Praise for Dennis P. Hupchick’s The Balkans

“In The Balkans, Dennis Hupchick has produced a creative, balanced, objective, well-written, and at times even inspiring synthesis of the peninsula’s convulsive history. It is a masterful synthesis that covers the history of the individual Balkans peoples at the best moments of their history, while also giving due recognition to those external powers—the Byzantine Empire, the Ottoman Turkish Empire, and to a lesser degree the Habsburg Empire—that have had a controlling influence over the Balkans ever since the fifth century. It is a book that is a joy to read. Dennis Hupchick’s The Balkans will undoubtedly join the ranks of those time-honored volumes that stretch from Ferdinand Schevill’s The History of the Balkan Peninsula (1933), through Robert Lee Wolff’s The Balkans in Our Time (1956) and L.S. Stavrianos’s The Balkans since 1453 (1958), to Barbara Jelavich’s History of the Balkans (1983).” Steven Béla Várdy, Ph.D. McAnulty Distinguished Professor of European History Duquesne University

“Dennis Hupchick’s history of the Balkans is an expertly researched and excellently written text that fills a vital need in historical scholarship. It is the first single volume English language comprehensive history of the Balkans covering the peninsula from the Middle Ages to the post Communist period. Hupchick gives us a readable look at the complexities of this crucial world crossroads for over fifteen centuries allowing us to understand the problems which are still making headlines in the contemporary world. He concludes with a valuable bibliography in each chapter for further exploration. This is a vital work for every student of history and political science and for those who are simply interested in understanding the crises of today.” Frederick B. Chary Professor of History at Indiana University Northwest This page intentionally left blank The Balkans This page intentionally left blank The Balkans from Constantinople to Communism

DENNIS P. HUPCHICK THE BALKANS Copyright © Dennis P. Hupchick, 2002. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be used or reproduced in any manner whatsoever without written permission except in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical articles or reviews.

First published in hardcover in 2002 by Palgrave Macmillan First PALGRAVE MACMILLAN™ paperback edition: February 2004 175 Fifth Avenue, New York, N.Y. 10010 and Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire, England RG21 6XS. Companies and representatives throughout the world.

PALGRAVE MACMILLAN is the global academic imprint of the Palgrave Mac- millan division of St. Martin's Press, LLC and of Palgrave Macmillan Ltd. Macmillan® is a registered trademark in the United States, United Kingdom and other countries. Palgrave is a registered trademark in the European Union and other countries.

ISBN 978-1-4039-6417-5 ISBN 978-0-312-29913-2 (eBook) DOI 10.1057/9780312299132

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Hupchick, Dennis P. The Balkans: from Constantinople to communism / Dennis P. Hupchick. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index.

I. Balkan peninsula-History. I. Title: From Constantinople to communism. II. Title.

DR36 H87 2001 949.6-dc21 00-062590

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.

Design by planettheo.com

First PALGRAVE MACMILLAN paperback edition: February 2004

10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 In memory of my mentor, James F. Clarke (1906-1982) This page intentionally left blank Contents

Preface...... xi Note on Spelling and Pronunciation ...... xvii Maps ...... xviii Glossary ...... xxxi

Introduction: Land, People, and Culture...... 1

PART ONE Era of Byzantine Hegemony, 600–1355

1. East Romans, Slavs, and Bulgars ...... 21 2. The First Bulgarian Empire...... 38 3. Byzantium Declines...... 57 4. Serbia Preeminent ...... 75 Further Readings ...... 95

PART TWO Era of Ottoman Domination, 1355–1804

5. Ottoman Conquest ...... 101 6. The “Ottoman System”...... 124 7. The Balkan Peoples under the Ottomans ...... 144 8. Ottoman Destabilization...... 164 Further Readings ...... 184 PART THREE Era of Romantic Nationalism, 1804–1878

9. The Rise of Romantic Nationalism ...... 189 10. Revolutions and Resurrected States ...... 212 11. Ottoman “Reform” Efforts ...... 234 12. The “Eastern Question” ...... 247 Further Readings ...... 268

PART FOUR Era of Nation-State Nationalism, 1878–1945

13. Early Nation-States ...... 275 14. National Conflicts...... 296 15. World War I and Versailles ...... 316 16. The Interwar Years and World War II...... 338 Further Readings ...... 360

PART FIVE Era of Communist Domination, 1945–1991

17. Communist Takeover ...... 369 18. The Greek Exception ...... 388 19. Splits in Socialism ...... 403 20. Communist Decline and Collapse...... 416 Further Readings ...... 445

