Information to Users

Home , 1913 in Croatia, Barbara Jelavich, Illyrian movement, Serbian Militia

INFORMATION TO USERS

This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of computer printer.

The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction.

In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.

Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand comer and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in reduced form at the back of the book.

Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6” x 9” black and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order. UMI A Bell & Howell Information Company 300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor MI 48106-1346 USA 313/761-4700 800/521-0600

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Reproduced with with permission permission of the of copyright the copyright owner. owner.Further reproduction Further reproduction prohibited without prohibited permission. without permission. ETHNIC NATIONALISM OR TRIBAL ENEMIES? NATIONAL

IMPULSES AND SEPARATIST TENDENCIES AMONG

THE SOUTH SLAVS THROUGH 1914

Andrew Gage Katkin

Submitted to the

Faculty of the College of Arts and Sciences

in Partial Fufillment of

the Requirements for the Degree

Master o f Arts

Chair: ames Mallov

Richard Breitman

Ik. Dean of the College

It Date

1997

The American University SCOT

Washington. D.C. 20016 UNIVERSITY LIBRARY

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. UMI Number: 13 87953

This microform edition is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.

UMI 300 North Zeeb Road Ann Arbor, MI 48103

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. ETHNIC NATIONALISM OR TRIBAL ENEMIES? NATIONAL

IMPULSES AND SEPARATIST TENDENCIES AMONG

THE SOUTH SLAVS THROUGH 1914

Andrew Gage Katkin

ABSTRACT

At the end of the twenty first century Yugoslavia was tom apart by vicious ethnic

rivalries. Many observers made light of the ancient origins of these rivalries and, in so

doing, cast doubts on the wisdom of ever having created a multi-ethnic, multi-lingual and

multi-faith state such as Yugoslavia.

Through the use of primary sources from the turn of the century, as well as a vast

array of secondary sources, this thesis seeks to debunk the myth of ancient hatreds and

critically examine the movement towards Yugoslav unity. In chapters tracing the

histories of the Yugoslav peoples and their respective periods of national awakenings, the

rise of a distinctly Yugoslav nationalism is chronicled. Substantive chapters on variations

in language, education and religion address the separatist tendencies inherent in such

differences as well attempts to minamalize these variants in order to construct a coherent

Yugoslav nationalism. In the end it is found that up to and beyond 1914 there was

substantial reason to believe that a unified Yugoslav state could succeed and thrive.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT...... ii

INTRODUCTION...... 1

Chapter

1. HISTORIES OF THE SOUTH SLAVS IN THE BALKANS...... 11

2. NATIONAL AWAKENINGS...... 26

3. LANGUAGE AND SOUTH SLAV NATIONALISM...... 62

4. EDUCATION ...... 75

5. RELIGION ...... 81

CONCLUSION...... 96

BIBLIOGRAPHY...... 105

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. INTRODUCTION

As the war in what was Yugoslavia comes to what can only be hoped to be a

lasting ending, many observers continue to ponder the origins of this period of

devastation and destruction. Much has been made of the historical differences among the

South Slavs.1 Some have gone so far as to suggest that it was folly for the multi-ethnic,

multi-cultural and multi-lingual state ever to have been created in 1918, that the "hatred"

between Muslims, Serbs and Croats, supposedly dating from before medieval times, was

too powerful for any conceivable similarities to overcome. A.J.P. Taylor asserts that in

1914 "every nationality in Austria except the Italians and a minority of the Germans,

preferred the Habsburg Monarchy to any conceivable alternative."2 Lawrence Goodrich

wrote in the Christian Science Monitor that "what is happening today in the Balkans is

nothing new. It is the continuation of the ethnic and religious hatreds that have swept the

region for centuries.. . ."3 U.S. Marine Corps Major Arthur L. Clark, in his book Bosnia:

'The South Slavs include the Serbs, Croats, Slovenes, and Bulgarians, as well as the less clearly defined national groups currently known as Bosnians, Montenegrins, and Macedonians.

2As quoted in Hans Kohn, "Reflections on Austrian History" The Austrian History Yearbook 1, (1965): 14.

3Lawrence J. Goodrich, "Old Animosities, Exploited Today, Underline Complex Balkan Puzzle." Christian Science Monitor. 17 May 1993, sec. 1:1. Goodrich goes farther in his article, asserting that: "the rule of the Balkans is: Everything for my ethnic group and nothing for yours. The group on top

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. What Every American Should Know, asserts that in Bosnia there are "religious, ethnic,

and political tensions that have simmered, and sometimes exploded violently, over

hundreds of years."4

When the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes, as Yugoslavia was originally

known, was formed in 1918 it was a nation of peoples who spoke seven different

languages, professed three major religious beliefs, and used two different alphabets.5 And

yet the nation’s borders were cemented and approved at the Paris Peace Conference that

concluded the following year. Was this creation a Frankenstein monster, doomed from

the start to be destroyed at the hands of its citizens?

This paper addresses the historical context as it existed in 1914 when, following

the assassination of Franz Ferdinand on June 28, the world was plunged into war. After

an examination of the early history, periods of national awakening, and the political

events of the century leading up to the First World War, the paper concludes that there

were substantial bases for optimism about national unity. While there were many

differences, and even some antagonisms, among the South Slavs, there were also many

now [presumably he is speaking of the Serbs who, at least in military terms, are the dominant force in the region] governs at the expense of the others; the groups out of power wreak vengeance when the power balance shifts." He then continues to the point of absurdity by professing that "People see themselves as Serbs, Romanians, or Albanians first and as individuals second."

4Arthur L. Clark. Bosnia: What Every American Should Know fNew York: Berkley Books, 1996), 1- 2 .

5Additionally there was still a limited use of the Arabic script among sections of the Islamic community in Bosnia.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. persuasive reasons for thoughtful observers at the time to believe that a united South Slav

state was both proper and prudent. One might remember that Frankenstein's monster was

created not by a madman but by a learned scientist who saw in the disparate parts the

inherent similarities capable of sustaining autonomous life.

