideological principles that guided the author of this chronicle undoubtedly strengthened both pan-Slavic ideology and the ideology of Sarmatism that dominated Poland at the second half of the 16th century and the first half of the 17th century, consolidating at the same time the Polish position within the Grand Duchy of Lithuania [Kiaupa, Kiaupien, Kuncevius 2000, 292293]. Shortly, Sarmatian myth was transformed by Poles from geographic term to ethnic dimension and became finally political program under the motto: Polonia caput ac Regina totius
77
______________________BALCANIA
Sarmatiae [Conte 1986, 301]. Vitezovi was accepting old writings about the Slavs, or at least the peoples whom he believed to be Slavs. For that reason he accepted Polish Sarmatian ideology based on the writings of the ancient Greek and Roman historians and geographers (for instance, Strabo 63. B.C.23. A.D., Ptolemy 100168) who divided the territory of contemporay Poland into two parts: Germania (Western Poland) and Sarmatia (Eastern Poland) [Conte 1986, 292]. Ptolemy named the whole territory of Central and Eastern Europe as Sarmatia [Sulimirski 1945, 26]. Roman Empire succeeded to establish between 16. B.C. and 9. A.D. three new provincies, Raetia, Noricum and Pannonia, and to firm its own position along the Danube, only after military victories over two Sarmatian peoples: Roxolanes and Iazyges. However, both peoples were occupying Roman province Moesia Inferior (that is today Bulgaria) from 69. B.C. Pannonia and the Northeastern Balkans (i.e., Hungary and Bulgaria) are considered in Povest vremennyh let as born places of the three brothers Slavic progenitors [Povest vremennyh let 1884, 4]. For Vitezovi it was quite logically to conclude that the Slavic progenitors from Povest vremennyh let originated in PannonianDanubian-Balkan Sarmatians from Roman annales. The Stryjkowskis chronicle strengthened the idea of panSlavism in the eyes of Kriani, but in the eyes of Vitezovi this pan-Slavic ideology was converted into pan-Croatian one. Furtermore, Vitezovi was familiar with the theory of Sarmatian origin of the Slavs developed in the short history De slowinis seu Sarmatis written by Dalmatian historian, inventor, philosopher and lexicographer from ibenik, Faust Vrani, in 1606. The next step used by Vitezovi was to identify Porphirogenitus White Croats with Slavi Vandali (Vandalic Slavs). They were divided in Georgii Horni, sive Historia imperiorum et regnorum, a conditio orbe ad nostra tempora (1666) into Venedicos (Wends) and Sarmaticos (Sarmatians) [about the problem of the homeland of the Venetae see: Darden 1997, 430435]. Finally, Vitezovi was influenced at the great extend by the works of Juraj Kriani and Martin Cromer with regard to pan-Slavic unity and reciprocity, but he rejected their teaching that all Slavs originated in Rus [Kriani 16611667; Kriani 1859; Cromer 1555. About Slavic origin see: Gob 1991]. In sum, combining the works of Porphirogenitus, Stryjkowski, Vrani, Kriani, Cromer and Horn, Pavao Ritter Vitezovi claimed that all Western, Southern and Eastern Slavs are the Croats.
78
______________________BALCANIA
Vitezovi in dealing with the Balkan Croatia accepted an idea of Croatian 17th century historian from Dalmatia, Ivan Lui, who divided the whole Croatia into three provinces: Maritima, Mediterranea, and Interamnensis sive Savia. However, Vitezovi added additional two provinces of Croatia: Citerior (Istria and Slovenia) and Ulterior (Serbia). These were further divided into upanije (provinces) and comitatus (iudicial districts) [Vitezovi 1997, 195].
Coat of Arms of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania
II) The ultimate political purpose of Vitezovis works and ideological construction was triple.
79
______________________BALCANIA
First of all, he tried to refute Venetian claims on the territory of Dalmatia, Istria, Dalmatian islands and Boka Kotorska (Cattaro Gulf in Montenegro) that rose during the Great Vienna War 16831699 in which Republic of St. Marco successfully fought the Ottomans in a coalition with the Habsburgs [Banac 1984, 73]. As a result of Venetian military victory over the Ottoman Empire the officials of the Republic of St. Marco required considerable territorial enlargment of their possessions on the eastern Adriatic littoral at the expense of both the Ottoman Empire and the South Slavs. Venetian territorial demands had been based on Venices state-historical and ethnolinguistic rights on the east Adriatic littoral. It was pointed out that Signorina ruled Istria, Dalmatia and Adriatic islands since the year of 1000, strengthening her realm by further territorial annexations in 1409, 1420, 1433, and 1669 [Difnik 1986, 330338; Westermann 1985, 63, 94]. Further, according to the opinion of Venetian authorities, the majority of population of the eastern Adriatic littoral were Italian-speaking inhabitants whose wish and natural rights have been to be liberated from the Ottoman sway and ruled by the Italian-speaking Venice. Due to their military victories over the Ottomans and wellorganized propaganda network, the Venetians extended their Dalmatian possessions according to the peace treaty with Turkey on January 26th, 1699 in Sremski Karlovci by acquaring the city of Herzeg Novi, part of Boka Kotorska, the mouth of Neretva River and continental Dalmatia up to the Dinaric Range [ 1960, 777778]. Actually, Vitezovi tried to negate Venetian claims on South Slavic Adriatic littoral, which was considered by him as Croatian states and ethnolingiustic territory, by protest against articles of the Karlovci peace treaty (1699) with the Ottoman Empire. For that purpose Vitezovi based Croatian territorial claims primarily on historical rights iura municipalia but combaining them as well with Croatian ethnolinguistic rights. Thus, for instance, the whole territory of Adriatic Dalmatia was appropriated to Croats by Vitezovi because of the Croatian king Peter Kreimir IV (1058 1075) included this region into Croatian mediaeval state [Fine 1994, 278279; Klai 1971, 105111; Macan 1992, 3641]: Cresimirus Croator Rex Adriaticum Mare suae appropriabat jurisdictioni [Ritter 1700, 13]. Vitezovis writings were especially pointed out against proVenetian writings of the famous historian and doctor of law from Dalmatian city of Trogir, Ivan Lui (Lucius Joannes 16041679), traditionally considered as the founder of Croatian scientific
80
______________________BALCANIA
historiography. Luis most important work De Regno Dalmatiae et Croatiae libri six (Kingdom of Dalmatia and Croatia in six volumes), Amsterdam, 1666, which includes many narrative sources, genealogical tables and historical-geographical maps, suggests that Dalmatia was separate territory from Croatia and in fact Venetian possession. However, Vitezovi, due to his Croatocentric point of view, used every opportunity to accuse Lui (Lucius) of Dalmatocentric, pro-Venetian attitude, a subject to which he devoted a whole work under the title Officiae Ioannis Lucii de Regno Dalmatiae et Croatiae Refutatae (Refutation of Luis Kingdom of Dalmatia and Croatia) written in 1706. For this purpose, Vitezovi refered to the Priest from Doclea who wrote in his chronicle that synonym for White Croatia/Croatia Alba is Lower Dalmatia/Dalmatia Inferior while synonym for Red Croatia/Croatia Rubea is Upper Dalmatia/Dalmatia Supperior [ 1967, 194196]. Clearly, for both the Priest from Doclea and Pavao Ritter Vitezovi Croatia and Dalmatia were the same territory, but with two names. Second of all, Vitezovis political aim was to put all Croatian Balkan territories under the sciptre of the Habsburg Emperor Leopold I. The regions in question which remained outside the borders of Croatia and Habsburg Monarchy after the peace treaty of Sremski Karlovci in 1699 became the object not only of Vitezovis Croatocentric, but of the Habsburg imperial desires too. For instance, during the first peace treaty negotiations between Austria and Turkey in 1689, Habsburg diplomatic representatives steadily demanded that the eastern frontier of the Habsburg Monarchy had to follow Morava River (in Central Serbia). It means that Bosnia-Herzegovina, Srem, Croatia, Slavonia and bigger part of Serbia had unconditionally to be part of Austria [Stoye 1994, 7172]. Unsatisfied with the newly established borders accorded by the peace treaty of Sremski Karlovci in January 1699 [Weigl 1699], the Croatian representative in Austrian commission for demarcation, cartographer and historian Pavao Ritter Vitezovi presented his memorandum, printed under the headline Croatia rediviva, i.e., his view of the real historical borders and territory of Croatia [Markovi 1987, 7199; Frst-Bjeli 2000, 211214; Kovaevi 1973] to Leopold I Habsburg urging him to liberate and include into the Habsburg Monarchy all cisdanubian Croatian territories, what was acctually the whole Balkans without the Central and Southern Greece. Surely, Vitezovis political plan presented to Leopold I fitted to the Habsburgs plans of the future
81
______________________BALCANIA
Austrian foreign policy. Thus, already in the late 1700, after submission of manifesto Croatia rediviva to the Austrian authorities, Habsburg Emperor officially invited Vitezovi to visit him in Vienna since certain and important reasons make your presence in order to provide some information urgently required, also bring all letters and documents delineating and defining borderlines and demarcations of our said Kingdom of Croatia you have on your person [Klai 1914, 105]. Subsequently, Leopold I Habsburg, Emperor of the Holy Roman Empire of German Nation, King of Hungary and King of Croatia, frequently had been expressing hereditary claims on Dalmatia, at the expense of Venice, after the conversation with Vitezovi in Vienna. Vitezovi himself confirmed that his manifesto was accepted at the Viennese court with full attantion: the Viennese are applauding my Prodromus in Croatiam Redivivam I have sent them [Lettere del Cavaliere Ritter 1700]. Vitezovi based Croatian claims on these territories on two principles of legitimisation: historic rights and the Croatian/Illyrian form of local toponymes and as the most reliable champion of the essence of national character [Simpson 1991, 94; Blaevi 2000, 228229]. Subsequently, Croatia Meridionalis (Southern Croatia) was designed to join the Austrian Empire. Thus, the Balkan Croatia (Illyria) would be politically united in whole under the Habsburg administration. Actually, Vitezovi attempted to establish a fact that historical borders of the Kingdom of Croatia were considerably larger than those established in his own time. Beside the far-reaching consequences of the future annexation of Dalmatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina to Croatia, which were according to Vitezovi integral parts of united Croatia, Pavao Ritter Vitezovi in fact formulated with his works a political program that would have a significant impact on the 19th c. Croatian national revival, officially named as Illyrian Movement [Frst-Bjeli 2000, 211214; Perkovi 1995, 225236]. Shortly, Vitezovi protested against geografical, historical-administrative and ecclesiastical division of historic Croatia.
A (Croat national) flag of the State of Slovenes, Croats and Serbs proclaimed in Zagreb in October 1918 pretending to encompass all South Slavic territories of the Austria-Hungary
82
______________________BALCANIA
Coats of Arms of South Slavic provinces from Seutter's map (Amsterdam, 1709) from left to right: Dalmatia, Croatia, Slavonia, Bosnia and Serbia
Third of all, I am inclined to contend that according to Pavao Ritter Vitezovi, the second and final phase of total Croatian historical-ethnolinguistic unification under the Habsburg government should be realized by the Habsburg occupation and annexation of Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and the Russian Empire (according to Vitezovi, Croatian Sarmatia). It should be pointed out on this place that Bohemia, Moravia and Lusatia, understood by Vitezovi as Croatian Venedia already were parts of Habsburg Empire. Historic Bohemia became integral part of the Habsburg Empire in 1526 while Lusatia, which was a part of the Holy Roman Empire of German Nation, was ruled by the members of the Habsburg dynasty as the German emperors already from 1438 onward [Brenger 1994, 8098; Kann 1990, 7; Johnson 1996, 60]. Thus, the final step of pan-Croatian political unification should be annexation of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and Russia into the Habsburg Empire. Actually, this stage of panCroatian unification started to be realized by the First (1772) and the Third (1795) partition of Poland and Lithuania when Galicia was incorporated into Austria in addition to Bukovina (Bukowina) which became incorporated into Habsburg domains in 1775 [Hammond MCMLXXXIV, 24; Westermann 1985, 115; Kiaupa Z., Kiaupien J., Kuncevius A. 2000, 340358; Lietuvos istorijos atlasas 2011, 14]. Consequently, with partitions of Poland and Lithuania and annexation of Bukovina (previously in the second half of the 15th century a vassal territory of the Polish-Lithuanian united state) the territory of transdanubian White Croatia, according to Vitezovis ideological construction a motherland of the Czechs, Moravians, Sorbs, Poles, Lithuanians and Russians,
83
______________________BALCANIA
became politicaly united by personal union (i.e., by the Habsburg ruler) with cisdanubian Croatia Alba. III) The most significant question of our interest which needs satisfactory answer is: why Vitezovi considered Lithuania as Croato-Slavonic land and Lithuanias inhabitants as CroatoSlavs? There are two possible answers to this question: 1. Because of historical development of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania which brought Lithuanians into the very closer relations with the Slavs (Eastern and Western) that resulted in Slavization of Lithuanias cultural life and Lithuanias ruling class; and 2. Because of pro-Slavic and pro-Polish historical sources and writtings related to the affairs of the PolishLithuanian Republic read and used by Vitezovi. Nevertheless, in both cases Croatian nobleman could got impression that the entire territory of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth was settled by the Slavic population, or/and that their common spoken and written language was Slavic one. On this place we will emphasise only the most remarkable historical facts in connection with this problem. In several letters by Lithuanian grand duke Gediminas (13161341) from 1322 to 1324 he named himself as lethphanorum ruthenorumque rex (King of the Lithuanians and Russians), although he did not have in reality a title of the king. However, it clearly shows that he was a ruler of Slavic subjects, i.e., Russians. When the Grand Duchy of Lithuania during the time of Gediminas extended its state borders on the east and south-east, i.e., when the territories populated by Slavic people became incorporated into the 14th century Lithuania, she became multiethnic, multilinguistic and multiconfessional mediaeval state in which gradually Slavic elements prevailed over ethnic Lithuanian ones. Furthermore, in the following centuries as Lithuania was extending her borders far to the east, south-east and south-west making more profound contacts with her Slavic neighbors and including them into her states borders, Lithuanian language acquired significant number of Slavic borrowings. The conflict with Polish Kingdom over Galicia, Volynia and Podolia in the 14th15th centuries ended in the sharing of these three provinces, mainly populated by the Slavs, between Poland and Lithuania [Kojelaviius 1650/1669, 489513]. It is known that nearly 150 Slavisms entered Lithuanian language, either from the Eastern Slavs or from the Poles, before 17th century (for instance, words from Old Russian as: angelas, baniia,
84
______________________BALCANIA
gavnia, kaldos, kriktas, velykos, etc). The Slavic borrowings increased during the time of Kriani and Vitezovi for whom the language was the crucial indicator of national identification. Slavic population (for example tradesmen from Rus') was living in Lithuanias capital Vilnius from the time of Lithuanian grand duke Algirdas (13451377) who declared in 1358 that all lands of Rus should belong to Lithuania [Kiaupa Z., Kiaupien J., Kuncevius A., 2000, 110]. Kriani who was traveling across Kingdom of Poland and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and was living in Vilnius for several months in Dominician monastery became familiar with heterogenous ethnic and religious situation within the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, with a number of Slavic population in Lithuania and Vilnius and with often usage for official purposes of Slavonic language within the Grand Duchy of Lithuania which in fact became Lithuanian-Slavic state. The influence of Slavic culture and especially the language in the culture of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania was in the area of writings. In the first half of the 15th century the Slavic Old West Russian language was used in Lithuania as one of the three written languages alongside with the Latin and German. The Old Church Slavonic language was used in Lithuania in correspondence with the Russian duchies, the Tartars in Crimea as well as in the internal life of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. During the time of the grand duke of Lithuania Vytautas the Great 13901430 an official Slavonic language (the Old Church Slavonic) for the writing of the first annals of the Lithuanian grand dukes (Chronicle of the Lithuanian Grand Dukes, 14291430, with Shorter Compilation of Lithuanian Chronicles added around 1446) was used. Furthermore, Christianization of Lithuania in 1386/7 established strong prerequisites for the usage of the Polish language for official purposes in the following centuries. In the period of Lithuanian history after the death of Vytautas the Great in the official civic domestic life in addition to the Lithuanian and Russian languages (spoken in cities), as well as German and Polish (spread in the second half of the 15th century), the Old West Russian language alongside with the German and Latin was used for the writings [see for instance: Kojelaviius 1650/1669, 548]. At the time of Renaissance there were many texts and books in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania printed in Byelorussian/Belarus and Polish languages (as well as in Lithuanian). In fact, the authors of these texts and books considered the languages in which they were printed as the national languages of multinational Lithuania.
85
______________________BALCANIA
A territory of the Kingdom of Poland and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania in 1434
It is a fact that on the territory of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania in the first half of the 16th century the first books were printed in two Slavonic languages: the West Russian and Polish ones. Printing of the so-called Brasta Bible in Polish language in 1563 shows clearly that sphere of influence of Polish (i.e., Slavic) language within the Grad Duchy of Lithuania was significantly spreading on. At that time Lithuanian rulers, court and nobility (magnates) already used overwhelmingly the Polish language in public life within the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. It is paradoxically, but true that Lithuanian aristocracy and the ruling political elite, which tried to defend Lithuanias state (political) independence from the Kingdom of Poland accepted both Polish culture and Polish language which became official language of their communication with Polish ruler and Polish political elite. Shortly, Lithuanian magnates did not become defenders of Lithuanian language as they were defenders of Lithuanian independent
86
______________________BALCANIA
statehood. Subsequently, spoken Polish language became very serious competitor to the Lithuanian language within the Grand Duchy of Lithuania that led to the gradual, but inevitable Polonization, i.e., Slavicization, of Lithuanias cultural life [for a more extensive treatment of the Polish-Lithuanian relationships see: Davies 1981]. Literary and linguistic developments within the Republic of Two Nations helped to accelerate the Polonization of the ethnic Lithuanian, Russian, Byelorussian/Belarus and Ukrainian aristocratic circles [Bideleux, Jeffries 1999, 129; Maczak 1992, 194; Kamiski 1983, 1445; Kamiski 1980].
Croatian lands in 753 according to Croatian historiography
87
______________________BALCANIA
However, it must be emphasised that for Lithuanias ruling elite the notion of nation was not connected with the language (spoken or writen) or ethnicity as it was in the case of Kriani and Vitezovi for whom spoken and writen language was crucial national determinator. Contrary to these two Croatian intellectuals, for Lithuanias magnates the nation was linked to the statehood, but not to the language or ethnicity. Thus, for example, during the time of conclusion of the Lublin Union with Poland in 1569 the ruling elites of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, composed by ethnic Lithuanians and ethnic Slavs, who spoke and wrote in Polish language, called themselves Lithuanians what means actually natio Lithuanica (Lithuanias political nation), i.e., the aristocracy who lived within the state borders of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania [about feudal political and romanticist linguistic conceptions of nation see: Johnson 1996, 4562, 136148; Bideleux, Jeffries 1999, 153161; Guibernau, Rex 1999; Hutchinson, Smith 1994; Hobsbawm 2000]. The most influential champion and ideologist of natio Lithuanica was Mykolas Lietuvis (Vaclovas Mikolajaitis/Michalo Lituanus), a Lithuanian aristocrat from Maiiagala, who developed his theory about political nation of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania in historic treatise De Moribus Tartarorum, Lithuanorum et Moschorum (On the Customs of the Tatars, Lithuanians and Muscovites) written in Latin language in 1550 (incomplete text of this treatise was printed in 1615). However, after the Lublin Union of 1569 Poles became the senior partners in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth till its final dismembermant in 1795 [Wandycz 1997, 7278, 8893, 102107]. The Lithuanian nobility, i.e., natio Lithuanica, became assimilated or Polonized to such extent that the term Polish represented joint Lithuanian and Polish interests. In fact, Polish and Lithuanian ethnically different groups of aristocracy identified themselves with one cultural tradition and as one political nation [Davies 1981, 115159; Johnson 1996, 52]. The ethnolinguistic structure of Lithuanian Grand Duchy in the following centuries was changing in the favour of the ethnic Slavs. Thus, in the mid-16th century ethnic Lithuanians constituted around one-third of the total Lithuanias population (approximatelly 3,000,000 people were living at that time within a whole of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania). However, at the same time more than half of the population of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania were ethnic Slavs who lived in the eastern and southeastern provinces annexed by the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, i.e., former duchies of Polotsk, Vitebsk, Volynia, Kiev and Smolesk
88
______________________BALCANIA
[Kiaupa Z., Kiaupien J., Kuncevius A., 2000, 162]. We have to keep in mind as well the fact that the East Slavic territories, ruled by Lithuanians till the Lublin Union in 1569, were approximately ten times bigger than Lithuania propper [Samalaviius 1995, 42]. After Lublin tragedy in 1569 [Gudaviius 1999, 634] linguistic polarization within the Grand Duchy of Lithuania remained. There were still two basic spoken languages, Lithuanian and Russian and two bureaucratic languages, Old West Russian (Old Byelorussian/Belarus) and Latin [Bideleux, Jeffries 1999, 122]. However, in Western Belarus and Western Ukraine after 1569, the educated, middle, and administrative classes and the feudal gentry became predominantly Polish speaking. A spreading of Polish language in both writtn and spoken forms in Lithuania was carried on by Lithuanias feudal and political aristocracy who have been in most frequent contacts with their Polish counterparts, through Polish priests and monks and Polish intellectuals. Especially the 17th century, a century of Kriani and Vitezovi, was the period of expansion of the Polish language in public life in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. Moreover, at the first year of realm of Friedrich August II Saxon (16971706/1709 1733) in 1697 the Polish language officialy eliminated Old West Russian language from public officies in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania - coaequatio iurium [apoka 1936, 371374; Kiaupa Z., Kiaupien J., Kuncevius A., 2000, 265]. In the late 17th century both magnates and gentry of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania knew Polish and used it. Even there was formed the so-called Lithuanian type of the Polish language. On the same territories of the Polish Kingdom and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania through which Kriani travelled the urban centres were as well Polonized (i.e., got Slavic feature). The lower classes and the rural population of serfs were the Eastern Slavs. Even Lithuanias capital Vilnius or Ukrainian Lviv, a political-cultural center of Galicia, became Polish, i.e., Slavic, which Poles regarded both of them as essentially Polish even at the biginning of the 20th century [Johnson 1996, 52]. The Polish historiography during the last two centuries created an image that federal state of the PolishLithuanian Republic after 1569 was actually only Polish one. Certainly, cultural-linguistic Polonization spread faster, but in the sphere of politics and social life the Polish-Lithuanian Republic was as well gradually, but certainly becoming Polish for the reason that people from the Grand Duchy of Lithuania did not oppose in higher degree the appropriation of the Polish language and culture [Kiaupa Z., Kiaupien J., Kuncevius A., 2000, 362].
89
______________________BALCANIA
According to Robert Bideleux and Ian Jeffries, since Lithuanian [language] is directly related to the Slavonic languages, and since an old form of Byelorussian [not Lithuanian] was the official language of the grand duchy [of Lithhuania], the Lithuanian nobility probably felt some degree of cultural kinship with their Polish counterpartsIndeed, the Lithuanian nobility gradually became thorougly polonized [Bideleux, Jeffries 1999, 122] with the ironic result that Polish [language] eventually became more widely used among the Lithuanian than among the Polish nobility in the future Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth [Davies 1982, 2021]. Because of a right or wrong beliefe that Lithuanian language is closely related to Slavonic languages and because of Polonization (Slavicization) of upper strata of Lithuanian society Pavao Ritter Vitezovi at the turn of the 18th century considered entire inhabitants of Lithuania as Slavic ones (i.e., Croats) and Lithuania as Slavic (i.e., Croatian) country. The fact is that as a result of Polonization of the vast territories of the East-Central Europe from 1569 to 1795 many Poles considered these lands as Polish linguistic and cultural space. It became a common attitude of modern western historians of non-Polish origin to describe the Republic of Two Nations as exclusivelly Polish one due to the great degree of Polonization of Lithuanian society and culture. For example, Alan Palmer is in opinion that ethnic Lithuanians were readily assimilated by Poles: the most important dynasties of Poland, the Jagiellonian one (13861572) was in fact of Lithuanian origin, and Vilnius (Wilno) was a city, despite of its Lithuanian foundation, a symbol of Polish-Lithuanian cultural union [Palmer 1970, 4]. Such impression had and Juraj Kriani who passed through whole Ukraine, main part of Belarus and who spent some time in Vilnus as well becoming a member of estate circle of Dominician Order in Lithuanias capital. At the turn of the 18th century the members of natio Lithuanica and Lithuanian middle class society faced the real danger of denationalization through Polonization. Ultimately, it should not be forgotten that overwhelming majority of 7,5 mil. of total population of the Republic of Two Nations (Rzeczpospolita Obojga Narodow), i.e., of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, established according to the Lublin Union in 1569 were ethnic Slavs; a fact which induced Vitezovi to consider the whole Republic as Slavic state and according to his Croatocentristic theory to uderstand Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth as Croatian ethnolinguistic territory.
90
______________________BALCANIA
A pro-Polish viewpoint of Stanislaw Orzechowski and especially of Martinu Kromer (Martin Cromer) about PolishLithuanian relationships, Lithuanias incorporation into the Polish Kingdom after 1569, and Polonization of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania became one of the most significant sources about ethnolinguistic situation within the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth for both Kriani and Vitezovi. In his Razgowori ob wladatelystwu (16611667), Kriani frequently cited Martinu Kromer, the author of history of Poland under the title De origine et rebus gestis Polonarum (Basel, 1555) who saw Lithuania as ordinary province of Poland. Particularly it was Kriani who was acquainted with a very number of Polish and other authors who wrote on Slavic matters and who considered the whole territory of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth as a Slavic country. Thus, Kriani became aquainted with the work Bellum Prutenum (The Prussian War) written in 1515 by the poet Jan Vislicius who presented the Lithuanian history as a part of Slavic one. Vislicius viewed the future development of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania only within a united Polish Sarmatian Empire. After the Lublin Union in 1569 the Polish doctrine of Sarmatism, that proclaimed Lithuania, Samogitia (emaitia) and Russian duchies as integral parts of Polish state, increased and obtained a certain level of popularity within the territory of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania as a result of firm contacts of Lithuanias nobles (ethnic Lithuanians and ethnic Slavs) with Poland, Polish culture and state ideology. It is quite sure that both Kriani and Vitezovi were familiar with the Polish doctrine of Sarmatism among the noble circles within the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. The Sarmatian doctrine presented the territory of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania as Slavic one; a viewpoint that was accepted by Vitezovi and even served him to name total population of the Kingdom of Poland, Grand Duchy of Lithuania and Muscovy Russia as Sarmaticos who belonged to Croatia Septemtrionalis that was a part of his ethnolinguistic-historical united Croatia. Finally, if we know that Krianis writings about Slavic matters and his personal experience about Polonization/Slavicization of Lithuania (by making contacts with the upper and middle classes of society of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania) have been one of the most significnt sources for Vitezovi, that is not surprisingly that Pavao Ritter Vitezovi encounted the whole territory of the Kingdom of Poland and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania into Slavic lands, and furthemore according to his ideological doctrine, into a Greater Croatia.
91
______________________BALCANIA
It should be pointed out that modern our-days historiography and Slavonic studies upon the question of ethnolinguistic origin of the Croats and Serbs more and more incline on the side of those authors who supports a linguistic theory of Indo-Sarmatian origins of proto-Croats and proto-Serbs. According to this contemporary explanation, the Croats and Serbs were the people of Iranian (Sarmatian) origin, who migrated to the Balkans in the 7th c. and subjected the Slavs there. However, in the course of time they became totally slavicizied (like proto-Turkic Bulgars who were settled on the Balkans between Danube River and the Balkan Range), but gave ethnic name to the Balkan Slavic subjects. At least from the beginning of the 9th century both the Croats and Serbs are clearly a Slavic people. For those authors, linguists proved that words Croat and Serb are not of Slavic language. They believe that name Croat is similar to an Iranian-Sarmatian place-name Choroathos, on the lower Don River, or that name Croat originated in Iranian Chrovatosa a prominent chiftain who gave his name to the whole tribe. Some of scholars are pointing out that Iranian name Croat can be found as a personal name in the inscriptions from Tanais from the 2nd and 3rd centuries, or that words haurvatar means in Iranian cattle-breeder, and huurvatha friend. In addition, there are two Greek inscriptions in the area of Asov Sea around the mouth of of Don River related to the personal names Horathos and Horathos, which are considered of Iranian-Sarmatian origin. At the time of Jesus Christ there was an Iranian-Sarmatian tribe on the lower Don River that was known to the Greek geographers as Serboi. In the 10th century one Arab geographer noted a Sarban tribe in the Caucasus. These two tribes are clearly not Slavic ones. However, most probably it happened that many ethnic Slavs have participated in the armies led by IranianSarmatian Croats and Serbs and have migrated to the Balkans with their Iranian-Sarmatian military leaders and lords. Assimilation, i.e., Slavicization, of Iranian-Sarmatian Croats and Serbs started already beyond the Carpathians. IranianSarmatian Croats and Serbs have been relatively few in number, but as the warrior horsemen they became greatly superior in military point of view over subjugated Slavs. They came to the Balkans in the second wave of Slavic settlement on the peninsula where they met and subjugated already settled Slavic tribes from the first wave of migration to the Balkans. Soon the newcomers led by Iranian-Sarmatian Croats and Serbs came to provide a
92
______________________BALCANIA
general name for all Slavic people under them which are known today as ethnic Croats and Serbs. In the other words, since the Slavs were the vast majority, as the Croats and Serbs intermarried and mixed with them, in the course of time the conquerors came to speak the Slavic language. This language,which they came to speak and which had been spoken by the earlier arriving Slavs (from the first migration), came to be named after Iranian-Sarmatian newcomers (from the second migration to the Balkans) as Croatian and Serbian. Finally, this process of assimilation was indentical with that one of the Turkic Bulgars who conquered the Slavic tribes on the territory of the present-day Northern Bulgaria. They came to be slavicizied in the course of time, but provided the name for the Slavic people, language, and state established in Bulgaria [Fine 1994, 4959, 305307; Conte 1986, 300; Gregoire 19441945, 88118; orovi 1993, 4950; Macan 1992, 15; compare with Davies 1981, 45].
Coat of arms of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania
IV) Vitezovis works had a great impact on development of the South Slavic national ideologies, national consciousness and nationalism. Vitezovi influenced at the great extend the 18th
93
______________________BALCANIA
century Serbian and Bulgarian national movements. His heraldic manual under the title Stemmatographia, sive Armorum Illyricorum delineatio, descriptio et restitutio, written in Vienna in 1701, in which coats of arms of all Illyrian (according to him, Croatian) historical provinces were presented, was translated into Slavonic-Serbian language, adapted and expanded in the mid-18th century by the Serbian patriot of Bulgarian ethnic origin from Southern Hungary, Hristifor efarovi (17001753). Examples of the coats of arms of Illyria (i.e., the Balkans) are available in Sebastian Mnsters Cosmographia, printed in Basel in 1544 and revised by the Italian version of Mnster in 1575. What is the crucial on this place is that the very idea of Illyrian (i.e., Balkan or South Slavic) unity can be found exactly in the Mnsters Cosmographia, where the lands of Carinthia, Carniola, Croatia, Slavonia and Bosnia-Herzegovina are described as Illyrian provinces. Vitezovi used as well as example for his own armorial manual (from 1596) the heraldic work of Herzegovinian nobleman and admiral in Spanish navy service, Petar Ohmuevi (known in Spain as Don Pedro). Ohmuevis version of united pan-Illyrian empire of the Serb Stefan Duan was ilustrated by coats of arms of the following Illyrian lands: Macedonia, Bosnia, Dalmatia, Croatia, Slavonia, Bulgaria, Serbia, Rascia and Littoral. Ohmuevis armorial manual was used and extended by Mavro Orbin in his famous work where the coats of arms of Bulgaria, Slavonia, Bosnia, Macedonia, Dalmatia, Serbia, Croatia, Rascia and Littoral were considered as historical provinces of South Slavic Empire of Stefan Duan who was the most famous, mighy and glorified South Slavic ruler, in fact the emperor of Serbia from 1346 to 1355 [Banac 1993, 218225]. Nevertheless, in Vitezovis interpretation all of these coats of arms were heraldics of Croatian historical and ethnolinguistic provincies. These insignias were followed in Vitezovis armorial work by the next arms of Croatian lands: Bohemia, Muscovy, Polish-Lithuanian Republic, Ukraine, Carinthia, Carniola, Istria, Moldavia, Transylvania, Wallachia, Lower and Upper Austria, Prussia, Venice, Hungary, Albania, Celta, Crete, Dacia, Dardania, Epirus, Greece, Japodia, Liburnia, Mysia, Pannonia, Romania, Scythia, Baltic Slavonia, Thessaly, Odrysia, Thrace, and Triballia. What Vitezovi wanted it was actually to demonstrate by his armorial pan-Croatianism that all Slavs around the world were really Croats and that Great and glorious Croatian Empire (but no longer the Illyrian Empire of Stefan Duan) had to be reestablished under the Habsburg scepter.
94
______________________BALCANIA
However, while Mnsters and Ohmuevis Illyrian heraldic manuals were for Vitezovi in fact Croatian ones, for efarovi the same Mnsters and Ohmuevis Illyrian coats of arms were in fact Serbian ones. Sabsequently, efarovis Stemmatographia (), printed in Vienna in 1741, of coats of arms of all Serbian historical-state lands that should belong to restored and united Serbian Empire of Stephan Duan (ruler of Serbia from 1331 to 1355) contributed to the growth of both Serbian national awareness and nationalism. efarovi presented a triumphant mighty emperor Duan surraunded by 24 Balkan coats of arms that represented united Serbian Empire. The message was that all the lands of Duans crown (but in fact of the whole Balkans) should be politically united.
Serbias coat of arms from 1882
A shorter version of circulated among Austrian and Ottoman Serbs at the beginning of the 19th century
95
______________________BALCANIA
having a strong impact on the idea of restoration of Serbian mediaeval state (especially during the time of the First Serbian Uprising against the Turks (18031813)) orovi 1993, 556; 1994, 5459]. The 19th and 20th centuries state and national coats of arms of Croatia and Croats and Serbia and Serbs were modeled according to Vitezovi-efarovi drawings. efarovis , which was based on Vitezovis Stemmatographia, became one of the most influential ideological and programatic lighthouses for the Serbs to struggle for their national unification up today. Vitezovi created in his Stemmatographia, according to the drawing of Mavro Orbin, a coat of arms of Bulgaria, and invented completely new coat of arms of Romania. Shortly, Vitezovis Illyrian heraldry became one of the most influential contributions to the iconography of the Balkan nationalism. Both Vitezovis and efarovis heraldic manuscripts were the sources of national identities for the succeeding Croatian and Serbian generations [Banac 1991b; Banac 1993]. efarovis collection of Illyrian (according to him, Serbian) coat of arms clearly conveyed the notion that adherence to Orthodoxy made for the Serbs a nationhood suggesting furthermore that Serbian historical-national task was to unite all the lands of old Illyricum under a single coat of arms of Serbia. Nevertheless, Vitezovi ideologically mostly influenced development of Croatian nationalism particularily in the 18th and the 19th centuries. His armorial and ideological pan-Croatianism was both historical construct and political program. During these two hundred years his ideological influence extremely benefited to the Croatian resistence against Hungarian claims on historicalstate rights over Croatia, Slavonia and Dalmatia (i.e., Triune Kingdom). At the turn of the 19th century Vitezovis writings were in a great demand by the Croats and vere reprinted in many occasions. During the whole 19th century Vitezovis Croatia rediviva was playing the role of the Bible of Croatian national policy and nationalism too [ii 1934, 46; Banac 1993]. For example, several the most significant and influential 19th century Croatian politicians (some of them the leaders of Croatian national revival movement (Illyrian Movement)) as Ljudevit Gaj (1809 1872), Ivan Derkos (18081834), Janko Drakovi (17771856), Ante Starevi (18231896) and Eugen Kvaternik (18251871) were quite familiar with Vitezovis work which crucially influenced their ideology of pan-Croatianism. For Gaj, Starevi and Kvaternik (the fathers of Croatian nation) the South Slavs were only synonyms for the Croats [Gaj 1835, 1; Gaj 1965, 299
96
______________________BALCANIA
301; Starevi 1971; Kvaternik 1971], whereas for Derkos and Drakovi the Orthodox Serbs from Croatia, Slavonia, Dalmatia and Military Border were only ethnolinguistic Croats [Derkos 1832; Drakovi 1832]. The design of symbol (coat of arms) of Illyrian Movement, invented by Gaj, was a Morning Star inspired by Vitezovis work. Ljudevit Gaj still sincerely believed in Illyrian protohomland of all Slavs and moreover found evidence for this thesis in the large number of Czech, Polish, and Russian coats of arms. For him simply Illyrian (i.e., Croatian) Morning Star became only common coat of arms of all our (i.e., SlavonicCroatian) tribes and lands [Gaj 1863, 194]. Starevi and Kvaternik, the founders of the most nationalistic and ultra-right Croatian Party of (historical-state) Rights, denied the legitimacy of any other term and name of the Balkan Slavs than Croat. In the other words, all South Slavs were speciums of Croatian gens. In conclusion, the modern Croatian national-political ideology of Gaj, Starevi and Kvaternik was directly derived from Vitezovis Croatocentric terminology, ideology and viewpoints of the Balkan and world affairs. It should be said at the end that Vitezovis conception of linguistic nationhood, i.e., his perseption that the language was the pivotal national determinator, influenced South Slavic linguistically based definitions of nationhood from the time of Romanticizm, an approach that had a considerable impact to the South Slavic national ideologists especially during the 19th century and the first half of the 20th century [see for instance, Sotirovi 2000, 724; Banac 1983, 448474]. Ultimately, Vitezovis idea of Lithuanians (as Slavic people) Balkan origin based on ethnolinguistic determination of the nation was shared by famous Lithuanian 19th20th cc. national worker Jonas Basanaviius who claimed after many years of investigation and comparison of contemporary Lithuanian and old Thracian languages that Lithuanian ancestors migrated from the Western Balkan province of Thrace (i.e., originated in ancient Thracias) to the Baltics [Basanaviius 1898, 815, 21, 3435, 74]. Nevertheless, Balkan Thrace was a part of Vitezovis Croatia rediviva or united Croatia populated by ethnolinguistic Croats from the time of Antique onward. It can be given a short conclusion that Vitezovi following the main idea of mediaeval and Renaissance South Slavic writers upon Slavic matters who apotheosized Slavism transformed the message of one of them, Vinko Pribojevi, that historical task of Slavic nation was to rule the world (ut totius orbis habenas
97
______________________BALCANIA
regeret [Pribojevi 1951, 78] into the new futurological anticipation that ethnolinguistic Croats (among them and Lithuanians) had a historical destiny to rule the globe. Shortly, while Pribojevi was speaking in the favour of world Slavic empire, Vitezovi introduced a concept of ethnolinguistic ecumenical Croatian Empire. CONCLUSION Pavao Ritter Vitezovi, 16521713, an aristocrat of German origin of the Dalmation city of Senj, was the first South Slavic national ideologist who extended the Croatian ethnic name not only to the Balkan Slavs, but rather to all Slavs. Using several different medieaval historical sources upon Slavic settlement on the Balkan Peninsula and many of South Slavic literal and historical works that recorded a popular tradition about BalkanIllyrian origin of all Slavic peoples, Vitezovi concluded that legendary Slavic progenitors, brothers Czech, Lech and Rus', should be understood as of Croat ethnolinguistic origin. Indentifying the brothers as Croats, Vitezovi concluded that in fact the entire Slavic population in the world is descended from Croats. During the last stage of the Great Vienna War, 16831699, between Christian Alliance against the Ottomans, when the struggle between Venice and the Habsburgs for division of South Slavic lands emerged, Vitezovi wrote a memorandum to the Austrian emperor in order to refute any Venetian claim on the territory of Croatian historical lands. His work about limites totius Croatiae (the borders of whole Croatia) demonstrated the borders of a Greater Croatia, which was divided into two parts: Croatia Septemtrionalis (Northern Croatia) north of the Danube composed by Bohemia, Moravia, Lusatia, Hungary, Poland, Lithuania and Russia, and Croatia Meridionalis that was the Balkan Peninsula with Croatia, Slavonia, Dalmatia, Slovenia, Bosnia, Herzegovina, Albania, Epirus, Thessaly, Serbia, Bulgaria, Macedonia and Thrace. Balkan Croatia was further subdivided into Croatia Alba (White Croatia) and Croatia Rubea (Red Croatia). Transdanubian Croatia was subdivided into Sarmatia: Poland, Lithuania and Russia, and Venedia: Bohemia, Moravia, and Lusatia. Shortly, 17th century Croatian usage of the terms Illyrian and Croat as the synonyms Vitezovi simply extended to all Slavs
98
______________________BALCANIA
understanding them as the peoples of the Croat origin. In the other words, each Slavic people was only specium of Croatian gens. The ideology of pan-Croatianism created by Pavao Ritter Vitezovi, who developed the ancient theory upon derivation of all Slavs from the Croats, was a historical construction and a political program as protest against the long-time fragmentation of Croatian historical and ethnic territories, but it was at the same time and politics against territorial pretensins to the Croatian historical-ethnic space by Republic of St. Marco. Finally, Vitezovi attempted by his writings to obtain Habsburg political-military support for establishing of united Croatia, i.e., Croatia rediviva. Vitezovi's arguments were both historical and ethnolinguistic that helped him to appropriate a vast territory of Europe, from the Adriatic and Black Sea to Ural and the Baltic Sea, to Croatdom. Vitezovi considered the whole territiry of the PolishLithuanian Commonwealth as Croato-Slavic land primarily due to the fact that his knowledge about Poland and Lithuania mainly came from the writings of pro-Polish and pro-Slavic authors who saw Lithuania as Slavic territory, which was in the great extent polonized, i.e., became of Slavic feature, through the Polish language and culture. In addition, Vitezovi apprehension of Lithuania as Croato-Slavic land came from the facts that Slavic languages, among the others, were languages of official correspondence within the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, and what is more important, that majority of Lithuanias population was of Slavic origin. Subsequently, according to his Croatocentric doctrine, Slavic Grand Duchy of Lithuania was actually populated by ethnolinguistic Croats and belonged to united and Greater Croatia rediviva. Finally, I agree with Simpson Catherine Anne that for Vitezovi the value of the past was equal to that of the present, i.e., the past and the present are juxtaposed and intertwined, and that he occasionally subordinated the present to the past in the light of his national and political ideals [Simpson 1991, 94107]. It explains why in Vitezovis historiographic discourse there is no clear distinction between the past and the present. Blaevi Zdenka was right that both function as argumentative axes around which the functional and transtemporal Croatia as a discursive articulation of Vitezovis world view is being build [Blaevi 2000, 230]. Clearly, Vitezovis metahistoric Croatia (as temporalised narrative space produced by historical discourse [Veli 1991, 111]) would not be made to fit the geographic boundaries of its contemporary toponym.
99
______________________BALCANIA
REFERENCES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY Banac I. 1983: The Confessional Rule and the Dubrovnik Exception: The Origins of the Serb-Catholic Circle in Nineteenth-Century Dalmatia, Slavic ReviewAmerican Quaterly of Soviet and East European Studies, 42 (3). 448474. Banac I., 1984: The National Question in Yugoslavia. Origins, History, Politics. Ithaca and London. Banac I., 1991a: Hrvatsko jezino pitanje. Zagreb. Banac I., 1991b: Grbovi biljezi identiteta. Zagreb. Banac I., 1993: The Insignia of Identity: Heraldry and the Growth of National Ideologies Among the South Slavs, Ethnic Studies, vol. 10. 215237. Barii F., 1961: Vizantijski izvori u dalmatinskoj istoriografiji XVI i XVII veka, Zbornik radova Vizantolokog instituta, 7. 227257. Basanaviius J., 1898: Lietuvikai Trakikos Studijos. Shenandoah. Bazala V., 1954: Stric Grgur i neak Toma Budislavi, Republika, 10, 2-3. 255259. Brenger J., 1994: A History of the Habsburg Empire, 12731700. London and New York. Brenger J., 1997: A History of the Habsburg Empire 17001918. London and New York. Bideleux R., Jeffries I., 1999: A History of Eastern Europe. Crisis and Change. London and New York. Blaevi Z., 2000: Croatia on the Triplex Confinium: Two Approaches, in Roksandi D., tefanec N., (eds.) Constructing Border Societies on the Triplex Confinium, International Project Conference Papers 2, Plan and Practice. How to Construct a Border Society? The Triplex Confinium c. 17001750 (Graz, December 9-12, 1998), 221238. Budapest. Bogii R., (ed.), 1970: Pavao Ritter Vitezovi, Plorantis Croatiae saecula duo in Hrvatski latinisti II: Pisci 1719 stoljea, vol. 3 of Pet stoljea hrvatske knjievnosti, Zagreb. Bratuli J. (ed.), 1994: Pavao Ritter Vitezovi. Izbor iz djela. Zagreb.
100
______________________BALCANIA
Bumblauskas A., 2007: Senosios Lietuvos istorija 10091795. Vilnius: R Paknio leidykla. Bury J. B., 1906: The Treatise De Administrando Imperio, Byzantinische Zeitschrift, XV. 517577. Cassio B., 1604: Institutionum linguae illyricae libri duo. Authore Bartholomeo Cassio Curictensi Societatus Iesu. Rome. Cynarski S., 1968: The shape of Sarmatian ideology in Poland, Acta Poloniae Historica, 19. 617. Conte F., 1986: Les Slaves. Aux origines, des civilisations d Europe centrale et orientale (VIXIII sicles). Paris. orovi V., 1993 (written in 1941): Istorija Srba. Beograd. Cromer M., 1555: De origine et rebus gestis Polonarum. Basel. Cromer M., 1555: De origine et rebus gestis Polonorum. Basel. Cronia A., 1952: Contributo alla grammatologia serbocroata, Ricerche slavistiche, 1. 2237. Cronia A., 1953: Contributto alle lessicografia del Dictionarum quinque nobilissimaram Europae linguarum di Fausto Veranzio, Ricerche slavistiche, 2. Darden B. J., 1997: On Zbignew Gob, the Homeland of the Slavs, the Indo-Europeans, and the Venetae, Balkanistica, vol. 10. 430435. Davies N., 1981: Gods Playground: a History of Poland, vol. I, The Origins to 1795. Oxford. Davies N., 1982: Gods Playground: a History of Poland, vol. II, 1795 to the Present. Oxford. Derkos I., 1832: Genius patriae super dormientibus suis filiis. Zagreb. Difnik F., 1986 (written in 1671): Povijest Kandijskog rata u Dalmaciji (Historia della guera seguita in Dalmatia tra Ventiani e Turchi dallanno 1645 sino alla pace e separatione de confini). Split. Drakovi J., 1832: Disertacija iliti razgovor. Zagreb. Dukat V., 1925: Rjenik Fausta Vrania, Rad JAZU, 231. 102136. Engel J. (redactor), 1979: Groer Historischer Weltatlas. Zweiter Teil. Mittelalter. Mnchen.
101