Selected General Bibliography...... 449 Index...... 456 Preface

On a late-September evening in 1938, British Prime Minister Neville Cham- berlain went on radio to address the nation regarding the growing international crisis surrounding events in Czechoslovakia. The Nazi-influenced Sudeten Ger- man minority in that state had precipitated a situation that threatened to result in a German invasion of the country. France had signed an alliance guaranteeing Czechoslovakia’s security, and Britain was closely allied with France in case of any future hostilities. An invasion by Hitler’s Germany would force both to live up to their treaty responsibilities. The frightening possibility of a costly and bloody European war loomed large, and naturally the British people were concerned. In the course of his address, Chamberlain, desperate to avoid a conflict, made the following comment: “How horrible, fantastic, incredible it is that we should be digging trenches and trying on gas masks here because of a quarrel in a faraway country between people of whom we know nothing.” The next day Hitler notified Chamberlain that he was willing to discuss a diplomatic solution to the crisis. The day after that, the British prime minister flew off to Munich, where he and French Premier Edward Daladier, under the delusion that peace thus would be assured, essentially caved in to Hitler’s demands to dismember France’s East European ally. Fear of spilling British blood to uphold Britain’s moral responsibilities and ignorance of East European realities led Chamberlain to the Munich appeasement. Far from preventing the war he feared, his actions ultimately guaranteed its outbreak a year later. One cannot help but be struck by similarities between Chamberlain’s reaction to the Sudeten crisis sixty-odd years ago and those of Western leaders to the war in Bosnia-Hercegovina that raged between 1992 and 1995. The same ignorance, befuddlement, and fear reflected in Chamberlain’s telling remark characterized their efforts to end the Bosnian debacle. Apparently lacking any concrete understanding of the situation on the ground, caught off guard by the rapid and violent disintegration of Yugoslavia, and afraid that the resulting regional instability would threaten relationships in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the European Union (EU), the Western powers vacillated among inactivity, half measures, and appeasement of nationalist aggressors—anything to avoid costly, and potentially bloody, direct intervention—before finally manipulating the parties involved in the war into signing a tenuous agreement at Dayton, Ohio. xii THE BALKANS