Finally, just as the Frankenstein tale can tell us much about man’s relationship to

a rapidly industrializing society, the saga of Yugoslavia can be used to help us understand

the world around us. Yugoslavia is unique to a certain degree, but the universal

commonalities should not be overlooked. Particularly in eastern Europe, the struggle to

overcome non-organic differences left from centuries of foreign conquest, is a common

theme of every national unity movement. The Yugoslav saga offers a vivid picture both

of how to nurture these similarities and the surprising degree of flexibility that a

nationalist agenda can take. To be a Yugoslav one had to subordinate differences in

language, culture, and religion, just to name a few, to a larger national identity. Of course

modem Yugoslavia also provides us with a stark view of the consequences of allowing

the perception of difference to dominate the feeling of unity; just as scholars and policy

makers can learn from the history of Yugoslavia, they must also be sure to properly digest

the lessons of the present conflict.

Four years after the assassination of Franz Ferdinand, the European balance of

power broken by a World War in its final days, the Presidents, Prime Ministers, Kings

and Queens of the victorious powers began to ponder the fate, and new face, of Europe.

Yugoslavia, the most intricate of the new states established after the war, was a virtual

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 4

fait accompli even before the first day of the Paris Peace Conference. Of course by that

time the Yugoslav program had enjoyed four years of an aggressive, and highly effective,

publicity and propaganda machine fueled by the likes of R.W. Seton-Watson, Frano

Supilo, Ante Trumbic, and, occasionally even by the Serbian Kingdom, as represented by

the Prime Minister Nikola Pasic. But four years had done little to change the basic issues.

The language problems were still the same, as were the religious, cultural, and economic

differences between the soon to be "Yugoslav" peoples. Contemporary interest in the

history of these differences and their impact on separatist identities is certainly

understandable, but should not obfuscate awareness of similarities found in patterns of

domination, as well as linguistic and cultural structures in the region and of forces

impelling towards unification.

To fully understand the history of Yugoslavia it is critical to recognize that the

peoples who came together in a new state in 1918 had striking similarities as well as great

differences. In the end the differences may be seen to have foreshadowed the cataclysm

that destroyed the Yugoslav state; but post factum reasoning is always dangerously

simplified.6 Suppose the Basque or Catalonian separatist forces in Spain should succeed

in tearing apart that nation; would it then be said to have been foreordained for

destruction? What if the Northern League in Italy were to succeed? Would the visions of

6The scholar of nationalism, William Pfaff, calls this approach to attempting to comprehend modem conflicts, "mystification through history" and notes that the further back one sets the roots of a conflict, the less amenable the conflict seems to eventual resolution. See William Pfaff, "Invitation to War," Foreign Affairs 72, no. 3 (1993): 97-109.

i I _ .. . ______

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Garibaldi, Mazzinni, and Cavour be revealed as flawed? Could a resurgence of a

nationalist sentiment in some region of Germany prove that Bismarck's strategy of

unification was a blunder? Such contingencies must be viewed as genuine possibilities.

Nations are neither monolithic nor unchanging; history has proven that much. In 1914

forces inclining toward unity in the Balkans were sufficient to allow many thoughtful

persons in the region and abroad to believe that unification was feasible and desirable. In

1918 the truth of this was merely amplified. Yugoslavia was not doomed to fail any more

than Italy, Germany, Spain, or even the United States, have unchallengeable promises of

eternal national union. As with the Frankenstein monster, Yugoslavia was capable of

sustained life, despite the problems present at the moment of creation.

One striking characteristic of the nineteenth century was the growth of

nationalism in central Europe which had involved overcoming substantial differences in

culture, political structure, dialect, and religion to form "ethnically" related nations such

as Germany, Romania and Italy. Prior to the nineteenth century, ideas of Yugoslav unity

were seldom articulated in the Balkans. This was largely due, claims the historian Ivo J.

Lederer, "to the fact that there was little contact between Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes" at

the time. He goes on to hypothesize that "to the Orthodox world of Serbia and

Montenegro, Croatia seemed more distant than Russia."7 By the beginning of the

7Ivo J. Lederer, "Nationalism and the Yugoslavs" in Nationalism in Eastern Europe eds. Peter Sugar and Ivo J. Lederer (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1969), 411-412. There are, however, several demonstrable periods of increased harmony, and even a few radical thinkers who seemed to have envisioned Yugoslav unity in modem terms even before the French Revolution. Lederer’s article discusses several of these early radical thinkers. In particular look for his account of the life of the Archimandrite Jovan Rajic, who in 1794 argued forcefully for the shared kinship of all

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. twentieth century, however, the idea was known, if not fully embraced, by nearly the

entire South Slav population. As the late twentieth-century observer knows, periods of

dominant, though by no means ubiquitous, "Yugoslav" identity did indeed prevail for

relatively long periods throughout the century before the nation collapsed into civil war.

The central thesis of this paper is that the thoughtful viewer of Yugoslavism and

the Yugoslav issue in 1914 would have been cognizant of the differences and animosities

among the South Slavs, but would also have been aware of their deep similarities and the

power of mutually shared interests. This was a confluence that seemed to be part of the

nation-building process across Central Europe, and at the time there was reason to believe

that national union was a solution to the recurring explosive tensions within the Slavic

domain.

This paper is not strictly a discussion of the "Yugoslav Idea"; to attempt this in a

vacuum would be useless. Nor is it a study of the political developments that occurred

during the First World War to create Yugoslav nationalism.8 Finally, this paper will not

South Slavs and set about to prove his theory in a manuscript written and published in the vernacular. Also of note is the seventeenth century Croatian monk Juraj Krizanic who, like Bishop Strossmayer two hundred years later, sought to bridge the gap between east and west and reunite the Christian Church, and Pavao Ritter Vitezovic, a Croatian journalist, politician and publicist, who helped lay the foundation for the thesis that all South Slavs were of the same ethnic community with its own historical identity and unity.