______________________BALCANIA
Fedorowicz J., (ed.): 1982: A Republic of Nobles: Studies in Polish History to 1864. Cambridge. Fine J., 1994: The Early Mediaeval Balkans. A Critical Survey from the Sixth to the Late Twelfth Century. Ann Arbor. Franievi M., 1983: Povijest hrvatske renesansne knjievnosti. Zagreb. Frst-Bjeli B., 2000: Cartographic Perceptions of the Triplex Confinium and State Power Interests at the Beginning of the 18th century, in Roksandi D., tefanec N., (eds.) Constructing Border Societies on the Triplex Confinium, International Project Conference Papers 2, Plan and Practice. How to Construct a Border Society? The Triplex Confinium c. 1700-1750 (Graz, December 912, 1998), 205220. Budapest. Gabri-Bagari D., 1976: Institutiones linguae illyricae Bartola Kaia i tenje ka standardizaciji jezika, Knjievni jezik, 12. 5568. Gabri-Bagari D., 1984: Jezik Bartola Kaia. Sarajevo. Gaj Lj., 1835: Horvatov Szloga y Zjedinjenye, Danicza Horvatzka, Slavonzka y Dalmatinzka, January 7th. Gaj Lj., 1863: Leljiva, Danica ilirska, June 27th. Gaj Lj., 1965: Horvatov sloga i sjedinjenje, in Hrvatski preporod, vol. I. Zagreb. Gimbutas M., 1985: Primary and Secondary Homeland of the Indo-Europeans, Journal of Indo-European Studies, 13. 185202. Gluck W., 1939: Toma Nadali Budislavi, Pregled, 3, vol. 15, 183184. 150154. Gob Z., 1991: The Origin of the Slavs: A Linguists View. Columbus. Golub I., 1976: Juraj Kriani, Hrvat iz Ozalja-Georgius Krisanich Croata-ili Krianieva ukorjenjenost u zaviaju, Kaj, asopis za kulturu, 912. 100103. Gortan V., 1958: igori i Pribojevi, Filologija, 2. 149 152. Gregoire H., 1944-1945: Lorigine et le nom des Croates et des Serbes, Byzantion, XVII. 88118. Gudaviius E., 1999: Lietuvos istorija I tomas nuo seniausi laik iki 1569 met. Vilnius: AB spaustuv Spindulys.
102
______________________BALCANIA
Guibernau M., Rex J., (eds.), 1999: The Ethnicity. Nationalism, Multiculturalism and Migration. Oxford. Hammond, MCMLXXXIV: Historical Atlas of the World. Maplewood. Hobsbawm E., 2000: Nations and Nationalism since 1870. Programme, Myth, Reality. Cambridge. Hutchinson J., Smith A. D. (eds.), 1994: Nationalism. Oxford, New York. Istorija Jugoslavije (group of authors), 1973. Beograd Jeli L. (ed.), 1906a: Fontes Historici Liturgiae Glagolito-Romanae a XII ad XIX saeculum, saec. XIII. Krk. Jeli L. (ed.), 1906b: Fontes Historici Liturgiae Glagolito-Romanae a XII ad XIX saeculum, saec. XIV. Krk. Jeli L. (ed.), 1906c: Fontes Historici Liturgiae Glagolito-Romanae a XII ad XIX saeculum, saec. XVIII. Krk. Johnson L. R., 1996: Central Europe. Enemies, Neighbors, Friends. New York and Oxford. Johnson L., 1996: Central Europe. Enemies, Neighbors, Friends. New York and Oxford. Kamiski A., 1983: The Szlachta of the PolishLithuanian Commonwealth and their government, in Banac I., Bushkovitch P., Yale Concilium: The Nobility in Russia and Eastern Europe. New Haven. Kann R. A., 1990: A History of the Habsburg Empire, 15261918. Berkeley, Los Angeles, London. Kai B., 1997: Izabrana tiva. Zagreb. Kiaupa Z., Kiaupien J., Kuncevius A., 2000: The History of Lithuania before 1795. Vilnius. Klai N. (ed.), 1972: Izvori za hrvatsku povijest do 1526. godine. Zagreb. Klai N., 1971: Povijest Hrvata u srednjem vijeku. Zagreb. Klai V., 1914: ivot i djela Pavla Rittera Vitezovia (16521713). Zagreb. Kojelaviius (Koialowicz) A. W., 1650/1669 (reprint 1989): Historiae Litvaniae. Dancige, Antverpene. Kolendi A., 1962: est latinskih knjiica tampanih u Krakovu u ast Dubrovanina Tome Natalisa Budislavia, Zbornik istorije knjievnosti, SANU, 3. 211240.
103
______________________BALCANIA
Kovaevi E., 1973: Granice bosanskog paaluka prema Austriji i Mletakoj republici po odredbama Karlovakog mira. Sarajevo. Kriani J., 16611667: Razgowori ob wladatelystwu. Cracow. Kriani J., 1859: Gramatino izkaznje ob Rskom jezku. Moscow. Kvaternik E., 1971: Politiki spisi. Zagreb. Laszowski E., 1923: Putovanje Bartula Kaia po Srijemu g. 16121618, Hrvatski list, 4, 264. 2. Lietuvos istorijos atlasas vidurinei mokyklai, 2011: Vilnius: Leidykla Briedis. Lettere del Cavaliere Ritter: 1700; Biblioteca Universitaria di Bologna, Fondo Marsili, vol. 709, XIX, letter 2. Bologna. Lucius J., 1668; De regno Dalmatiae et Croatiae libri sex. Amstelodami. Lui I., 1986: O kraljevstvu Dalmacije i Hrvatske. Zagreb. Macan T., 1992: Povijest hrvatskoga naroda. Zagreb. Macan T., 1992: Povijest hrvatskoga naroda. Zagreb. Maczak A., 1992: Poland in Porter R. and Teich M. (eds.): The Renaissance in National Context. Cambridge. Mallory J.P., 1989: In Search of the Indo-Europeans. London. Markovi M., 1987: Prilog poznavanju djela objavljenih u zagrebakoj tiskari Pavla Rittera Vitezovia, Starine, 60. 7199. Zagreb. Markovi M., 1993: Descriptio Croatiae. Zagreb. Marsigli L. F., 1699: Relazione di tutta la Croazia, considerata per il geografico, politico e economico e militare. Bologna. Mati T., 1950: Bajraktarijev prijevod Orbinijeva Il regno degli Slavi, Historijski zbornik, 3, 14. 193 197. Moravcsic G. (ed.), Jenkins R. J. H. (translator), 1949: Constantinus Porphyrogenitus. De Administrando Imperio. Budapest. Novak G., 1951: Dalmacija i Hvar u Pribojevievo doba in Pribojevi V., O podrijetlu i zgodama Slavena. Zagreb. Orbin M., 1968: Kraljevstvo Slovena. Beograd. Orbini M., 1601: Il Regno degli Slavi. Pesaro.
104
______________________BALCANIA
Palmer A., 1970: The Lands Between. A History of EastCentral Europe since the Congress of Vienna. London. Pandi A., 1988: Pet stoljea zemljopisnih karata Hrvatske. Zagreb. Panteli M., 1965: Glagoljski brevijar popa Mavra iz godine 1460, Slovo, XV-XVI. 94149. Paanin A. (ed.), 1974: ivot i djelo Jurja Kriania: Zbornik radova. Zagreb. Perkovi Z., 1995: Croatia Rediviva Pavla Rittera Vitezovia, Senjski zbornik, 22. 225236. Povest vremennyh let (translation, introduction and comments by L. Leger), 1884. Paris, Leroux. Pribojevi V., 1951: De origine successibusque Slavorum. Zagreb. Radoji N., 1950: Srpska istorija Mavra Orbinija. Beograd. Reetar M., 1915: Toma Nadal Budislavi i njegov Collegium Ortodoxum u Dubrovniku, Rad JAZU, 206. 136141. Ritter P. E., 1689: Anagrammaton, sive Laurus auxiliatoribus Ungariae liber secundus. Vienna. Ritter P. E., 1696: Kronika, Aliti szpomen vsega szvieta vikov. Zagreb. Ritter P. E., 1699: Responsio ad postulata comiti Marsiglio in Count Marsiglis collection , manuscript volume 103, entitled Documenta rerum Croaticarum et Transylvanicarum in Commisione limitanea collecta, fol. 27r34r, Biblioteca Universitaria di Bologna, Bologna. Ritter P. E., 1706: Indigetes Illyricani sive Vitae Sanctorum Illyrici. Zagreb. Ritter P., 1689: Anagrammaton, Sive Lauras auxiliatoribus Ungariae liber secundus. Vienna. Ritter P., 1700: Croatia rediviva: Regnante Leopoldo Magno Caesare. Zagreb. Ritter P., 1701: Stemmatographia, sive Armorum Illyricorum delineatio, descriptio et restitutio. Vienna. Samalaviius S., 1995: An Outline of Lithuanian History. Vilnius. Samardi R., 1983: Veliki vek Dubrovnika. Beograd.
105
______________________BALCANIA
Sanevi Z., 1991: Povijesne granice Hrvatske i Bosne prema kartografima of 16. do 18. stoljea, Hrvatska revija, vol. III. 1746. Schmaus A., 1953: Vicentius Priboevius, ein Vorlufer des Panslavismus, Jahrbcher fr Geschichte Osteuropas, 1. 243254. Simpson C. A., 1991: Pavao Ritter Vitezovi; defining national identity in the baroque age. Manuscript. The School of Slavonic and East European Studies. University of London. London. Slukan M., 1999: Kartografski izvori za povijest Triplex Confiniuma. Zagreb. Sotirovi V., 2000: Nineteenth-century ideas of Serbia linguistic nationhood and statehood, Slavistica Vilnensis, Kalbotyra, 49 (2). 724. Stani N., 1985: Hrvatski narodni preporod, 17901848: Hrvatska u vrijeme Ilirskog pokreta. Zagreb. Starevi A., 1971: Politiki spisi. Zagreb. Stoye J., 1994: Marsiglis Europe 16801730. The Life and Times of Luigi Ferdinando Marsigli, Soldier and Virtuoso. New Haven and London. Stojkovi M., 1913/1914: Karakteristika ivota i djelovanja Bartula Kaia iz Paga, Nastavni vjesnik, 22, 1. 19. Stojkovi M., 1919: Bartuo Kai Paanin, Rad JAZU, 220. 170263. Sulimirski T., 1945: Schythian Antiquities in Central Europe, The Antiquaries Journal, XXV. 126. apoka A. (ed.), 1936 (reprint 1989): Lietuvos istorija. Kaunas. idak J., 1972: Poeci politike misli u HrvataJ. Kriani i P. Ritter Vitezovi, Nae teme, XVI/78. ii F., 1934: Hrvatska historiografija od XVI do XX stoljea, Jugoslovenska istoriski asopis, I/14. murlo E. J., 1926: Juraj Kriani: Panslavista o missionario, Rivista di letteratura, arte, storia, 1. 34. murlo E. J., 1927: From Kriani to the Slavophils, Slavonic Review, 6, 17. 321325. repel M., 1890: Latinski izvor i ocjena Kaieve gramatike, Rad JAZU, 102. 172201. tefani V., 1938: Bellarmino-Komuloviev Kranski nauk, Vrela i prinosi, 8. 150.
106
______________________BALCANIA
tefani V., 1963: Tisuu i sto godina od moravske misije, Slovo, XIII. 542. Tadin C., 1903: Elio Lampridio Cerva, Rivista Dalmatica, 3, 6. 265278. Teak S., 1996: Naglasci Jurja Kriania i dananji naglasni odnosi na podruju Ribnika, Ozalja Dubovca, Filologija, 26. Zagreb. The Sorbs in Germany (group of authors), 1998. Grlitz. Vanino M., 1934: Bartul Kai i knjievni mu rad, Napredak, kalendar, 23. 123127. Vanino M., 1936: O Aleksandru Komuloviu, Napredak, kalendar, 26. 4054. Vanino M., 1940: Autobiografija Bartula Kaia, Gradja, 15. 1144. Veli M., 1991: Otisak prie. Zagreb. Verantius F., 1595: Dictionarium quinque nobilissimarum Europae linguarum, Latinae, Italicae, Germanicae, Dalmatiae & Ungaricae. Venice. Vitezovi P. R., 1699: Mappa Generalis Regni Croatiae Totius. Limitibus suis Antiquis, videlicet, a Ludovici, Regis Hungariae, Diplomatibus, comprobatis, determinati. 1:550 000 (drawing in color). 69,4 x 46,4 cm. Hrvatski dravni arhiv, Kartografska zbirka (Croatian State Archives, Cartographic Collection), D I. Zagreb. Vitezovi P. R., 1700: Croatia rediviva: Regnante Leopoldo Magno Caesare. Zagreb. Vitezovi P. R., 1706: Offuciae Ioannis Lucii de Regno Dalmatiae et Croatiae Refutate. Zagreb. Vitezovi P. R., 1997: Oivjela Hrvatska. Zagreb. Vitezovich P., 1696: Kronika, aliti szpomen vszega szvieta vikov. Zagreb. Vrani F., 1971: Rjenik pet najuglednijih evropskih jezika. Zagreb. Wandycz P., 1974: The Lands of Partitioned Poland, 17951918. Seattle. Wandycz P., 1992: The Price of Freedom: a History of East-Central Europe from the Middle Ages to the Present. London. Wandycz P., 1997: Laisves kaina. Vidurio Ryt Europos istorija nou vidurami iki dabartines. Vilnius.
107
______________________BALCANIA
Weigl J. Ch. 1699: Mappa der zu Carlovitz geschlossen und hernach durch zwei gevollmchtige. Comissarios vollzogenen Kaiserlich-Trkischen Grantz-Scheidung, in dem frh jahr 1699. angefangen und nach verfliesung 26. Monaten volendet worden. 1:11 300 000. 1702. Copperlate in colour; 290 x 365 cm. Hrvatski dravni arhiv, Kartografska zbirka (Croatian State Archives, Cartographic Collection) A I 12; Muzej hrvatske povijesti, Kartografska zbirka (Museum of Croatian History, Cartographic Collection) 3844, Biblioteka nacionalnog univerziteta, Kartografska zbirka (National University Library, Cartographic Collection) S-JZ-XVIII-14. Westermann, 1985: Groer Atlas zur Weltgeschichte. Braunschweig. Zamoyski A., 1987: The Polish Way: a One Thousand Year History of the Poles and their Culture. London. efarovi H., 1741: . Vienna. ic N., 1935: Hrvatske knjiice Aleksandra Komulovia, Vrela i prinosi, 5. 162181. (group of authors), 1960. . , 1969; . ., 1994: . . . ., ., 1929-1930: , , vol. VIII, 5. 158182. ., ., ., 1991: . . ., 1928; , -.
108
______________________BALCANIA
The Slavs and their neighbours in 8th9th centuries
Dismemberment of the Ottoman Empire from 1683 to 1923
109
______________________BALCANIA
THE NATO WORLD ORDER, THE BALKANS AND THE R U SSI A N N A TI ON A L I N TE R E ST
Abstract: This article investigates the Russian foreign politics at the region of the Southeast Europe after the dissolution of the Soviet Union at the time of the NATO World Order in relation to the Pan-Slavic ideals of intra-Slavic solidarity, reciprocity and brotherhood. The particular stress is put on relations between pro-Western and pro-Orthodox approaches of the Russian national interests among the Russian domestic political scene and their attitudes towards the Balkans. Keywords: NATO World Order, Russia, Russian foreign policy, Russia and the Balkans, the South East Europe, Russia and the South Eastern Slavs, Pan-Slavism THE PAN-SLAVISM AND RUSSIA The Balkan Peninsula and the region of the Southeast Europe historically have been one of the most important focal points of the Russian foreign policy, cultural influences and attempts to spread ideology of the Orthodox solidarity and the Slavic reciprocity as well. These ideas are common to almost all trends of the Russian public life in the past and today. After the lost Crimean War 18531856 Russia intensified its cultural influence in the region of the Southeast Europe for the purposes of beating the Habsburg (Roman-Catholic) rivalry and to spread idea of the Pan-Slavism in this part of Europe. Undoubtedly, the political and economic rivalry between Russia, on one hand, and the Habsburg Monarchy (Austria-Hungary from 1867) and the German Empire (from 1871), on the other, over the dominance in this region was strongly affected in Russia by the growth of the Pan-Slavic sentiment, based on the common Slavic origin, mutual Paleoslavonic language, and above all grounded on emotional sentiment to liberate those South Slavs who were under the Ottoman rule.
110
______________________BALCANIA
Map of the Slavic Europe today composed by the territories settled by the Eastern, Western and South Slavs of all confessional denominations
Historically, Russia had two pivotal interests in both the Balkans and the Southeast Europe: 1) strategic, and 2) cultural/ religious. From strategic point of view, the Russian diplomacy concerned the Balkans and the Southeast Europe as essential for the Russian state security and above all for the stability of the Russian state frontiers. The Russian intention as to obtain favorable frontier in Bessarabia (today independent Moldova) and to have a control over the Bosphorous and the Dardanelles, which became very important to the Russian commercial and economic development; in particular for the shipment of surplus grain (from present-day Ukraine) to the world markets. The Bosphorous and the Dardanelles became a part of Russias security zone (in both economic and political terms). The Russian main concern was to safeguard free passage through the Bosphorous Straits to the Mediterranean Sea. Simultaneously, Russia intended to block the expansion of other European great powers, particularly AustriaHungary and Germany into the region. Taking religious and cultural aspects of the Russian interests in the Balkans and the Southeast Europe, largely due to the Russian Pan-Slavic agitation, Russia succeeded to develop from 1870 a strong interest in the fate
111
______________________BALCANIA
of the Balkan Slavs and the Southeast European Orthodox Christians. The Pan-Slavism, based on the myth of the Slavic solidarity and primarily on the Orthodox Slavic reciprocity, which created a strong ethnic, religious and cultural sentiments among the Slavic Orthodox population, became at the end of the 19th century one of the dominant driving forces behind the Russian policy in the Balkans and the Southeast Europe. The myth of the Slavic solidarity and brotherhood exerted a considerable influence on many intellectuals and found support in official circles in Russia, Serbia, Montenegro and Bulgaria.
Russian project of Greater Bulgaria by Count Cherkasky in 1877. According to this project, biggest part of the Eastern Balkan Paninsula will go to Greater Bulgaria as a Russian client state. By such means, Russia will have control over the Straits that was of crucial importance for the Russian foreign policy at that time. This project was in fact realized next year by the Peace Treaty of San Stefano on March 3rd, 1878 between the Russian and Ottoman Empires. The main losers in this case have been Serbia and Greece who lost Macedonia to Bulgaria. However, this peace treaty was revised at the Berlin Congress of the same year in June-July by the western European graet powers to the detriment of Russia and Russian interests
112
______________________BALCANIA
RUSSIA BETWEEN THE WESTERNIZERS AND THE PATRIOTS With the end of the Cold War, the Balkans, especially the question of the destiny of the former Yugoslavia, re-emerged as one of the major concerns in Russia. It has to be noticed that the USSR was simply dissolved by one man-decision the General Secretary of the Communist Party of Soviet Union, Mikhail Gorbachev, who, concerning this matter, made a deal firstly with the European Community in 1985 and later in 1988 with the US administration at the bilateral meeting with the US President Ronald Regan in Rejkjavik in Iceland. The USSR was the only empire in the world history which became simply dissolved by its own government as the rest of the world empires were destroyed from the outside after the lost wars. In our opinion, there were three main hypothetical reasons for Gorbachevs decesion to dissolve the Soviet empire: 1. Personal bribing of Gorbachev by the western governments (the USA and the EC); 2. Gorbachevs wish, as the first and the only ethnic Russian ruler of the USSR to prevent a further economic exploitation of the Russian federal unit by the rest of the Soviet republics that was a common practice since the very beginning of the USSR after the Bolshevik (anti-Russian) Revolution and civil war of 19171921; and the most important 3. Gorbachevs determination to transform Russian Federation, which will firstly get rid of the rest of the Soviet chigoe republics, into economically prosperous and well-todo country by selling its own natural resources (gas and oil) to the West according to the world prices. These are exactly the real reasons why during the last 23 years Russian foreign policy is totally soft and even subservient to the West to which mercy Moscow left the rest of the world including and the ex-Soviet republics with c. 40 million of ethnic Russian population outside the motherland. For the matter of comparison, in 1991 Belgrade also left all other Yugoslav republics to leave the federation free of charge, at least for the second Gorbachevs reason to dissolve the USSR, but with one crucial difference in comparison with the Russian case: the ethnic Serbs outside Serbia were not left at mercy, at least not as free of charge, to the governments of the newly (anti-Serb) proclamed independent states emerged on the wreck of (anti-Serb and
113
______________________BALCANIA
dominated by Croatia and Slovenia) ex-Yugoslavia. That was the only sin by Serbia in the 1990s and for that reason she was and still is sternly fined by the West. Russias policy and attitude towards the South Slavs in the Balkans during the last two decades is a part of a larger debate over Russias national interest and even over the Russian new identity after dissolving the Soviet Union. Since 1991, when its independence was formalized and internationally recognized, Russia has been searching for both its national identity and foreign policy. Intellectual circles in Russia have debated very much over the content of the Russian national self-identity for centuries. On one side there were/are those who believe that the Russian culture is a part of the European culture and as such the Russian culture can accepts some crucial (West) European values in its development, especially from the time of the emperor Peter the Great. This group, we could call them as the westernizers, have never negated the existence of Russias specific characteristics as a Euroasian country, but have always believed that staying within the framework of the Russian spectrum is equivalent to the national suicide. On the other hand, there are those who have tried to preserve all traditional Russian forms of living and organizing, including the political one and the cultural one, not denying at the same time that Russia is a European country too. This, we can name them as the patriotic group, of the Slavic orientation, partly nationalistically oriented, have believed and still believe that the (West) European civilizational and cultural values can never be adjusted to the Russian national character and that it is not necessary at all for the Russian national interest. The confrontation of these two groups characterizes both the Russian history and the present-day political and cultural developments. Very similar situation is in Serbia as well as Serbias society today is sharply divided into the so-called First (patriotic) and the Second (western) Serbia. At the moment, the basic elements of Russian national identity and state policy are: 1. The preservation of its territorial unity; 2. The protection of its interior integrity and its external (state) borders; and 3. The strengthening of its statehood. It means that contemporary Russia (The Gazprom Republic) rejected, at least for some time, the most significant element in its foreign affairs that has historically been from the time of the emperor Ivan the Terrible the (universal) imperial code
114
______________________BALCANIA
constant expansion of its territory or, at least, the position of a power that cannot be overlooked in the settlement of strategic global matters. At the present stage of her history, characterized by very harmonious (symphonic) economic and political relations with the West, especially with Germany, Russia in fact became a political colony of the West which is seen in Moscow eyes only as a good source for making money. The results of such kind of RussiaWest relations are Russian tourists all over the world, an impressive Russian state gold reserves (500 billion euros), buying real estate properties all over the Mediterranean littoral by the Russians, huge Russian financial investments in Europe and finally, Russian authorization of NATO and EU foreign policy that is mostly visible exactlly at the Balkans.
Coat of Arms of the Russian Romanovs Dynasty
Russias foreign policy is surely a part of its national and cultural identity as for any other state in world history. In the last 23 years, Moscow accepted the western academic and political propaganda as a sort of new facts that: 1. Russia is reportedly no longer a global super or even military power, although its considerable military potential is undeniable and very visible;
115
______________________BALCANIA
2. Russia allegedly has no economic power, although it has by very fact an enormous economic potentials, and 3. Russia, as a consequence, can not have any significant political influence which could affect the new international relations established after 1989/1991, i. e. the NWO (the NATO World Order), or better to say Pax Americana. It makes Russia a western well payed client state as in essence no strategic questions can be solved without Russian permission, however for certain sum of money or other way of compensation. For instance, the Kosovo status was solved in 2008 between Russia and NATO/EU on this way that Russia de facto agreed to Kosovo self-proclaimed independence (as US client terrytory) for western also de facto agreement to South Ossetian and Abkhazian self-proclaimed independence (as Russian client territories) too. Russia as a country is unpredictable when it is isolated, and its unpredictability can be dangerous for the surrounding regions as well as for the global international relations. This thesis has had its confirmation in the events concerning the conflicts in both former Yugoslavia (the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia/the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia), and the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (the FYROM). The cultural, religious and historic ties with the Orthodox Slavs who live in the Balkans (together with the western money) determine the Russian attitude and politics towards the political challenges in the Southeast Europe during the last decades especially what concerns the Orthodox Slavs in Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosmet (Kosovo and Metochia) and Macedonia (i.e. the Serbs, Montenegrins and Macedonians). In Russia emerged after Gorbachevs dissolution of the Soviet Union two ideological-political streams in the general debate in the Russian society about the national interests. The first emphasizes the importance of Russias long-standing ethnic, cultural and religious ties with the Balkan peoples, especially with the Serbs, Montenegrins (Montenegrins and the Serbs from Montenegro) and Macedonians. The second stresses the importance of good ties to the West and integrating Russia into a broader Euro-Atlanticist framework. Since Russia formally has lost all the attributes of a super power after the disolution of the Soviet Union, its political elite has in the early 1990s become oriented towards closer association with the institutional structures of the West in accordance with its oficially general drift towards liberal-democratic reform (in fact towards the taycoonization of the whole society and politics). Till
116
______________________BALCANIA
1995 Russia had become a member of almost all structures of the NATO, even of the Partnership for Peace Programme what is telling the best about real aims of the Gazprom Russias foreign policy. In May 1997 Russia signed the NATO-Russia Founding Act on Mutual Relations, Cooperation and Security, which meant de facto that it accepted the NATO as the core of the Euro-Atlantic system of security. Whether or not the ruling structures in Russia had expected a more important role for their country in its relations with the new partners, since 1995 there has been certain stagnation in the relations with the West, accompanied by the insistence on the national interests of Russia. In practice, this was manifested in the attempts to strengthen the connections with the Commonwealth of Independent State (CIS) with which it had somewhat more stable and secure relations. However, the state of relations within the CIS, accompanied with a very difficult economic and politically unstable situation in some of the countries in the region, prevented any organizational or other progress in this direction. Still, the CIS has remained the primary strategic focus for Russia, especially when it comes to the expansion of NATO towards these countries. RUSSIA, THE WEST AND EX-YUGOSLAVIA The economic and political situation in Russia, the changes, as well as the rate and the content of its fitting into the existing international relations influenced Russias attitude towards the wars in the regions of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugosavia (the SFRY), the State Unity of Serbia and Montenegro (former Federal Republic of Yugoslavia-the FRY) and the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (the FYROM). Since the beginning of the disintegration of the SFRY, Russia has taken very diplomatic position that these conflicts are the Yugoslav domestic matters and consequently should be settled peacefully, without use of force, with the UN or the OSCE as mediators. Russia kept this official position throughout the wars in Yugoslavia, till the end of the military conflict in Kosovo in June 1999, but even and during NATO military occupation of Kosovo & Metohija followed by the expulsion of majority of the ethnic Serbs and all other nonAlbanian ethnicities by Albanians from the region (19992013). In view of its position in Europe and the world (especially in relation to the USA), characterized by her need and wish to become a
117
______________________BALCANIA
respectable partner to the most developed countries, Russia is blindly following the decisions of its partners from the West, especially at the time of the western clown Boris Yeltsin. So, for instance, Russia recognized Croatia and Slovenia in February 1992 as independent states, in May 1992 it did the same with the FYR of Macedonia and in August of the same year with Bosnia and Herzegovina. Although it was formally on the side of Serbia and Serbs, mainly because of deep historic, cultural and political linkages with the Serbs, it actually accepted the decisions of its western partners and followed their obviously anti-Serb Balkan policy. Such attitude was the result of its orientation towards getting closer to European economic, political and security institutions, but also the result of a different orientation. For Russia, the Balkans is still just a part of its European (economic) strategy, but not the main task of her European (political) policy.
Deployment of international UNPREDEP forces in the FYROM from 1991 onward. No Russian troops
This is quite similar with the case of the NATO military aggression on the FR of Yugoslavia in 1999 for the real reason to occupy and separate Kosovo & Metohija from Serbia for the final sake of creation of a Greater Albania. Formally, Russia remained
118
______________________BALCANIA
resolute in her demand that the conflict in Kosovo & Metohija had to be resolved in the Security Council of the UN or in the OSCE, but in fact nothing did to realy help the Serbs in their fight against Albanian nacionalism and US imperialism exactlly what Washington and Brussells wanted and needed from Moscow. From the very fact, when several western countries decided to intervene against Yugoslavia in 1999, Russia did nothing concrete to change that decision, although Moscow nominally disagreed because there was no formal decision in the Security Council of the UN and it was against the use of force in regional ethnic conflicts in general. In fact, the Russian pro-western taycoon authorities did not wish to get directly involved in the conflict in Kosovo & Metohija in order to keep very prosperous relations with the West. Formally, during the NATO military aggression on Yugoslavia Russia tried to sustain contacts with Serbia. These attempts met with the approval of a part of the public, which, along with the nationally oriented intellectual and political elite, was pushing Russia into a conflict with the West, with the USA in particular, for the matter to defend the Orthodox Slavs in the Balkans as historically Russia was a natural protector of them during the time of existence of the Ottoman Empire. That is how it came about that during the Kosovo Crisis and War of 19981999 the relations between Russia and the USA became the worst since the end of the Cold War period, but in essence nothing was changed after the war in relations between Russia and the West. Nevertheless, the Russian participation with the NATO in international contingent of peacekeeping forces in BosniaHerzegovina (the IFORS/SFOR) and Kosovo-Metohija (the KFOR) shows that (Gazprom) Russia became highly opportunistic and even smarmy to the West as she consciously accepted to participate in these NATO military missions only for the reason to internationally legalize the new NATO World Order that is obviously in the first place de facto anti-Russian. However, it is very unconvincing explaination by the Russian Westernizers that this decision to participate in the NATO peace keeping missions in the Balkans in the 1990s was for Moscow only possibility to prove that Russia is still no out from international politics of the Great (western) Powers and to have some influence in the region. But it is known that this participation is under the full-scale dictate of the NATO what is clearly visible from at least three facts: 1. Russia did not get its own sectors of protection either in Bosnia-Herzegovina or Kosovo-Metohija nevertheless Russia required them. The territory of Bosnia-Herzegovina
119
______________________BALCANIA
was divided into three sectors of protection: the Canadian, the US, and the French once. However, it was no single Russian one. 2. A brigade of the Russian peacekeepers has been based in Bosnia-Herzegovina in the US sector, the Multinational Division North, since January 1996, numbering only some 1,200 airborne troops. The Russian zone of responsibility was running between the predominantly Croat and Muslim Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina from the predominantly Serb Republika Srpska. However, about 30 US soldiers were permanently stationed at the Russian brigades headquarters in Ugljevik (the Northeastern Bosnia-Herzegovina) while the Russian peacekeeping troops were in fact under the US supervision and command. In this respect, can you immagine the US military brigade under the Russian supervision and command in Afganistan or Iraq? We have also to notice at this place that in 1877 Russia entered the war against the Ottoman Empire because of Bosnia-Herzegovina (the so-called Eastern Crisis) and even the First World War in 1914 after Sarajevo Assassination and Austria-Hungarys ultimatum to the Kingdom of Serbia. However, it was an Imperial Russia (not at all in much better possition to the western Great Powers as today Russia is), but not the Gazprom one. 3. The Russian peace keeping contingent in KosovoMetohija of some 3,150 soldiers (out from total 45,000 international NATO troops in Kosovo-Metohija) was deployed in three sectors in the US-led Multinational Brigade East, in the French-led Multinational Brigade North, and in the German-led Multinational Brigade South. In June 1999, when the NATO troops occupied KosovoMetohija, the NATO headquarters in Brussels decisively rejected the Russian demand that Russia should have its own sector of protection in Kosovo-Metohija. We also have not to forget that the Russian troops (came from BosniaHerzegovina) occupied the Prishtina airport in June 1999 before the NATO troops from the south reached the administrative centre of Kosovo-Metohija. That was at the moment a greatest victory of Russia over the West from the time of dissolution of the Soviet Union. However, very soon the same Russian troops left the Prishtina airport under the western pressure what shows at the best a real self-wanted possition of (Gazprom) Russia in the NATO World Order
120
______________________BALCANIA
after the end of the Cold War (19491989). Consequently, Moscow in 2001 left Afganistan in full mercy of the US occupation the land which was only three decades ago (in 1979) understood by Kremlin as excusively its own sphere of dominance without western interference.
Albanian terror and ethnic cleansing of the Serbs from Kosovo & Metohija under the umbrela of KFOR/NATO presence in the region from June 11th, 1999
Obviously, only limited and formal Russian participation in the the so-called peace-keeping forces in Bosnia-Herzegovina and Kosovo-Metohija, that is in fact just international legalization of the NATO occupation of these lands, is very welcomed by the NATO headquarters as it gives NATO a legitimacy of human rights protection in the Balkans. Following its orientation towards the well-to-do Russian home, combined with its new national security concept of protecting Russias state borders, but without crossing them in international relations, Russia is trying to achieve the optimum of such kind of politics to play a role of a formally respectable power on the international scene which will take its part in the most significant strategic changes in the world done by the NATO and US administration followed by its European client the European Union for the sake of keeping perfect economic relations with the West. Therefore, Russias attitude towards Republic of Srpska in Bosnia-Herzegovina, Serbia, Montenegro
121
______________________BALCANIA
and Macedonia is regarded in the contexts of its attempts to put into practice its common westernization policy with the ultimate goal to integrate Russia into the western political scope and system. Having in mind this, it is quite predictable that Russian forces will took participation in the NATO peace keeping forces in Macedonia (MACFOR) or Vojvodina (VOJDFOR) or Sandak (SANDFOR) in the near future under the same conditions as in BosniaHerzegovina and Kosovo-Metohija. For the mattar of better clarification, Serbias northern region of Vojvodina, populated by the Serb majority and non-Serb minority (predominantly Hungarian one) and southwest region of Sandak (Sanjak), populated by mixed Orthodox Serbian and Muslim Boshniak (Bonjak) population, are scheduled by the West (the USA, NATO, EU) as the next regions of separation at the Balkans where the western peace-keeping troops are going to be located. Thus, such Russian role in the Balkan affairs fits to the ideas of the main Russian proponents of the so-called Atlanticist School (for instance, a former Russias Foreign Minister Andrey Kozyrev), which tends to play down the idea of Russia as the protector of the (Orthodox) Slavs in the Southeast Europe. However, instead of this idea, the Russian Westernizers emphasize the crucial importance of co-operating with the West for the Russian economic (and cultural) development in the future. Subsequently, they explicitly reject a policy based on ethnic, religious and cultural ties with the Balkan Orthodox Slavs, particularly with the Serbs. Absolutely the same situation is and with the Serbian Westernizers (the Second Serbia) who are rejecting any ties with Kosovo-Metohija for the sake of (remains of) Serbias prosperity in the (western) future. The myths of a fundamental Slavic brotherhood and the pan-Slavic solidarity, based on common Slavic origin, and especially with the Orthodox South Slavs, based on shared culture and the same religion is by now put aside as an ancient history by Moscow. It was visible, at least, twice in relations to the Serbs: 1) when the Parliament of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia proclaimed a state unity with Russia in 1999 during the NATO aggression and 2) when Kosovo-Metohija Serbs (c. 100.000) required Russias citizenship in 2011. Moscow in both cases simply was deaf, but it would be a perfect opportunity and excuse for Russia to do realy something for the Serbs and to stop a NATO machinery at the Balkans. However, some of influential Russias political leaders and representatives are still ardent to the ideology of the Pan-Slavic common ethnolinguistic origin, cultural
122
______________________BALCANIA
reciprocity, solidarity and brotherhood. For instance, during a visit to Serbia in January 1994 (the Jew) Vladimir Zhirinovsky warned the West that any attack on Serbia or Bosnian Serbs would be considered by the Russians as an attack on Russia itself. However, when it happened in reality in 1995 and 1999 Russia did simply nothing. It is interesting that on the same occasion he called for a union of all Slavic nations from Knin to Vladivostok. Zhirinovsky was also the main advocator of a radical revision of the territorial map of Europe, especially in the Southeastern Europe. In his conception of reshaping the political map of Europe, the new (Russian) order in the Southeast Europe has to be based on the (by now utopian) Slavic pyramid: 1) Bosnia and Herzegovina would be divided between a Greater Serbia and Greater Croatia; 2) A Greater Bulgaria would be created with its capital in Sofia; 3) Greece would be given parts of European Turkey, and finally, 4) Hungary would get back Transylvania from Romania. It is quite predictable that idea of the Pan-Slavic solidarity, reciprocity and brotherhood will be put on agenda of the Russian national interest if the Russian Patriots and Pan-Slavic nationalists gained political power in Russia (after the next revolution or not). In this case, the concept of reshaping the Southeast Europe on the model of some kind of the Slavic pyramid will surely play a significant role in the Russian foreign policy and presumably in the next and last world war.
CONCLUSIONS At the end of this text we will express several of our basic conclusions in relations to the topic of contemporary Russian relations with the Balkans, or better to say, to the debate of the main issue of the present-day Russian foreign policy between West and herself: 1) Post-Soviet Russia is politically very deeply involved in the western system of international relations and cultural values that is basically giving to Moscow a status of the western client partner on the international scene of the NATO World Order.
123
______________________BALCANIA
2) A full victory of the Russian Westernizers allow them to further westernize Russia according to the pattern of the Emperor Peter the Great with the price of Russian inferiority and even servility at the international relations. For that reason, the West already succeeded to encircle Russia with three rings: the NATO at the West, the Muslim Central Asian at the South and the Chinise one at the South-East. 3) The West is buying Russias inferiority at the international scene by keeping perfect economic relations with Moscow that is allowing Russia, especially Russias taycoons, to become enormously reach. These harmonious West-Russia political-economic relations are goint to be broken in the future only under two circumstances: if the Russian Patriots with take political power in Kramlin, or if the West will introduce any kind of economic sanctions against Russia (i.e. to restrict importing Russian gas and oil or to limit business operations of the Russian oil and gas companies outside Russia). 4) Up to now, the Souteast Europe is left to the western hands by Moscow and the region is already incorporated into the NATO World Order. Russia in this region has only and exclusively economic-financial interest (the Southern Stream, investments, buying the real estate properties, selling its own products, etc.). The region is becoming more and more under the Russian direct financial control and as the best example is Montenegro with 40% Russian investment out of total foreign one. 5) The only political and national losers at the Balkans, as the outcome of such West-Russia post-Soviet relations, are the Serbs who as a nation have been expelled from Croatia and lost their Republic of Serbian Krayina, lost 20% of their land in Bosnia-Herzegovina, lost KosovoMetohija and will lose Vojvodina and Sandak in the near future. The state territory of Serbia, according to the western designes from the very end of the Cold War era, would be reduced to the borders of Bismarck Serbia after the Berlin Congress in 1878 up to the Balkan Wars of 19121913.
124
______________________BALCANIA
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Allcock B. J., Explaining Yugoslavia, New York: Columbia University Press, 2000. Bideleux R., Jeffries I., A History of Eastern Europe. Crisis and Change, LondonNew York: Routledge,1999. Black E. C., Russia and the Modernization of the Balkans, Jelavich Ch., Jelavich B., (eds.), The Balkans in Transition: Essays on the Development of Balkan Life and Politics since the Eighteenth century, Archon Books, 1974. Castellan G., History of the Balkans: From Mohammed the Conqueror to Stalin, New York: Columbia University Press, East European Monographs, Boulder, 1992. Guskova J., Istorija jugoslovenske krize, III, Beograd, 2003. Guskova J., Jugoslovenska kriza i Rusija, Beograd, 1996. Gow J., Triumph of the Lack of Will: International Diplomacy and the Yugoslav War, London: Hurst & Company, 1997. Hofbauer H., Eksperiment Kosovo: Povratak kolonijalizma, Beograd: Albatros Plus, 2009. Janos C. A., East Central Europe in the Modern World. The Politics of the Borderlands from Pre- to PostCommunism, Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2000. Jelavich B., Russias Balkan Entanglements, 18061914, Bloomington, 1991. Kiernan V. G., America, The New Imperialism: From White Settlement to World Hegemony, London: Verso, 2005. Larrabee F. S. (ed.), The Volatile Powder Keg: Balkan Security after the Cold War, Washington, DC: The American University Press, 1994. Markovi B. Yugoslav Crisis and the World: Chronology of Events: January 1990October 1995, Beograd, 1996. Mendeloff D., 'Pernicious History' as a Cause of National Misperceptions: Russia and the 1999 Kosovo War, Cooperation and Conflict: Journal of the Nordic International Studies Association, Vol. 43, 1, pp. 3156.
125
______________________BALCANIA
Narochnitskaya A. N., Spiritual and geopolitical rivalry in the Balkans at the brink of the XXI century, Eurobalkans, autumn 1998, pp. 1823. Oven D., Balkan Odyssey, London 1996. Parchami A., The Pax Americana Debate, Hegemonic Peace and Empire: The Pax Romana, Britanica and Americana, Taylor & Francis Group, 2009. Riasanovsky V. N., A History of Russia, Oxford University Press, 2006. Sabrina R., The Three Yugoslavias: State-Building and Legitimation, 19182005, Indiana University Press, 2006. Szajkowski B. (ed.), Political Parties of Eastern Europe, Russia and the Successor States, London, 1994. Trifunovska S. (ed.), Yugoslavia Through Documents: From its creation to its dissolution, Dordrecht-BostonLondon: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1994. Woodwards S., Balkan Tragedy: Chaos and Dissolution after the Cold War, Washington, 1995. ., , , 1996. E. . (.), : , , : , III, , 19921993. ., : (14921992), , : Evro-Giunti, 2010. ., : . , : , 1870. . , , : , 1989. Shoup S. P (ed.), Problems of Balkan Security: Southeastern Europe in the 1990s, Washington, DC: The Wilson Center Press, 1990. Ullman H. R. (ed.), The World and Yugoslavias Wars, New York: A Council on Foreign Relations, 1996.
126
______________________BALCANIA
Russian Greater Bulgaria from 1878
127
______________________BALCANIA
Tampon Zone on the administrative border with Kosmet and Triplex Confinium between FYROM, Kosmet and Serbia proper (June 1999onward)
128
______________________BALCANIA
Pan-Slavic flag
Territory of Bismarck Serbia from 1878 to 1912
129
______________________BALCANIA
KOSOVO AND THE CAUCASUS: A DOMINO EFFECT
Abstract Goal and objectives: The goal of this research is to investigate and compare the interethnic and interstate clashes and wars in the Balkan micro region of Kosovo-Metohija with those from the macro region of the Caucasus. Basic research methodology employed: Textual analyzes of the primary sources and scientific literature. Key words: Kosovo, Metohija, Balkans, Serbs, Serbia, South Slavs, Albanians, international relations, ethnic cleansing, Causasus, Russia, Georgia. Introduction After February 2008 when Kosovo Albanian-dominated parliament proclaimed Kosovo independence (without organizing a referenda) with obvious U.S. diplomatic support (unilateral recognition) with explanation that Kosovo case is unique in the World (i.e., it will be not repeated again) one can ask the question: is the problem of southern Serbian province of Kosovo (and Metochia) really unique and surely unrepeatable in some other parts of the World as U.S. administration was trying to convince the rest of the international community? Domino effect Consequences of recognition of Kosovo independence by one (smaller) part of the international community are already (and going to be in the future) visible primarily in the Caucasus because of the very similar problems and situation in these two regions. At the Caucasus (where 50 different ethnolinguistic groups are living) self-proclaimed independence already was done in Abkhazia and South Ossetia only several months after self-
130
______________________BALCANIA
proclaimed independence of the so-called Republic of Kosova, but consequences could be felt and in Nagorno-Karabakh (province in Azerbaijan) as well. The experts from German Ministry of Foreign Affairs expressed even in 2007 their real fear that in the case of U.S. and E.U. unilateral recognition of Kosovo independence the same unilateral diplomatic act could be implied by Moscow by recognition of Abkhazia and South Ossetia as a matter of diplomatic compensation and as result of domino effect in international relations. It is also known and from official O.S.C.E. sources that Russian delegates in this pan-European security organization have been constantly warning before 2008 the West that such scenario is quite possible, but with one peculiarity: from 2007 they stopped to mention possibility of the Russian recognition of Nagorno-Karabakhs self-proclaimed independence (on September 2nd, 1991). It is most probably for the reason that Moscow does not want to spoil good relations with Azerbaijan a country with huge reserves of natural gas and oil.
A map of Kosovo and Metochia with main Serbian mediaeval churches and monasteries
131
______________________BALCANIA
Why South Ossetia could be different? On the first glance it can be said that Orthodox South Ossetians are equally separatist as Muslim Kosovo Albanians. However, South Ossetians are having sympathies towards Serbs (not because both of them are Orthodox) but not towards, as we could expect, separatist Kosovo Albanians. The real reason of such sympathies is similar legal state rights applied by both Serbs in Kosovo and South Ossetians. Historically, South Ossetia was never really integral and authentic part of sovereign Georgian state, differently with Kosovo which was not only integral, but culturally and politically the most important region of medieval Serbian state till 1455 when Kosovo with Metochia became occupied by the Ottomans. Moreover, Georgia itself was almost never before entered Russia an united state territory, also differently to Serbia which lost independence in 1459 and regained it in 1804. Present day territory of Georgia entered Russia in parts segment by segment. Ossetia as united territory (not divided into Northern and Southern as today situation is) became voluntarily part of Russian Empire in 1774. The Russian Empress Catherin the Great (17621796), in order to be surely convinced that the Ossetians are really independent, before incorporation of this province into the Russian Empire sent a special commission which informed St. Petersburg that the Ossetians are free people subordinated to no one.
Serbian monastery of Dechani (first half of the 14th century) in Kosovo-Metohija today. It is protected by the Italian NATO troops from the Albanian destructive attacks. The NATO troops are protecting only top-important Serbian monasteries and churches from the Middle Ages in Kosovo-Metohija for the matter of presenting the region as a multicultural one. However, the biggest part of Serbian cultural property in Kosovo-Metohija is already either destroyed or damaged by the ethnic Albanians
132
______________________BALCANIA
A geopolitical map of the region of the Caucasus in 2008
Georgia itself became part of Russian Empire in 1804 (27 years later then Ossetia). This fact is the most important argument used by the South Ossetians in their dispute with Georgian authorities. Differently to the Ossetians, Kosovo Albanians such argument do not have in relation to the Serbs. In is known that Albanians started to settle themselves at the region of Kosovo and Metochia from present-day Northern Albania only after the First Serbian Great Migration from the region in 1689. It should be said as well that, according to several Byzantine and Arab sources, the Balkan Albanians are originating from the Caucasus Albania in the 9th century they left the Caucasus and have been settled by the Arabs in West Sicily and South Italy which they left in 1043 and came to the Balkans. Southern part of Ossetia was given to be administered by Georgia only in the USSR by decision of three Georgian Communists J. V. Stalin, Sergei Ordzonikidze and Avelj Enukindze. Between these two parts of Ossetia never was a border before 1994. The people of South Ossetia on the referendum upon destiny of the USSR on March 17th, 1991 voted for existence of
133
______________________BALCANIA
Soviet Union (like the Serbs upon Yugoslavia, but and Kosovo Albanians on illegal referendum to become independent from Serbia like Georgians from the USSR). The referendum on March 17th, 1991 was organized two months after Georgian army started the war against South Ossetia in which till September of the same year 86 Ossetian villages have been burned. It is calculated that more than 1.000 Ossetians lost their lives and around 12.000 Ossetians emigrated from South to North Ossetia. This is the point of similarity with expelled 250.000 Serbs from Kosovo by the Albanian the so-called Kosovo Liberation Army after NATO peace-keeping troops entered this province in June 1999. Independence of Republic of South Ossetia was proclaimed on May 29th, 1992. However, this legal act has not been understood as separatist because at that time Georgia was not recognized by no one state in the world as independent one and Georgia was not a member of the United Nations. Oppositely to the South Ossetian case, Kosovo Albanian unilateral independence proclamation on February 18th, 2008 cannot be treated by international community as a legal one (without permission by Belgrade) as Kosovo by international law and agreements is integral part of Serbia and Serbia (differently from Georgia in May 1992) is internationally recognized independent state and a member of the United Nations. This is and common point of similarity between Ossetians and Serbs: both of them are fighting against separation of one part of national body and land from the motherland. International system of governing and separation The main argument for the western politicians upon Kosovo independence, as unique case of Kosovo situation, is the fact that according to Kumanovo agreement between Miloshevics Serbia and NATO on June 10th, 1999, and the UN Resolutions 1244 (following this agreement), Kosovo is put under UN protectorate with imposed international system of governing and security. However, such argument does not work in the case of South Ossetia as the Ossetians are governing their land by themselves and much more successfully in comparison with internationally (i.e. NATO) protected Kosovo. It was quite visible in March 2004 when international organizations and military troops could not (i.e. did not want to) protect ethnic Serbs in Kosovo from violent attacks organized by local Albanians when during three days (March 1719th) 4,000 Serbs exiled, more than