Later, in 1999, fear of casualties and, once again, a lack of understanding of Balkan realities led the West to resort to an airwar half measure against Serbia in an avowed effort to protect the Albanian minority in the Serbian province of Kosovo from Serbian ultranationalist “ethnic cleansing.” NATO’s bombing campaign did not spare the Kosovar Albanians from the atrocities that it supposedly sought to prevent. Ultimately Serbia’s leadership was bludgeoned into submission and most of the Kosovar Albanian refugees originally forced out of the region by the Serbs returned to their devastated homes, whereupon they began perpetrating their own round of atrocities on those Kosovar Serbs who did not flee when Serbian forces withdrew. The befuddlement and fear demonstrated by Western leaders during the Bosnian and Kosovo crises were a direct reflection of an ignorance of Balkan history. But the leaders merely mirrored the more widespread ignorance of their respective constituencies. The majority of westerners had little knowledge of, or interest in, Balkan affairs beyond a rudimentary, generalized, and frequently oversimplified awareness of assorted cold war-related situations: Yugoslavia was a “good” Commu- nist country ever since Marshal Josip Tito broke with Joseph Stalin in 1948 and mixed capitalism with socialism; Bulgaria was the blind puppet and lackey of the Soviet Union; Romania under Nicolae Ceaupescu was a “friendly” Communist state that frequently opposed Soviet imperialism; rarely noticed Albania was akin to Tibet, isolated in its mountains and in its affinities to Red China; Greece was part of NATO, a member of the West that was not considered part of the Balkans; and Turkey, another NATO ally, was Middle Eastern and not a part of Europe. When Yugoslavia disintegrated in 1992, unfamiliarity with pre-cold war Balkan history made it easy for Western politicians and journalists to blame the resulting warfare on “centuries-old” ethnic or religious conflicts—again, an oversimplification rooted in a fundamental misunderstanding of Balkan history—and to tag the fighting inaccurately as the “Third” Balkan War (assuming, of course, that their Western audiences were aware that there once had been two others). Perhaps the unfamiliarity with Balkan history displayed by English speakers can be blamed partly on a certain lack of general education dealing with the region. Except for a few occurrences that have played important roles in determining the course of Western European developments (such as the fall of Constantinople to the Ottoman Turks in 1453 and the 1914 assassination of the Austro-Hungarian Archduke Francis Ferdinand in Sarajevo), events in the Balkans rarely have found their way into English-language secondary education textbooks. At the level of higher education, the same often holds true for courses in general European and world history. This “Balkan gap” in recent English-language education can be attributed in some measure to continuing vestiges of Western European cultural antipathy toward the Orthodox European and Islamic civilizations that have held historical PREFACE xiii sway in the region as well as to a certain lack of available, sound general studies of Balkan history. When discussing Orthodox Europe and Islam, westerners frequently portray them as either threatening or as inferior with regard to the West. As threats, both provide westerners with their most long-standing cultural bogymen: Orthodox Europe spawned the Byzantine Empire, Russia, and the Soviet Union; Islam begot the Arab Caliphate, the Spanish Moors, the Saracens, the Ottoman Empire, and, most currently, Islamic “fundamentalism,” Libya, Iran, and Iraq. Less concrete (but more insidious because of their casualness) are the consistent Western portrayals of Orthodox European and Islamic inferiority in texts and in the media by using culturally negative or pejorative descriptive terms (such as “underdeveloped,” “backward,” “Asiatic,” “fossilized,” among others) when discussing them and by categorizing their political and social structures as innately flawed (such as being politically “autocratic” or “authoritarian” and socially “inequitable” or “tradition-bound”). As birthplace for the Orthodox European civilization and dominated for close to half a millennium by Islamic civilization, the Balkan Peninsula suffers accord- ingly. Its very name seems unconsciously associated in Western minds with “otherness,” since it derives from a colloquial Turkish term for mountain. This perceptual foreignness has been reinforced further by the late-nineteenth- and early- twentieth-century chaos and divisiveness characterizing the rise of modern nation- states in the region, epitomized in the term “balkanization.” So tangible is the negative perception of the Balkans in Western minds that many peoples native to the region—Greeks, Romanians, Croats, and Slovenes, in particular—adamantly reject the use of the term, thus hoping to escape the impression of inferiority in the West. Some Western scholars of the region do so as well because of an awareness of the cultural implications of the word. Instead, the term “Southeastern Europe” has become a common substitute. One might posit that, if the Balkans received the volume of English-language general historical coverage approaching that given most areas of Western Europe, then at least westerners’ ignorance of the region would be mitigated and the cultural biases dampened. This, of course, is conjecture. As it stands, few book-length general studies of Balkan history have been published in English. Even if the comparison is limited to English-language books specifically treating Eastern Europe, the Balkans place far behind those devoted to Central-Eastern and Northeastern European topics. It would appear that the Balkans enjoy copious coverage only when events in the region cause some sense of crisis in the West. Both the “Eastern Question” (1875-78) and the Balkan Wars (1912-13) produced outpourings of predominantly superficial or subjective publications on the Balkans that ceased once the crises ended. The current rash of mostly journalistic and memoir publications generated by the collapse of Yugoslavia, the war in Bosnia-Hercegovina, and the humanitarian debacle in Kosovo follows in their mold. xiv THE BALKANS