8For more on the role of propaganda during World War One see Bela K. Kiraly, Nandor F. Dreisziger, and Albert F. Nofi, eds., War and Society in East Central Europe. Vol. XIX: East Central European Society in World War t (New York: Columbia University Press, 1985); Ivo Banac, "South Slav Prisoners of War in Revolutionary Russia" in War and Society in East Central Europe. Vol. V: Essavs on World War One: Origins and Prisoners of War eds., Samuel R. Williamson, Jr. and Peter Pastor (New York: Columbia University Press, 1983.); Eduard Benes, Mv War Memoirs (New York: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1928.); Stephen Borsody, "Hungary's road to Trianon: Peacemaking and

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. study the political developments that occurred during the war years that laid the ground

work for the creation of a Yugoslav state following the cessation of hostilities.9 The

focus of this paper is on the similarities and differences in Yugoslav history and in the

experiences of the various groups of South Slavs who came together in 1918 that made

"Yugoslavia" a feasible idea at the outbreak of World War One.

The paper begins with an examination of the early histories of the South Slavs.

Despite early separation and contrasting cultural patterns, these are people who share a

common ancestry. The historical fact of shared ethnicity is no less important to the

experience of the region than the record of disharmony. This chapter continues with a

study of the thousand-year period of foreign domination experienced throughout the

Balkan peninsula. Much has been made of the fact that the Serbs, for example, were

under Ottoman domination, while the Croats were under Habsburg control. These two

Empires were radically different and hundreds of years of domination by them left unique

marks upon the two post-colonial cultures. Again, however, there are significant patterns

of similarities that show through in these periods. Foreign domination, regardless of by

whom, has a tendency to lead to widespread feelings of oppression, cultural weakness,

Propaganda," in War and Society in East Central Europe: Vol VI: Essays on World War I: Total War and Peacemaking. A Case Study on Trianon eds., Bela K. Kiraly and Peter Pastor (New York: Columbia University Press, 1982.); Kenneth J. Calder, Britain and the Origins of the New Europe. 1914-1918 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1976.)

9For the best single work on this period see Dimitrije Djordjevic, ed., The Creation of Yugoslavia. 1914-1918 (Santa Barbara: Clio Books, 1980.)

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 8

and amplified national pride, particularly once the domination is thrown off. Among the

nationalities who came together in 1918, these feelings ran deep.

Next the period of national awakenings of the South Slavs, dated roughly from the

beginning of the nineteenth century to the start of the First World War, will be discussed.

Only limited attention will be paid to the smaller ethnic groups in Yugoslavia as it was

not uncommon for them not to have reached an independent period of awakening prior to

1914. Here too the differences are immediately apparent: the Serbs threw off domination

in a series of military revolts early in the nineteenth century and set up an independent

Kingdom; the Croats found their national revival in linguistic and cultural affirmation and

in their unique state right. But even in this period there are patterns of affinity, and

examples of individuals who worked towards developing national unity.

Chapter 3 discusses the multitude of attempts to foster South Slav unity through

linguistic reform and the homogenization of dialectical variations. While it is true that

Serbo-Croatian is a more or less uniform language, it was not always so.10 Prior to the

orthographic reforms of Vuk Karadzic (1787-1864) and Ljudevit Gaj (1809-1872), there

l0See, for example: Ricardo Picchio and Harvey Goldblatt, eds., Aspects of the Slavic Language Question, vol. 1. Church Slavonic - South Slavic - West Slavic (New Haven: Yale Concilium on International and Area Studies, 1984); Thomas Butler, "Yugoslavia's Slavic Languages: A Brief Historical Perspective," Review of National Literatures 5, no. 1 (1974); Thomas Butler, "The Origins of the War for a Serbian Language and Orthography," Harvard Slavic Studies 5 (1970): 1-81; Albert B. Lord, "The Nineteenth-Century Revival of National Literatures: Karadzic, Njegos, RadiCevic, the Illyrians, and PreSeren," Review of National Literatures 5, no. 1 (1974); Nikola R. Pribic, "Dositej Obradovic (1742 - 1811): Enlightenment, Rationalism, and the Serbian National Tongue." Canadian Review of Studies in Nationalism 10, no. I (1983); Christopher Spalatin, "The Rise of the Croatian Standard Language," Journal of Croatian Studies 16 (1975).

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 9

were numerous dialects in the South Slav lands. Moreover, a thousand years of rule

under different empires left the Serbs with a different alphabet than that of the Croats and

Slovenes. The pattern of dynamic tension between integrationalist linguistic reforms and

xenophobic efforts to use linguistic variation to amplify the differences among the South

Slav groups will also be discussed.

Chapter 4 concentrates on education, and to some extent, the lack of education

among the masses. Despite many cultural and historical similarities among the South

Slavs, and the growing integrationalist sentiments of many well-educated people, the

general populace was ignorant of the issues. In fact, it was not uncommon for Serbs, for

example, to grow up learning that all South Slavs were Serbs, or for Montenegrins to

know virtually nothing of their ethnic affiliation with Slovenes. Thus, no matter how

great the similarities and the intellectual sentiment for greater unity, the educational

policies of the respective states, hampered successful unification.

In Chapter 5 the role of religion in the development of South Slav nationalist

ideologies will be discussed. The Reformation and Counter-Reformation left serious

marks on Slovene national development. Similarly, Orthodoxy and Catholicism seriously

affected Serbian and Croatian national development; the clash between Orthodoxy and

Roman Catholicism was one of the catalysts in the growth of Serbo-Croat animosity.

Nevertheless, the motif of forces tending towards national unity developing alongside

intergroup distrust and conflict is reflected in the attempts of Bishop Juraj Strossmayer

(1815-1905), and others who worked to ease religious conflict. Such efforts were critical

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 10

to the development of an integrationalist nationalism."