134
______________________BALCANIA
800 Serbian houses are set on fire and 35 destroyed or severely damaged Serbian Orthodox churches and cultural monuments. The March Pogrom revealed the real situation in the region of Kosovo and Metochia. The position of the South Ossetians in independent Georgia from 1991 to August 2008 could be compared with position of the Serbs in Kosovo after June 1999. Differently with the Kosovo case after June 1999, or even after February 2008, South Ossetia, Abkhazia and Pridnestrovje showed much more political-legal bases to be recognized as independent as they showed real ability to govern themselves by only themselves but not by the international organizations as in the case of Kosovo. They also proved much more democracy and respect for human and minority rights in comparison with Albanian-ruled Republic of Kosova.
Crucified Kosovo by Muslim Albanians today
Nagorno-Karabakh and Kosovo There are several similarities, but also and dissimilarities between conflicts upon Nagorno-Karabakh and Kosovo. In both cases the international community is dealing with autonomy of compact national minority who is making a majority on the land in question and having its own national independent state out of
135
______________________BALCANIA
this territory. Both Nagorno-Karabakh Armenians and Kosovo Albanians do not want to accept any other solution except separation and internationally recognized independence. Both conflicts are in fact continuations of old historic struggles between two different civilizations: Muslim Turkish and Christian Byzantine. In both conflicts the international organizations are included as the mediators. Some of them are the same - France, U.S.A. and Russia as members of both Contact Groups for exYugoslavia and Minsk Group under O.S.C.E. umbrella for Azerbaijan. Both Serbia and Azerbaijan have been against that their cases (Kosovo and Nagorno-Karabakh) would be proclaimed by some kind of international community as the unique cases as it would be a green light to Albanian and Armenian separatists to secede their territories from Serbia and Azerbaijan without permission given by Belgrade and Baku (what in reality already happened).
One of burned Serbian churches in Kosovo-Metohija by Muslim Albanians. It was done during the March Pogrom of March 1719th, 2004
136
______________________BALCANIA
A map of ethnolinguistic groups in the Caucasus region in 2009
However, there are and significant differences between Kosovo and Nagorno-Karabakh cases. Firstly, Kosovo is internal conflict within Serbia (which is after June 1999 internationalized) but in the case of Nagorno-Karabakh we have to speak about external military aggression (by Armenia). Secondly, in difference to Armenia in relation to Nagorno-Karabakh, Albania formally never accepted any legal act in which Kosovo was called as integral part of state territory of Albania (with historical exception during the Second World War when Kosovo, Eastern Montenegro and Western Macedonia have been included into Mussolinis the so-called Greater Albania). Delegation from Albania did not take
137
______________________BALCANIA
any participation in the talks and negotiations upon the final status of Kosovo between Prishina and Belgrade in 20072013, while Armenia has official status of interested side in the conflict concerning Nagorno-Karabakh. However, the Armenians from Nagorno-Karabakh such status still did not obtain. Official regular army of Albania never was involved in Kosovo conflict (differently from great number of volunteers from Albania), while Armenian army (i.e. from the state of Armenia) was directly involved in military operations in Nagorno-Karabakh, officially part of independent state of Azerbaijan. As result, Armenia occupied 1/5 of Azerbaijan territory and the victims of ethnic cleansing are only Azerbaijani. Differently from Kosovo case, weaker Azerbaijan side did not apply to NATO for the military help but weaker Albanian side did it during the Kosovo conflict 1998/1999. Conclusion It can be concluded that Albanian unilaterally proclaimed Kosovo independence in February 2008 is not unique case in the world without direct consequences to similar separatist cases following the domino effect (South Ossetia, South Sudan...). That is the real reason why the government of Cyprus is not supporting Kosovo Albanian rights to self-determination as the next unique case can be easily northern (Turkish) part of Cyprus which is by the way already recognized by Republic of Turkey and under de facto Ankaras protection. Finally, the author of the article has strong belief that the USA and Russian administrations simply decided in 2008 to recognize at the moment de facto situation upon the Balkans and Caucasus affairs: Kosovo (and Metochia) will be recognized as the USA domain, while South Ossetia and Abkhazia as the Russian one. By now, and of course, such secret diplomacy deal can not be proved by any document. Bibliography , , : , 1989. , : (, , ), : , 2006.
138
______________________BALCANIA
Hannes Hofbauer, Experiment Kosovo. Die Rckker des Kolonialismus, Wien: 2008. The March Pogrom in Kosovo and Metohija (March 1719, 2004) with a survey of destroyed and endangered Christian cultural heritage, Belgrade, 2004. Jorge Heine, The Conflict in the Caucasus: Causing a New Cold War?, India Quarterly: A Journal of International Affairs, vol. 65, no. 1, 2009, pp. 5566 Moorad Mooradian, Daniel Druckman, Hurting Stalemate or Mediation? The Conflict over NagornoKarabakh, 199095, Journal of Peace Research, vol. 36, no. 6, 1999, pp. 709727. Chorbajian Levon, Patrick Donabedian, Claude Mutafian, The Caucasian Knot, Atlantic Highlands, NJ: Zed., 1994. Judah Tim, Kosovo: War and Revenge, New Haven: Yale University Press, 2000. Klare Michael, Rising Powers, Shrinking Planet: The New Geopolitics of Energy, New York: Metropolitan Books, 2008. Armenian Center for National and International Studies, Nagorno Karabagh: A White Paper, Yerevan: ACNIS, 2008. Pl Kolst, The Sustainability and Future of Unrecognized Quasi-States, Journal of Peace Research, vol. 43, no. 6, 2006, pp. 723740. The Crucified Kosovo Independent Research Project http://crucified-kosovo.webs.com . , : , : , 2007.
139
______________________BALCANIA
. , , : , 2006. Neue Zrcher Zeitung, 14. 05. 2004.
, , 15. 11. 2006: http://www.kommersant.ru/doc/721626. Kosovo The Land of the Living Past http://www.kosovo.net
140
______________________BALCANIA
Kingdom of Georgia in 1230
141
______________________BALCANIA
NATIONAL IDENTITY: WHO ARE THE ALBANIANS? THE ILLYRIAN ANTHROPONYMY AND THE ETHNOGENESIS OF THE ALBANIANS
Object: Investigation and presentation of principal theoretical approaches towards the question of Albanian ethnogenesis with main focus on the Illyrian theory of Albanian ethnical and cultural origin. Goal and importance: To show the main possible political consequences of the implementation of the Illyrian theory of Albanian ethnogenesis, accepted firstly by the national awakening movement of the Albanians (18781913) called Rilindja, i.e., the renaissance. It covers the period between the time of establishment of the First Albanian League of Prizren in 1878 to the time of proclamation of the first modern Albanian independent state on November 28th, 1912 during the course of the Fist Balkan War (19121913). A real importance of showing how Albanian intellectuals resolved the problem of Albanian ethnical/national origin and identity can be properly understood if we know that resolving of this problem was pivotal precondition for the fixing the borders of Albanian national state. Methodology: Analysis and comparison of different historical sources, scientific literature and ideologicallypropaganda works by distinct and opposite authors of different ethnical and educational backgrounds. Conclusion: The 19th century movement of Albanian national awakening started half of the century later in comparison with the similar process of other Balkan nations and even the whole century in comparison with Central European ones. The cause for this delay was a general national-cultural underdevelopment of the Albanian people who lived under the Ottoman lordship for the centuries without cultural and ideological connections with the Western Europe where the ideology and movement of nationalism emerged and spread up throughout the rest of European continent. Subsequently, the ideas of national identification, national statehood and the concept of historical-ethnical territorial boundaries had been actualized by all Albanian neighbours (the Greeks, Serbs and Montenegrins) earlier than by the Albanian people. When
142
______________________BALCANIA
Albanian intellectuals during and after the Great Eastern Crisis 18751878 theoretically shaped the thought and concept of Albanian national idea related to the question of fixing Albanian national territories and creating Albanian national state, they faced, and had to struggle with, Serbian, Montenegrin and Greek national conception and thought of their own national statehood. This ideological, political and military fight was focused primarily on the question upon certain national soils on the Balkans which should be included either into united Serbia, united Montenegro, united Greece or united Albania: Kosovo and Metohija, Northern Epirus, Western Macedonia, Skadar (Skutari) region in the Northwest Albania and the territories around the city of Ulcinj and the River of Bojana in the Eastern Montenegro. The national program of the First League of Prizren set up the following two ultimate national goals of the Albanians: 1) the national liberation of all Albanians who in majority lived within the Ottoman Empire and in minority in independent states of Serbia and Montenegro; and 2) the creation of a national state of Albanians in which the entire Albanian historical and ethnical territories were to be incorporated into the Greater Albania. This second requirement led the Albanians in the subsequent decades to the open conflict with the neighbouring Christian states: Serbia, Montenegro and Greece. The national awakening of the Albanian people in the years of 18781912 resulted in establishment of ideology of nationhood and statehood that became in a greater or lesser extent challenged and opposed by all Albanian neighbours today the Serbs, Greeks, Montenegrins and the Macedonian Slavs. 1. Introduction On the first place we must be clear about what the autochthony, anthroponymy and ethnogenesis of the Albanians mean. Actually, it is a question: have the Albanians been living uninterruptedly on the present-day ethnical territories of the Albanians (Albania, the Eastern Montenegro, Kosovo and Metohija, the Southern Central Serbia, the Western Macedonia and the Northern Epirus) since the ancient Greek and Roman times or not? In the other words, are the Albanians really the indigenous people of the Balkans as they claim or just the newcomers to their present-day ethnical territories? True, the question of Illyrian ethnic and cultural background of the presentday Albanians (i.e., the ethnogenesis of the Albanians) has been
143
______________________BALCANIA
politicized in the recent period. The question is related both to the ancient history of the Albanians and to the pre-history of their language. For some German and Austrian 19th century linguists and historians it was evident that the Albanians were autochthonous population in Albania since pre-Greco-Roman times. It means that these scholars accepted the theory that the 19th century Albanian nation had direct ethnical continuity from the autochthonous Balkan people the ancient Illyrians. For Albanian scientists it is incontestable that not only cultural, but also, ethnic continuity exists between the ancient Illyrians and the present-day Albanians. Many of the 20th century scholars, especially after the Second World War, however, have quite opposite opinion for the very scientific reason: the theory of Illyrian origin of the Albanians is not supported by any single historical source! They claim that the Albanians are not native Balkan population as they are newcomers to the present-day Albania from more or less distant regions. Two main arguments for this hypothesis or theory are: 1) the DacianAlbanian-Romanian linguistic connections; and 2) the placenames in Albania, which indicate a lack of Illyrian-Albanian continuity. Nevertheless, the second approach to the question of Albanian ethnogenesis, i.e. that the Albanians are the newcomers to the Balkan Peninsula who came later in comparison to all Albanian neighbours, is backed by several historical sources. 2. The science of albanology and political claims
The interest of European scholars, primarily German and Austrian, in research of Albanian ethnical origin rose gradually during the second half of the 19th century.1 Their interest for
1 The question of Albanian ethnogenesis was firstly examined by Johan Thunmann (17461778) in 1774 (Research on history of the East European peoples, Leipzig) and Johan Georg von Hahn (18111869) in 1854 (Albanian studies, Jena). Both of them had opinion, but not based on any source, that the Albanians live on the territories of the ancient Illyrians and they are native and Illyrian in essence. Hahn thought that ancient names like Dalmatia, Ulcinium, Dardania, etc. were of Illyrian-Albanian origin. This hypothesis is absolutely accepted by modern Albanian linguists. For example, we can read that the name of Ragusium (present-day Dubrovnik), which in the mouth of the Albanians was Rush Rush, shows that the Adriatic coast was part of the territory inhabited by the ancestors of Albanians beyond the present ethnic borders. The adoption of this name by the Albanians belongs to the time since 614 B.C. For instance, we can read I conclude that there is a continuity of the
144
______________________BALCANIA
Albanian and Balkan studies came later in comparison with the other ethnical groups and regions in Europe. The reason was that Euro-centrism of the late 19th century and the early 20th century defined the Balkans and its nations as the territory and peoples of quite obscure identity. In comparison with a real Europe, the Balkans was Orient, not part of Europe at all, and above all it was considered as uncivilized part of the world. Nonetheless, when it started, the research upon Albanian studies was focused on the relationships of Albanian language to other European languages. However, the fist hypothesis of Albanian ethnical origin was quite indistinct and very soon discarded by the majority of scholars. According to this nebulous hypothesis by A. Schleicher, the Albanians originated from the Pelasgians who were supposed to be the most indigenous Balkan population, settled not only on the whole territory of the Balkan Peninsula, but also inhabited and major portion of the Mediterranean basin in the pre-historic times. Moreover, it was wrongly believed that Indo-European languages as the Greek, Latin and ancient Albanian (i.e., Illyrian language) were derived from the ancient Pelasgian language. However, some of Albanian
Albanians in their present territories since ancient times. The old place-names in their present form indicate that this population has continuously inhabited the coasts of the Adriatic from that time until today [abej E., The problem of the autochthony of Albanians in the light of place-names, Buletini i Universitetit Shteteror te Tiranes, 2, 1958, pp. 5462]. This standpoint is usually unquestionably recognized as the final truth by Albanian and German researchers like Peter Bartl in his book: Albanian. Vom Mittelalter bis zur Gegenwart, Regensburg, Verlag Friedrich Pustet, 1995 [Serb language edition: ., , : CLIO, 2001, p. 15]. However, the Illyrian theory of Albanian origin (the Albanians were considered even as the oldest European people) was created by German and Austrian scholars for the very political purpose: to unite all ethnic Albanians around the central political ideology and national consciousness [ . ., . , , : , 2007, pp. 6667; ., 17901918, II, , 1989, pp. 450455]. At that time, like today, the ethnic Albanians were divided into three antagonistic confessions (Islam, Roman-Catholicism and Orthodoxy) and many hostile clans based on the tribal origin. In fact, the German scholars invented for Albanians both artificial tradition and artificial imagined community in order to be more scientifically stronger in their territorial claims against the Serbs, Montenegrins and Greeks. In this context, we cannot forget that the first Albanian state was created and supported exactly by Austria-Hungary and Germany in 19121913. In the other words, the Albanians have been the Balkan clients of German political expansionism in the region.
145
______________________BALCANIA
scholars still today believe that this hypothesis has real scientific foundations regardless on the fact that later 19th century linguists and researchers in comparative philology undermined the Pelasgian hypothesis and finally at the beginning of the 20th century overturned it. The German linguist Franz Bopp was the fist who claimed (in 1854) that Albanian language had to be considered as separate branch of Indo-European family of languages. Scientific foundation of the hypothesis that Albanians should derive their ethnical origin from the Balkan Illyrians according to the language criteria was laid by the late 19th century Austrian philologists Gustav Meyer. Exactly, he claimed that contemporary Albanian language was a dialect of ancient Illyrian language. His claims initially were based on the results of analyzed a few hundred basic Albanian words, tracing their Indo-European origin. Albanian national workers transformed later this Meyers hypothesis into the Illyrian theory of Albanian ethnical background. Meyers hypothesis was based on his result of linguistic investigations and comparisons of ancient Illyrian language with contemporary Albanian language. Meyer argued that modern Albanian language had to be considered as the last phase of old Illyrian language evolution. Specifically, according to him, the 19th century Albanian language was a dialect of ancient Illyrian language.1 However, the crucial problem with Mayers methodology was the fact that we do not have any source of recorded ancient Illyrian language as they have been illiterate. The reconstruction of this ancient language is a matter of the science of fantasy. Nevertheless, G. Meyer, a professor at Graz University from 1880 to 1896 wrote several works in which he was beating A. Schleichers Pelasgian theory of Albanian origin. Mayer claimed in his works (Albanesischen Studien, Albanesische Grammatik, Etymologische Wrterbuch der Albanesischen Schprache) that Albanian language was nothing else than the dialect of the ancient Illyrian language.2 Meyers hypothetical claims were taken up by majority of Albanian authors, primarily from Italy, who made use of them in the propaganda of realization of Albanian territorial claims and especially by Albanian nationalistic movement in the coming
1 Regarding the contemporary scientific results on this question see in: Hamp E. P., The Position of Albanian, Proceedings of Conference on IndoEuropean Linguistics, Los Angeles, 1963. 2 . ., . , , : , 2007, p. 66.
146
______________________BALCANIA
decades. The final aim of this propaganda work was to prove, using the scholarly evidence of research results, that Albanians were not members of ethnical Turks, Greeks or the South Slavic population, but rather members of a totally different ethnic group, who had its own language what was not so difficult to prove. In the other words, they fought for international recognition of the existence of separate Albanian nationhood which had certain national rights among which the right to create their own national independent (Albanian) state was the basic one. Such national state of Albanians should embrace all Albanian population in the Balkan Peninsula. For instance, the Albanian Constantinople Committee expressed on May 30th, 1878 its wish for peaceful coexistence between the Albanians and their Slavonic and Greek neighbours, but only under condition that Albanian national lands would be included into unified Albanian national state. The so-called Italo-Albanians, or Arbereshi, whose predecessors emigrated from Albania after the death of Scanderbeg in 1468 to the southern Italian provinces of Puglia, Calabria and Sicily, formulated this political program for unification of Albanians into united or Greater Albania. The program underlined that the achievement of national unity and liberation of the Albanians requires their territorial unification, joint economy, joint standardized language and a pervasive spirit of patriotism and mutual solidarity. Albanian national leader from the end of the 19th century, Nam Frashri (18461900), described with the following words what does mean to be Albanian: All of us are only single tribe, a single family; we are of one blood and one language.1 It is obvious that Albanian workers on national unification at the turn of the 20th century seek an Albanian ethnical and cultural identity primarily in common language since in Albanian case the religion was divisive rather than unifying factor. They demanded as well as, for the same purpose of national unification, that Albanian language should be written in the Latin alphabet in order to distinguish themselves from the neighbouring Greeks, Serbs, Montenegrins and Ottoman lords what was totally irrelevant to overwhelming majority of the Albanians who could read no one script at all.2 However, the national unification of
1 Gut Ch., Groupe de Travail sur lEurope Centrale et Orientale, Bulletin dInformation, 2, June 1878, Paris, p. 40. 2 International political aspect of Albanian struggle for pan-Albanian national unification into Greater Albania is visible from the fact that Albanian national workers tried to get West European support for this project by claiming that
147
______________________BALCANIA
Albanian people on the basis of language was not completely successful since even today there are many difficulties for Gheg Albanians to properly understand the Tosk Albanian dialect.1 3. The Illyrian theory of Albanian ethnical origin The so-called Illyrian theory of Albanian ethnical origin (created by German and Austrian scholars) is the most popular theory of Albanian nations derivation among the majority of 19th and 20th century Albanian scholars, politicians and intellectuals.2 The crucial and concluding point of this theory (in fact, it is just non-provable hypothesis) is that Albanians are authentic nation (ethnolinguistic group) at the Balkans, the oldest, aboriginal and autochthonous one in this part of Europe. As a result, Albanian South Slavic neighbours (the Serbs, Montenegrins,3 and Macedonian Slavs) are, in comparison with indigenous
Greater Albania would be the crucial bulwark against Russian penetration to the Balkans via Russian client (Orthodox) nations and states the Serbs, Montenegrins and Greeks. For instance, Montenegro was presented by Albanians as the Russian outpost at the Adriatic Sea. The Albanian Sami Frashri published an article in Istanbul newspapers Tercman-i ark on September 27th, 1878 in which the borders of Greater Albania were founded: four Albanian provinces (vilayets) of the Ottoman Empire Scodra, Bitola, Ioanina and Kosovo would be united into the so-called Albanian Vilayet. The First Prizren League, as the first organized Albanian political organization, accepted this project in the autumn of 1879 as the programe of the organization [ ., , : CLIO, 2001, pp. 96, 100101]. See the appendix 1. 1 Hobsbawm E. J., Nations and Nationalism since 1789. Programme, Myth, Reality, Cambridge, 2000, pp. 52, 115. About the language basis of (non)identification among the Albanians from the beginning of the 20th century see: Durham E., High Albania, London, 1909, p. 17. 2 For example, Marmullaku R., Albania and Albanians, London, 1975, pp. 5 9; Miridita Z., Istorija Albanaca (Iliri i etnogeneza Albanaca), Beograd, 1969, pp. 613; Historia e popullit Shqiptar, I, Prishtin, 1969, pp. 155161. 3 The Montenegrins should be considered in cultural, religious and ethnolinguistic point of view as the Serbs from Montenegro [Glomazi M., Etniko i nacionalno bie Crnogoraca, Beograd: TRZ PANPUBLIK, 1988]. Historical, political, religious, economic and cultural relations between the Serbs from Montenegro (the Montenegrins) and the Serbs from Serbia are similar to these relations between the Germans from Austria (the Austrians) and the Germans from Germany. However, today c. 60% citizens of Montenegro claim that they are ethnolinguistic Montenegrins different from the Serbs.
148
______________________BALCANIA
Albanians, just the newcomers at the Balkans whose ethnicity and nationality are much younger than Albanian.1 Subsequently, historical rights of the Balkan autochthonous Albanian population on certain disputed Balkan territories (between the Albanians and the South Slavs) are stronger, more justifiable and deeper historically rooted than historical rights of the Serbs, Montenegrins or Macedonian Slavs.2 According to the theory of Illyrian-Albanian ethnolinguistic continuity, the Albanians are descendants of the ancient Balkan population the Illyrians. The national name of the Albanians comes from the name of one Illyrian tribe the Albanoi. Furthermore, the tribal name of Albanoi was designated to entire number of Illyrian tribes around the Ionian Sea.3 The proponents of Illyrian theory of Albanian origin are building their hypothesis mostly on the speculation that modern Albanian language is directly descended from the ancient Illyrian one. Both of them belong to the same Indo-European language-group.4
1 However, it is known that Albanian national identity was created by AustroHungarian authorities at the late 19th century and the very beginning of the 20th century. Bulgarian scholar Teodora Todorova Toleva in her book on creation of Albanian national identity published in 2012 is showing by using unpublished documents from the Austrian State Archives (Haus-, Hof- und Staatsarchiv) in Vienna that the Austro-Hungarian authorities had a crucial influence on creation of Albanian nationality in the years of 18961908 [ ., - , 1896-1908, : CIELA, 2012]. This book is based on her Ph.D. dissertation defended at the Barcelona University on September 16th, 2008. See also: Schanderl D. H., Die Albanienpolitik sterreichUngarns und Italiens 18771908, Albanische Forschungen 9, Wiesbaden: Otto Harassovitz, 1971. 2 About the problem of relations between national identification and border identities see in: Wilson Th., Donnan H. (eds.), Border Identities. Nation and state at international frontiers, Cambridge, 1998. 3 However, contemporary German historiography is not mentioning the Illyrian tribal name Albanoi. The territory of Albania in the ancient times during the ancient Greeks and Romans was populated only by the Illyrian tribe called Taulantii. In addition, neighbouring present-day Greek territories have been settled by Illyrian tribe Dassaretii, while in ancient Macedonia lived Paeones and Dardanes, while Kosovo and Metohija were settled by Scirtones (Westermann Groer Atlas zur Weltgeschichte, Braunschweig, 1985, pp. 3839). 4 The Illyrian linguistic theories of Albanian and South Slavic ethnogenesis have certain similarities with the Thracian linguistic theory of ethnical origin of Lithuanian nation championed by the 19th century Lithuanian
149
______________________BALCANIA
Nevertheless, this claim is disputed by contemporary linguistic science. The fact is that Albanian language as spoken language of the settlers of the present-day Albania was mentioned in historical sources for the first time only in 1285 in the manuscripts from Dubrovnik in which the language was named as lingua albanesesca. From the language-name is derived the land-name Albanon (the territory on which Albanian language speakers lives). This term for Albania can be read, according to the supporters of this theory, in several 13th century Latin dictionaries, as well in some of the Byzantine historical sources. The same Byzantine sources called the region between the Lake of Scodra and the River of Drim as Arbanon (or Arber). This territory was settled, according to the Greek geographer Ptolemy from the 2nd century A.D., by the Albanoi tribe of Illyrian origin.1
linguist and national worker Jonas Basanaviius. The theory was result of Basanaviius linguistic research of ethnogenesis of the 19th century Lithuanian nation. In his book Lietuvikai trakikos studijos he developed the theory according to which, part of ancient Thracians emigrated from their Balkan homeland and ultimately settled themselves in the eastern littoral of the Baltic Sea. Basanaviius exactly claimed that these Thracian migrants from the Balkans were the predecessors of the modern Lithuanian nation. The theory was based on the fact that ancient Thracian language was similar to the 19th century Lithuanian one. Both of these languages belong to the family of Indo-European languages. Basanaviius was working for years in Bulgaria and in order to prove his theory primarily was collecting the documents with the Thracian personal names, toponyms and names for different kinds of drinks and comparing them with those of Lithuanians. He claimed, for example, that Lithuanian personal name Getas comes from the Thracian tribal name Getai [Basanaviius J., Lietuvikai trakikos studijos, Shenandoah, PA, 1898, pp. 815; Seen A. E., Jonas Basanaviius: The patriarch of the Lithuanian national renaissance, Newtonville, MA, 1980]. According to Basanaviius, the name for the mediaeval Lithuanian capital Trakai was derived from the Greek name for old Thracians, while some of the Polish names for the settlements (for instance, Kalisz in the region of Poznan) were not real Polish once: they were of Lithuanian-Thracian origin. Basanaviius concluded that ancient Thracians were of the same ethnicity as Lithuanians [Basanaviius J., Lietuvikai trakikos studijos, Shenandoah, PA, 1898, pp. 2174]. 1 Before the Ottoman conquering of the Balkans, the population of Albania called themselves as Arbrsh/Arbnesh and their country Arbn/Arbr. South Slavonic name for the people from Albania was Arbanas. The Arnauts () were Islamized and later Albanized Serbs in Kosovo and Metohija who still did not forget their original ethnicity [ ., , III, , 1911, p. 11621166]. However, during the time of Albanian national revival movement in the late 19th century the Albanians called themselves as Shqiptar and the
150
______________________BALCANIA
The partisans of the Illyrian theory of Albanian origin are speaking in the favour of the school of thought of the origin and evolution of the Illyrians, which claims that ancient Illyrians did not migrated to the Balkans. Instead, they were an autochthonous people in this part of Europe and even one of the oldest settlers in Europe. It is suggested that the Albanians, as direct ethnical, political and cultural offspring of the ancient Illyrians, are the most original and indigenous inhabitants of the Balkans, even more aboriginal than the ancient Greeks for the reason that the ancient Greeks migrated to the Balkans in two great migration waves: firstly, around 2000 B.C., and secondly (Dorians), around 1200 B.C.1 Clearly, the Albanian historical rights are much stronger, justifiable and historically deeper grounded in comparison with Serbian, Montenegrin, Greek or Macedonian Slavs and Bulgarian rights referring to several Balkan territories of doubtful authenticity. In the other words, the Albanians are the hosts while their all neighbours are the guests in the Balkan Peninsula.2 American mediaevalist John V. A. Fine simplified the crucial point of the theory of Illyrian-Albanian ethnical-culturalpolitical continuity as: if the Illyrians were the ancestors of the Albanians, then the Albanians, as original inhabitants, have some historic right to that region and possibly rights to other regions
country Shqiptaria. The name is most probably derived from the word shqipe what means eagle referring to the mountainous settlers of the high Albania. However, this word probably comes from old Dacian-Moesian language adopted by Bulgarians who settled themselves on the territory of Roman province of Moesia Inferior in 680/681. In Bulgarian language the Shqiptars means the highlanders. The popular nickname for Albanians is the Sons of the Eagle and for Albania the Land of the Eagle. Two the most important and powerful Albanian tribal units around 1900 were the Ghegs (the Roman Catholics) in the Northern Albania and the Tosks in the Southern Albania. The entire Albanian population was (and is) divided in religious point of view into the Muslims (majority of Albanians), the Roman Catholics and the Eastern Orthodox (minority of Albanians). The last one live in the South-East Albania around the cities of Kor and Gjirokastr (Argyrus). For more details see in: Skendi S., Religion in Albania during the Ottoman rule, Sdost Forscungen, 15, Mnich, 1956; Hobsbawm E. J., Nations and Nationalism since 1789. Programme, Myth, Reality, Cambridge, 2000, p. 70; and especially in: Hobhouse J. C. (Lord Broughton), Travels in Albania and other provinces of Turkey in 1808 and 1810, I, II, London, 1858. 1 Oxford Dictionary of World History. The worlds most trusted reference books, New York: Oxford University Press, 2001, p. 253. 2 For instance, see: Marmullaku R., Albania and Albanians, London, 1975, p. 6; Miridita Z., Istorija Albanaca (Iliri i etnogneza Albanaca), Beograd, 1969, p. 9.
151
______________________BALCANIA
which had been settled by Illyrians. And their Illyrian ancestry has been very important in Albanian nation-building myths.1 The pivotal segment (from historically-political point of view) of the Illyrian theory is the claim that Illyrian-Albanian tribes withdrew from the vast areas of the Balkans settling themselves into the Balkan coastal towns and into the mountains of the present-day Albania, Epirus, Macedonia and Montenegro during the Slavic invasion and occupation of the Balkans in the 6th and 7th centuries. However, according to this theory, Kosovo and Metohija were only fertile lowlands in the whole Balkans, which were not abandoned by Romanized Illyrians-Albanians. As a result, Albanians of Illyrian ethnical origin were considered as autochthonous population of Kosovo and Metohija while Slavonic Serbs and Montenegrins were seen and understood like occupiers and newcomers in the region of Kosovo and Metohija. Shortly, Illyrian-Albanian historical and ethnical rights on Kosovo and Metohija, as the land mostly disputed between Albanians and their neighbours, according to the champions of Illyrian theory of Albanian ethnogenesis, are even 15 centuries older than Slavonic Serbian-Montenegrin historical and ethnical rights upon the same territories. This theory emphasizes that in the present-day Northern Albania grew up an extensive settlement of old inhabitants after the occupation of the Balkans by more powerful South Slavonic tribes.2 This segment of the Illyrian theory was exceptionally used during the Balkan Wars of 19121913 in order to refute Serbias claims on the territory of northern Albania. Furthermore, IllyrianAlbanian population from the lowlands of Kosovo and Metohija began to fall under Slavonic political-cultural influence, while the Illyrian-Albanian mountainous tribes from high Albania, due to the less contacts with the Slavs, succeeded to maintain their social
1 Fine J., The Early Medieval Balkans, Ann Arbor, 1994, p. 10. 2 This opinion is also shared by some Serbian scholars. For instance, Ferjani B., Istorija Albanaca (Albanija do XII veka), Beograd, 1969, p. 29. The champions of the Illyrian theory frequently cited the words of Milovan ilas, one of the leading Yugoslav Communists after the Second World War (and a war criminal) from Montenegro who wrote: The Albanians are the most ancient Balkan people older than the Slavs, and even the ancient Greeks (cited from: [Costa N., Albania: A European Enigma, New York, 1995, p. 1]), or French scholar Andre Malraux who wrote that Athens was, alas no more than an Albanian village [Malraux A., Anti-Memoirs, New York, 1968, p. 33].
152
______________________BALCANIA
system and cultural inheritance unaltered. The defenders of this theory claim that the Byzantine province of Theme Dyrrhachium (which was established around 809 and covered the entire Albanias territory, part of Northern Epirus, Western Macedonia and the main part of Montenegrin littoral with the area of the Lake of Scutari) was populated by Albanian people who caused the region to develop a special (Albanian) character.1 Charles I of Naples (12271285) established his own feudal domain under the name of the Regnum Albanai, which is considered by Albanian historiography as the first Albanian national state, exactly on the territory of the Byzantine Theme Dyrrhachium. Its capital became the city of Dyrrhachium (Durazo/Durs/Dra/Epidamnos). According to the Illyrian theory, the Albanians as one of the oldest European peoples, who live at the same territory since the early period of the Antiquity, deserved to be taken into account as one of the original features of Europe. They descended from the Illyrians, i.e. from a special branch of Indo-European peoples, just like the Greeks or Armenians. Besides, the Albanians have a language which reflects even the quality, intensity and times of important pre-Indo-European and Mediterranean (i.e., Pelasgian) influences, a culture different from the neighbouring ones, three confessions which exist one beside other in religious tolerance, a common history of permanent resistance against any foreign power and subjugation, a partial (medieval) experience in independent statehood, a culture which shows an amalgamation of Illyrian-Balkan origins and East-West European elements, a very old and distinctive folk culture, and ultimately certain kind of individualist toughness which, all together, singles the Albanians out of their immediate surroundings2 Subsequently, in historical and ethnical terms, the following territories in the South-Eastern Europe were inhabited by the Balkan Illyro-Albanians and should compose the territory of united (Greater) Albania, as the national state of all Albanians, in
1 Marmullaku R., Albania and Albanians, London, 1975, p. 8; Ferluga J, Sur la date de la cration du thme de Dyrrhachium, Extrait des Actes du XII Congrs International des Etudes Byzantines, vol. 2, Beograd, 1964, pp. 8392. Regarding the borders of the Byzantine Theme Dyrrhachium see: Engel J. (ed.), Groer Historischer Weltatlas. Mittelalter, Mnchen, 1979, p. 14. 2 Ismajly R., Albanians and South-Eastern Europe (Aspects of Identity), Conflict or Dialogue. Serbian-Albanian relations and integration of the Balkans. Studies and Essays, Subotica, 1994, p. 269.
153
______________________BALCANIA
the future: from the area of the Lake of Scodra in Montenegro on the north, to the Bay of Ambrazio in Greece on the south, and from the Adriatic Sea on the west, to the River of Treska in Macedonia and Preevo, Medvea, Bujanovac and Lebane districts in Serbia at the east.1 That was and is, in the eyes of supporters of Illyrian theory of Albaian ethnogenesis, the exact territory of IllyroAlbanian 2.000 years old history and their culture.2 The Albanian national movement Rilindja (18781913) aimed Albanian liberation from the Ottoman rule and to create a national Albanian state which borders will embrace the whole of above mentioned (ethnical and historical Albanian) territories. Political institution of the movement, the First League of Prizren (18781881),3
1 For example, Protest of the Population of Shkodra, Podgorica, Shpuza, Zhabjak, Tivar, Ulqin, Gruda, Kelmend, Hot and Kastrat addressed to the Ambassador of France in Istanbul against the annexation of Albanian lands by Montenegro (Shkodra, May 8, 1878), Archives du Ministre des Affaires trangres, Paris, Fund of the French Embassy at the Sublime Porte, Turkey, vol. 417, pp. 5154, supplement to the report 96. Original in French. English translation in Pollo S., Pulaha S. (eds.), Pages of the Albanian National Renaissance, 18781912, Tirana, 1978, pp. 1213; Contents of the coded telegram sent by Dervish Pasha from Shkodra (December 27, 1880), Basbakanllik Arsive, Istanbul, Fund of Jilldiz esas evraki, 14 88/16 88 12. Original in Turkish. See appendix 2. 2 However, several written historical sources from different cultural environments (Byzantine, Arab...) clearly say that the Albanians arrived to the Balkans in the year of 1043 from the Eastern Sicily and that the original place of living of the Albanians was the Caucasus Albania which is mentioned in several antique sources as an independent state with its own rulers. The Caucasus Albania was neighbouring the Caspian Sea, Media, Iberia, Armenia and Sarmatia Asiatica. The most important source in which is clearly mentioned that the Balkan Albanians came from the Eastern Sicily in 1043 is the Byzantine historian Michael Ataliota [Ataliota M., Corpus Scriptorum Historiae Byzantine, Bonn: Weber, 1853, p. 18]. This historical fact is recognized and by some of Albanian historians like Stefang Pollo and Arben Puto [Pollo S., Puto A., The History of Albania, London-Boston-Hebley: Routledge & Kegan, 1981, p. 37]. 3 The League (Lidhja e Prizrenit) was established in the town of Prizren in Metohija for the very political purpose: to claim that this old Serbian town is in fact Albanian one. However, Prizren was at that time settled by 70% of the Serbs and 30% of the Albanians. The town was a capital of Serbia in the 14th century with the royal-imperial court and the Orthodox cathedral ( ) built in 1307. Today in the town of Prizren left only several Serbian houses. Metohija is a term of the Greek origin () for the land owned by the Orthodox church. As the Serbian medieval rulers granted a huge portions of land between the towns of Pe, Prizren, Mitrovica and Pritina to the Serbian Orthodox Church the western part of Kosovo became called as
154
______________________BALCANIA
established its own organizational structure which covered the entire of these territories clearly directed its political activities towards the establishment of united ethnical state of all Albanians.1 The League launched the motto: feja e shqyptarit asht shqyptaria (Religion of the Albanians is Albanianism) for the sake of overcoming Albanian religious diversity and separation. This movement has been the crucial united force of Albanians and the pivotal point for definition of the national identity and development of the Albanians. 4. The Illyrians autochthonous Balkan people It is true that every story about the Balkan Peninsula begins with the ancient Illyrians.2 Historians believe that this IndoEuropean people were one of the largest European population inhabited the western portion of the Balkans along the coasts of the Ionian Sea and the Adriatic Sea to the Alps around the year of 1000 B.C. Their eastern neighbours were also the Indo-European peoples the Thracians. The demarcation line between their
Metohija [ . ., - . , , , 2006, p. 10]. This province is called by the Serbs as Kosovo and Metohija, while the Albanians purposely calling this province only as Kosova/Kosov, but not mentioning Metohija at all. 1 For example, The Activity of the Albanian League of Prizren in the vilayet of Kosova (1880), Consul-General Blunt to the Marquis of Salisbury, Public Record Office, Foreign Affairs, London, 195/1323; The British Museum, London, Fund of Accounts and Papers (43), 1880, LXXXII, 82, 7778. The document is published in: Rizaj S., The Albanian League of Prizren in British Documents, 18781881, Prishtina, 1978, pp. 279280. 2 Stipevi A., Every Story About the Balkans Begins with the Illyrians, Pritina, 1985; Buda A., The Southern Illyrians as a Problem of Historiography, Historical Writings, vol. 1, pp. 1315. During the last decades there are many scholars who claim that the Balkan Illyrians (and Thracians) have been nothing else but the ethnolinguistic Serbs [ ., , -, , 2003; . ., . ., . ., , : , 2009; ., , : Admiral Books, 2011; ., I X , : , 1999]. In the other words, they claim, that the Serbs, but not the Albanians, are the only autochthonous people (nation) at the Balkan Peninsula, according to the historical sources of the time.
155
______________________BALCANIA
settlements, cultural and political influence was on the River of Morava in present-day Serbia (in Latin, the River of Margus located in the Roman Province of Moesia Superior) and the River of Vardar in present-day Macedonia. On the north, on the shores of the River of Sava and the River of Danube, their neighbours were the Celts, while on the south the Pindus Mountains separated the Illyrians from the ancient Macedonians and the Greeks.1 The Illyrians lived on the eastern littoral of the Adriatic Sea around 500 B.C. as it is suggested by the Greek geographer Hecatei (Hecateus) from the Asia Minors city of Miletus. According to the early Byzantine historian Pseudo-Scilac, who lived 150 years later, the Illyrian settlements at the Balkans reached at the south the area of the southern Albanian port of Valona (Vlor).2 Among the ancient and early medieval historians and geographers the most reliable information upon geographic dispersion of the Illyrians and demography of the Illyrian territory can be found in the writings of Herodotus, Livy, Pliny, Ptolemy, Appianus, Strabo, Procopius of Caesarea, Synecdemos of Hierocles, Isidorus Hispaniensis, and Euagrius. When the Celts came to the Balkans in the 3rd century B.C. some of Illyrian tribes mixed with them. In the same century Illyrian King Agron from the tribe of Ardaei organized the first Illyrian state. At the time of its greatest extension this state had the borders on the River of Neretva in Dalmatia and BosniaHerzegovina, the River of Vjos in the Southern Albania and the Ohrid Lake in Macedonia. Some of the early 20th century Albanian historians and national workers claimed that Albanian right to require the national state organization in 19121913 was grounded on Albanian political-state inheritance from the Agrons Illyrian Kingdom. Nevertheless, the Romans succeeded to defeat the Illyrians and to abolish their own state organization during three Illyrian-Roman Wars between 229 and 168 B.C.
1 Islami S., Anamali S., Korkuti M, Prendi F., Les Illyriens, Tirana, 1985, p. 5; Anamali S., The Illyrians and the Albanians, Prifti K., Nasi L., Omari L., Xhufi P., Pulaha S., Pollo S., Shtylla Z. (eds.), The Truth on Kosova, Tirana, 1993, p. 5; Cabanes P., Les Illyriens de Bardylis Genthios, IVII sicles avant J.C, Paris, 1988, p. 17. The borders of geographical distribution of the Illyrian population in Antique Balkans are primarily reconstructed according to the writings of the Greek historians Herodotus who lived in the 5th century B.C. and wrote Historiae and Appianus who lived in the 2nd century A.D. and wrote Illyrica. 2 The most outstanding Illyrian tribes were: Iapudes, Dalmatae, Autariatae, Docletae and Taulantii.
156
______________________BALCANIA
The administratively-political concept of Illyria, or Illyricum, was created in the following centuries by the Romans who after the new conquests in the Balkans established firstly the Province of, and later on, the Praefectura of Illyricum.1 It stretched from the Istria Peninsula on the north-west to the Northern Albania on the south-east, and from the Adriatic littoral on the south to the River of Drava on the north. In spite of that, the main portion of Albania left out of this province as it was included into the Roman province of Macedonia. This fact can be explained by Roman consideration that only the territory of Northern Albania was settled by Illyrian tribes, but not the Central and Southern Albania. The proponents of Illyrian theory of Albanian origin did not give answer to the question: why the whole Albania was not included into the Roman Province of Illyricum if it was entirely settled by the Illyrians? The Romans finally subjugated all Illyrian tribes in the new war between the years of 6 and 9 A.D. From that time the overwhelming and very successful process of Romanization of the whole Balkan Peninsula started.2
1 The Praefectura of Illyricum was subdivided into the following Provinces: Dacia Ripensis, Dacia Mediterranea, Moesia Superior Margensis, Dardania, Praevalis, Macedonia Prima, Macedonia Secunda, Epirus Nova, Epirus Vetus, Thessalia, Achaia and Creta. 2 Regardless on the fact that the Latin language did not replace Illyrian one on the territory of Albania during the Roman rule as the Latin did not become the language of the common people, the Illyrian language was Romanized in certain degree and the Latin alphabet became later chosen by the Albanian national workers as a national script of the Albanians (one of the reasons for such decision was of the pure political nature). It shows that Roman/Latin elements, besides the Illyrian ones, participated in the process of the ethnogenesis of the Albanians. The proponents of the Illyrian theory of Albanian ethnogenesis refute this opinion emphasizing that the number of Latin inscriptions found in Albania is small when compared with the number found in the other provinces of the Roman Empire. Their total number is 293. Half of these inscriptions are found in and around the Roman colony located in the ancient city of Dyrrhachium. Theodore Mommsen thought that the people used exclusively Illyrian language in the interior of Albania during the Roman occupation [Mommsen T., The Provinces of the Roman Empire, vol. 1, Chicago, MCMLXXIV, pp. 202203]. For the supporters of the Illyrian theory, as Dardania was one of the least Romanized Balkan regions its native population preserved its ethnic individuality and consciousness. Subsequently, the Dardanians, who escaped Romanization and survived the South Slavic migrations to the Balkans, emerged in the Middle Ages with the name of Albanians. However, the Latin terminology in modern Albanian language and the place-names in Albania are evidences of Illyrian-Albanian Romanization/Latinization.
157
______________________BALCANIA
Some protagonists of the Illyrian theory of Albanian origin developed the hypothesis that the Roman Emperors Aurelian, Diocletian and Probus, who originated from the western part of the Balkans, which was settled by the Illyrian tribes, can be considered as the predecessors of the modern Albanian nation.1 During the time of the Roman Emperor Diocletian (284305), who was of Illyrian origin, the whole territory of the Balkans, except its eastern part, was administratively organized as the Praefectura Illyricum. Mainly due to such Roman administrative organization of their possessions in the Balkans the names Illyria and Illyrians were preserved for the very long period of time as common names for the peoples who lived in the western and central parts of the Balkans, i.e. for the South Slavs2 and the
1 However, the proponents of the theory of Serbian Balkan origin claim that all Balkan-born Roman emperors (c. 20) were the ethnic Serbs. Diocletian and Constantine the Great are the most important among them. 2 Among the South Slavs, and partially among the Poles and Russians, the Illyrian theory of Slavic origin was widespread from the early 16th century to the early 19th century. According to this theory, the South Slavs were the autochthonous population in the Balkans originated from the ancient Illyrians. Furthermore, all Slavs formerly lived in the Balkans and were known by the ancient authors as the Illyrians. At the beginning of the Middle Ages they split themselves into three groups: one group migrated to the Central Europe (the Western Slavs), another group went to the Eastern Europe (the Eastern Slavs) while the last group left in the Balkans (the South Slavs). According to several medieval chronicles, the South Slavic ascendants were the ancient Illyrians, Thracians and Macedonians. As a result, Alexander the Great, Constantine the Great, Diocletian and St. Hieronymus were of the South Slavic origin. In the time of Humanism, Renaissance, Reformation and the Counter-Reformation, the following Dubrovnik (Ragusian) writers became the most prominent champions of this theory: Vinko Pribojevi (On Origin and History of the Slavs, printed in Venice in 1532), Mavro Orbini (De Regno Sclavorum, printed in Pesaro in 1601) and Bartol Kai (Institutiones Linguae Illyricae, printed in 1604). Pribojevi claimed that all Slavs were speaking one common language, which originated from the Balkans. For him, the Russians spoke Dalmatian dialect of the common Slavic language. This common Slavic language was named by Dubrovnik writers as Our, Illyrian or Slavic one. Subsequently, all Slavs who spoke Our language belonged to Our people. The influence of the Illyrian theory of (the South) Slavic origin can be seen in: 1) the work of Serbian noblemen from Transylvania, Count ore Brankovi (16451711) who wrote in 1688 the first political program of the South Slavic unification into free and independent state called by him as the Illyrian Kingdom; in 2) the fact that Orbinis De Regno Sclavorum was translated into the Russian language in 1722; and in 3) the act that the Croatian movement of national renewal from the time of the first half of the 19th century was officially called as the Illyrian Movement.