Because the prospects are likely that post-Communist turmoil in the Balkans will continue for some time to come, raising serious security and foreign policy issues for the United States and Europe, westerners will need to know as much as possible about the region, especially about its history. The number of reliable and compre- hensive general histories of the Balkans readily available in English at present can be counted on one’s fingers and toes, and most of these are limited in scope, dated, or written almost exclusively for specialists. Supplementing these works are some English-language studies devoted to important stages in Balkan history, such as the Byzantine, Ottoman, and modern national periods. For much of the later national and Communist periods in Balkan history, the reader is forced to cull information from general studies of Eastern Europe. Augmenting such general studies are a number of English-language, national-oriented histories spanning all of the periods. Taken as a whole, however, their coverage is uneven because English-language histories of states that have been of intrinsic cultural or political interest to the West (such as Greece and Yugoslavia) far outstrip in number those of the other Balkan states (including pre-Yugoslavia Bosnia-Hercegovina, Croatia, Macedonia, Mon- tenegro, Serbia, and Slovenia). Also, most of these works have as their focus the modern national and, especially, Communist periods rather than the Byzantine or Ottoman, and many of them suffer from nationalist or ideological biases. In any case, their total numbers are few relative to those available for the rest of Eastern Europe, let alone to those treating with Western European states. On the whole, few comprehensive studies of the Balkans exist. More narrowly directed general works of all kinds tend to emphasize periods in which Western influences play a significant role. Times in which non-Western forces predominated in Balkan history are de-emphasized or ignored. Yet it is precisely the non-Western influences that have made the Balkans “the Balkans”—that region of Europe that has proven so befuddling to westerners over the years. The historical survey that follows is an attempt to assist the English-speaking student and general reader in gaining a basic introductory understanding of Balkan history in all of its varied cultural stages, from the end of antiquity through the collapse of communism (but without the usual pro-Western biases) and to provide them with a resource for launching further, more in-depth study should they so desire. As the title proclaims, it is a survey history of the Balkans. The term intentionally and consistently is used throughout the text to emphasize the region’s cultural and historical uniqueness relative to Western Europe without any implied qualitative connotation—and nothing more. The text constitutes an interpretive narrative organized into large, subdivided sections corresponding to important developmental periods—“eras”—in Balkan history, beginning with the advent of Slav and Turk settlement in the region and ending with the collapse of Communist governments in 1991. Post-1991 developments have not been included, since the “facts” surrounding them are still PREFACE xv too sketchy, or partisan, or not at present fully understood regarding their future significance to provide any definitive insight into the fundamental nature of the new, post-Communist era. The text represents an interpretive synthesis of ideas and observations gained by years of extensive reading and research in the fields of history and Balkan studies and by extended periods of firsthand experience in the region itself. In an effort to aid those interested in pursuing study of the Balkans at greater length, extensive lists of further readings and a selected general bibliography supplement the text. Rather than fill the text with footnote references to general data that essentially are well known to specialists, a detailed list of reference readings pertinent to the material presented is appended at the end of each major text division. Selected listing of general studies as well as some collections of primary sources translated into English immediately follow the body of the text. Each of the listings is organized topically, first by general works and then by state/region. The references included in the listings are extensive but selective. First, since this study is targeted specifically at English-speaking introductory students and general readers, the works listed are published exclusively in English. Thus, many important source studies have been omitted because they are available only in non- English languages. Those possessing the ability to read foreign languages will find more than adequate references to such studies in the notes and bibliographies of the works cited. Second, for reasons both of intent and space, only book titles have been included, most of which represent monographs. It seems unlikely that this book’s intended readership will be able to jump immediately into digesting the narrowly focused and highly specialized literature represented by scholarly articles. The titles listed provide the general in-depth exposure to various issues in Balkan history usually needed before plunging into the available periodical literature. As a final, personal note, I wish to extend acknowledgment and thanks to those who lent support and assistance over the time involved in bringing the following study to fruition. The completion of the manuscript’s final draft was facilitated through a sabbatical leave granted me by President Christopher N. Breiseth and the trustees of Wilkes University. President Breiseth’s enthusiastic support for the project was inspirational and greatly appreciated. A number of colleagues and friends at Wilkes University were particularly helpful. Harold E. Cox, a historian who contributed expert cartographic collaboration on three of my previous book projects, once again produced the maps supplementing this text. I feel truly fortunate to enjoy his willing cooperation. J. Michael Lennon, vice president for academic affairs, and Robert J. Heaman, expert in literary culture, kindly gave of their time to critique portions of the manuscript to help make it more readable for nonspecialists, for which I am grateful. Kathleen J. Diekhaus, departmental secretary, rendered useful clerical aid, and Brian R. Sacolic, reference and database librarian, provided valuable xvi THE BALKANS bibliographic search assistance. At Palgrave Press, Michael J. Flamini and Amanda Johnson demonstrated genuine tolerance and great understanding over delays caused by unforeseen health problems and revisions. Finally, I wish to thank my wife, Anne-Marie, for suffering through three years of her husband’s assorted preoccupations, obsessions, and agonies surrounding the project.