A thorough knowledge of issues in Yugoslav History, language, education and

religion, while not the only areas of concern, afford us a great deal of insight into the

movement towards Yugoslav unity. When the Serbs, Croats and Slovenes finally joined

together in 1918 it was not a perfect union. Many differences still separated these

peoples, but the similarities, shared experiences and common ethnicity allowed for the

possibility of a mature, mutually beneficial, coexistence. Taken from the viewpoint of

1914, there was reason for little but optimism.

1 ‘Throughout the paper, particular attention will be paid to the Serbians, Croatians, and Slovenians, the three most nationally developed Yugoslav peoples, and the three who were at the core of the first Yugoslavia. The bias towards these peoples, while unfortunate, is necessary; among many of the peoples that made up Yugoslavia, nationalist ideas, both integrationalist and separatist, developed substantially later, and thus simply fall outside the parameters of this study. Neither the Bosnians nor the Macedonians, for example, developed a unique sense of nationality until the late 1980s. Other Yugoslav peoples, such as the minority populations of ethnic Hungarians, Czechs, Germans, Italians, and Albanians, had different concepts about nationalism, often believing themselves, and their territory, to belong to a different, possibly even non-Slavic, nation.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. CHAPTER 1: HISTORIES OF THE

SOUTH SLAVS IN THE BALKANS

The history of the South Slavs on the Balkan peninsula is strewn with foreign

invasions, wars, and religious conflict. As was often the case in the Balkans, foreign

powers were constantly occupying parts of the future Yugoslav nation. The result was

that not all of the Yugoslav peoples shared the same histories, religions, customs, or

languages. The Serbs, Montenegrins, and Bosnians, for example, were all under Ottoman

control by the end of the fifteenth century. The Serbs and Montenegrins successfully

revolted and established independent kingdoms in the nineteenth century; the Bosnian

peoples were bandied about between the Ottomans and Austrians during the nineteenth

century and did not experience independent statehood until 1991. The Croats and

Slovenes came under the domination of the Hungarian, and later the Austro-Hungarian

Empires. Neither were independent nations until 1989. The Macedonians ended a

twenty-year revolt against their Turkish suzerain in 1912, and following that their

territory was occupied and annexed by Bulgaria. The following year, in the Second

Balkan War, Serbia took possession of Macedonia, which did not become an independent

state within Yugoslavia until the Communist reorganization following World War Two.

j ______

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 12

Yugoslavia, itself, was not a nation until 1918.12 This brief historical sketch only begins

to scratch the surface; historical differences run deep among the South Slavs, but so too

do the similarities.

This chapter will briefly trace the history of the individual South Slavic ethnic

groups from the arrival of the first Slavic tribes, through their division into separate

communities, to the birth of their medieval Empires. Additional attention will be paid to

the period of foreign domination that accompanied the fall of the medieval Empires and

lasted, in varying degrees, up to the beginning of the First World War.

The Slavic tribes began to arrive in the Balkans early in the sixth century a.d.lj

The Slavic peoples (or Slavs as they have come to be known) encountered, and eventually

absorbed the Greek, Roman, and Celtic populations already present in the region.14

As the Slavs settled in the Balkans they became separated from one another -- a

phenomenon attributed to the geographic obstacles to free and rapid movement that exist

along the Balkan Peninsula -- and soon began to develop different histories and

l2The working name of the first union of South Slavs was originally the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes. In 1929 the Kingdom changed its name to Yugoslavia. It is common in academic works to use the name Yugoslavia for the pre-1929 period.

,3Jakov Bacic, "The Emergence of the Sklabenoi (Slavs), Their Arrival on the Balkan Peninsula, and the Role of the Avars in these Events. Revised Concept in a New Perspective." (Ph.D. diss., Columbia University, 1983), chap. 1.

l4Bacic, "Emergence of the Sklabenoi," chap. I.

I I

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 13

customs.15 The early distinctions among the Serbs, Croats, Slovenes, Bosnians.

Montenegrins, and Slavic (as opposed to ethnically non-Slavic) Macedonians are obscure,

but they held the seed of cultural differences that would grow to haunt the nation of

Yugoslavia throughout its short existence.16

Within a few decades of the initial migration the Slavs began to divide into

distinct communities, each occupying an independent area of the Balkans. It is from this

period that the terms Serb, Croat, Slovene, and Bosnian originate; they may have been

names of tribal leaders or the actual names of the early tribes.17 The Serbs and

Montenegrins settled near the bottom of the peninsula, the Croats in former Roman

territories farther to the North, the Slovenes still further north near the lands of the

Germanic princes, and the Bosnians roughly in the middle of the future state and along

the Dalmatian Coast.

Each tribe formed into a separate administrative unit, over a period of 700 years:

early contact with outside rulers was also substantially different. The Croatians. living in

conquered Roman territories, quickly came under foreign domination. In the late seventh

century, most of Croatia was conquered by the Byzantines who immediately began

l5Fred Singleton. A Short History of the Yugoslav Peoples (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985), 1, 10.

l6Naval Intelligence Division. B.R. 493A (Restricted’) Geographical Handbook Series: Jugoslavia: Volume II. History. Peoples, and Administration fNaval Intelligence Division, October 1944), 3.

17Ivo Banac, The National Question in Yugoslavia: Origins. History. Politics (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1984), 34.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 14

converting the population to Christianity. This situation lasted until 924 a.d. when

Tomislav (r. 910-ca. 928), a strong tribal leader from the Adriatic region, unified an

independent Croatian state.18 One year later Tomislav was recognized as the King of the

Croats by Pope John X.19

At virtually the same time, a Serb named Caslov (927-950) had gained control

over nearly all the Serbs in Serbia, Montenegro, and Bosnia.20 While Caslov managed to

build a substantial empire, he could not fend off the larger and more powerful Byzantines,

and was forced to recognize the Byzantine Emperor as his Suzerain around the year 950.21

Bosnian territory had been possessed by numerous foreign rulers, including

Serbian and Croatian, before it achieved any semblance of statehood. This would later

come back to poison Serbo-Croat unity movements as nationalists from each state

believed that Bosnia belonged to their state.22 The first native ruler of Bosnia was Kulin

Ban (r. 1180-1204), who in 1189 formed the first nominally independent, albeit small,

I8R.W. Seton-Watson, The Southern Slav Question and the Habsburg Monarchy (New York: Howard Fertig, 1969), 16.