158
______________________BALCANIA
Albanians.1 Definitely, according to the 19th21st century official sciences of history, ethnology and philology (but not and according to many relevant sources), the Illyrians were not the Slavs. The later came to the Balkans 1.500 years after the Illyrians.2 Clearly, the name Illyrians disappeared in the 7th century at the time of the Slavic migration to the Balkans. After the 6th century, however, in the Byzantine texts there were no reports about the Illyrians who abandoned the Balkan territories from the Dalmatian Alps to the River of Danube. The new Illyrian political and cultural centre became the region of Arbanum (in Greek, or , in Serbian, ) in the Southern Albania. The name Albani appeared in historical sources not before the 9th century. The Byzantine historians used the name Albani for the Slavic inhabitants living around the sea-port of Durazzo (ancient Dyrrhachium) in the Northern Albania. From the 11th century the name Albani (in Latin, Arbanensis, or Albanenses, in Greek, or ) was related to all Albanian tribes.3 In the Middle Ages the Albanoi lived on the territory between the cities of Skadar, Prizren, Ohrid and Valona. According to the champions of the Illyrian theory of Albanian ethnogenesis, the Slavic raids and migrations to the Balkans in the early Middle Ages did not affect the native inhabitants on the territory of the present-day Albania who continued to live there by preserving their own culture, habits and social organization. Shortly, the
1 Miridita Z., Istorija Albanaca (Iliri i etnogeneza Albanaca), Beograd, 1969, pp. 9-10; Qabej W., Hyrje n historin e gjuhs shipe, Prishtin, 1970, pp. 29 32; Prifti K., Nasi L., Omari L., Xhufi P., Pulaha S., Pollo S., Shtylla Z. (eds.), The Truth on Kosova, Tirana, 1993, pp. 573; Dobruna E., On some ancient toponyms in Kosova, Onomastika e Kosoves, Prishtina, 1979; Anamali S., The Problem of the Formation of the Albanian people in the Light of Archaeological Information, The National Conference on the formation of the Albanian people, their language and culture, Tirana, 1988; abej E., The problem of the autochthony of Albanians in the light of place-names, Buletini i Universitetit Shteteror te Tiranes, 2, 1958, pp. 5462. 2 For instance: ., , : , 1993, pp. 366; ., , : , 1966, pp. 2026; Kont F., Sloveni. Nastanak i razvoj slovenskih civilizacija u Evropi (VIXIII vek), Beograd: Zavod za izdavaku delatnost Filip Vinji, 1989, pp. 1443; ., , 1, : , 1998, pp. 8196. 3 The name for Albanians - is derived from the Latin name for Albanians as the Arbanenses.
159
______________________BALCANIA
southern Illyrian provinces retained its previous ethnical composition. And of course, this previous ethnical composition was (unproved by the sources) the Albanian one.
5. The Dardanians the Illyro-Albanians, the Daco-Moesians or the Thracians?
The Albanian historiography claims that the Central Balkan tribe - Dardanians, who were settled in the southern portion of the territory of the Roman Province of Moesia Superior and northwestern part of the Roman Province of Macedonia, should be considered as one of the Illyrian tribes as an ancestor of the Albanians. The Albanian historians in this point referring to the German linguist Norbert Jokl who wrote, according to the research of historical toponomastics, that the ancient cradle of the Albanians was Dardania, wherefrom they moved westwards to their present territories in the late Roman time.1 Consequently, the north-western territory of the present-day Republic of Macedonia (the FYROM), Kosovo and Metohija and the presentday Southern Serbia (settled by the Dardanians in the Antiquity likewise the north-eastern portion of the present-day Republic of Albania) are considered as the Albanian historical lands and had to be included into united Albanian national state in the future. For Albanian proponents of the theory of Illyrian-Albanian symbiosis, the most valuable information and evidence that the ancient Dardanians were exactly the Illyrians (and thus the Albanian ancestors) comes from the archaeological excavations in Kuks region in the North-eastern Albania which belonged to the western portion of Dardanian state.2 What is of extreme importance according to them, the traditional Illyrian names like Andinus, Annius, Dassius, Epicadus, Genthiana, Rhedon, Surus, Tata, Tridus can be found in the inscriptions in Dardania. The Yugoslav specialist in illyrology, Henrik Bari from Sarajevo, also championed the idea that the Balkan homeland of the Albanian people must have been Dardania-Paeonia, provinces which, judging from the known names of persons, were Illyrian and not Thracian in AntiquityTherefore, it can be said that Dardania and
1 Jokl N., Eberts Reallexicon der Vorgeschichte, I, 1924, p. 91. 2 Anamali S., The Illyrians and the Albanians, Prifti K., Nasi L., Omari L., Xhufi P., Pulaha S., Pollo S., Shtylla Z. (eds.), The Truth on Kosova, Tirana, 1993, p. 7; Jubani B., Features of Illyrian Culture in the Territory of Dardania, Illyria, 2, 1985, pp. 211220; Islami S., The Illyrian State Its Place and Role in the Mediterranean World, I, Tirana, 1974, pp. 85105.
160
______________________BALCANIA
Paeonia were the provinces in which the early Albanian-Illyrian symbiosis took place in the interior of the Balkan Peninsula.1 Bari in fact disagreed with the theory of Romanian linguist Mateescu who, in his detailed analyzes of the epigraphic material, found the Thracian infiltration in the province of Dardania in the 2nd and 3rd centuries A.D.2 The Albanian exponents of the theory of Illyrian-Albanian continuity and the ethnical symbiosis repeatedly quote the words of Arthur Evans that the same coins, pottery and other handcraft products from ancient Dyrrhachium and Apollonia (located on Albanian littoral) are found in Kosovo and Metohija (in the regions of Pe, akovica and Prizren).3 This fact is, however, only the evidence of the Hellenization of the Illyrians as the coins were of the Greek origin. The Greek language was evidently the written language of official inscriptions among the educated class of the Illyrian society.4 The Yugoslav historian Fanula Papazoglu discovered Dacian-Moesian or Phrygian stratum in the formation of the Dardanians. For that reason, the Dardanians cannot be identified with the Illyrians and cannot contribute in developing of the Illyrian-Albanian ethnic self-awareness.5 Finally, the modern
1 Taken from Hymje ne historine e gjuhes shqipe, Prishtin, 1955, pp. 4950. 2 Mateescu N., Granita de apur a Tracilor, Annuarul Institutului de Istoria nationale, III, Cluj, 1923, pp. 377492. 3 Evans A., Antiquarian Researches in Illyricum, Archeologia, XLIX, Westminster, 1883, p. 62. 4 Papazoglu F., Les royaumes dIllyrie et de Dardanie, Origines et development, structures, hellenisation et romanization, Iliri i Albanci, Beograd, 1988, p. 194; Ceka N., Survay of the Development of Urban Life Among Southern Illyrians, Illyria, 2, 1985, pp. 119136. Compare with: Toi V., New Data About the Illyrian Onomastics in Durrhachium, Illyria, 1, 1986, pp. 123135. 5 Regarding the problem of the Illyrian origin of the very important Central Balkan tribe Dardanians see in: Garaanin M., Considerations finales, Iliri i Albanci, Beograd, 1988, pp. 370372; Garaanin M., Razmatranja o makedonskom haltatu-Materijalna kultura, hronologija, etniki problem, Starinar, VVI, 19541955, pp. 3740; Garaanin M., Istona granica Ilira prema arheolokim spomenicima, Simpozijum o teritorijalnom i hronolokom razgranienju Ilira u praistorijsko doba, Sarajevo, 1964, pp. 138141; Mack R., Grenzmarken und Nachbarn Makedonien in Norden und Western, Gottingen, 1951, pp. 170173; Vulpe R., Gli Illiri dellItalia Imperiale Romana, III, 1925, p. 163; Cerskov E., Rimljani na Kosovu i Metohiji, Beograd, 1969, p. 106; Mirdita Z., Dardanian Studies, Rilindja, Prishtina, 1979, p. 49; Papazoglu F., Srednjobalkanska plemena u
161
______________________BALCANIA
European ethnographic and historical sciences suggest that the homeland of the Albanian nation lies in what is today the Central Albania. The German illyrologist-albanologist, Georg Stadtmller, stresses that the original Albanian native region includes the valley of the River of Shkumba, both sides of the River of Mat, Kruja, and some neighbouring areas.1 The highlanders from Albania, however, started to migrate from their mountains from the mid-14th century towards more fertile lowlands of Thessaly, Boeotia, Attica, Euboea and Peloponnese, while from the end of the 17th century they started to migrate towards the north-east occupying the territories of Kosovo and Metohija (the Old Serbia or Serbia proper) and the territories of the present-day Serbia around the cities of Novi Pazar, Vranje and Ni.2 Certainly, not until the 18th century did the masses of the Albanian herdsmen start coming down from their
predrimsko doba, Sarajevo, 1969, p. 402; Papazoglu F., Dardanska onomastika, Zbornik Filozofskog fakulteta, 81, Beograd, 1964; Papazoglu F., Les royaumes dIllyrie et de Dardanie, Origines et development, structures, hellenisation et romanization, Iliri i Albanci, Beograd, 1988, p. 174; Jubani B., Features of Illyrian Culture in the Territory of Dardania, Illyria, 2, 1985, pp. 211222; ., , , , CLV, , 1933. While the Yugoslav historian Novak claimed that the Dardanians were not of the Illyrian origin his compatriot Budimir claimed that they were one of Illyrian tribes [ ., La nazionalit dei Dardani, , IV, , pp. 7289; ., O etnikom odnosu Dardanaca prema Ilirima, Jugoslovenski istorijski asopis, III, Beograd, 1937, pp. 129; ., , , 1950]. 1 Stadtmller G., Forschungen zur albanischen fruhgeschichte, zweite erweiterte auflage, Albanische Forschungen, 2, Wiesbaden, 1966, pp. 167, 173. 2 ., , , 1996, p. 12, p. 245; ., , , 1959, p. 464, p. 505; Lemerle P., Invasions et migrations dans les Balkans depuis la fin de lpoque Romaine jusquau VIIIe sicle, Revue historique, 78, 1954, p. 294; Lemerle P., Les plus anciens recueils des miracles de Saint Demtrius, II, Paris, 1981, p. 67; ., . 1537. g., I, , 1978 (original written in German and published in Wien, 1911), pp. 8586, 216; ., ., . , II, B, 1978 (unfinished original by K. Jirechek in German, printed in Wien, 1911. Completed by J. Radonji), pp. 33, 34, 101, 105, 145, 153. On the Albanian residents in Southeastern Serbia in the districts of Ni, Leskovac, Prokupjle and Kurumlija in 1878 see in: Protest of 6200 Albanian emigrants (Pritina, June 26, 1878), Politisches Archiv des Auswartigen Amtes, Bonn, Fund of the Acts of the Congress of Brlin, 2, 1878, doc. 110 (telegram).
162
______________________BALCANIA
native countrys highlands to the fertile areas of Kosovo and Metohija, populated until that time almost exclusively by the Eastern Orthodox Serbs, and to the regions of todays Western Macedonia (from Skopje to Bitola) inhabited by the majority of Macedonian Slavs and the minority of the Serbs.1 Practically, the territory of the former Roman province of Dardania mainly settled by Dardanian tribe was not influenced by the Illyrian-Albanian elements before the migrations of the Albanian tribes from high Albania since the end of the 17th century. The supporters of the theory of Illyrian-Albanian ethnical continuity and symbiosis, however, asseverate that at the time of the Slavic incursions on the Balkans there was no large-scale settling of the Slavs in the territory of Kosovo, Metohija and Montenegro, i.e. in the former Roman Provinces of Dardania and Praevalis. According to E. Dobruna, an Albanian archaeologist from Kosovo, who investigated ancient toponyms in this region, we find the continuous presence of native Albanians as successors of the Illyrians in the same territory where they live today since ancient times.2 From the banks of the Bojana River, as far as Ianina, a unified and homogeneous people live. From Ianina to Bay of Ambrazio, lies the territory denied by the Greek religious and other propaganda to the Albanians, who are predominant there if not in number, than at least in strength and capacity to resist.3 Consequently, Illyrian-Albanian historical rights on these
1 The Roman Catholic bishop in Skopje, Matija Masarek wrote in 1764 a report to Vatican in which he noted brand-new colonies of the Albanians who had just abandoned high Albania and settled themselves in the lowland of Metohija around the city of akovica [Radoni J., Rimska kurija i junoslovenske zemlje od XVI do XIX veka, Beograd, 1950, p. 654]. On religious and ethnical situation in Albania, Kosovo and Metohija in the mid17th century see in Jaov M., Le Missioni cattoliche nel Balcani durante la guerra di Candia (16451669), vol. III, Citt del Vaticana, 1992, in the mid19th century in Mller J., Albanien, Rumelien und die sterreichischmontenegrinische Granze, Prag, 1844, and in the years from 1804 to 1912 in ., 18041912, , 1994. According to the Serbian historian Jevrem Damnjanovi, the members of the following Albanian tribes (fisses) settled Kosovo and Metohija during the Ottoman rule: Kriezi, Tsaci, Shop, Dukadjini, Berisha, Bitiqi, Krasniqi, Gashi, Shkrele, Kastrati, Gruda, Shala, Hoti, and Kelmendi [ ., , , , , , 1988, p. 5]. 2 Dobruna E., On some ancient toponyms in Kosova, Onomastika e Kosoves, Prishtina, 1979, p. 46. 3 Stulli B., Albansko pitanje, JAZU, Zagreb, vol. 318, 1959, p. 325.
163
______________________BALCANIA
Slavic-Serbian-
territories are longer and stronger than Montenegrin-Macedonian and even Greek ones.1
6. A Question of the Koman Culture The majority of Albanian archaeologists declared that the Koman Culture, existed in the 7th and 8th centuries, represents historical-ethnical continuity of Illyrian-Albanian ethnogenesis. The Koman Culture, according to them, included an extensive territory from the Skadar Lake on the north to the Ohrid Lake on the southeast. For them, the Illyrian-Albanian ethnic roots of the Koman Culture are more than obvious (but not scientifically proved). The importance of this culture for the Albanian albanologists is of an extreme value as they are trying to prove that the Koman Culture is the direct continuation of the local IllyrianAlbanian culture of the late Antiquity and the early Middle Ages. In the other words, according to them, the Koman Culture shows that at the time of Slavic migration to the Balkans the native IllyrianAlbanian territories had stability and vitality. They further claim that the material findings of the Koman Culture, which lasted during the period of transition from the late Antiquity to the early Middle Ages, are common for all Illyrian-Albanian regions including those of Kosovo and Metohija, Eastern Montenegro and Western Macedonia. The Albanian archaeologists disregard with the opinion of their Yugoslav colleagues about the Slavic or Roman-Byzantine character of the Koman Culture.2 Thus, for the Albanian
1 abej E., The problem of the autochthony of Albanians in the light of placenames, Buletini i Universitetit Shteteror te Tiranes, 2, 1958, pp. 5462. 2 Anamali S., La ncropole de Kruje et la civilisation du Haut Moyen Age en Albanie du Nord, Studia Albanica, 1, 1964, pp. 149164; Anamali S., The Question of the Albanian Early Mediaeval Culture in the Light of New Archaeological Discoveries, Studime Historike, 2, 1967, pp. 2240; Spahiu H., The Arber graveyard at the Dalmaca Castle, Illyria, 910, 19791980, pp. 2345; Komata D., The Arber grave-yard of Shurdhah, Illyria, 910, 19791980, pp. 105121; Prendi F., A grave-yard of the Arber culture in Lezha, Illyria, 910, 19791980, pp. 123170; Doda N., The Arber Graves of Prosek in Mirdita Region, Illyria, 1, 1989, p. 113; Spahiu H., Komata D., Shurdhah-Sarda, a Mediaeval Fortified Town, Illyria, 3, 1975, p. 249; Popovi V., Byzantins, Slaves et autochthones dans les provinces de Prvalitane et Nouvelle Epire, Ecole franaise de Rome, 1984, pp. 181243;
164
______________________BALCANIA
scientists, the archaeologists have discovered many localities from the 7th and 8th centuries, which clearly fill the gap of the IllyrianAlbanian cultural-ethnical continuity, the gap which could not be filled completely from the written historical (primarily Byzantine) sources. To conclude, for the Albanian Albanology, exactly the Koman Culture is the crucial grummet in the chain of the unbroken Illyrian-Albanian ethnogenesis from the early Antique up today. It has to serve as the pivotal proof of allegedly Albanian originality at the Balkan Peninsula. However, it is known that large Slavic settlements and toponyms existed in the area that came to be known as presentday Albania. After the first Albanian state was created in 1912, and especially during the rule of the Albanian communist dictator, Enver Hoxha (19451985), however, a great part of the nonAlbanian (especially Slavic) population and toponyms have been Albanized.1 Simultaneously, Albanian national soil was (and is) gradually cleansed from both the Slavs and the Greeks2 and their national-cultural traces. In this respect, the province of Kosovo and Metohija experienced the most serious ethnic and cultural cleansing in the post-1945 Europe (together with the territory of ex-Republic of Serbian Krayina in the present-day Croatia which was cleaned by the Croat military and police forces in August 1995).3 This southern Serbias province, known as the Old Serbia, or Serbia proper, became almost totally ethnically and culturally cleaned by the local ethnic Albanians after the province was occupied by the NATO troops in June 1999. Today, there are
Popovi V., Albanija u kasnoj antici, Ilirci i Albanci, Beograd, 1988, pp. 202283. 1 Hrabak B., irenje arbanakih stoara po ravnicama i slovenski ratari srednjovekovne Albanije, Stanovnitvo slovenskog porijekla u Albaniji, Titograd, 1991, p. 115. Regarding the Slavic toponyms in Albania see: Popovi V., Albanija u kasnoj Antici, Ilirci i Albanci, Beograd, 1988; Selischev A. M., , , 1931. 2 Gersin K., Altserbien und die albanische Frage, Wien, 1912, p. 29; Vlora B. E., Lebenserinnerungen, Band I (1885 bis 1912), Mnchen, 1968, p. 275; Vlora B. E., Die Wahrheit ber das Vorgehen der Jungtrken in Albanien, Wien, 1911, p. 43. According to the U.S. Office of Strategic Services, from April 1941 until August 1942, the Albanians killed around 10.000 Serbs and Montenegrins in the areas of Kosovo and Metohija which were incorporated into Italian Greater Albania [Krizman S., Maps of Yugoslavia at War. Massacre of the Innocent Serbian Population, Committed in Yugoslavia by the Axis and its Satellites from April 1941 to August 1942, Washington, 1943]. 3 See the appendix 3.
165
______________________BALCANIA
only up to 3% of non-Albanian population in the province (comparing to 13% in 1998), the Slavic-Serb toponyms are renamed to the Albanian ones, the Serb cultural property, as the fact of the national existence in the province from historical perspective, is very much destroyed or officially called as the Byzantine one and the rest of non-Albanian population (together with the local Serbs) is expelled from the province which proclaimed state independence in February 2008.1 At such a way, Kosovo and Metohija became exclusively Albanian populated and culturally inherited land a part of united national state of the ethnic Illyro-Albanians in the form of the Greater Albania. Nevertheless, from the perspective of relevant historical source (the Ottoman census in 1455), there were only 2% of Albanian population in the province in the mid-15th century.2 One of the most famous South Slavic philologists in the 20th century, Pavle Ivi came to the conclusion after a deeper investigation of the case-study of Kosovo and Metohija that the factual material clearly shows that there was no linguistic continuity between the ancient population of the present province of Kosovos population, and those who now inhabit the area.3 This is one of the most serious scientific refutation of the Albanian hypothesis of the Illyrian-Albanian ethnogenesis. In addition, even today, overwhelming majority (if not all) of the toponyms in Kosovo and Metohija are of the Slavic (Serb) origin. The presentday Albanian practice to Albanize them is quite understandable from the perspective of the political aims of the proponents of the hypothesis of the Illyrian-Albanian ethnogenesis.
1 March Pogrom in Kosovo and Metohija, March 1719, 2004, with a survey of destroyed and endangered Christian cultural heritage, Belgrade: Ministry of Culture of the Republic of SerbiaMuseum in Pritina (displaced), 2004; http://crucified-kosovo.webs.com; http://www.kosovo.net; http://www.crucified-kosovo.eu 2 abanovi H. (ed.), Hadibegi H., Handi A., Kovaevi E. (prepared by), Oblast Brankovia. Opirni katastarski popis iz 1455. godine (original title: Defter-I, Mufassal-I, Vilayet-I, VLK, sene 859), Monumenta Turcica. Historiam Slavorum Meridionalium Illustrantia, Tomus tertius, serija III, Defteri, knjiga 2, sv. 1, Sarajevo: Orijentalni institut u Sarajevu, 1972. 3 ., , : , 1990, p. 141.
166
______________________BALCANIA
7. The Dacian theory of the Albanian ethnical background The hypothesis and later accepted theory of the AlbanianIllyrian identification is seriously challenged by many contemporary linguists and historians as simply hypothesis not based on historical sources. Thus, the Illyrian theory of Albanian ethnical origin and national inheritance had four weakest points: The ancient Illyrians, according to some scholars, are not indigenous Balkan people as they migrated to the Balkans around 1000 B.C. (i. e., later than the ancient Greeks). There are enough number of relevant historical sources of the time according to which, the Balkan Albanian motherland was the Caucasus Albania in the presentday Province of Dagestan of the Russian Federation and the Republic of Azerbaijan (see the appendix 4). The claim of Illyrian-Albanian ethnogenesis is not based on any relevant historical source it is much more just unproved hypothesis than the real scientific theory. Finally, there are indications that the Albanians, who are living today on the territory of ancient Illyria, came there from the territory of the Roman Province of Moesia Superior (in the present-day Serbia) and especially from the valley of the River of Morava which is now the territory of the Eastern Serbia i.e., the ancient Illyrians cannot be the ancestors of the present-day Albanians. The last point deserve more attention. As the territory of the Province of Moesia Superior was in the ancient times the zone of Dacian ethnicity, the modern Albanians can be only of the Dacian ethnical origin, but not of the Illyrian one. In this case, however, the Albanians are of the same ethnical origin like the modern Romanians. Such conclusions are supported by the following facts: 1) Illyrian toponyms from the time of ancient Greeks and Romans are not in accordance with the Albanian phonetic laws; 2) most ancient Latin loanwords in the Albanian language have the phonetic form of the eastern Balkan type of the Latin language that is showing that the Albanians are descendent from the ancient Dacians; 3) the most part of terminology in the Albanian language, which is in connection to the expression of littoral terms, is
167
______________________BALCANIA
borrowed from different languages what suggests that the Albanians have not been originally a coastal people; 4) only a few ancient Greek loanwords exist in modern Albanian language; if Albanians of Illyrian origin were really indigenous population in Epirus region there should be much more loanwords from the ancient Greek language; 5) there is no any reference to the Albanians on the present-day Albanias territory in any medieval historical source before the 9th century1; and 6) around one hundred words from the Romanian language are similar only to the words from the Albanian language. It suggests that the Albanians came to the present-day Albania either from the present-day Romania or from the territory of Serbia that is close to Romania.2 The Albanian language was passing through the process of development during the 4th, 5th, and 6th centuries - the time when the proto-Romanian language was formed. According to some
1 Similarly, the Hungarian historians and linguists are stressing that the Romanian theory of Romanian ethnical origin from the ancient Dacians is unjust. The Hungarians are arguing that the Vlachs (or the Romanians as it is regarded in Romanian historiography) arrived in the 12th century when the name of Vlach was mentioned for the first time in historical sources. This opinion is primarily based on the highly ideological Gesta Hungarorum of the unknown cleric Anonymus three-hundred years after the events recorded [i. e., the Magyar settlement in the Pannonia and Transylvania] splendid victories over fictitious chiefs of the peoples found here by the Magyars, actually projecting the twelfth-century status quo onto the ninth [Kontler L., Millenium in Central Europe. A History of Hungary, Budapest: Atlantisz Publishing House, 1999, p. 43]. Contrary to their Hungarian colleagues, the Romanian historians and linguists developed the Dacian-Vlach theory of Romanian ethnical origin suggesting that the ancient Dacians were protoRomanians. As a result, the modern Romanians are considered as original settlers in Transylvania and they have stronger historical rights to this territory than the Hungarians who came there just in the 10th century (for example, see: [Bolovan I. and others, A History of Romania, Iai, 1996, pp. 4663]). 2 The Romanian philologist Vasila Parvan launched a hypothesis in 1910 that the proto-Albanians left their original territories in the Carpathians between the 3rd and the 6th century A.D. and moved to the Balkans through Transylvania. The Romanian linguist Theodor Capidan was sure in 1922 that the Albanians formerly lived somewhere in the northern part of the Balkan Peninsula [Capidan Th., Dacoromania, II, Bucharest, 1922, p. 487]. The Greek linguist Philippides thought that the Albanian motherland was ancient Roman Province of Pannonia (all citations taken from [abej E., The problem of the autochthony of Albanians in the light of place-names, Buletini i Universitetit Shteteror te Tiranes, 2, 1958, pp. 5462].
168
______________________BALCANIA
scholars, the Romanian language should be seen as the Romanized Dacian-Moesian language, while the Albanian language is a semiRomanized Dacian-Moesian language.1 It has to be said that the arguments for the Dacian origin of the Albanians have strong points and they deserved to be seriously taken into consideration by the scholars. The Albanians did not have a single ancestor in some of the pre-South Slavic Balkan peoples. The present-day Albanians, likewise other modern Balkan peoples, are ethnically mixed and composed by an admixture of their main ancestor with the ancestries of the modern South Slavic, Greek and Romanian people. The pivotal purpose of supporters of the Illyrian theory of Albanian ethnical origin was to underline that the Albanian historical rights in the Balkans are the oldest and strongest ones in comparison with their neighbours: the Serbs, Montenegrins, Macedonian Slavs and Greeks. However, either the Dacian theory, or the theory of admixture of Albanian ethnical roots, argues that Albanian historical rights in the Balkans are not older than historical rights of their neighbours. This theoretical-scientific question of Albanian ethnical derivation greatly influenced the creators of the Balkan states borders during the Balkan Wars 19121913 and also had serious implications for the fixing of the borders of an independent Albanian state in 19121921. In the other words, either the Northern Epirus will become a part of Albania or Greece, the Western Macedonia, Kosovo and Metohija parts of Serbia or Albania and the Eastern Montenegro with the Scodra Lake and the city of Scodra will become parts of Albania or Montenegro, highly depended on the question whose historical rights to these lands were stronger. By using the Illyrian theory of Albanian ethnogenesis, many of Albanian national workers, scholars and politicians claimed that, for instance, the so-called Greek province of the Northern Epirus actually had to be considered as the Southern Albania and as such to be included into the united national state of all Albanians.2
1 Georgiev V., The Genesis of the Balkan Peoples, Slavonic and East European Review, 44, 103, 1966, pp. 285297; Fine J., The Early Medieval Balkans, Ann Arbor, 1994, pp. 10, 11. 2 That term Northern Epirus has to be understood as the Southern Albania suggests and American scholar: Stickney E. P., Southern Albania or Northern Epirus in European International Affairs: 19121923, Stanford, 1926. In the Appeal of the Central Committee for the defense of the rights of the Albanian nationality addressed to all patriots to defend the Albanian lands which are threatened with annexation by Montenegro (Istanbul, May, 30, 1878), the
169
______________________BALCANIA
8. Conclusion: Understanding Albanian nationality and political consequences The Albanian nationhood was understood in the 19th century romanticist notion of the nationality, i.e., Albanians were the Balkan people whose mother tongue was Albanian regardless on confessional division of Albanian people into three denominations (Islamic, Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox). Within the north Albanian tribes, especially among the Miriditi, the Roman Catholic Church was very influential. The Roman Catholic Church became in the first place the principal vigilante of the language, cultural heritage and national identity of the Albanians in the Northern Albania.1 The expression of common sense of the Albanian nationhood was uttered by Albanian political leadership in the years of the Balkan Wars 19121913 in the following slogan: Neve Shqiptar nuk jemi Greke, Sllav, or Teerk, neve jemi Shqiptar (We Albanians are not the Greeks, Slavs, or Turks, we are the Albanians). The Albanian political methodology from the time of the First Priznen League in 1878 till the Balkan Wars in 19121913 was applied to prepare unification of all ethnically Albanian territories in the Balkans into (a Greater) Albania - a single national state of all Albanians, i.e., within the ethnic borders demanded by the League in the years of its existence from 1878 to 1881. Essentially similar national-state concepts were also
Committee demanded that the Albanians should be left to their lands: Through the press and local committees, we have distributed your protest against the pretensions of the Greek Government towards Southern Albania, or Epirus, which is a component part of our country like Central and Northern Albania. Further, the Central Committee will make every effort to defend the rights of Albanian nationality in Northern Albania before European public opinion and diplomacy as it has done already for the same reasons in Epirus, Live the Albanian lands to Albanians! [The Archives of the Institute of History of Republic of Albania, Tirana, Fund of the Albanian League of Prizren, file 2, document 5523]. This proclamation is published as a leaflet in Albanian and Italian. The English language translation of the document can be found in: [Pollo S., Pulaha S. (eds.), Acts of the Albanian National Renaissance, 18781912, Tirana, 1978, pp. 1819]. 1 Draki S., Nadmetanje Austro-Ugarske i Italije koncem XIX i poetkom XX veka u Albaniji, Albansko pitanje u novoj istoriji, III, Beograd: Marksistika misao, 2-1986, pp. 129132. See also: [Starova G., The Religion of the Albanians in the Balkan European Context, Balkan Forum, Skopje, vol. 1, 4, 1993, pp. 201204].
170
______________________BALCANIA
included in political programs of the Albanian Peja (Pej) League, from 1899, the Greater Albanian Kosovo Committee, from 1920, and the Second Prizren League, from 1943. Shortly, preservation of the traditional, common law and local community as the organizational basis of the national movement followed by the demand for unification of all territories populated by Albanians became Albanian primary national interest from 1878 onward. Clearly, the process of creation of Albanian nationality was not finished yet at the end of the 19th century. The Albanian nation was not considered as a political reality in Europe by many politicians at that time. The Albanian people were among the last one in Europe to build up their own national identity and national community. When during the sessions of the Congress of Berlin in 1878 the question of Albania and Albanians was put on the agenda, the German Chancellor (Kanzzelar) Otto von Bismarck decisively rejected to speak about it with the explanation that there was no Albanian nationality.1 For him, the Albanians were the Turks. At the same period of time, the Serbs (either from Serbia or from Montenegro) and the Greeks considered themselves as a nation (i.e., ethnical groups which had its own state organizations), and as such were understood by Europe, while the Albanians were understood as the Balkan ethnical group (i.e., the group of people who did not have its own state). Consequently, ethnical group of Albanians could live only as ethnical minority included into some of the Balkan national state(s) and cannot expect more than the right to autonomy within it (them). All in all, at the turn of the 20th century many politicians in Serbia, Montenegro and Greece shared opinion that the ethnical group of Albanians was culturally and politically incapable of a modern national development and above all unable and incompetent to establish and rule their own national state.2 The backwardness of development of Albanian society at the beginning of the 20th century was seen from the fact that initiated process of modernization shook the Albanian tribal society, but failed to replace it with a modern industrial,
1 Logoreci A., The Albanians. Europes Forgotten Survivors, Colorado, 1977, p. 41. 2 Such approach can be understood as old theory, which was used during the Balkan Wars 19121913 to justify Serbian conquering of the Northern Albania, Greek occupation of the Southern Albania and Montenegrin military taking over the city of Skadar/Scutari [ ., , , , 1913, pp. 177118].
171
______________________BALCANIA
parliamentary and civil society. The Albanian national movement was seen as well as archaic social movement that cannot reach a level of national cohesion in modern terms. This movement produced among the Serbs, Montenegrins and Greeks a feeling of jeopardizing the political and territorial integrity of Serbia, Montenegro and Greece.1 For them, the theory of IllyrianAlbanian continuity is in essence a nationalistic ideological construction which became a driving politically-ideological force for Albanian politicians to create, from the Albanian vision, their ethnic borders according to Albanian acquired rights. Geopolitically, this project, from 1878 to the present, demands not only the territories which ethnically and historically belong to the Albanians, but it went beyond them and encompassed the entire Illyrian-Albanian ethnic population, dispersed in different areas over the neighbouring Balkan regions: Kosovo and Metohija, southern parts of Central Serbia, ameria (Greek Epirus and Greek Western Macedonia), western portion of the Republic of Macedonia (the FYROM) and the Eastern Montenegro.2
1 The Serbs, Montenegrins, Macedonian Slavs and Greeks are accusing the Albanian intellectuals and politicians for using the theory of Illyrian-Albanian ethnical, linguistic and cultural continuity for the sake of realizing the political concept of a Greater Albania at the Balkans. This concept can not be realized without a radical change of the borders of the Balkan states established in 19121913, following two Balkan Wars. Such change of the borders would violate the territorial integrity of Serbia, Montenegro, Macedonia and Greece. In conclusion, the concept of a Greater Albania, based among other ideological constructions and on the theory of Illyrian-Albanian ethnogenesis, may serve as a prelude to a Third Balkan War. Regarding the concept and consequences of creation of a Greater Albania at the Balkans see, for example: [anak J. (ed.), Greater Albania. Concept and possible Consequences, Belgrade: the Institute of Geopolitical Studies, Belgrade, 1998; Borozan ., Greater Albania-Origins, Ideas, Practice, Belgrade: the Institute of Military History of the Yugoslav Army, Belgrade, 1995]. It should be stressed that in addition to Orthodoxy and the so-called St. Savas spiritual legacy, the province of Kosovo and Metohija (i.e., Serbia proper) is the third pillar of Serbian national identity. Contrary to the Serbian case, Kosovo and Metohija are not of any significance for the Albanian national identity. Regarding the (crucial) importance of Kosovo and Metohija for the Serbs from historical perspective, see: [ . , , : , 1989]. 2 According to the map of United Albania, composed by Ali Fehmi Kosturi and distributed since 1938. Historically, there were two attempts to create a Greater Albania: firstly in 1912 supported by Austria-Hungary, and secondly in 1941 with the direct intervention of fascist Italy and the logistic support of the Third Reich. In both cases the concept of Greater Albania reasserted the
172
______________________BALCANIA
However, contrary to the theory of backwardness of Albanian social development, the Albanian political and intellectual leadership from the turn of the 20th century argued that the Albanians met all conditions required by contemporary political science to be recognized as a nation: 1) they had their separate ethnic, linguistic and cultural identity; 2) the Albanian settlements in the Balkans are compact; 3) the Albanians had a very precisely defined national program; and 4) they posses abilities to build up a community and their own independent state which would be governed by themselves.1 The Albanian political and intellectual leadership often were stressing that Albanian people with their own national idea would never be successfully integrated either into Serbian, Montenegrin or Greek societies and states. That is, in addition to numerous and diverse causes, also due to the fact that the Albanians do not belong to the Slavic or Greek linguistic and cultural groups. There is also significant divergence of national development of the Serbs, Montenegrins, Greeks, on the one hand, and the Albanians, on the other. These nations had different kind of the national movements and particularly had and have different sort of the political elite and national ideology, too. However, the Albanian national ideology of the Illyrian-Albanian ethnogenesis was created and still exists as a pure myth in a form of a quasiscientific political propaganda for the sake of creation of a Greater Albania. Finally, the Albanians surely were among the very few Balkan peoples who managed to find an internal balance between three confessions and to build up the three-confessions national identity: Islam, followed by 70% of Albanian population (primarily from Albania proper, Kosovo and Metohija, the Western Macedonia and the Eastern Montenegro), Eastern Orthodoxy, professed by 20% of Albanians (chiefly from the Southern Albania and the Greek Northern Epirus) and Roman Catholicism, confessed by 10% of the Albanians (mainly from the Northern
demands by the 18781881 Albanian First League of Prizren to create an Albanian state inside alleged Illyrian-Albanian historical-ethnical borders. 1 Similar arguments referring to Kosovo and Metohija were presented by the Albanian Kosovo intelligentsia in the 1990s during the Kosovo crisis and the war. See, for example: [Maliqi S., Strah od novih ratnih uspeha, Borba, Beograd, September 16th, 1993].
173
______________________BALCANIA
Albania proper and Kosovo and Metohija).1 The Illyrian theory of the Albanian ethnogenesis played a crucial role in this management. Used bibliography (sources & literature)
Anamali S., La ncropole de Kruje et la civilisation du Haut Moyen Age en Albanie du Nord, Studia Albanica, 1, 1964 Anamali S., The Illyrians and the Albanians, Prifti K., Nasi L., Omari L., Xhufi P., Pulaha S., Pollo S., Shtylla Z. (eds.), The Truth on Kosova, Tirana, 1993 Anamali S., The Problem of the Formation of the Albanian people in the Light of Archaeological Information, The National Conference on the formation of the Albanian people, their language and culture, Tirana, 1988 Anamali S., The Question of the Albanian Early Mediaeval Culture in the Light of New Archaeological Discoveries, Studime Historike, 2, 1967 Appeal of the Central Committee for the defense of the rights of the Albanian nationality addressed to all patriots to defend the Albanian lands which are threatened with annexation by Montenegro (Istanbul, May, 30, 1878)
1 To this very day, the Albanian Muslims are the main corps of the Albanian national movement and nationalism. The concept of United, or Greater, Albania, in its original form (from 1878), was under the strong influence of conservative, political Islam.
174
______________________BALCANIA
Ataliota M., Corpus Scriptorum Historiae Byzantine, Bonn: Weber, 1853 Basanaviius J., Lietuvikai trakikos studijos, Shenandoah, PA, 1898 Bolovan I. and others, A History of Romania, Iai, 1996 Borozan ., Greater Albania-Origins, Ideas, Practice, Belgrade: the Institute of Military History of the Yugoslav Army, Belgrade, 1995 Buda A., The Southern Illyrians as a Problem of Historiography, Historical Writings, vol. 1 Cabanes P., Les Illyriens de Bardylis Genthios, IVII sicles avant J.C, Paris, 1988 abej E., The problem of the autochthony of Albanians in the light of place-names, Buletini i Universitetit Shteteror te Tiranes, 2, 1958 Capidan Th., Dacoromania, II, Bucharest, 1922 Ceka N., Survay of the Development of Urban Life Among Southern Illyrians, Illyria, 2, 1985 Cerskov E., Rimljani na Kosovu i Metohiji, Beograd, 1969 Contents of the coded telegram sent by Dervish Pasha from Shkodra (December 27, 1880), Basbakanllik Arsive, Istanbul, Fund of Jilldiz esas evraki, 14 88/16 88 12 Costa N., Albania: A European Enigma, New York, 1995 anak J. (ed.), Greater Albania. Concept and possible Consequences, Belgrade: the Institute of Geopolitical Studies, Belgrade, 1998 Dobruna E., On some ancient toponyms in Kosova, Onomastika e Kosoves, Prishtina, 1979 Doda N., The Arber Graves of Prosek in Mirdita Region, Illyria, 1, 1989 Draki S., Nadmetanje Austro-Ugarske i Italije koncem XIX i poetkom XX veka u Albaniji, Albansko pitanje u novoj istoriji, III, Beograd: Marksistika misao, 2-1986 Durham E., High Albania, London, 1909 Engel J. (ed.), Groer Historischer Weltatlas. Mittelalter, Mnchen, 1979
175
______________________BALCANIA
Evans A., Antiquarian Researches in Illyricum, Archeologia, XLIX, Westminster, 1883 Ferjani B., Istorija Albanaca (Albanija do XII veka), Beograd, 1969 Ferluga J, Sur la date de la cration du thme de Dyrrhachium, Extrait des Actes du XII Congrs International des Etudes Byzantines, vol. 2, Beograd, 1964 Fine J., The Early Medieval Balkans, Ann Arbor, 1994 Garaanin M., Considerations finales, Iliri i Albanci, Beograd, 1988 Garaanin M., Istona granica Ilira prema arheolokim spomenicima, Simpozijum o teritorijalnom i hronolokom razgranienju Ilira u praistorijsko doba, Sarajevo, 1964 Garaanin M., Razmatranja o makedonskom haltatuMaterijalna kultura, hronologija, etniki problem, Starinar, VVI, 19541955 Georgiev V., The Genesis of the Balkan Peoples, Slavonic and East European Review, 44, 103, 1966 Gersin K., Altserbien und die albanische Frage, Wien, 1912 Glomazi M., Etniko i nacionalno bie Crnogoraca, Beograd: TRZ PANPUBLIK, 1988 Gut Ch., Groupe de Travail sur lEurope Centrale et Orientale, Bulletin dInformation, 2, June 1878, Paris Hahn G. J., Albanian studies, 1854 Hamp E. P., The Position of Albanian, Proceedings of Conference on Indo-European Linguistics, Los Angeles, 1963. Haus-, Hof- und Staatsarchiv, Wien, sterreich Historia e popullit Shqiptar, I, Prishtin, 1969 Hobhouse J. C. (Lord Broughton), Travels in Albania and other provinces of Turkey in 1808 and 1810, I, II, London, 1858 Hobsbawm E. J., Nations and Nationalism since 1789. Programme, Myth, Reality, Cambridge, 2000 Hrabak B., irenje arbanakih stoara po ravnicama i slovenski ratari srednjovekovne Albanije, Stanovnitvo slovenskog porijekla u Albaniji, Titograd, 1991
176
______________________BALCANIA
Independent Research Project Crucified Kosovo: http://crucified-kosovo.webs.com The Crucified Kosovo Independent Research Centre for Advanced Balkan Studies: http://www.crucified-kosovo.eu Kosovo The Land of the Living Past: http://www.kosovo.net Hymje ne historine e gjuhes shqipe, Prishtin, 1955 Islami S., Anamali S., Korkuti M, Prendi F., Les Illyriens, Tirana, 1985 Islami S., The Illyrian State Its Place and Role in the Mediterranean World, I, Tirana, 1974 Ismajly R., Albanians and South-Eastern Europe (Aspects of Identity), Conflict or Dialogue. Serbian-Albanian relations and integration of the Balkans. Studies and Essays, Subotica, 1994 Jaov M., Le Missioni cattoliche nel Balcani durante la guerra di Candia (16451669), vol. III, Citt del Vaticana, 1992 Jokl N., Eberts Reallexicon der Vorgeschichte, I, 1924 Jubani B., Features of Illyrian Culture in the Territory of Dardania, Illyria, 2, 1985 Kai B., Institutiones Linguae Illyricae, 1604. Komata D., The Arber grave-yard of Shurdhah, Illyria, 9 10, 19791980 Kont F., Sloveni. Nastanak i razvoj slovenskih civilizacija u Evropi (VIXIII vek), Beograd: Zavod za izdavaku delatnost Filip Vinji, 1989 Kontler L., Millenium in Central Europe. A History of Hungary, Budapest: Atlantisz Publishing House, 1999 Krizman S., Maps of Yugoslavia at War. Massacre of the Innocent Serbian Population, Committed in Yugoslavia by the Axis and its Satellites from April 1941 to August 1942, Washington, 1943 Lemerle P., Invasions et migrations dans les Balkans depuis la fin de lpoque Romaine jusquau VIIIe sicle, Revue historique, 78, 1954
177
______________________BALCANIA
Lemerle P., Les plus anciens recueils des miracles de Saint Demtrius, II, Paris, 1981 Logoreci A., The Albanians. Europes Forgotten Survivors, Colorado, 1977 Mack R., Grenzmarken und Nachbarn Makedonien in Norden und Western, Gottingen, 1951 Maliqi S., Strah od novih ratnih uspeha, Borba, Beograd, September 16th, 1993 Malraux A., Anti-Memoirs, New York, 1968 March Pogrom in Kosovo and Metohija, March 1719, 2004, with a survey of destroyed and endangered Christian cultural heritage, Belgrade: Ministry of Culture of the Republic of SerbiaMuseum in Pritina (displaced), 2004 Marmullaku R., Albania and Albanians, London, 1975 Mateescu N., Granita de apur a Tracilor, Annuarul Institutului de Istoria nationale, III, Cluj, 1923 Mirdita Z., Dardanian Studies, Rilindja, Prishtina, 1979 Miridita Z., Istorija Albanaca (Iliri i etnogeneza Albanaca), Beograd, 1969 Mommsen T., The Provinces of the Roman Empire, vol. 1, Chicago, MCMLXXIV Mller J., Albanien, Rumelien und die sterreichischmontenegrinische Granze, Prag, 1844 Orbini M., De Regno Sclavorum, Pesaro, 1601 Oxford Dictionary of World History. The worlds most trusted reference books, New York: Oxford University Press, 2001 Papazoglu F., Dardanska onomastika, Zbornik Filozofskog fakulteta, 81, Beograd, 1964 Papazoglu F., Les royaumes dIllyrie et de Dardanie, Origines et development, structures, hellenisation et romanization, Iliri i Albanci, Beograd, 1988 Papazoglu F., Srednjobalkanska plemena u predrimsko doba, Sarajevo, 1969 Pollo S., Pulaha S. (eds.), Acts of the Albanian National Renaissance, 18781912, Tirana, 1978
178
______________________BALCANIA
Pollo S., Pulaha S. (eds.), Pages of the Albanian National Renaissance, 18781912, Tirana, 1978 Pollo S., Puto A., The History of Albania, London-BostonHebley: Routledge & Kegan, 1981 Popovi V., Albanija u kasnoj antici, Ilirci i Albanci, Beograd, 1988 Popovi V., Byzantins, Slaves et autochthones dans les provinces de Prvalitane et Nouvelle Epire, Ecole franaise de Rome, 1984 Prendi F., A grave-yard of the Arber culture in Lezha, Illyria, 910, 19791980 Pribojevi V., On Origin and History of the Slavs, Venice, 1532 Protest of 6200 Albanian emigrants (Pritina, June 26, 1878), Politisches Archiv des Auswartigen Amtes, Bonn, Fund of the Acts of the Congress of Brlin, 2, 1878, doc. 110 (telegram) Protest of the Population of Shkodra, Podgorica, Shpuza, Zhabjak, Tivar, Ulqin, Gruda, Kelmend, Hot and Kastrat addressed to the Ambassador of France in Istanbul against the annexation of Albanian lands by Montenegro (Shkodra, May 8, 1878), Archives du Ministre des Affaires trangres, Paris, Fund of the French Embassy at the Sublime Porte, Turkey, vol. 417, supplement to the report 96 Qabej W., Hyrje n historin e gjuhs shipe, Prishtin, 1970 Radoni J., Rimska kurija i junoslovenske zemlje od XVI do XIX veka, Beograd, 1950 Rizaj S., The Albanian League of Prizren in British Documents, 18781881, Prishtina, 1978 Schanderl D. H., Die Albanienpolitik sterreich-Ungarns und Italiens 18771908, Albanische Forschungen 9, Wiesbaden: Otto Harassovitz, 1971. Seen A. E., Jonas Basanaviius: The patriarch of the Lithuanian national renaissance, Newtonville, MA, 1980 Selischev A. M., , , 1931
179
______________________BALCANIA
Skendi S., Religion in Albania during the Ottoman rule, Sdost Forscungen, 15, Mnich, 1956 Spahiu H., The Arber graveyard at the Dalmaca Castle, Illyria, 910, 19791980 Spahiu H., Komata D., Shurdhah-Sarda, a Mediaeval Fortified Town, Illyria, 3, 1975 Stadtmller G., Forschungen zur albanischen fruhgeschichte, zweite erweiterte auflage, Albanische Forschungen, 2, Wiesbaden, 1966 Starova G., The Religion of the Albanians in the Balkan European Context, Balkan Forum, Skopje, vol. 1, 4, 1993 Stickney E. P., Southern Albania or Northern Epirus in European International Affairs: 19121923, Stanford, 1926 Stipevi A., Every Story About the Balkans Begins with the Illyrians, Pritina, 1985 Stulli B., Albansko pitanje, JAZU, Zagreb, vol. 318, 1959 abanovi H. (ed.), Hadibegi H., Handi A., Kovaevi E. (prepared by), Oblast Brankovia. Opirni katastarski popis iz 1455. godine (original title: Defter-I, Mufassal-I, Vilayet-I, VLK, sene 859), Monumenta Turcica. Historiam Slavorum Meridionalium Illustrantia, Tomus tertius, serija III, Defteri, knjiga 2, sv. 1, Sarajevo: Orijentalni institut u Sarajevu, 1972 Tercman-i ark, September 27th, 1878 The Activity of the Albanian League of Prizren in the vilayet of Kosova (1880), Consul-General Blunt to the Marquis of Salisbury, Public Record Office, Foreign Affairs, London, 195/1323 The Archives of the Institute of History of Republic of Albania, Tirana, Fund of the Albanian League of Prizren, file 2, document 5523 The British Museum, London, Fund of Accounts and Papers (43), 1880, LXXXII, 82, 7778 Thunmann J., Research on history of the East European peoples, Leipzig, 1774 Toi V., New Data About the Illyrian Onomastics in Durrhachium, Illyria, 1, 1986
180
______________________BALCANIA
Vlora B. E., Die Wahrheit ber das Vorgehen der Jungtrken in Albanien, Wien, 1911 Vlora B. E., Lebenserinnerungen, Band I (1885 bis 1912), Mnchen, 1968 Vulpe R., Gli Illiri dellItalia Imperiale Romana, III, 1925 Westermann Groer Atlas zur Weltgeschichte, Braunschweig, 1985 Wilson Th., Donnan H. (eds.), Border Identities. Nation and state at international frontiers, Cambridge, 1998 ., , , , 2003 ., , : CLIO, 2001 . ., . , , : , 2007 . ., . , , , 2006 ., O etnikom odnosu Dardanaca prema Ilirima, Jugoslovenski istorijski asopis, III, Beograd, 1937 ., , , 1950 ., , , , CLV, , 1933 ., , , , , , 1988 . ., . ., . ., , : , 2009 ., 17901918, II, , 1989 ., I X , : , 1999 ., , : , 1990
181
______________________BALCANIA
., . 1537. g., I, , 1978 (original written in German and published in Wien, 1911) ., ., . , II, B, 1978 (unfinished original by K. Jirechek in German, printed in Wien, 1911. Completed by J. Radonji) ., , : Admiral Books, 2011 ., La nazionalit dei Dardani, , IV, . ., , , 1996 ., , , 1959 ., , 1, : , 1998 . , , : , 1989 ., 18041912, , 1994 ., - , 1896-1908, : CIELA, 2012 ., , , , 1913 ., , : , 1993 ., , : , 1966 ., , III, , 1911 Summary
National Identity: Who are the Albanians? The Illyrian Anthroponymy and the Ethnogenesis of the Albanians 182
______________________BALCANIA
Assoc. Prof. Vladislav B. SOTIROVI, Ph.D.