Dennis P. Hupchick Wilkes-Barre, PA, 2001 Note on Spelling and Pronunciation

An attempt has been made in the following text to render most proper names and foreign terms in or near their native spellings. Exceptions to this approach are terms generally better known to English speakers in their Anglicized forms (such as the names of states, certain cities, and various geographic elements) and the first names of Greek, Russian, and Western European individuals. Place-names (other than Constantinople/Istanbul, Adrianople/Edirne, and Nicæa/Iznik) are given in their contemporary forms, with variants provided in parentheses following their initial appearances in the text. In the case of languages written in non-Latin alphabets, a “phonetical” transliteration system, generally following that used by the U.S. Board on Geographic Names, is employed for Bulgarian and Russian, while for Serbian and Macedonian a system based on the Latin, Croat form of Serbo-Croatian (utilizing diacritical marks and familiar in the West for transliterating “Yugoslav” languages), is used. Turkish terms are spelled in the Latin characters currently used in Turkey, with appropriate diacritics. A guide to the simple phonetical pronunciation of certain foreign letters follows. ai (Greek), é (Hungarian): as long a in bay á (Hungarian), a (in all cases except Hungarian): as a in ah c (in all cases except Turkish), t (Romanian): as ts in beats c, d (Serb, Croat, Macedonian), cs (Hungarian), ç (Turkish): as ch in church dj (Serb, Croat, Macedonian), gy (Hungarian), c (Turkish): as dzh in badge e (in all cases): as short e in let g (Turkish): as silent h in oh h (Bulgarian, Serb, Croat, Macedonian, Turkish, Russian): as ch in Bach i (in all cases), oi (Greek), yi (Hungarian): as ee in sweet j (in all cases except Romanian): as y in yet ó (Hungarian): as long o in so o (Hungarian), a (Romanian): as ur in purge s (Serb, Croat, Macedonian), s (Hungarian), p (Romanian, Turkish): as sh in sheet sz (Hungarian): as s in say u (in all cases), ou (Greek): as oo in zoo ü (Turkish, Hungarian): as yoo in milieu u (Bulgarian), â (Romanian), i (Turkish), ë (Albanian), ö, a (Hungarian): as short a in but x (Albanian): as dz in buds y (Russian), î (Romanian): as short i in it z (Serb, Croat, Macedonian), zs (Hungarian), j (Romanian): as zh in measure

This page intentionally left blank Glossary

Ahi Islamic urban fellowship. Akçe Silver coin used in the Ottoman Empire. Akinci Ottoman irregular cavalry used for scouting, raiding, and pillaging. Askeri Ottoman military-administrative (ruling) class. Avaris Ottoman extraordinary tax, often collected on a regular basis. Ayan Ottoman semi-independent provincial strongman or governor. Bakpip “Gift” (Turkish); a bribe. Ban “Leader” (Croatian); Hungarian title for a nominally subordinate Croatian or Bosnian provincial ruler. Banovina Post-1929 province of Yugoslavia. Bapibazuks Ottoman irregular troops recruited from Muslim villagers and Circassians. Bey Turkish title for lord, notable, or governor. Beylerbeyi Highest ranking original Ottoman provincial commander-governor. Boier Romanian landholding aristocrat. Bojar Serbian landholding aristocrat. Bolyar Bulgarian landholding aristocrat. Calarapi Romanian free peasant. Car Serbian medieval imperial title. Celep Livestock breeder or dealer; deliverer of food to Istanbul or to military depots. Cetnik Serbian anti-Ottoman guerrilla; Serbian World War II nationalist partisan. Çift Land plot on Ottoman military fiefs reserved for the fief-holder’s personal use. Çiftlik Privately owned Ottoman capitalistic farm or estate. Cizye Ottoman poll-tax levied on non-Muslim subjects. Comes/Knez Dubrovnik head of state. Dervenci Ottoman mountain pass, road, or bridge guard. Dervip Islamic mystical order; wandering Muslim holy man. Devpirme Periodic Ottoman child levy; Ottoman slave administrator class. Divan Ottoman imperial state council. Djed “Grandfather” (Slavic); head bishop of the Bosnian church. Doge Venetian head of state. Dorobanti Romanian landless peasant; Romanian serf. Dragoman Ottoman foreign trade agent for westerners holding capitulations. Emir Turkish prince or dignitary. Esnaf Ottoman artisan or merchant guild. Eyalet Largest original Ottoman provincial military-administrative unit. Fratia “Brotherhood” (Romanian); nineteenth-century Romanian nationalist orga- nization. xxxii THE BALKANS