19Banac, National Question In Yugoslavia. 35.

20Dimitrije Djordjevic, "The Serbs: A Historical Survey" in Landmarks in Serbian Culture and History: Essavs ed. Vasa D. Mihailovich (Pittsburgh: Serb National Federation, 1983), 2.

21 Djordjevic, "The Serbs: A Historical Survey," 2.

22 A common contention of both Serbian and Croatian nationalists that the Islamic Bosnians were Serbs, or Croats as the case may be, who had accepted Islam while under Turkish rule.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 15

Bosnian state.

The first Slovene kingdom emerged in 627 a.d. under Prince Samo (r. 623-658).2j

In 748 the Slovenes backed a failed Bavarian attempt to separate from the Frankish

Empire. The result was the incorporation of the Slovene lands into the Frankish

Empire.24 The Slovenes attempted to revolt against Frankish rule in 772. but were

quickly subdued.25

Through much of its early history Montenegro was simply a part of the Serbian

Empire. The earliest recorded independent Montenegrin territory dates to 1355 when,

after the death of the Serbian Emperor Stephen Dusan (r. 1331-1355), Montenegro

23Accurate historical records for the South Slavs are not available from the seventh century, but some scholars believe that the Slovene King Samo may have united most or all of the South Slavic tribes under his leadership. See, for example, Griffith Taylor, "The Geographical Scene" in Yugoslavia ed. Robert J. Kemer, (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1949), 7.

24The fact that the Slovenes were incorporated into the Frankish Empire in 772, while the rest of the South Slavs were not, seems to indicate that the large estimates of the size of the early Slovene empire may be exaggerated.

^From 772 until 1918 the term "Slovenia" ceased to have relevance as anything but a historical term. The Slovene peoples were not grouped into a single administrative unit, but rather they were spread out across the Crownlands of Camiola, where, in 1910, they made up over 90 percent of the population, and Carinthia and Styria where they comprised between 20 and 30 percent of the population. Some 68,000 additional Slovenes lived in the Prekemuije and Medjumuije administrative districts of south-western Hungary. For more on the proportional representation of various ethnic minorities in the Habsburg Empire's Crownlands please see: Robert A. Kann, The Multinational Empire: Nationalism and National Reform in the Habsburg Monarchy. 1848-1918 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1950), 299-307; For information on the Slovene attempt to resist Frankish expansion see: Pavle D. Ostovic. The Truth About Yugoslavia (New York: Roy Publishers, 1952), 37.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 16

splintered off from the Serbian Empire.26 After the fall of Serbia to the Turks in 1389

many Serbs sought shelter in Montenegro, thus further obfuscating the ethnic divide.

Even at this juncture, however, it would be inaccurate to refer to the Montenegrin

territory as a state.27 As Milovan Djilas wrote in his study of the great nineteenth-century

Prince-Bishop Njegos of Montenegro, "[T]he very name Montenegro . . . referred to a

region and to a feudal holding, and not to a state."28 For approximately 50 years

following Dusan's defeat some semblance of independence was maintained in

Montenegro, but Turkish forces were not to be held back indefinitely.

Finally, Macedonia, as a geographic term denoting a primarily South Slavic

territory or its inhabitants, has only come into use in this century. Prior to this the term

was used almost exclusively to describe the Greek Kingdom of King Phillip (r. 359-336

b.c.) and Alexander the Great (356-323 b.c.).29 Besides Greece, all of the major powers

“ Despite this clear break from Serbia in the fourteenth century, Montenegrins to this day feel a strong affinity between themselves and Serbs; their language is nearly identical and until this century most Montenegrins simply "thought of themselves as Serbs." See: Banac, National Question in Yugoslavia. 45.

27Alan Ferguson, in his study of Montenegrin society at the turn of the nineteenth century, notes that the phenomenon of statehood in Montenegro is not "clearly discernible until the 1830s." See Alan Ferguson, "Montenegrin Society 1800-1830" in Balkan Society in the Age of Greek Independence, ed. Richard Clogg (Totowa: Barnes & Noble Books, 1981,) 225.

28Milovan Djilas, Niegos: Poet. Prince. Bishop. (New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc., 1966), 255.

29For an excellent article on Greek nationalism and its ties to the concept of Macedonia, see: Jerry Augustinos, "The Dynamics of Modem Greek Nationalism: The "Great Idea" and the Macedonian Problem," East European Quarterly 6, no. 4 (1972): 444-454.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 17

in the region owned substantial tracts of territory in the area prior to the arrival of the

Turkish armies, and continued, some to this day, to claim the territory as part of "Greater

Serbia," "Greater Albania," or "Greater Bulgaria." When the Turks arrived in the late

fourteenth century, most of what is modem day Macedonia was in the Serbian Empire of

Stefan Dusan, while the city of Skopje, in present day Macedonia, was the seat of the

Serbian King.30 Following his defeat the Ottoman Empire gained suzerainty of the region

and maintained it as an administrative unit until 1912. Its borders are contested to this

day, and to avoid offending the neighboring Greeks, whose affinity for Macedonia has

been mentioned, it has been forced to operate under the awkward name. The Former

Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. For historical purposes it is more useful to view

Macedonia as a geographic phenomenon such as the Great Plains or the Sahara Desert

than as a political structure.