Mykolas Romeris University Institute of Political Sciences, Vilnius (vsotirovic@mruni.eu)
The Albanians believe to be the last pure and direct descendants of the ancient Illyrians, the Balkan people who lived at this peninsula in the Antique time. Many scholars consider the Albanians as the offspring population of the ancient inhabitants of the Balkan Peninsula, either the Pelasgians or the Illyrians, i.e. the population residing in this part of Europe before the Middle Ages. During the mid-19th century and especially after the establishment of the Albanian national-political organisation the First League of Prizren in 1878 the romanticist understanding of the nationhood according to the linguistic principle prevailed among the Albanian intellectuals, particularly among those who were living as the emigrants in Italy (the Arabresh, how the ItaloAlbanians called themselves). The Albanian national movement Rilindja took anti-South Slavic and anti-Greek political-ideological orientation, which at any case can not be considered as anti-Christian. The Albanian national identity is derived from confrontation with, and from, differences in comparison with their neighbours. The majority of Albanian political workers from the time of Rilindja accepted the German-Romanticist principle of linguistic nationhood and they created the notion of Albanians that designated an ethnic group whose mother tongue was the Albanian language. However, referring to the linguistic evidences some scholars defend the thesis that the Albanians are descendants of the ancient Dacians who have been inhabiting and the lands south of the River of Danube (the Roman Provinces of Moesia Superior and Moesia Inferior) and migrating south-west to the territory of the presentday Albania. Some serious indications refer Albanian ethnical origin to the Dacian-Moesian root. On the first place it is Albanian name for them the Shqiptars, the word of Dacian-Moesian origin, which means the highlanders in the Bulgarian language. However, the proponents of the Illyrian theory of Albanian ethnogenesis connected the contemporary international name for the Albanians with the Albanoi what was the name of an Illyrian tribe living in the present-day North Albania, mentioned for the first time in the works of the Greek geographer Ptolemy in the 2nd century A.D.
183
______________________BALCANIA
The ideology and efforts of the Albanian national movement in the years of 18781913 to unify all Albanian Balkan population who lived in compact masses into a single independent ethnically homogenous state of the Albanians jeopardized the idea of territorial integrity of Serbian, Montenegrin and Greek national states. The same is and with the present-day projects to re-create a Greater Albania from the time of the WWII. Numerous transformations have been taken place among the Albanians through their historical development, which have resulted in alternation of their real (the Caucasus) ethnical entity. There are no pure peoples (nations) in the world and the Albanians are not pure, either. There is an ethnic substratum that is present in all Balkan peoples (nations). However, it is beyond doubt that the Albanians have retained some of the Illyrian elements in their ethnic make-up for the very reason: they were settled on the Illyrian territory in 1043. But, on the other hand, all the peoples (nations) who live today in the Western and the Central Balkans have Illyrian elements. However, in the other regions of the Western and the Central Balkans, the Slavic element is predominant. Among the Albanians the Latinized Illyrian elements are strong, especially in the point of language. Nevertheless, this fact cannot be utilized by anybody to claim that Albanian historical and ethnical rights on certain Balkan territories are stronger and longer than the Slavic or the Greek ones. In this point, the Illyrian-Albanian cultural-ethnic continuation can gain a new political dimension with the interethnical conflicts in the Balkans, which are already exist, as a Greater Albania is in the process of formation (or re-creation). The first Balkan province already de facto incorporated into the united national state of the Illyro-Albanians is Kosovo and Metohija.
Appendices
184
______________________BALCANIA
1: Four Albanian vilayets to be united into the so-called Albanian Vilayet of the Ottoman Empire and to compose at such a way a Greater Albania (c. 1878)
185
______________________BALCANIA
2: Map of a Greater Albania promoted by the Albanian diaspora in Sweden in 1977
186
______________________BALCANIA
3: Destruction of Serbian national traces in Albanian-ruled Kosovo and Metohija after June 1999
187
______________________BALCANIA
4. Ancient Cholhis, Iberia and Albania at the Caucasus
188
______________________BALCANIA
T H E B A L K A N V L A C H S A N E XT I N G U I S H I N G E THN OLI N GU I STI C GR OU P