Gaza Ottoman holy war. Gazi Ottoman holy warrior; Ottoman border warrior. Haiduk Slav bandit; sometimes an anti-Ottoman resistance fighter. Han Ruler of Turkic or Mongol-Tatar peoples. Hane “Hearth” (Turkish); household originally constituting the smallest Ottoman tax unit. Haraç Ottoman land-use tax. Has Largest Ottoman sipahilik fief, usually granted out of imperial lands (see Sipahilik). Hatti Hümayun Ottoman imperial edict, issued by a sultan (which see). Hisba Islamic religious injunction against undue profiteering, fraud, and speculation among artisans. Hospodar “Governor” (Turkish); Phanariote-era Romanian ruler. Janissary Ottoman slave standing infantry, recruited through the devpirme (which see). Kadi Ottoman judge. Kadiasker Highest Ottoman judge. Kaghan Avar ruler. Kaghanate Avar confederative state. Kanun Ottoman secular law, issued by a sultan (which see). Kapikulu Ottoman military-administrative slave household of the sultan (which see). Kaza Smallest original Ottoman provincial military-administrative unit. Klepht Greek bandit; sometimes an anti-Ottoman resistance fighter. Knez “Leader” (Serbian); Serbian princely title; head of a Serbian village commune. Krajina Border zone. Kralj Serbian royal title. Kul Ottoman slave. Madanci Ottoman metal ore miner or processor. Mahalle Ottoman residential quarter. Martolos Local Ottoman militiaman. Medrese Islamic mosque school of higher theological learning. Millet “Nation” (Turkish); a group of Ottoman subject people considered by the authorities as a legal-administrative unit, based on religious affiliation. Mir Russian village commune. Miri Ottoman Government owned properties, usually land. Mufti Islamic legal scholar. Mülk Ottoman private property, usually land. Müsellem Ottoman landholding light cavalry. Narodna Odbrana “National Defense Society” (Serbian); early twentieth-century Serbian nation- alist organization supporting nationalist activities outside of Serbia. Nazami Cedid Early nineteenth-century westernized Ottoman military force. Papa High, honorific Ottoman title of rank; high military rank (e.g., a general). Philike hetairia “Society of Friends” (Greek); nineteenth-century Greek émigré nationalist- revolutionary organization. Posveta “Enlightenment” (Bosnian Serb); early twentieth-century Bosnian Serb nationalist-cultural organization primarily supported by Narodna Odbrana (which see). Pronoia Byzantine conditional military landholding. GLOSSARY xxxiii

Reaya “Flock” (Turkish); originally all subjects of the Ottoman state, later restricted to non-Muslims only. Samizdat “Self-published” (Slavic acronym); anti-Communist dissident literature. Sancak “Banner” (Turkish); Ottoman original military-administrative unit forming a major subdivision of a province. Sancakbeyi Commander-governor of a sancak (which see). Securitate Romanian Communist security and secret police force. Periat Islamic Sacred Law. Peyülislam “Leader of Islam” (Turkish); chief judge and enforcer of Islamic laws. Sipahi Ottoman cavalryman, either fief-holding or salaried. Sipahilik Ottoman military fief system. Skupstina Serbian national assembly. Sporazum Yugoslavian Croatian autonomous territory (1939). Subranie Bulgarian national assembly. Sufi Mystical school of Islam. Sultan Ottoman imperial title. Sunni Muslim belief based on the four recognized “orthodox” legal schools of Islam. Tanzimat Ottoman nineteenth-century adaptive reform movement and reform group. Theme Byzantine regional army; Byzantine province. Timar Ottoman small-size sipahilik fief (see Sipahilik). Tsar Bulgarian and Russian male imperial title. Tsarina Bulgarian and Russian female imperial title. Ulema Islamic learned religious leadership class. Ustase Croatian ultranationalist terrorist organization. Vakif Ottoman income-producing property bestowed on religious establishments as endowments in perpetuity. Vali Highest ranking Ottoman provincial commander of professional military forces. Veliki Knez Medieval Serbian ruling prince. Veliki Zupan Early medieval Serbian ruling prince. Vezir Ottoman governor-general or commander-in-chief. Vilayet Nineteenth-century Ottoman province. Vladika Montenegrin title for the ruling prince-bishop. Voievod Romanian princely title. Voynuk Horse breeder for the Ottoman imperial stables and the military. Yamak Ottoman auxiliary Janissary. Yaya Ottoman irregular (auxiliary) infantry. Yürük Turkic nomadic pastoral tribe. Zadruga Serbian extended communal family. Zakonik Medieval Serbian civil law code, issued under Car Stefan Dusan. Zeamet Medium-size Ottoman sipahilik fief (see Sipahilik). Zimma Guarantee of protection granted by Muslim authorities to their non-Muslim subjects under the periat (which see). Zimmi “Protected persons” (Turco-Arabic); non-Muslims subject to Muslim rule and protected by zimma (which see), usually denoting an inferior status. Zupan Serbian princely title.