Prior to the Middle Ages there was already evidence of the burgeoning formation

of unique characteristics among the more cohesive new Slavic tribes. The Slovenes had

early ties with many Germanic peoples, a tradition that lasted for centuries, and, with the

fall of communism has been largely resurrected. Conversely, the Serbs, affected by the

Byzantine culture, have maintained a distinctly eastern outlook. These differences, while

perhaps not insurmountable, are socially significant and must be recognized by anyone

30Miodrag B. Petrovich, "The Serbian Tsar Stephen Dushan The Mighty" in Landmarks in Serbian Culture and History: Essavs ed. Vasa D. Mihailovich (Pittsburgh: Serb National Federation, 1983): 42-54.

1 ______

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 18

who seeks to understand whether Yugoslavia should have been created, let alone why it

fell apart.

That said, however, there are also significant similarities in the early histories of

the Slavic tribes. The Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes are three related cultures that early in

their histories developed independent states against great odds. Each was forced to utilize

creative diplomacy in attempts to maintain its independence, and each, to some degree,

failed. Soon, however, some of these states revitalized themselves. The result were

impressive medieval empires which, for a time, were both sizable and puissant.

Particularly in the Balkans, nineteenth- and twentieth-century nationalist

propagandists place much importance on the medieval states and the myths and legends

that surround them. In each case this is because territorially and politically the period

when each state was at its apex came in the Middle Ages. Thus, an extreme Croatian

nationalist can attempt to justify desires to occupy Bosnia, Slovenia, and even parts of

Serbia. At some point most of the modem states of Croatia, Serbia, Bosnia, and Bulgaria

occupied most or all of each other, though often for only a few short years between

conquests of a dominant empire.

Croatia, Serbia, and Bosnia each established substantially impressive states in the

Middle Ages. Croatia's period of medieval independence began with the crowning of

King Tomislav in 924 a.d., and the state reached its territorial apex one hundred and fifty

years later. By 1300 the Serbs had become a fully autonomous Empire and were a major

force in the politics of the region. The Serbian Empire reached its apex, both territorially

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 19

and politically, under Emperor Stephen Dusan; his Empire held all of Serbia, Albania,

Macedonia, and Bosnia, and parts of Croatia, Greece, and Bulgaria.31 Before his death

Dusan held the title of "Tsar and Autocrat of the Serbs, Greeks, Bulgarians, and

Albanians."32 Bosnia reached its political and territorial zenith under the rule of Stephen

I Tvrtko (r. 1353-1391). After the death of the Serbian King Dusan in 1355, Tvrtko won j [ over many of the Serbian feudal lords and had himself crowned King of Serbia. In I addition he managed to acquire the crowns of Bosnia. Dalmatia, Croatia, and Rascia.JJ

This empire, based in Bosnia, was the closest thing to a unified South Slav state until

1918.

While the Slavic Medieval Empires in the Balkans were quite impressive, they

were uniformly short lived. From the north came attacks from the more powerful

German princes and alliance with the Hungarian Kingdom; the South of the peninsula

was similarly devastated by the seemingly unstoppable Ottoman Empire. Many of the

most exploited geographic claims of South Slav nationalists can be traced to the

geographic fluctuations that accompanied the tumultuous years before the region was

entirely overrun.

Croatia lost its independence when the royal lineage died out in the late eleventh

3lPetrovich, "Dushan The Mighty," 47; and Banac, National Question in Yugoslavia. 37.

32Banac, National Question in Yugoslavia. 37.

33Mihailo Cmobmia. The Yugoslav Drama (Montreal: McGill University Press, 1994), 35.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 20

century. When no suitable heir could be found the crown was handed over to the

Hungarian King, thus creating a legalized vassal relationship for the young Croatian

state.34 Not until 1918 would it end its affiliation with the Hungarians. Serbia, on the

other hand, lost its independence on the battlefield. On June 28, 1389, the Serbs and

Turks collided at Kosovo where the Serbian forces were catastrophically defeated, and

the Turks turned the kingdom of Serbia into a vassal state.35 The subsequent Turkish

34When Croatian society revitalized in the nineteenth century, much was made of the fact that the Croat state had certain legal rights granted in their negotiations with the Hungarians, as well as an intrinsic "state right". These distinctly legal arguments were uniquely characteristic of the Croatian revival as none of the other states in the region had maintained even a semblance of continued, autonomous, legal existence, nor did they have precedence for total independent action within a Diet. Ironically, the Croats often felt alienated from their Slavic cousins by their unique legal situation. No one else could fight their captors in the courts of law and, thus, they had no use for, and frequently no more understanding of, Croatia's tactics. For more please see Emilio Pallua, "A Survey of the Constitutional History of the Kingdom of Dalmatia, Croatia, and Slavonia," Canadian American Slavic Studies 24. no. 2(1990): 129-154.

35It is interesting to note that June 28 is a monumental day for Serbia. Besides being the anniversary of the Battle of Kosovo, it was the day when Franz Ferdinand was assassinated in 1914, the day the Versailles treaty — which officially created The Kingdom o f Serbs, Croats and Slovenes — was signed in 1919, the day the first Yugoslav constitution was introduced in 1921 and the day when Stalin broke off diplomatic relations with Tito's regime in 1948.

Sadly, many examples of Serbs attempting to refight Kosovo can be found in the modem Yugoslav conflict. After the ethnic cleansing of the town of Zvomik in northeastern Bosnia, for example, the Serbian mayor rejoiced over the eradication of remains of the village's population that had converted to Islam hundreds of years earlier. After passing through the rubble of the town it was reported that he stopped at a cross and declared: "The Turks destroyed the Serbian church that was here when they arrived in Zvomik in 1463. Now we are rebuilding the church and reclaiming this as Serbian land forever and ever."

For more on Kosovo see: Thomas A. Emmert, Serbian Golgotha: Kosovo. 1389 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1990); Neil J. Kressel, Mass Hate: The Global Rise of Genocide and Terror (New York: Plenum Press, 1996); and Marko Markovic, "The Secret of Kosovo" in Landmarks in Serbian Culture and History: Essavs ed. Vasa D. Mihailovich (Pittsburgh: Serb National Federation, 1983.)