To talk of the pure originsof any ethnic populating the Balkan Peninsula is neither justified nor serious nor scientific (E. Ivanova, The Ethnic Conflict, Iztok-Iztok, 2, 1991, p. 64)
Introduction This text has set itself the tasks to present historical development and current economic, cultural and political position in the Balkan societies of one specific ethnolinguistic group of the Orthodox religion - the Vlachs1, who speaks some form of Romanian language and is called by their neighbors by different names Koutsovlahs,2 Aromanians, Armanians,3 Grammostens,4 Karakachans, Cincars,5 Arnauts, Uruks, Macedo-Romanians, Chobans,6 etc. This pastoral ethnolinguistic group is a good example of successful peaceful minority assimilation into the majority ethnic and linguistic groups of the region. Traditionally they were nomadic cattle-breeders who were living in an extended family under a dominant headman, summering in the mountains and wintering in the plains. However, after 1918 an impact of the
1 It is believed that the Vlach means either free people, shepherds or former worshipers of the pagan god of herders Volos. 2 In Greek language Koutsos means lame. The Vlach is considered as a synonym for the shepherds. 3 This ethnonym is used by the community itself in most cases. According to the Vlach tradition, the Armanian means a free man, a person who has remained in one place and a non-Romanian. 4 It means those who have been living at the Grammos Mt. that is on the border between Albania and Greece. 5 The ethnonym Cincars or Tsintsars is given to the Vlachs probably because the specific pronunciation of the phoneme c which sounds in Vlach language as ts. Nevertheless, the Cincar means a man who is miser or skinflint. According to one of the hypotheses, the Tsintsars is derived from the Roman Fifth Legion (tsintsi, means five) since it is believed that the Vlachs are descendents of the Roman soldiers from this legion, which operated in the Balkans during the time of the Late Roman Empire. 6 The Choban means a herder in Albanian and South Slavic languages. This term is of Oriental origin.
189
______________________BALCANIA
new economic forms created a significant shift from nomadic flocks to the area of farming. This process, nonetheless, became drastically changed after 1945 as a new economic system forbade possession of the big herds of sheep or horses in the post-war Balkan societies. Therefore, many Vlachs abandoned their nomadic style of life and settled themselves in the villages, or moved to the towns and cities, being gradually assimilated by the co-dwellers. During the last decades this process escalated by the mass migration of the young Vlachs into the growing industrial centers. This ethnolinguistic group is threatened by biological vanishing because the negative birthrate1 and by assimilation as well. In some of the Balkan states they are not recognized as a separate national minority. In many Balkan regional societies the Vlachs willingly chose the national identity of the ethnolinguistic majority in order to legally improve their status within the local society. Their easier assimilation is due to the fact that this extinguishing ethnolinguistic minority is dispersed throughout the region of the South East Europe2from the Pindus Mt. in the south to the Transylvanian Alps in the north and from the Istrian Peninsula in the west to Dobruja (Dobrodgea) region in the east.
History and Language
The South Eastern Europe is relatively small region, which is populated by many of different peoples in the matter of culture, religion and language and is being in this point the unique part of European continent. In this region we found the members of the Christian, Islamic and Judaic denominations. The communities use different alphabets as the Latin, Cyrillic, Hebrew, Arabic and Greek. Outstandingly, in every Balkan state, there are more people who are speaking some of the European main languages than the language(s) of their neighbor(s).3
1 During the last half of the century the natural increase (birth-rate) of the Vlachs is negative since the parents (remarkably from the urban environments) opted to have a single-child family. 2 Besides the Vlach geographical dispersion across the Balkan Peninsula, the fact that they traditionally migrated in summer and winter time makes one of the pivotal difficulties to fix their real number. 3 Traditionally, the attitudes and policies of regional majority groups towards their own minorities have been more emotional than rational. Participation of the members of minority communities into the state institutions was all the time limited and restricted especially in the periods of political troubles. In
190
______________________BALCANIA
Territorial despersion of the Vlachs and Romanians in the South East Europe today
The majority of the regional peoples belong to the migrant tribes who came from the north between the 6th century (the South Slavic Second migration) via the 9th century (Magyar/Hungarian settlement) to the Albanian migration from Sicily in 1043.1 From the 14th century onward there was an influx of the Ottoman Turks and other Muslim pastoral tribes from Asia (who came with them) including and the Gypsies who followed the Ottoman armies in their successful military campaigns in Asia Minor and later in the South East Europe. In this region, however, there are today three autochthonous (aboriginal) ethnicities who survived all of those invasions and number of migrations, preserving their language, customs and culture: 1) the Vlachs (most probably descendents from the Thracians who have been living in the time of the Antique in the eastern areas of the Balkansfrom the Morava River to the
general, the idea of widespread and broad minority rights is not very popular among the macro-communities in the Balkans. One of the crucial reasons for such attitude (especially toward those minorities who live territorially in compact masses) is a fear of the Cyprus syndrome. 1 . . , . . , . . , , , 2009.
191
______________________BALCANIA
Black Sea), 2) the Greeks (who came in two migration waves around 2000 and c. 1200 B.C.), and 3) the Slavs known in ancient documents as the Illyrians.1 In the current ethnic situation of the Balkans there are three stateless ethnolinguistic groups: the Vlachs, the Gypsies/Roma/Romani and the Pomaks. Each of them has a longstanding experience of coexistence with the macrocommunities. Among three of them, the Vlachs are the most vanishing community. This traditionally rustic people, who spoke a language, which is mostly closed to the modern Romanian, but not purely understandable by the speakers of standardized Romanian, are concentrated in mountainous terrains of Greece, Albania, Macedonia, Serbia and Bulgaria. The Vlachs undoubtedly belong to the ancient Balkan people who, because of different historical reasons (mostly migrations), are dispersed in the region creating non-territorially connected diaspora communities. The anthropological research upon the Vlach matters proves that they are one of the earliest populations not only in the Balkans, but in Europe too. However, due to the lack of historical sources, there are several various theories upon the Vlach origin. The language of the Vlachs is one of the crucial points of the currently leading theory about their ethnolinguistic genesis: they descend from the cis-Danubian Thracians who have been relatives of the transDanubian Dacians. The same ethnolinguisic ancient community of Daco-Thracians became the progenitor of the modern Romanians (northward from the River of Danube) and the Vlachs (southward from the River of Danube) who are speaking similar languages. Nevertheless, while the scholars agree that the Vlach language belongs to the Romance family of languages, they disagree upon more precise origin of the Vlachs. Some scholars are kin to conclude that the progenitors of the Vlachs are the Roman colonists (soldiers, merchants, craftsmen, etc.), while the other group of researchers claim that the Vlachs are descendants of the Romanized autochthonous Balkan inhabitants who by intermarriages mixed with the Roman colonists. The Vlach self-notions in regard to their origin, based on earlier knowledge and the folk interpretations of literary versions, are essentially different. Firstly, some of them think that the Vlachs/Aromanians came to the Balkans from the Italian city of Rome. For this group of community members the Vlach language
1 . . , I X , , 1999.
192
______________________BALCANIA
is Roman which is the same language spoken in Italy and France (with dialectical differences). However, other Vlachs believe that they belong to the indigenous Balkan population (i.e., they are not migrants to the region) and that their language is derived from the ancient Illyrian-Thracian language with strong elements of the Latin. Nevertheless, the Vlach folk mind preserved the notion that the Vlachs are people who live in diaspora, which started with the fall of the Roman Empire. According to the first hypothesis, the pivotal outcome of the Vlach migration from Italy is that they adopted a nomadic pastoral style of live and economic activity of the cattle-breeding.1 The new stage of Vlach diaspora started at the beginning of the 19th century with the declination of the Ottoman power in the South East Europe. There are some scholars who believe that those Vlachs who today live on the southern flanks of the River of Danube (the Northern Bulgaria and the Eastern Serbia) came there in the Ottoman time (particularly in the second half of the 18th century and the first half of the 19th century) from the territories north from the River of Danube. The reason for their resettlement was three-folded: 1) the feudal tyranny and exploitation north from the River of Danube; 2) the conscription introduced in the Principality of Wallachia in 1831; and 3) the policy of the Ottoman authorities, which encouraged the Vlach settlement in depopulated agricultural areas after devastating Austrian-Ottoman wars. The Balkan Vlachs have historically been divided into two socio-economic groups. First, majority of them were nomadic (transhumant) sheep/horse-breeders who have been living in the countryside. The nomadic Vlachs, as a result of the nature of their profession, lived in isolation within their own community, subjugated to their traditional laws and speaking the mother language. They have been organized in special shepherdtranshumant clans, which were led by the richest member who possessed the most authorities. He was at the same time a Vlach representative in communitys relations with the Ottoman authorities (especially in regard to the paying taxes) and with the
1 They were breeding the horses and sheep on natural pastures in the two main seasons (summer and winter). The food, cloths, furnishing and transportation were provided primarily from the horses and sheep. One of the main characteristics of the Vlach livelihood and lifestyle was that they had in most cases a permanent summer and winter camps, which have been the only territorial communities (independent and isolated from both one another and settlements of the other ethnic groups).
193
______________________BALCANIA
local populace (in particular in regard to the trade business). The Vlach nomads did not belong to the social class of the serfs since they were movable people: in the summer time they lived in the mountains, but the wintertime they spent in lowland areas. The distance between the summer mountain pasture to the winter residence could be several hundred km.1 Second, minority dealt with trade, crafts or being employed in the woodworking industry and inn-keeping business and thus living in the urban environments. This socio-economic group of the Vlachs tended to obtain as better as education and knowledge of the local ethnic majority and the foreign languages. Some of the Balkan macro-communities call the persons from the first group (pastoral Vlachs) as the Vlachs, while the members of the second group (urban Vlachs) are called as the Aromanians. However, the urban Vlachs accepted from the end of the 19th century the ethnonym Armanians for their own selfidentification due to both the academic researches and studies upon the Vlach matters and Romanian propaganda concerning the ethnogenesis of Romanian nation and political unification of all Romanians.2 It is interesting that some of the urban Vlach communities call themselves as Cincars (Tsintsars), but they call the Vlach-shepherds as the Vlachs. This distinction is of socioeconomic, but not of ethnolinguistic nature. Today all Vlachs are members of the Eastern Orthodox Christian Church.3
1 For instance, they were summering on the Osogovske Mt. (2084 m.) in the Eastern Macedonia, but wintering as far as an area of the city of Salonika (Thessaloniki). 2 As a result of the Romanian-language and the school curricula education and propaganda a huge number of educated Vlachs received at the beginning of the 20th century a Romanian ethnocultural feeling. It produced the Vlach (Aromanian) national revival movement that was based on the self-awareness of the Romance origin. This trend brought the Vlachs closer to the Romanians who formed in the mid-19th century a national state. Consequently, there was a deep distinction concerning the Vlach self-determination since some of them identified themselves as the Aromanians while the others did it as the Romanians. In the course of time a trial self-identity was present in many of the Vlach families: Aromanian in the private sphere, Romanian in intracommunity sphere, and as a member of macro-community in the public sphere. 3 The Christianity was always one of the crucial ethnic determinations of the Vlach self-identity. Consequently, there were some cases that the Vlach women from nomadic communities had been tattooing crosses on the foreheads and hands. The most important collective celebrations of the Vlachs are Christmas, Easter, St Georges Day and St Peters Day. The cults of the
194
______________________BALCANIA
Most probably, the Vlachs were formed as a distinctive ethnolinguistic group from the 14th century to the 16th century. Their original homeland was the mountainous regions of the Northern Greece (Epirus and Thessaly), the South West Macedonia, and the South East Albania.1 During the Ottoman rule over the region (till 1913) the Vlachs migrated from the Epirus, Pindus Mt. and the Grammos Range to the north and the east. The reasons for their migrations have been of multiply economic nature: the need of new pastures, the increased number of livestock, the prosperous trade with Austria, the declining trade activities with Venice, the afforestation of the mountains (after 1918) that limited opportunities for the free nomadic cattlebreeding, etc., but as well as of multiply political nature: the administrative disorder in the Ottoman Empire, the pressure by the Muslim Albanians, the autocratic rule of Ali-Pasha of Ioanina, a Romanian propaganda (after 1918) for the purpose to colonize the Southern Dobruja, etc. The Vlach emigrants resettled themselves either in the hilly areas of Bulgaria, Thrace and Macedonia2 or found the new homeland in the towns in Austria, Serbia, Greece, Bulgaria and Macedonia. Some of the urban Vlach residents became economically well-to-do citizens and even very wealthy entrepreneurs who played a significant role in municipal cultural and political life.3 As many Vlach migrants who became resettled in the towns and the cities had a Greek education it became a base for potential conflicts with the local macro-community members, but in majority of cases the Vlach newcomers have been accepted by
Mother of God and St Petka are also very much celebrated in majority of the Vlach nomadic communities. However, it should be stressed that coming to the churches and having regular contacts with the priests for the Vlachs was rather complicated because their communes have been living faraway from the population settlements. Permanent contacts with the church had only urban Vlachs. 1 In this region the Vlachs developed very profitable trade that was mainly based on flourishing sheep/horse-breeding, but as well on crafts and cartage. 2 Many of Grammos Vlachs migrated to the region of Ovche Polje in the Eastern Macedonia for the reason to escape a tyrannical rule of the Ottoman governor of Ioanina, Ali-Pasha (ethnic Albanian). 3 One of the negative results of these migrations was that many Vlach families became divided: elders stayed in the old environment while the young men emigrated. This break-up of kinship network dealt both a psychological and economic blows to the Vlach community, which felt a great sense of personal insecurity either in old or new environment.
195
______________________BALCANIA
tolerance1 primarily because they shared a common (the Eastern Orthodox) denomination and similar customs with the old dwellers. The urban Vlachs became faster assimilated by the macro-community than those who continued nomadic lifestyle due to getting education in macro-community languages and mixed marriages. The medieval historical sources mention the Vlachs, but in two different respects: 1) from the linguistic point of view as the Balkan neo-Latin-speakers; and 2) from the socio-professional point of view as nomadic (not sedentary) cattle-breeders. One province of the peninsula (Thessaly) was in the late Middle Ages known as Megalovlachia (Great Wallachia). Some of the regional authorities (as the Austrian and Venetian governments) accepted the leading medieval meaning of the term of the Vlachs that referred to all Balkan nomads irrespective of their ethnic identity. After the dissolution of the Ottoman power in the Balkans (in 1913), when occurred a crucial change in the political map of the modern history of the Balkans as a result of the national liberation movements and national liberation wars, important changes took place in the life of the Vlachs since the free migration (for the purpose of finding pastures and do a seasonal work in the time of the harvest) across the peninsula was now impossible because of the new state borders and cross-border restrictions. The physical obstacles posed by the new arrangement of the borders significantly restricted a free movement between seasonal pastures and extremely complicated administrative customs procedures. A limitation of the nomadic way of life showed the way to the sedentary type of life and establishment of permanent places of residence. The purchase of pastures resulted in the establishment of permanent summer hut villages. A significant number of the Vlachs became the urban settlers and automatically the structure of their livelihood was changed. Today there are urban Vlachs who are involved in medicine, architecture, engineering, etc. After 1913, but especially after 1918, the state policy of agricultural reform involved redistribution of the pastures, meadows, forests, fields, which forced the Vlachs to reorient their economic activities.
1 Hostility to the urban Vlachs was primarily directed towards those proGreek members of the Vlach micro-community who did not drop their cultural and political loyalty to Hellenism. It is true particularly at the turn of the 20th century when the Serbs, Bulgarians and Greeks struggled over territorial division of geographic Macedonia, Albania, and Thrace. In this respect, the Vlachs have been pejoratively called as the Greco-Tsintsars who betrayed national interests of the macro-community.
196
______________________BALCANIA
However, although the Vlachs bought the land they in many cases did not cultivate it, but leased it out.
The Balkan states after the Balkan Wars of 19121913
The public stereotype of appreciating the ethnocultural characteristics of the Vlachs is ambivalent. On the one hand, the urban Vlachs are labeled with quick wit, diligence, ingenuity,
197
______________________BALCANIA
enterprise, kindness, persistence, willingness to learn foreign languages and to get as better as education, honesty, love for the family,1 hard-working, and as non-drinkers. Especially the Vlach women are well known as tidy persons and thus welcomed as potential spouses. However, the nomadic Vlachs, whom the local macro-ethnic populaces hardly knew, are on badly reputation as lewd, vulgar, Vlach woman are loose with a tendency to often divorce and remarry, wilder, pinchers, and as non-educated people. The process of speed modernization, which was associated with urbanization and industrialization after the Second World War, had a crucial impact on integration of the Vlachs into the everyday life, customs and holidays of the macro-community(s). The Vlachs finally rejected the tradition of endogamy and consequently there were much more inter-ethnically mixed marriages (exogamy). But, on the other hand, urbanization, education and mixed marriages irreversibly accelerated the process of linguistic-cultural assimilation of the Vlachs.2 Sedentary life and urbanization of the Vlachs unavoidably changed their traditional culture since they adopted the models of everyday life of the local population from the new environment. As a nomadic community did not exist anymore, the family became only reproducer of the ethnocultural traditions of the Vlachs and the main preserver of the language. The change of life brought the Vlachs to the difficult situation since it caused danger to their very existence as a separate and distinctive ethnicity.
The Vlachs in Albania
Albanias Vlach community is living in the southern part of the country, which has its historical name the Northern Epirus.3 They are dispersed from the city of Gjirokastr in the south to the city of Elbasan in the Central Albania. However, the largest Vlach concentration is in the areas of the cities of Gjirokastr, Kor and Prmet in the southernmost part of Albania where they live
1 Traditionally, the family was the main protector of the Vlach language, customs and ethnic features. 2 For instance, majority of young Vlachs prefer to speak the language of the macro-community instead of the Vlach one. 3 The Southern Epirus is part of Greece. Epirus was divided between Albania and Greece after the Second Balkan War in 1913 when the independent state of Albania became recognised by the great European powers (Albanias independence was proclaimed in the city of Vlor on November 28th, 1912).
198
______________________BALCANIA
together with the Orthodox Greeks, Albanians and Macedonians.1 The number of Albanian Vlachs is estimated from 35,000 to 100,000, but some researchers raise this figure to almost 200,000 (that is around 12,5% of the total Albanias population).2 However, the real figure of any minority in Albania is quite difficult to realize for the matter of unreliable census records and a very little information on the ethnic minorities in this country. Additional difficulty in this matter is produced by the Greek officials who claimed that all Albanias Orthodox Christians (approximately 400,000) are ethnic Greeks (this number includes all of those who identify themselves as Albanians, Macedonians, Vlachs, Greeks, etc., but they are of the Christian Orthodox religion).3
1 See the map on the page 194 in H. Poulton, The Balkans. Minorities and States in Conflict, London: Minority Rights Group, 1994. The number of the Slav Macedonians in Albania ranges from 4,000, according to the Albanian sources, to 100,000, according to the Macedonian sources. Most probably, the real figure is 15,000. 2 Albania has an area of 28,748 sq. kms. and, according to the census from 1981 it had a population of 2,752,300 with the highest population growth rate in Europe together with Kosovo. The figure of 35,000 Vlach community in Albania is claimed in: S. M. Horak, National Minorities in Albania, 1919 1980, Horak S. M. (ed.), East European National Minorities: 19191980, Colorado, 1985. The other two figures are put by independent researchers and the international institutions and organisations for protection of human and minority rights. There are even some authors who unjustifiably claim that majority of Albanias Orthodox believers are originally ethnic Vlachs. This claim is surely not supported by historical sources. 3 This Greek claim is based on the fact that before the Second World War there were 400,000 Orthodox believers in Albania who have been registered as the members of the Independent Orthodox Church in Albania, which used exclusively the Greek language in service. Majority of Albanias Orthodox population attended the Greek language schools. After the Second World War the Albanian society was divided according to the religious affiliation into the Roman Catholics (10%), Orthodox (20%) and Muslims (70%). The Orthodox population, according to the ethnic belonging, was composed by the Greeks, the Vlachs, the Montenegrins and the Macedonians (i. e., the Macedonian Slavs). The Serbs officially do not live in Albania, while the Montenegrins are separated from the Serbs. Nevertheless, after 1967, when Albania officially proclaimed to be the first world atheist state, there is no available records on religious affiliation of Albanias citizens [for the issue of political imprisonment of the ethnic minorities members see: Amnesty International, Albania: Political Imprisonment and the Law, AI EUR, 11. April 1984, p. 13]. For sure, the biggest part of Albanias Orthodox inhabitants is of the Greek origin (according to the 1955 census, they represented 2,5% of total Albanias population. According to the 1961 census there were 95% of total population
199
______________________BALCANIA
The territory of Albania, from the geographical point of view, was extremely proper for economic activities of the Vlachs in historical perspective and accurate for preservation of their culture, language and identity. As the pastoral people, who traditionally have been dealing exclusively with the cattlebreeding, the Vlachs from the early Middle Ages found the land of Albania, which is the totally mountainous, as one of the most profitable in the Balkans for their professional prosperity. Furthermore, the political and economic isolation of Albania from the rest of the world, which started in 1961 (with Albanias breaking off relations with the Soviet Union) and ended in 1985 (with the death of Enver Hoxha), also greatly participated in protecting of the Vlach ethnolinguistic and cultural identity. The Albanian communist government of Enver Hoxha,1 in difference to the Greek policy towards the ethnolihguistic minorities in Greece, did not pursue such harsh measures of national homogenization. However, there were examples that the Albanian authorities pressed the local minorities to accept the Albanian forms of names and surnames in the 1960s and the 1970s.2 The provisions of Albanian Constitution of 1976 and the Criminal Code of 1977 directly affected the Vlach community (like many others) as any kind of private or public religious activity and
who declared themselves to be the ethnic Albanians. The 5% belonged to the ethnolinguistic minorities). After 1967 there were more than 600 Orthodox churches destroyed and other 600 converted to other purposes like the grain store-houses, theatres, coffee shops, stables, etc. [Human Rights in Albania: Hearing Before the Sub-Committee on Human Rights and International Organizations of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, statement by Nikolaos A. Stavrou on January 25th, 1984]. 1 He was born in 1908 in Gjirokastr, exactly in the southern part of Albania where the most Vlach concentration has been and died in 1985 in Tiran. E. Hoxa ruled Albania from 1946 to 1954 as the prime minister and from 1954 to 1985 as the first secretary of the Communist Party of Albania [D. Crystal (ed.), The Cambridge Encyclopedia, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994, p. 543]. 2 Together with the Vlach minority all Albanias minority as well suffered from such policy. For instance, many Christian Orthodox geographical and settlement names adopted the Albanian ones (for example, the ethnic Greek village of Agios Nikolaos, that is St. Nicolas, became renamed into Albanian Drita, what means the light). However, Muslim personal names and surnames have not been changed. It can be explained with the fact that traditionally the Islam was one of the crucial components of the Albanian national identity within the Ottoman Empire (Albanians have been surrounded with hostile non-Muslim neighbours of the Christian Orthodox creed: the Greeks and the Slavs from Serbia, Macedonia and Montenegro).
200
______________________BALCANIA
propaganda have been strictly forbidden.1 This anti-religious campaign weakened the Vlach ethnic identity because the Orthodoxy was, alongside with the language, the main national identity of this minority community especially in such environment (as Albania) where the majority of local population have been the Muslims (i.e. not Christian Orthodox).2 Practically, it became forbidden to have either foreign or religious names. Albanias authorities in 1975 carried out intensive campaign of name-changes for all citizens who did not have the appropriate personal names/surnames (from ideological, political and moral standpoints and instead of them had the names with the religious connotation), offering to them an official list of the proper names, which they had to choose.3 Nevertheless, many Vlach parents registered their children with the Albanian names, but at home they used the Vlach names. Furthermore, the government relocated unknown number of persons and even families to different regions of the country. Transferred Vlachs and Greeks from the southern Albanian districts were sent to the northern parts of Albania, while the ethnic Albanians, mainly the Muslims, have been resettled in the southern districts. The politics of state persecution of religious celebrations weakened after the Hohxas death in 1985 and finally the Albanian parliament and government announced in May 1990 that expression of religion is free.4 It was followed in the next year by the internal liberalization of the country, total opening of the state borders (this policy started from 1987),5 an introduction of the multi-party system and the better treatment of ethnolinguistic minorities. The end of Albanias isolation fostered the emigration
1 This anti-religious campaign was a part of Albanias cultural and ideological revolution, which followed the example of the Peoples Republic of China. 2 Amnesty International, Albania: Political Imprisonment and the Law, AI EUR, April 11th, 1984. The Greek national identity as minority group in the Southern Albania (and other Balkan states as well), where the Greeks live mixed with the Vlachs, is closely connected with the adherence to the Christian Orthodox Church, the use of the Greek language and the use of the Greek forms of personal names, surnames, geographical names and names for the settlements (i.e. villages). 3 Prifti P., Socialist Albania since 1944: Domestic and Foreign Developments, Cambridge, Mass, London, 1978, p. 164. 4 Ens D., Growing religious freedom in Albania, News Network International, May 17th, 1990. 5 Cowell, A Hint of Change in the Albanian Air, New York Times, June 220th, 1988.
201
______________________BALCANIA
from the country of the thousands of Albanias citizens among them there were only in the late 1990 and the early 1991 approximately 10,000 those who emigrated to Greece.1 This number includes not only ethnic Greeks, but certainly and Hellenized ethnic Vlachs. The changed policy towards the ethnolinguistic and religious minorities in Albania after 1990 gave significant benefits to the Vlach community, which became constitutionally recognized as a separate national minority. However, this minority is still publicly considered primarily as a member of the vast Orthodox minority of the non-Albanian language in the country, but not as a separate ethnolinguistic minority. Legally, Albanias Vlachs obtained the right to education in their own mother tongue, but because of several political reasons this provision is hardly to be realized in the practice. Two crucial political issues postponed the legal obligation of Albanias authorities to introduce the Vlach (Aromanian) language instruction in the schools.2 Firstly, Albanian society was in 1997/1998 preoccupied with the issue of the inner social and political revolt that paralyzed any minority policy by the state. Secondly, from February 1998 to June 1999 Albania focused her attention mainly to the Kosovo crisis and the problem of Kosovos refuges inspired by Kosovo Albanian separatist and terror policy sponsored by the USA administration. The first problem was solved due to the intervention of the UN peacekeeping troops who were located in certain parts of Albania in order to reintroduce the political, legal and social order. The Romanian government conditioned participation of her military troops in the international operation of the peacekeeping order in Albania with their deployment only in the southern districts of the country where mostly concentrated Vlach minority lives. These two events surely delayed the implementation of the current legislation in Albania in the 1990s what concerns the protection of minority languages and ethnolinguistic minority identity. Nevertheless, the Council of Europe and the OSCE were pressing Albanias government to implement this language legislation as one of the crucial preconditions for international
1 BBC, Summary of World Broadcasts, Eastern Europe/0983 I, January 30th, 1991. 2 About the minority rights, including and those on the education in the mother tongue, see in Kymlicka W., The Rights of Minority Cultures, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000; Fishman J., Language and Ethnicity in Minority Sociolinguistic Perspectives, Clevedon: Multilingual Matters Ltd., 1989.
202
______________________BALCANIA
financial support of Albanias reforms and Albanias path to the European integration.1
The Vlachs in Bulgaria Bulgarian case in regard to the problem of finding proper information about the real number of the Vlachs and position of the Vlach society in this country is very similar to that of Albania. Bulgarian sources, either official or not, usually do not make any significant difference between the minority of standardized Romanian language (i.e. Romanians), who lives in the Northern Bulgaria bordered with Romania, and those who are speaking the Vlach (Aromanian) language and live in the Southern Bulgaria which is on the border with Greece and in the northern portions of the country alongside the Danube: both of these different minority groups are in Bulgaria put to the same category of (the Vlach) neoLatin speaking ethnolinguistic community.2 A great number of the Vlachs of Bulgaria came to this country in two migration waves from Macedonia, Albania and Greece; firstly, in the late 18th century and in the early 19th century, and secondly, in the mid-19th century. In Bulgaria they became both urban settlers (in Sofia, Samokov, Sliven, Razlog, Nevrokop, Stara Zagora, Peshtera, Plovdiv, etc.) and nomadic shepherds (settled in Maleshevo, Belasica, the River of Struma, the River of Mesta, Pirin Mt., Rila Mt., Rhodopes Mt., Sredna Gora Mt., the Balkan Range, etc.). Urban residents of the Vlach self-identity dealt with the trade, crafts and inn-keepings. A real number of the Vlach community in Bulgaria varied in the 20th century mainly due to the practice of minority exchange between Bulgaria and her neighbors. The main population exchange occurred after the Second Balkan War (in 1913), the First World War (19191920) and the Second World War (19451946)
1 By now there is no specific European Unions standards in regard to the protection of minority rights, but general European standards in the field may be found in several Europe-wide instruments which can provide the basic guidelines for minority protection of each European country like: Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities (accessed on April 26th, 2001); European Charter for regional or Minority Languages (accessed on April 26th, 2001); European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (accessed on April 27th, 2001). 2 In Bulgaria there is a great and even politically coloured debate on the name of the Vlach minority group: should they be designated by the accepted scientific term Aromanians or to be called as the Armanians that is the ethnonym used by the Vlachs themselves.
203
______________________BALCANIA
when Bulgarian minorities of a neo-Latin language (the Vlachs and the Romanians) and of the Greek language have been exchanged with the Bulgarian language speakers in at that time the Romanian (Southern) Dobruja and the Greek (Western) Thrace.1 However, as well as unknown number of ethnic Vlachs have been replaced across the border under the name of either Romanians or Greeks who left Bulgaria and settled themselves in Romania, Greece respectively.
1 Romania required the northwestern Bulgarian province of the Southern Dobruja (the Northern Dobruja was already included into Romania according to the Berlin Congress decision in 1878) in 1913 as a compensation for giving up the Vlachs (Wallachians) in Macedonia, who have been considered by Romanias authorities and intelligentsia as a Balkan minority of Romanian ethnolinguistic origin. The geographic-historical territory of Macedonia was divided in 1913 between Serbia, Bulgaria and Greece. Serbia received the Vardar Macedonia, Greece got the Aegean Macedonia and Bulgaria included the Pirin Macedonia. Romania did not participate in division of Macedonia. The Southern Dobruja was returned back to Bulgaria in 1940 while the Northern Dobruja remained within Romania. The region of Thrace was divided in 1913 between the Ottoman Empire (the Eastern Thrace) and Bulgaria (the Western Thrace). However, in 1919 the biggest portion of Bulgarian Thrace became included into Greece. Bulgaria temporally occupied both portions of Dobruja in 1916 and the Western Thrace in 1915 and 1941. The minority groups exchanges followed all of these territorial exchanges. For instance, after the First World War there were 250,000 Bulgarians who left the Southern Dobruja, the Vardar Macedonia, the Aegean Macedonia, the Eastern and the Western Thrace and migrated to the territory of Neuilly Bulgaria; 360,000 Turks and Muslims left Macedonia and the Western Thrace, 100,000 left Bulgaria and 25,000 left Crete to Turkey; 650,000 Greeks from Smyrna region in Asia Minor, 260,000 from Trabzon area, 50,000 from the South East Asia Minor and 260,000 from the Eastern Thrace emigrated from Turkey to Greece after the Greek-Turkish War of 19191923 and additional 50,000 of the Greeks left Bulgaria to Greece after 1919 [Westermann Groer Atlas zur Weltgeschichte, Braunschweig, 1985, p. 153, map V; K. Kanev, Law and Politics on Ethnic and Religious Minorities in Bulgaria, A. Krasteva (ed.), Communities and Identities in Bulgaria, Ravenna: Longo Editore Ravenna, 1998, pp. 6668; G. Genov, The Legal Status of Minorities, Sofia, 1929, p. 125; S. Ladas, The Exchange of Minorities: Bulgaria, Greece and Turkey, New York: Macmillan, 1932, pp. 122123]. According to the Greek historiography, in 1923 there were 1,100,000 Greeks who moved from Turkey to Greece, while some 380,000 Muslims were transferred from Greece to Turkey [R. Clogg, A Concise History of Greece, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992, p. 101]. The GreekTurkish population exchange in 1923 was in accordance to the Convention on compulsory exchange of population between Greece and Turkey, signed in January 1923. The war was over in July 1923 by the Treaty of Lausanne.
204
______________________BALCANIA
The first Bulgarias census (in 1881) recorded circa 50,000 of those who declared themselves as the Vlachs (what was 2,5% out of total Bulgarias population). Half of them lived in the district of Vidin. According to Bulgarias census of 1891 there were 2,300 of those who have been of the Aromanian identity. However, it is believed by the scholars that at that time have been circa 5000 of them, while in the first decade of the next century Bulgaria had around 7000 Aromanians including and those who came to Bulgaria in the summer time.1 The census of 1910 showed 96,502 native Romanian speakers of whom there were 80,000 Romanians. The number of Aromanians/Vlachs among them is not known. It is estimated that after 1913 there were 16,000 Aromanians in Bulgaria. Census of 1926 recorded only 1,550 Vlachs and 10,648 Aromanians,2 out of 83,747 Romanian native speakers. According to the census of 1992, there were 5,159 citizens of the Vlach minority group, but also 6,715 of those whose mother tongue was Vlach/Aromanian out of 8,487,317 Bulgarias citizens.3 The difference in number of the Vlach spoken language and the Vlach ethnicity is 1,556; i.e. there were 1,556 citizens in Bulgaria who declared in 1992 that their mother tongue was the Vlach, but their official national feeling was different that of the Vlach one. In addition, it is believed that in the main Bulgarian mountain range (the Balkan Mt.) there are several thousands of the Vlachs who are not counted in the census. The present-day Bulgarian (Southern) Dobruja is one of the Vlach populated regions in the country. The Vlachs came to live to this province during Romanian administration over the region (19131940) from different parts of the Balkan Peninsula, but primarily from Bulgaria and Macedonia. After the BulgarianRomanian Treaty of Craiova of September 7th, 1940, when the Southern Dobruja was returned back to Bulgaria from Romania, significant number of the Vlachs from this region migrated to
1 The German linguist, G. Weigand, put the number of 86,000 of a neo-Latin speakers in Bulgaria around the year of 1900 [G. Weigand, Rumanen und Arumunen in Bulgarien, Leipzig, 1907, p. 104]. 2 A leader of Aromanian community in the inter-war Bulgaria, I. N. Ghiulamila, claimed that in 1928 there were 4,000 sedentary and 9,000 nomadic Aromanians in Bulgaria [I. N. Ghiulamila, Romanii macedoneni din Bulgaria, Graiul romanesc, 2, 1928, pp. 3133]. 3 National Institute of Statistics, Results from the Population Census: Demographic Characteristics, vol. I (original in Bulgarian), Sofia, 1994, pp. 194, 222. It is estimated that today there are circa 3,000 people in Bulgaria with the Aromanian self-identity.
205
______________________BALCANIA
Romania.1 The Vlachs in the present-day Bulgarian part of Dobruja number a few hundred of people. The littoral of Varna area on the Black Sea is another one historically important part of the Northern Bulgaria with the Vlach inhabitants. In the time of the Peoples Republic of Bulgaria the Vlachs did not have the basic minority rights in the fields of politics and culture mainly due to Todor Zhivkovs policy of assimilation of the ethnolinguistic minorities, which reached its climax from 1984 to 1989 with forced assimilation of ethnic Turks and especially in summer of 1989 when 300,000 of Bulgarias Turks and other Muslims emigrated to Turkey (majority of them later returned back to Bulgaria).2 This policy of forced assimilation (which includes name changes and conversion)3 was primarily focused on Bulgarias ethnic Turks and to the lesser extent on the Pomaks (the ethnolinguistic Bulgarians of Islamic faith), but certainly it affected and the official Vlach minority group (both the Romanians and the Aromanians). Certainly, the Vlachs, as other Bulgarias minorities (except the Jews and the Armenians), were under the pressure of assimilation through the Bulgarization. At that time it seemed that the Vlach language would die out. It was true and about the language of Karakachans (Sarakatsans in Greece) who are like the Vlachs transhumant nomadic shepherds living in the mountainous areas of Bulgaria. However, for the reason that the Karakachans have many common customs and traditions with the Vlachs these two in essence different ethnolinguistic groups are usually wrongly treated as one (i.e., as the Vlach group).4
1 According to J. B. Schechtmans book European Population Transfers (19391945), Oxford University Press, New York, 1946, pp. 406409, under this treaty it was exchanged circa 61,000 Bulgarians and about 100,000 Romanians (the latter number includes and ethnic Vlachs). 2 Before this exodus of 1989 it happened twice in the communist-Bulgaria that Bulgarian citizens of Turkish origin migrated to Turkey: in 19501951 (154,000 persons) and between 1969 and 1978 (130,000 persons). 3 In the recent Bulgarian history it occurred twice between 1878 and 1945 that Bulgarian government persuaded campaigns of forced conversion and name changes among the minority groups for the sake of Bulgarization (during the wars of 19121913 and in 19421944). 4 The Karakachans and the Vlachs have a common feature in the point of livelihood and denomination, but these two minority groups differs from one another in the terms of language: the Vlach language is a neo-Latin, while the Karakachan language is a neo-Hellenic (it belongs to the northern dialect of the modern Greek language). The Karakachans are either 1) descendents of
206
______________________BALCANIA
In the post-communist Bulgaria discrimination in access to education for all citizens, including and minorities, is legally prohibited,1 but in practice successful application of these and related laws is extremely rare [Monitoring the EU Accession Process: Minority Protection 2001, Open Society Institute, Budapest, 2001]. However, Bulgaria, as an EU member state from 2007, is obliged to practically apply all of those instruments that Bulgarian authorities signed and ratified which anticipate the ethnolinguistic protection of the local minorities including and those of the Vlach origin: for example, Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities (signed on October 9th, 1997; ratified on May 7th, 1999); European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages (signed on November 9th, 2000); European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (signed on May 7th, 1992; ratified on September 7th, 1992); etc. As a result of a new (democratic) orientation of Bulgarian minority policy after 1989, two neo-Latin speaking groups (the Aromanians and the Romanians), who composed one legal minority group in Bulgaria (the Vlachs), became more active in establishing their own cultural (but still not political) organizations. The border between Bulgaria and Romania became more open what resulted in a quite regular traveling to Romania of Bulgarias Vlachs. It is important to notice that the Vlachs who live in the Northern Bulgaria (closer to Romania)2 are in a better position, in regard to the preservation of their linguistic and cultural features, in comparison with those who live either in the
the ancient Balkan peoples (the Thracians, the Illyrians) who have been living in pre-classical and classical times in the mountainous areas of the southern parts of the peninsula, but became Hellenized; or 2) they are descendents from sedentary Greek peasants who left their settlements in the late Middle Ages and became the nomadic shepherds. The Karakachans themselves believe that the Pindus Mt. in Greece is their original home place. Today they are living in Greece, Turkey, Bulgaria, Macedonia and Serbia. At any case, the majority of the present-day Vlachs and Karakachans is bilingual especially the males. 1 Article 36 of the Constitution of 1991 recognises the rights of the ethnic, religious and linguistic minority members in Bulgaria to self-protect and develop their culture and self-identity by using the mother tongue, along with the compulsory study of Bulgarian language. 2 Undoubtedly, the claim by some experts in the Vlach studies that in the Northern Bulgaria it can be found about 400,000 Vlachs is overwhelming exaggeration of the truth [European Parliament Working Document, 2 119/1985].
207
______________________BALCANIA
Balkan Mt. (in the Central Bulgaria) or in the southern portions of the country (in the Struma valley area) for the very reason that the Vlachs from the areas of the River of Danube can receive a regular signal transmitted from Romanian national TV and listen Romanian radio broadcasting. However, the main demand of Bulgarias Aromanian and Romanian minority groups is to obtain legal and practical rights to use their own language(s) when they have to communicate with the local authorities. Finally, the Bulgarian Vlachs are traditionally trying to preserve their ethnic features by self-created notion that they are more devout Orthodox Christians than the Bulgarians.1 One of the main obstacles for preservation of the minority identities in Bulgaria was Bulgarian constitutional reality which did not support (allowed) the foundation and existence of any political party based (by name or program) on either ethnic, racial or religious ground.2 Certainly, such constitutional provision imposed significant constraints for protection of specific rights of minorities. On the other hand, this judicial argumentation is based on avoiding inter-ethnic conflicts, and guaranteeing the participation of all citizens in political life.3 Consequently, there was no Vlach political party in Bulgaria, but only culturaleducational Association of the Vlachs in Bulgaria (registered in 1992) with the main task to slow down Vlach assimilation by promotion of the Vlach ethnocultural characteristics. For that purpose the association required after 1989 that four-year Romanian-language school (with the courses offered in the
1 A. Krasteva, Ethnicity, A. Krasteva (ed.), Communities and Identities in Bulgaria), Ravenna: Longo Editore Ravenna, 1998, p. 19. 2 Constitutional Court Judgement 4 of April 21st, 1992, Official Gazette, 35, Sofia, 1992. The legal provisions, which banned the establishment of political parties on ethnic basis have been included in the agreement upon creation of the Union of Democratic Forces (in 1990) in the Political Parties Act (in 1990) and in the post-communist Constitution of the Republic of Bulgaria (adopted on July 12th, 1991). 3 Notably, the Bulgarian constitutional and legal provisions from the time of liberation in 1878 onward guaranteed the equality of all Bulgarias citizens regardless on their ethnic, religious or linguistic origin. It included the rights to exercise minority ethnocultural features, to practice their religion and to speak the mother tongue. However, in practice, non-Bulgarians have been often under political pressure. The first Vlach cultural association in Bulgaria was established in 1895 and the first Romanian-language school in Bulgaria was opened in 1896. Both of them have been registered with the purpose to develop Vlach education and culture [V. Hristu, Aromanii din Bulgaria, Graiul romanesc, 67, 1931, p. 86].
208
______________________BALCANIA
Vlach/Aromanian as well) will be opened in Bulgarias capital. The association prints a newspaper Timpul. One of the main achievements of the association was publishing the AromanoBulgarian Dictionary, the Aromanian textbooks and a history of the Aromanians in Bulgaria.
The Vlachs in Greece Many researchers and scholars judge that the largest part of the Balkan Vlachs are concentrated in Greece. The census of 1935 recorded 19,703 Vlachs in Greece, but according to the last census in Greece that allowed people to express their ethnic identity (in 1951), there were 39,855 Vlachs in this state.1 However, a real number of the Vlachs in Greece today is up to 120,000.2 The Vlachs in a post-war Greece are not acknowledged as an ethnic or national group for the very reason that Greece from the mid-1950s does not recognize an existence of any national or cultural minority on its own territory. The religious minorities are only allowed.3 The Vlach ethnocultural self-identity became extremely disreputable as a result of a Greek course of action of ethnic homogenization in the form of Hellenization of all Greeces Eastern Orthodox inhabitants. Consequently, a great portion of the Greek Vlachs is Hellenophile.4 The part of the policy of ethnic homogenization was a practice to rename ethnic minorities in order to make as bigger as a gap between them and their home countries in the Balkans. Therefore, the Greek Vlachs have been renamed to the Vlach-speaking Greeks (similar to the Slavic Macedonians who were officially considered as the Slavophone Greeks). In general, cultural and travel relations between the Greek and the other regional Vlachs are limited by the Greek
1 H. Poulton, The Balkans. Minorities and States in Conflict, London: Minority Rights Group, 1994, p. 189. 2 Regardless that some of the Vlach emigrants from Greece claim the figure of 600,000 of the Greek Vlachs the Federal Union of European Nationalities estimated the real number of the Vlach population in Greece up to 300,000 [Information, Federal Union of European Nationalities, Flensburg, Austria, March 29th, 1990, p. 7]. 3 H. Poulton, The Balkans. Minorities and States in Conflict, London: Minority Rights Group, 1994, p. 175. 4 Many Vlachs who identified themselves as the Greeks, since received Greek education and had services in the Greek churches, had significantly contributed in the Greek struggle for independence from 1821 to 1830.
209
______________________BALCANIA
government like connections with the Romanian cultural and educational institutions. Probably the pivotal reason why the Greek authorities are not willing to open the Vlach-language schools and to allow the church service in the Vlach language is a unpleasant experience with the same matter from the turn of the 20th century when a significant part of the Vlach community in Greece, following the Romanian propaganda and political support, fought for the Romanian-language schools and churches to be opened in the Kingdom of Greece. Although this requirement was rejected, the Greeks understood any further similar Vlach or Romanian action as interference into domestic affairs as politically incorrect steps. Nevertheless, one significant number of the Vlachs left Greece and migrated to Romania as a reaction to the Greek unwillingness to promote protection of the Vlach ethnocultural identity.1 During the struggle over geographical Macedonia at the turn of the 20th century the local Vlachs were totally defenseless from the military actions by the Serb, Greek and Bulgarian paramilitary and volunteer detachments. There were cases that the Vlach civilians have been tortured and executed by the Greek, Serb or Bulgarian nationalists. After 1919 the Romanian and the Greek governments signed a bilateral treaty (in force till 1941) about protection of the Vlachs in Greece according to which, the Romanian-language schools have been opened. The Romanian sponsorship over the Vlach minority in Greece climaxed in the interwar period and resulted in the revival of the Vlach nationalism. From this period exists an idea to establish the Aromanian Orthodox Church in Greece; an idea, which never was realized since it has been sharply opposed by both the Greek government and the Ecumenical (Greek) Patriarchate. Nevertheless, the socialist government of Romania after 1945 gave up the policy of financing the Romanian-language schools and churches in Greece. At the Balkans the Vlachs are mostly concentrated exactly in and around the Greek Pindus Mt. where there is an unofficial capital of all Greek Vlachs - a town of Aminciu or Metsovan. Those Vlachs from the Pindus Mt. area are still today nomadic shepherds, but other group of the Vlachs in Greece is urban settlers who are employed in medicine, free services, law, taxi driving, etc. The Greek Vlachs during the time of the Ottoman Empire dealt with
1 The present-day Vlachs in Greece do not have any separatist intensions since they are descendents of those Vlachs who opted to stay in Greece at the beginning of the last century, but not to migrate to Romania.
210
______________________BALCANIA
shepherding, transportation of the goods by caravans and usually had a dominance in overland trade within the present-day territory of Greece, while the Greeks had a primate in the oversee trade business. The Vlach language, likewise any other minority language, is excluded from the public use in Greece. Some Vlachs have been endangered by imprisonment for the speaking the mother tongue on the streets. The Vlach, Macedonian, Turk and other emigrants from Greece reported that they have been persecuted in the Greek army for the reason that they used their own mother tongue. The general opinion of the ethnic Greek majority is that using minority languages is a proof that those speakers are culturally and intellectually backward in comparison to the Greek-speakers who use one of the oldest world languages in which the basic philosophical, literal and scientific works of the modern European and Western civilization have been written. An additional problem in regard to the negative attitude toward the Vlach language is that it is not standardized language and therefore is considered as the vernacular of less cultural and civilized populace. In many cases the macro-community in Greece considers the Vlach microcommunity as composed by not-working-loving and irresponsible members. From the matter of comparison, there was a significant difference between the minority position in Greece and in the former communist regional states before and after 1989. To be more precise, the minority and human rights in Greece till the end of the Cold War have been higher rated then those in Bulgaria, Romania and Albania. However, Greece did not succeed to match the highest regional level of minority rights that was established in ex-Yugoslavia. However, after the political changes in the region in 1989 and 1990 the level of minority protection in Greece became lower in comparison with Romania, Albania and Bulgaria. During the last 15 years there are many complaints to the Greek minority policy expressed in the European Parliament, the Council of Europe, the OSCE and human rights NGOs. Greece is portrayed as a country where the minorities are exposed to the assimilation without enjoying some basic minority rights that are guaranteed by the international community and especially by the European Union whose member is Greece from 1981.1 Nevertheless, the
1 The Vlach representatives complained several times to the European Communitys (now Unions) Bureau of Lesser Known Languages upon the neglecting the usage of the Vlach language in Greece. However, some of the leading Vlach figures in Greece did not support those critics and openly
211
______________________BALCANIA
treatment of the Vlach-speaking Greeks (as the Eastern Orthodox community) is better than of those minorities who are not of the same denomination as the Greeks are. Position of the Vlachs became after 1981 improved in comparison with the Slavo-Macedonian community for the very reason that the Greek government in Athens estimated that the Vlachs are not dangerous minority for the Greek territorial integrity. Additionally, after the (FYR of) Macedonian independence was proclaimed in 1991 the Greek Macedonians are seen as serious potential separatists. Consequently, there were established several Vlach cultural societies in Greece from the mid1980s like the Panhellenic Vlach Cultural Society and the Panhellenic Union of the Vlach Cultural Associations. The first Vlach cultural magazine in Greece (the Aromanian Chronicle) started to be printed from 1994, but in the Greek language. The another neo-Latin community in Greece, which is often considered as closely related to the Vlachs, is Megleno-Romanians who undoubtedly speaks a form of a modern Romanian language. The linguistic difference between the Vlachs (or the Aromanians) and the Megleno-Romanians in Greece is only in the fact that the language of the latter is closer to the present-day standardized Romanian. The Meglens of Greece are living in the northern part of the country nearby the border with the FYR of Macedonia and numbering circa 15,000 people. However, there are and the Meglen settlements in the Southern Macedonia as well; thus the Megleno-Romanians experienced the same political destiny like the other groups of the Vlach community because they are divided by the borders of enlarged (greater) Christian Balkan states at the beginning of the last century. Many Meglens who live in Greece accepted the Greek national identity, but those who live in the FYR of Macedonia in many cases declare themselves as the Macedonians. This double identity is a result of the community strategy to accept in the civic point of view one identity (of macrocommunity), but in the national (cultural-linguistic) point to have the another one (of their own micro-community). Certainly, such strategy brings a variety of practical benefits.
defended the standpoint of the Greek government. Nevertheless, the Vlach migr organizations in France, Germany, the USA, etc. on their regular meetings are heavily condemning the Greek linguistic policy and especially the practice that the Greek Vlachs are pressed to use the Greek alphabet in order not to antagonize the local authorities. The Vlach diaspora is fighting for the use of the Latin alphabet like it is a practice in Romania (after 1863).
212

______________________BALCANIA
The Vlachs in the FYR of Macedonia The territory of the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (the FYR of Macedonia; independent from 1991) does not include the whole geo-historical area of Macedonia (the FYR of Macedonia includes 25,441 sq. kms. out of 67,741 sq. kms. covered by historical-geographical Macedonia). A total territory of Macedonia is stretching from the Shara Mt. and Skopska Crna Gora Mt. in the north to the Olympus Mt. and the northern range of the Pindus Mt. in the south and from the Ochrid Lake and the Prespa Lake in the west to the Rhodope Mt. in the east.1 The Vlach population of the FYR of Macedonia, according to census of 1981, was 6,384 or 0,3% out of the total number that was 1,909,146 (of whom the majority have been the SlavoMacedonians1,279,323). The Vlachs are in the Southern Balkans spread from the Western Macedonia to Thessaly and Epirus and half of them are living within the borders of the geo-historical Macedonia. An official number of the Vlachs in the FYR of Macedonia increased, according to the census of 1991: there were 7,764 recorded Vlachs out of 2,033,964 Macedonias inhabitants. Today the Vlachs are the fifth ethnic group in the FYR of Macedonia, according to their number (after the SlavoMacedonians, the Albanians, the Turks and the Gypsies) and compose 0,38% of total population of the FYR of Macedonia. In the post-war Macedonia the biggest number of Vlachs are recorded in the year of 1948 when there were 9,511 Vlachs (0.8%), but the next three censuses (1953, 1961, 1971) did not mention the Vlachs.2 The Vlach community in the post-war FYR of Macedonia was mainly concentrated around the settlements of Bitola (Monastir), Resen and Krushevo (all of them are located in the
1 A historical-geographical Macedonia was divided in 1913 between Serbia, Bulgaria and Greece. This Balkan province was occupied by the Ottoman Turks in 1371 and liberated from the Ottoman lordship in 1912. About the Macedonian issue see: H. Poulton, Who are the Macedonians?, London: Hurst & Company, 1995; L. M. Danforth, The Macedonian Conflict. Ethnic Nationalism in a Transitional World, Princeton: Princeton University Press, New Jersey, 1997; H. N. Brailsford, Macedonia: Its Races and their Future, London: Methuen & Co., 1909; J. Pettifer (ed.), The New Macedonian Question, New York: St. Martins Press, 1999. 2 V. Andreev (and others), The Republic of Macedonia, Skopje, 1995, pp. 23.
213
______________________BALCANIA
Western FYR of Macedonia). In this period the Vlach societies in Skopje and Bitola were most active and they fought for the use of the Vlach language in the schools and for the opening of the Vlach churches in the FYR of Macedonia. One of the biggest problems which met the Vlachs in the Socialist Macedonia was the Yugoslav legislation that (in 1948) forbade private ownership of a big amount of sheep or horses. It resulted in the practice that important number of Macedonian Vlachs abandoned nomadic shepherd style of life and became sedentary people. Probably, the crucial feature of the current position of the Vlachs in this Balkan independent state in comparison to the other regional countries is that Macedonias Vlachs enjoy a higher level of legal rights and practical implementation of them: they are unambiguously recognized as a separate ethnolingustic minority community in the Constitution (adopted on November 17th, 1991); the same Constitution allowed the Vlachs, like other minorities, to get education in the mother tongue; the Vlach political representatives are the members of the Macedonian Peoples Assembly () in Skopje. Markedly, the Macedonias Constitution is the only in the region which explicitly mentions the existence of the Vlach minority. The implementation of constitutional protective measures of the Vlach minority identity in Macedonia is seen through the fact that the Macedonian state TV and radio programs are devoted to the Vlachs for several hours every day. Namely, the second national TV channel and radio, which are devoted to the minority groups, are broadcasting programs of different cultural subjects in the Vlach language with very often diffusion of the songs in the Vlach language from various Balkan areas. It is recognized by the international community that the position of the ethnic minorities in the FYR of Macedonia, in general point of view, is improved in recent times. However, the main pressures from both the international human and minority rights and the local minority representatives on the Macedonian government still are concerned upon the execution of constitutional paragraphs on minority language education. It is true that by now there is no Vlach language school in Macedonia, likewise in Turkish language. The reluctance of Macedonian government to open minority language schools is first and foremost based on fear that the Kosovo scenario of minority territorial separation (on the first place of the Albanians) would be inspired by giving the full rights to the ethnolinguistic minorities. The example of Kosovo Albanians, who had a maximum of
214
______________________BALCANIA
educational and minority rights in the former Yugoslavia, but did not give up an idea of separate Kosovo Republic, warned the Macedonian government to slow down the process of establishment of minority schools for some time, especially after the terrorist actions by the Albanian extremists in the Western Macedonia in 2001. Nevertheless, the minority representatives, including and those of the Vlach ethnolinguistic community, are constantly urging the Macedonian government to start the course of action in regard to opening the minority-language school education. The local Vlachs are permanently referring to the former time when this community enjoyed this privilege with a financial assistance provided by the Romanian government. The Romanian government, regardless that it did not have a common border with Macedonia, made claims upon the Macedonian Vlachs and established over 30 Romanian language schools on the territory of the Ottoman Macedonia at the turn of the 20th century out of total number of 100 such schools established and financed by the Romanian government in the Balkan areas settled by the Vlachs.1 This practice was significantly reduced in 1912 with the outbreak of the First Balkan War. However, in inter-war period Romanian government focused its financial and political schooling support to the Romanianlanguage schools in Bulgaria, especially to the Vlach populated areas of the Vidin district in the Northern Bulgaria, but in Sofia (where it was opened in 1924 a secondary school which was transformed in 1934 into a high school) and other Bulgarias regions as well. After the peace treaty of 1919 with Bulgaria the Romanian embassy in Sofia assumed the main charge of the Romanian-language schools and the Vlach cultural associations in Bulgaria. The climax of Romanian influence on Bulgarian Vlachs was reached when a Romanian Institute was active in Sofia in the 1930s, which was the main center in the Balkans of propagation of the Romanian language, education and culture among the Vlachs, but as well and a center for promulgation of the idea of pan-Romanian political unification and a cementation of the spiritual bonds with Romania (considered as a motherland of
1 Romanian struggle over Macedonia lacked in comparison with Bulgarian, Serbian and Greek efforts a national clergy, which will attract the Vlachs to Romanian church, but not to the Bulgarian, Serb or Greek ones. Anyway, the Ottoman authorities supported Romanian efforts at the expense of the Greek Patriarchate especially in the Bitola district in Macedonia. After diplomatic intervention in Istanbul by the Romanian ambassador in 1903 it was established a separate Aromanian ecclesiastical autonomy in Macedonia.
215
______________________BALCANIA
all neo-Latin speakers in the South East Europe). For the last purpose, it was also established in Bulgaria and a Romanian Church.1 The Romanian government continued to finance Romanian-language schools and churches in Greece after 1919, which have been devoted to the Vlachs (according to the Romanian-Greek agreement), but stopped this practice definitely after 1945. After the destruction of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia the Romanian government increased its influence once again in the area of the FYR of Macedonia using the Vlach question as a pretext: in 1991 the Romanian foreign ministry stipulated the recognition of Macedonian independence with Skopjes giving a high level of rights to the Vlach minority. From that time up today Romanian government uses periodically the rostrum of the Council of Europe to express its interest in protection of the Vlach minority rights in the FYR of Macedonia. A high concern on the Vlach issue in Macedonia by Romania could be seen and from the fact that this minority group in Macedonia is usually called by Romanian officials and intellectuals as the Macedo-Romanian. This is because of two reasons: 1) the Romanians consider all neo-Latin Balkan speakers as ethnic Romanian co-nationals; and 2) many of the Macedonian Vlachs emigrated at the turn of the 20th century to Romania in order to escape a bloody struggle over the province by Macedonias neighbors.2
1 The Romanian Church was consecrated in Sofia in 1923. However, the Aromanian Church existed in Bulgaria (in the town of Gorna Djumaya) from 1906. Both of them played an important role in the formation and maintenance of the Aromanian ethnocultural and linguistic identity. Undoubtedly, due to the activities of aforementioned institutions, together with the Aromanian Youth Association (established in 1923), the Aromanian language, traditions and customs were very much preserved in Bulgaria. These institutions have been closed in 1948 when the Peoples Republic of Bulgaria became fully involved into the Soviet political-economic bloc. After 1948 the Aromanians in Bulgaria have been officially considered as the Vlachs and later as ethnic Bulgarians who spoke a neo-Latin language. 2 It was established in Bucharest at the turn of the 20th century most important Vlach cultural organization under the name of MacedonianRomanian Society for Intellectual Culture. This organization was during the First and the Second Balkan Wars (19121913) the main proponents against territorial division of Macedonia between Serbia, Bulgaria and Greece. Instead, it fought for Macedonian autonomous province. The same Vlach organization was presented at the Versailles Peace Conference in 1919 requiring establishment of the autonomous Macedonia with an independent
216
______________________BALCANIA
In the inter war period some researchers recorded circa 4,000 Vlachs in the Bitola area, 3,000 in Skopje and 1,500 in the town of Krushevo that was populated by the Vlach majority.1 Additional difficulty for the Macedonian authorities to deal most effectively with the Vlachs is the attitude towards this ethnic group posed by the Greek officials who interfere in Macedonian domestic affairs concerning the minority issues. The Athens claims that all Macedonias Eastern Orthodox minorities (which include and the Vlachs) are of the Greek ethnic origin and consequently had to be protected by the Greek government. Undoubtedly, there are many regional Vlachs who obtained education in the Greek language in the schools and accordingly became Hellenized in the matter of cultural and even ethnic feelings. It inescapably produced in the whole 20th century certain level of tensions between those who fought for the Macedonian national idea and those who became champions of the Greek Megali Idea (a recreation of united Greek national state, i.e. some form of the former Orthodox Byzantine Empire).2 Finally, it should be considered the verity that among all scattered Vlach communities in the region (from the 2,000 of Istro-Romanians in the north-west of the peninsula to the several tens of thousands of the Vlachs in Thessaly and Epirus in the south-eastern parts of the Balkans) the Macedonian Vlachs have the best chances to preserve their ethnocultural characteristics due to the favorable legislation and practice in protection of their identity.
canton for the Vlachs, which will include the area of the Pindus Mt. The Italians established during the Second World War in Greece an autonomous Pindus Principality under their own protectorate that was considered as the Vlach ethnic state in this portion of the peninsula. The area of the Principality covered Epirus, Macedonia and Thessaly. The prince was Alcibiades Diamandi. The Principality had and its own armed forces the Roman Legion, composed by those Vlachs who supported Italian fascism [see: E. Averoff-Tossizza, The Call of the Earth, New York: New Rochelle, 1981]. 1 H. Poulton, Who are the Macedonians?, London: Hurst & Company, 1995, p. 94. 2 About the Megali Idea in connection with the Macedonian question see: T. G. Tatsios, The Megali Idea and the Greek-Turkish war of 1897: the impact of the Cretan problem on Greek irredentism, 18661897, New York: Columbia University Press, 1984; D. Dakin, The Greek struggle in Macedonia 18971913, Thessaloniki, 1966.
217
______________________BALCANIA
The Daco-Romanian, Megleno-Romanian, Aromanian and Vlach migrations
The Vlachs in Romania The territory of Romania is considered by significant number of the Balkan Vlachs as their real motherland (for the reason that it is the only state of the neo-Latin speakers in the South East Europe) or the national state of the Vlachs regardless on the fact that they are not originating from Romania. Outstandingly, the Romanian intellectuals (especially the linguists) and politicians expressed during the last century and a half a high level of attention to all neo-Latin speaking groups in the South East Europe claiming that all of them belong to the Romanian nationality. Accordingly, the leading theory about the ethnogenesis of Romanian (i.e., neo-Latin) speakers in the region is framed as it is presented in the next paragraph. The Romanians are descendents from old Thracians who inhabited a vast part of the Central and South East Europe in the pre-classical age (from Poland to Greece). A language of the ancient Thracians was of the same kind as the ancient Baltic, Slavic, Iranian and it was a part of the language group that is
218
______________________BALCANIA
known for the linguists as satem. During the Roman period the Thracians within the South East Europe lived on the territory of the present-day Romania, Moldova, Eastern Serbia and Bulgaria. The Greco-Roman geographers and historians named the Thracian tribes who lived between the Carpathian Mt., the Balkan Range and the Black Sea as the Dacians or Getae. These ancient GetoDacians, who had their settlements on the both banks of the River of Danube, were the ethnic base for the formation of the presentday neo-Latin speakers in this part of Europe who call themselves as the Romanians or the Aromanians (the Vlachs). In any case, the Latinity became the main feature of the Romanian nationality and it resulted from the process of Romanization. As the language is the essential aspect to define an ethnic identity and since the old Latin language creates the core of a modern Romanian language it is understandable why the Romanians call themselves by this ethnonym. Finally, there is a long tradition that the Romanian people considered the ethnonyms Vlach and Romanian as the synonyms: for instance the representatives of Transylvanian Romanians sent to the Habsburg emperor Leopold II (17901792) in March 1791 and in March 1792 the written requirements upon the political status of the Romanians in Transylvania under the title Supplex Libellus Valachorum. A territory of the present-day Romania had a great attraction for the Vlach migrants from the Balkans in the Middle and New Ages since the two semi-independent principalities of Romanian-speakers existed at that time: Wallacia and Moldavia. Both of them have been considered as the countries with flourishing economic activities and unwavering central authorities. One of the crucial national-political institutions that played a decisive role in the Vlach migration from the Balkan Peninsula to the independent state of Romania (which was made by unification of Wallachia and Moldavia in 1859 and became internationally recognized as an independent in 1878) was the MacedoRomanian Committee. It was established in the early 1860s in Bucharest and financed by the Romanian government. The prime political goal of the committee was to work on national renaissance of the Romanian language speakers for the unification with their motherland. The most remarkable success of the committee was opening of circa 100 Romanian schools within the Ottoman Empire and attraction of the Vlachs to migrate to Romania, particularly to the region of Dobruja. For instance, the Romanian authorities granted the privileges to all Vlachs from the Balkans in 1925 to come to the province of Dobruja where the Romanians
219
______________________BALCANIA
composed lesser than a half of all inhabitants. However, the local population in this province, either of the Romanian origin or not, expressed a certain level of antagonism toward the new (Vlach) colonists that compelled many of them to migrate to other parts of Romania. Today, Romanias Vlachs make a community of some 50,000 to 70,000 people, but majority of them accepted Romanian national identity although with a sense of having a distinctive vernacular in comparison with the literal Romanian language. The Romanians regard the Vlach language customarily as a (not standardized) dialect of the Romanian. The Vlachs as a population are considered as a cultural minority of Romanian kinship. Romanias Vlachs are in comparison to all other Vlach communities in the region mostly exposed to the assimilation due to the linguistic similarities with the members from a macrocommunity.
The Vlachs in Serbia
Within the whole territory of the former Yugoslavia the Vlachs have been most numerous in Serbia. In the Cold War period the Yugoslavias Vlach enjoyed the highest level of minority protection in comparison to the other states in the South East Europe. Nevertheless, some of the Vlach representatives complained at the end of the existence of the ex-Yugoslavia for the lack of the language and religious rights for this community especially in the Socialist Republic of Macedonia. The ex-Yugoslav authorities developed the so-called three-tier system of ethnonational rights according to which all ethnonational groups have been classified into three levels of the rights: a) the Nations of Yugoslavia (Slovenes, Croats, Serbs, Muslims, Montenegrins and Macedonians); b) the Nationalities of Yugoslavia (Slovaks, Turks, Czechs, Italians, Romanians, Gypsies, Ruthenians, Hungarians and Albanians); and c) the Ethnic groups of Yugoslavia (like Austrians, Greeks, Jews, Vlachs, Ukrainians, Russians, Poles, etc.). Officially, the minority status in the country was not recognized and all citizens of Yugoslavia had been equal in terms of culture, language and political rights. However, some de facto minority groups enjoyed the right to have a territorial and administrative autonomy (the Albanians and the Hungarians), while others did not. The majority of Serbias Vlachs live in the easternmost part of the country around the River of Timok (the so-called Timok
220
______________________BALCANIA
Vlachs).1 According to some scholars, majority of them have been resettled from the Principality of Wallachia, Transylvania and Banat to this area ( ) by the Ottoman authorities in order to repopulate the region. The majority of inhabitants of the lands along the River of Danube of this portion of Serbia, which is on the border with Bulgaria and Romania, are the Vlachs: 151 settlements are purely Vlach; while in 42 settlements they mixed with the Serbs and the Bulgarians. The Romanian authorities claimed that in the interwar period there were approximately 120,000 Romanians (the Vlachs of a neo-Latin language) in the Bulgarian part of Timok valley, which separates Serbia from Bulgaria.2 According to the official Serbias statistical data, at the end of the 20th century (the 1981 census) there were 135,000 speakers of the Vlach language, but only 32,000 of them declared themselves to be of the Vlach ethnicity. The rest of the Vlach speakers identified themselves as the Serbs.3 The Serbian authorities called them as the Serbs of Vlach language. However, some researchers increase the number of Serbias Vlachs to 200,000. Many of Timok Vlachs, who came to the area from Banat, and Transylvania, called themselves, and are known by the local populace, as the Ungurens (i.e., the Hungarians) since they migrated from historical lands of the Kingdom of Hungary. However, those Vlachs who migrated from the Principality of Wallachia (which had an ancient name of Tara Romaneasca) are known as the Tarans. The latter are living as well in the Vidin area of the North West Bulgaria. During the Ottoman rule the Vlachs from the Timok area (in Serbia) and the Vidin district (in Bulgaria) maintained intensive relations and were considered as a single compact group of the Vlachs. An establishment of the new political borders in the area (firstly between Serbia and Turkey in 1830/1833 and later between Serbia and Bulgaria in 1878), which followed the process of liberation of the Serbs and the Bulgarians from the Ottoman mastery, separated the Timok Vlachs from those who lived in the
1 For instance, according to the 1981 census, in the district of the city of Bor there were 10,29% Vlachs 2 C. Noe, M. Popesco-Spineni, Les Roumains en Bulgarie, Craiova, Ramuri, 1939, pp. 8688. 3 Statistical Yearbook of Yugoslavia 1988, Belgrade, 1989, p. 442 (in Serbian); R. Petrovi, Etniki meoviti brakovi u Jugoslaviji, Beograd, 1985, p. 3236.
221
______________________BALCANIA
vicinity of Vidin. Consequently, many of the Vidin Vlachs accepted either as first or second ethnic identity to be Bulgarians,1 while majority of the Timok Vlachs identified themselves as the Serbs (but of the Vlach language). It is very often that the Timok Vlachs would listen and perform Serbian folk songs and respect Serbian national customs and culture. The Serbias Vlachs have been quite positively considered and high rated by the Bulgarian Vlachs in the time of the Socialist Yugoslavia due to their economic prosperity, right to free express their ethnic self-nomination and greater individual freedoms. The census of 1981 showed that the Vlach ethnicity was not understood as a very deep identity, at least not enough rooted in order to survive on the political scene, but it is perceived as a strategic choice (for the practical reasons) of majority of the community, who opted to belong to another identity group (but preserving the mother tongue) in order to obtain more privileges and better position within the society.2 From this example is clearly seen that for some Vlach micro-communities the ethnic
1 There are Bulgarian scholars who found evidences that parts of the Timok and the Danubian Vlachs have ethnic Bulgarian origin. They are champions of the theory of double migration across the Danube, i.e., that majority of the Danubian, Timok and Vidin Vlachs originate in ethnic Bulgarians who once upon a time migrated from Bulgaria to Wallachia in order to escape from the Ottoman lordship. However, one part of them later resettled in the Northern Bulgaria and the Eastern Serbia while other part stayed in the Southern Romania. Those Bulgaro-Vlachs when resettled in the Northern Bulgaria brought with themselves corrupted Romanian language. This theory is partially confirmed in the Vlach oral tradition from the area of Vidin. 2 This is an example of applying the rational choice theory to ethnic identity and interethnic relations. The proponents of this direction of thinking stress that the individuals are trying always to chose the most optimal option from the corpus of available alternatives of ethnonational identity; i.e. they are choosing such alternative which may give them the highest gains and benefits. Accordingly, the ethnic (or national) group is only a coalition of individuals and a result of their rational way of thinking, which helps them to obtain as better as position in economic and political competition [M. Banton, The Actors Model of Ethnic Relations, J. Hutchinson, A. Smith (eds.), Ethnicity, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996, pp. 98104]. According to many authors, the notion of particular ethnicity is a product of social relations rather than a natural essence. At any case, the character of ethnicity is a variable and never ending process, through which the actors identify and are identified by the others on the basis of the Us-Them dichotomies established on the basis of cultural features, which are presumed to have derived from common origins and which are distinct in social interactions [P. Poutignat, J. Streiff-Fenart, Thories de l ethnicit, Paris: PUF, 1995, p. 154].
222
______________________BALCANIA
group1 and linguistic group can be differentiated from the each other. From the Vlach perspective, to be at the same time ethnic Serb (or Bulgarian as it is aforementioned) and linguistic Vlach does not affect the Vlach self-identity, but for sure it finally leads to the Vlach silent assimilation.2 Finally, it should be said that the Vlachs participated in the process of ethnogenesis of the Serbs as certain percentage of the Vlachs who lived in the Middle Ages in the Kingdom (Empire from 1346 to 1371) of Serbia and later in the Ottoman times within the borders of jurisdiction of revived Serbian Patriarchate of Pe (15571766) became included in the process of Serbization of not originally Eastern Orthodox Serbs. Consequently, it is extremely difficult to define the balance of ethnic Serbs and those Vlachs who accepted Serb national feeling within the population of the Eastern Orthodox believers who emigrated from the Ottoman provinces of Montenegro, Serbia, Herzegovina, Macedonia and Bosnia and resettled themselves on the territory of the former Habsburg Monarchy and Venice (the present-day territory of the Republic of Croatia). In the other words, the Venetian and Austrian provincial and central authorities very often mentioned in the sources and official documents these migrants as the Vlachs (in Austrian case) or the Morlacchi (by the Venetians). However, in the same sources these Vlachs or Morlacchi are recognized to be of the Serb customs and language.3 A historical presence of the Vlach population on the territory of Serbia is preserved in the names of the rivers, villages, mountains, etc. For instance, at the end of the 19th century there were 25 villages in Serbia with the name derived from the Vlach ethnonym. At the same period of time the Vlachs were the biggest minorities in Serbia with 7,47% of the total Kingdom of Serbias inhabitants, living between the Rivers of Grand Morava, Danube
1 In this article we regarded an ethnic group as a part of an ethnie that is living either in non-national state or in non-national-language environment, but preserved its language, culture, customs and are aware of its ethnic selfidentity. 2 Still the Vlachs identified themselves as different from their neighbors from the points of language, culture, tradition, customs and origin. 3 L. Wolff, Disciplinary Administration and Anthropological Perspective in Venetian Dalmatia: Official Reflections on the Morlacci from the Peace of Passarowitz to the Grimani Reform, D. Roksandi, N. tefanec (eds.), Constructing Border Societies on the Triplex Confinium (eds.), Budapest: Central European University Budapest, History Dept., Working Paper Series 4, 2000, pp. 4756.
223
______________________BALCANIA
and Timok. Majority of them originated from the migrants from the north of Danube.1
Conclusion
The status of the Vlach minority in the South East Europe is characterized with a shortage of authoritative resources, cultural, linguistic and political subordination to the ethnolinguistic majority environment, social, economic, and territorial (administrative) marginalization and, finally, with a long-standing process of tranquil assimilation especially by the Orthodox majority(s) due to the long-term cohabitation and familiarization. Ferdinand Toennies, a primordials theoretician of phenomena of ethnicity, divides modern ethnonational groups, according to their self-identity criteria, into community of blood, community of place and community of spirit.2 However, the Vlach self-identity apprehension does not fit to these three patterns. The Vlach pattern of self-identity could be called as community of language. For them, their language became the last stronghold of the ethnic spirit and a shield of their group self-identity. Therefore, the preservation of the Vlachs in the Balkans, as a separate ethnolinguistic minority in several regional states, primarily depends on a successful self-saving and maintenance of the Vlach language. However, the attempts to preserve the Vlach language and culture could not be fruitful without improved legal provisions and a real practical help by the governments of the Balkan states. In this study we considered the Vlach minority in cultural terms, i.e. as ethnolinguistic minority group in different Balkan countries, rather than religious, or other one. The reasons for that are twohold: Firstly, the Vlachs are identifying themselves in cultural terms (primarily by the mother language as a vital minority cultural identity issue and crucial distinct character). Secondly, they in recent times claim special collective cultural rights within the regional societies in order to preserve their collective cultural identity and authenticity as a specific way of life that is typical of their particular group, which separates the Vlachs from the others and forms its unique ethnic image.
1 . , . , , , 1887, p. 92 93. 2 F. Toennies, Community and Association, Sotsiologicheski Problemi, 4., p. 103.
224
______________________BALCANIA
However, the members of macro-ethnicities have impression that the Vlach minority culture is insignificant. Nevertheless, the political changes in the region after 1989/1990 did away with the obstacles to free profess religion and to express the ethnic identity that would lead to slow down Vlach assimilation. The process of modernization, especially its features of urbanization and industrialization, meant various forms of cultural, and even ethnic, assimilation of the Vlachs in the South East Europe. Assimilation of the Vlachs in many cases was done under the policy of suppression of their cultural identity. However, the opposite case might lead to self-segregation and even conflict with the majority of society. The future task of the regional administrations and communities is to find a proper policy to provide the best conditions under which the Vlach minority (and other minorities) would express its specific cultural features, but without antagonizing the other members of the society. The exercising cultural rights of minority communities have to be framed and respected within the set of general human rights. As a final point, an intercultural dialogue is needed in order to overcome mutual suspicion and enable the joint participation in power of representatives of the majority and the minorities. This will ensure a political protection of the interests of minorities, which would not confront them with the rest of the population. Thus, minority cultural rights will not antagonize, but harmonize political and other interests. References And Used Bibliography J. B. Wace, M. S. Thompson, Nomads of the Balkans, Methuen, 1914. Krasteva, Ethnicity, Communities and Identities in Bulgaria, A. Krasteva (ed.), Ravenna: Longo Editore Ravenna, 1998. Amnesty International, Albania: Political Imprisonment and the Law, AI EUR, April 11th, 1984. BBC, Summary of World Broadcasts, Eastern Europe/0983 I, January 30th, 1991. . . , I X , , 1999. C. Noe, M. Popesco-Spineni, Les Roumains en Bulgarie, Craiova: Ramuri, 1939. Constitutional Court Judgement 4 of April 21st, 1992, Official Gazette, 35, Sofia, 1992.
225
______________________BALCANIA
Cowell, A Hint of Change in the Albanian Air, New York Times, June 220th, 1988. D. Crystal (ed.), The Cambridge Encyclopedia, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994. D. Dakin, The Greek struggle in Macedonia 18971913, Thessaloniki, 1966. D. Ens, Growing religious freedom in Albania, News Network International, May 17th, 1990. E. Ivanova, The Ethnic Conflict, Iztok-Iztok, 2, 1991. European Parliament Working Document, 2119/1985. F. Toennies, Community and Association, Sotsiologicheski Problemi, 4. F. W. Carter, H. T. Norris (eds.), The Changing Shape of the Balkans, London: University College London, 1996. G. Castellan, History of the Balkans. From Mohammed the Conqueror to Stalin, New York: East European Monographs, Boulder, 1992. G. Genov, The Legal Status of Minorities, Sofia, 1929. G. Weigand, Rumanen und Arumunen in Bulgarien, Leipzig, 1907. H. N. Brailsford, Macedonia: Its Races and their Future, London: Methuen & Co., 1909. H. Poulton, The Balkans. Minorities and States in Conflict, London: Minority Rights Group, 1994. H. Poulton, Who are the Macedonians?, London: Hurst & Company, 1995. Human Rights in Albania: Hearing Before the Sub-Committee on Human Rights and International Organizations of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, statement by Nikolaos A. Stavrou on January 25th, 1984. N. Ghiulamila, Romanii macedoneni din Bulgaria, Graiul romanesc, 2, 1928. Information, Federal Union of European Nationalities, Flensburg, Austria, March 29th, 1990. B. Schechtman, European Population Transfers (19391945), New York: Oxford University Press, 1946. Fishman, Language and Ethnicity in Minority Sociolinguistic Perspectives, Clevedon: Multilingual Matters Ltd., 1989. J. Pettifer (ed.), The New Macedonian Question, New York: St. Martins Press, 1999. . . , . . , . . , , : , 2009.
226
______________________BALCANIA
Kanev, Law and Politics on Ethnic and Religious Minorities in Bulgaria, A. Krasteva (ed.), Communities and Identities in Bulgaria, Ravenna: Longo Editore Ravenna, 1998. M. Danforth, The Macedonian Conflict. Ethnic Nationalism in a Transitional World, Princeton: Princeton University Press, New Jersey, 1997. L. Wolff, Disciplinary Administration and Anthropological Perspective in Venetian Dalmatia: Official Reflections on the Morlacci from the Peace of Passarowitz to the Grimani Reform, D. Roksandi, N. tefanec (eds.), Constructing Border Societies on the Triplex Confinium, Budapest: Central European University Budapest, History Dept., Working Paper Series 4, 2000. Banton, The Actors Model of Ethnic Relations, J. Hutchinson, A. Smith (eds.) Ethnicity, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996. Monitoring the EU Accession Process: Minority Protection 2001, Budapest: Open Society Institute, 2001. Costa, Albania: A European Enigma, New York: East European Monographs, Boulder, 1995. Poutignat, J. Streiff-Fenart, Thories de l ethnicit, Paris : PUF, 1995. Prifti, Socialist Albania since 1944: Domestic and Foreign Developments, Cambridge, Mass.London, 1978. P. Stefanag, A. Puto, The History of Albania from its Origins to the Present Day, London: Routledge, 1981. Clogg, A Concise History of Greece, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992. Petrovi, Etniki meoviti brakovi u Jugoslaviji, Beograd, 1985. Ladas, The Exchange of Minorities: Bulgaria, Greece and Turkey, New York: Macmillan, 1932. S. M. Horak, National Minorities in Albania, 19191980, S. M. Horak (ed.), East European National Minorities: 19191980, Colorado, 1985. S. Pawlowich, The Improbable SurvivorYugoslavia and its Problems: 19181988, London: C. Hurst and Co., 1988. S. Skendi, The Albanian National Awakening, 18781912, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1967. Statistical Yearbook of Yugoslavia 1988, Belgrade, 1989 (in Serbo-Croatian).
227
______________________BALCANIA
G. Tatsios, The Megali Idea and the Greek-Turkish war of 1897: the impact of the Cretan problem on Greek irredentism, 18661897, New York: Columbia University Press, 1984. T. Winnifrith, The Vlachs, Duckworth, 1987. Andreev (and others), The Republic of Macedonia, Skopje, 1995. Hristu, Aromanii din Bulgaria, Graiul romanesc, 67, 1931. Kymlicka, The Rights of Minority Cultures, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000. Westermann Groer Atlas zur Weltgeschichte, Braunschweig, 1985. . , . , , , 1887.
228