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 21

domination of Montenegro and Macedonia has already been mentioned. A few years

later the Ottoman forces had advanced to Bosnian borders. Between 1463 and 1483 the

entire Bosnian Empire was conquered by the Turks.

The fact that the Serbs, Montenegrins, Macedonians, and Bosnians were

| conquered by the Ottomans, while the Croats and Slovenes came under Hungarian and

• German suzerainty, respectively, is perhaps the single most important fact in attempting

to analyze the potential success of a Yugoslav federation. From this split came lingering

differences in all walks of life, from social customs, to dialect and dress. More than any

political or religious differences, these social differences made the long term cohesion of

the South Slavs increasingly intricate. Linguistic, religious, and even "nationalist"

differences are always easier to overcome when dealing with someone who is perceived

as socially equal and desirable.36

Perhaps the best indicator of how different life was for the northern Yugoslavs, as

compared to those under Ottoman rule, is the vast differences in economic conditions.

The Slovenes and Croats benefitted greatly from Habsburg economic development; both

were industrialized, accorded public works programs, and made literate at rates unheard

of among the other South Slavic peoples.37 The Serbs and other South Slavic peoples

36The European Union clearly demonstrates how even well formed nation states can find common ground on which to affiliate provided that they do not have to join with their poorer, frequently ostracized, neighbors.

37Dedijer, Vladimir, Ivan Bozic, Sima Cirkovic, and Milorad EkmeCic, eds.. History of Yugoslavia (New York: McGraw - Hill, 1974), 360-361 and 552. The demographic changes that accompany industrialization have been particularly relevant in Yugoslavia where the north has been historically

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 22

under Ottoman rule, were less fortunate. Ottoman wealth, while at times great, did not

reach into its Slavic domains.38 Public works programs in most towns rarely went beyond

construction of a mosque or, where applicable, a bridge.39 By the eighteenth century the

Ottoman Empire was in serious economic straits. The Christians living under Ottoman

rule bore the brunt of this drastic decline.40 Even in Montenegro, an area never fully

conquered by the Ottomans, the constant guerrilla warfare forced the Montenegrins to

live cloistered existences.41 Economies could function in only their most rudimentary

richer and more industrialized, thus more urban and "cosmopolitan", than the South, a condition that remains to this day.

38Gale Stokes, "Dependency and the Rise of Nationalism," and Leften Stavrianos, The Balkans, 1815 - 1914.chap. 2.

39For a marvelous, literary description of economic circumstances, among other distinct characteristics of life under Ottoman rule, see Ivo Andric. The Bridge on the River Drina. trans. Lovett F. Edwards (New York: Macmillan, 1959.)

40For more on the decline of Ottoman strength in the eighteenth century, see: Peter Sugar, "Unity and Diversity in the Lands of Southeastern Europe in the Eighteenth Century" in War and Society in East Central Europe. Vol. II: East Central European Society and War in the Pre-Revolutionary Eighteenth Century ed. Gunther E. Rothenberg, Bela Kiraly, and Peter Sugar (New York: Columbia University Press, 1982,) 255-271.

‘‘'There is in fact no simple agreement in the literature concerning Montenegro’s status during the years between roughly 1450 and 1700. Pavle Ostovic, in his book, The Truth About Yugoslavia, states that Montenegro was "nominally a Turkish province." (p. 34). Paul Mojzes, however, states in his book Yugoslav Inferno that Montenegro was "entirely surrounded" by the Ottomans, but that they were never "able to conquer entirely this remote section of the Balkan peninsula." (p. 37). Finally, Stephen Pawlovitch, one of the most respected U.S. authorities on Balkan history, writes in his book Yugoslavia that "By 1459 the Turks had taken over Serbia... Montenegro, kept up the struggle until the end of the century." (p. 30).

In the face of such controversy it may seem imprudent to offer an opinion on the true nature of affairs in Montenegro, but I will attempt one nonetheless. It seems reasonable from the varied reports to

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. manner under such circumstances, and industrialization, or any large scale economic

development program, was inconceivable.42

Lingering economic backwardness was not the only damaging remnant of

Ottoman rule; in Bosnia the Turks introduced Islam as well as an administrative program

(the millet system) that established patterns for determining "national" affiliation. Under

this system membership in a nation was determined by religious affiliation, rather than

through a common history, language, or "ethnicity." Thus, those who converted to Islam

established for themselves a unique national affiliation, whereas those residents who

maintained their Orthodox or Catholic affiliations were considered part of a different

nation, often even the Croat or Serb nation, albeit on Bosnian soil.43 In the long run this

assume that much o f Montenegro was under Turkish control, and for administrative reasons the Turks may have considered themselves masters of this region. However, owing to its relative distance from power centers, and the fact that its terrain is the most mountainous anywhere in Yugoslavia. Montenegro would be very difficult to ever totally occupy by force. Obviously there were many pockets of resistance. Some of these pockets may have been substantially large enough for the residents to carry on life as if the Turks were a million miles away. In short, the Turks may have claimed to possess the territory, but in all likelihood it was the Montenegrins who were the masters of their own fates.

Finally a word of caution. It would be incorrect to assume that Montenegro's resistance to Turkish forces is evidence of a national awakening or even a desire to live together in a shared community. In fact, the Montenegrins, well into the twentieth century, seemed to be far more concerned with their tribal communities and were little more willing to surrender any of "their anarchic freedom to domestic central authority than they had been to 'the Turk.’" Quoted in Alan Ferguson, "Montenegrin Society". 205.

42Nicholas V. Gianaris, Geopolitical and F.conomic Changes in the Balkan Countries (London: Praeger, 1996), 86.