Sotirovic BALCANIA English Language Articles 2013

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Sotirovic BALCANIA English Language Articles 2013

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Vladislav B.

SCIENTIFIC ARTICLES IN ENGLISH

3. THE IDEA OF A GREATER CROATIA IN THE 17th CENTURY ____________________________________________________ p. 61

5. KOSOVO AND THE CAUCASUS: A DOMINO EFFECT ____________________________________________________ p. 130

7. THE BALKAN VLACHS AN EXTINGUISHING ETHNOLINGUISTIC GROUP ____________________________________________________ p. 189

THE CULT OF SERBIAN PRINCE LAZAR HREBELJANOVI KOSOVOS GREAT MARTYR

Crucified Kosovo in 21st c.

Do not surrender! Kosovo is Serbia!

Burned Serbian house in Kosovo by Albanians on March 18th, 2004

One of destroyed Serbian churches in Kosovo after June 1999

Which kind of Serbia in the EU?

Deani Monastery in Metohija today

1 J. idak and co-authors. Hrvatski narodni preporod, t. I. Zagreb, 1965, p. 7.

The Ottoman Empire and the Reliquiae reliquiarum of Croatia in 1683

A Greater Croatia in Titoist Socialis Yugoslavia, 19451991

A Serbian Empire in 1355

Coat of Arms of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania

Croatian lands in 753 according to Croatian historiography

Coat of arms of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania

Serbias coat of arms from 1882

The Slavs and their neighbours in 8th9th centuries

Dismemberment of the Ottoman Empire from 1683 to 1923

THE NATO WORLD ORDER, THE BALKANS AND THE R U SSI A N N A TI ON A L I N TE R E ST

Coat of Arms of the Russian Romanovs Dynasty

Russian Greater Bulgaria from 1878

Territory of Bismarck Serbia from 1878 to 1912

KOSOVO AND THE CAUCASUS: A DOMINO EFFECT

A geopolitical map of the region of the Caucasus in 2008

Crucified Kosovo by Muslim Albanians today

A map of ethnolinguistic groups in the Caucasus region in 2009

. , , : , 2006. Neue Zrcher Zeitung, 14. 05. 2004.

Kingdom of Georgia in 1230

Assoc. Prof. Vladislav B. SOTIROVI, Ph.D.

2: Map of a Greater Albania promoted by the Albanian diaspora in Sweden in 1977

4. Ancient Cholhis, Iberia and Albania at the Caucasus

T H E B A L K A N V L A C H S A N E XT I N G U I S H I N G E THN OLI N GU I STI C GR OU P

History and Language

The Balkan states after the Balkan Wars of 19121913

The Vlachs in Albania

The Daco-Romanian, Megleno-Romanian, Aromanian and Vlach migrations

The Vlachs in Serbia

Anda mungkin juga menyukai