43Tone Bringa, Being Muslim the Bosnian Wav: Identity and Community in a Central Bosnian Village (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1995), 20-23.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 24

would be a fatal development for Bosnia as it kept its non-Muslim citizens from finding

reason to develop a sense of Bosnian nationality44

The Balkan peoples were ruled for long periods by two non-assimilative multi

national Empires between the late Middle Ages and the end of the First World War.

These agglomerations lacked the technological and institutional facilities needed to

integrate and unify their subjects across geographical and cultural boundaries. Thus, the

South Slavs managed to maintain much of their unique cultural identification.45 But even

in non-assimilative states, certain residual characteristics remained, particularly during

long periods of forced domination and, in some cases, virtual colonialism. Among these

are differences in cultural backgrounds, economies, religions, styles of governance, and.

to some degree, even languages.

The history of the region also reveals strong commonalities among the South

Slavs. In the coming years the most important of these would be a growing desire to

throw off the foreign yoke. In their respective struggles the South Slavs were often able

44 At the turn of the twentieth century, there were 400,000 "Croats" and 850,000 "Serbs" living in Bosnia. In discussions of Bosnia I have chosen to place the commonly used names of the ethnic groups in quotations in an effort to diminish their otherwise concrete nature. In Bosnia there can be no clear delineation along ethnic groups. Not all Catholics believed themselves to be Croats, nor did all of the followers of Orthodoxy believe themselves to be Serbs. This was true for the period prior to the formation of Yugoslavia and it is equally true today. Moreover, when relying on religious classifications to determine ethnicity, the Muslims become a perfect conundrum; they can not be placed into any category and yet few outside observers, and even fewer among the Serbs and Croats, have wanted to provide them with their own, Bosnian, ethnicity. This is now, finally, being created, though only under the most vicious of situations.

4SLeften S. Stavrianos, The Balkans. 1815 - 1914 (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston). 9.

i .. . . ______

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 25

to look to one another for support, thus increasing knowledge among the populace about

their ethnic similarities, and sometimes prompting discussions about eventual unification.

While it is possible to see the differences in this period as more numerous than the

similarities, it is important to remember that all of these differences were the non-organic

result of forced occupation; the Serbs and Croats may have used different alphabets and

experienced different living standards, but their shared ethnic heritage could not be

denied.

Finally it is critical to notice that in this period there are no discemable tensions or

antagonisms between the South Slavs. Those who attempt to portray modem conflicts in

the Balkans as a result of hundreds of years of hatred would do well to more closely

examine the history of the region.

______

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. CHAPTER 2: NATIONAL AWAKENINGS

In the early nineteenth century several of the Yugoslav peoples grew increasingly

resentful of foreign domination. Their frustrations were expressed differently in different

regions; some degree of difference was to be expected as regaining power from different

empires under varied circumstances required the use of differing tactics. National

awakenings were especially acrimonious in this period in the South Slav lands as each

ethnic group began to define its own boundaries, both geographically and intellectually.46

Efforts to bring other South Slavs into an enlarged state or a new union, with or without

their approval, were often at the core of new national programs. Attitudes of cultural

superiority were present among nearly all of the leaders of the awakening societies, and

brought with them fear, distrust, and factionalism among the South Slavs who saw in the

ambitions of their neighbors the possibility of living yet again under what could be

perceived to be "foreign" rule. Attitudes of cultural superiority and the concomitant inter

group fears of domination have been an element of the culture of the Balkans to the

present day, and current circumstances in what was Yugoslavia do not augur well for

^In discussions of national awakenings and particularly with regards to nationalist programs or prejudice, it is crucial to remember that these positions were largely confined to the small segment of society that was literate or educated. The vast majority of Serbs knew almost nothing of Slovenes in the nineteenth century and vice-versa with the Slovenes.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 27

change.

Differences, and even antagonisms, can be found in the South Slav national

awakenings of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries; but it is also possible to see

great historical similarities. Attempts to throw off domination are arguably parallel

experiences, carrying with them important structural similarities regardless of the foreign

power involved. Even the most extreme programs of Greater Croatia and Greater Serbia

(to use the clearest examples) shared the belief that all South Slavs had a single ethnicity.

The Serbs preferred to call them all Serbians, and the Croats called them Croatians. The

potential to produce intergroup conflict is clear, but the importance of shared belief in

national unity, present in almost all of the nationally aware political platforms of the

period, is a powerful indicator of the potential success of a South Slavic union, and helps

to explain why, by 1914, there was a plausible basis for the widespread belief that

nationhood, of some sort, was a feasible alternative in a politically volatile region of

Europe.

Croatia

During the Napoleonic wars Croat troops fought under the Habsburg flag until

1809 when French troops defeated the Habsburgs at the Battle of Wagram. Defeat forced

the Habsburgs to hand over the city of Trieste, the county of Gorizia, the province of

Camiola, large parts of the provinces of Carinthia and Croatia, as well as six of Croatia's

I ______

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 28

military districts, Austrian Istria, and various islands in the Adriatic.47 Napoleon

organized these areas into the Province of Illyria, with a capital in Ljubljana (in modem

day Slovenia), and incorporated them directly into the French Empire.48 The

reorganization of the region swept away all traces of Habsburg bureaucracy and

introduced the ideas and institutions of the French Revolution. In addition, several major

public works projects were begun, and native language schools and newspapers were

introduced.49 These changes, while ephemeral, had a major impact on both the Croatian

and Slovenian attitudes towards the Habsburg Empire, and are often credited with

planting the seed of national unity among the northern Yugoslavs.50

47During Hungary's long affiliation with Croatia there were frequent attempts to break Croatia into multiple units, thus subtracting from the perceived strength and unity of the Croatian nation. For more on this trend, and particularly on the creation and rule o f the Croatian military districts, please see: Gunther E. Rothenberg, The Military Borders in Croatia. 1740 - 1881: A Study of an Imperial Institution (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1966); For more on the Battle of Wagram see: Pavle D. Ostovic, The Truth About Yugoslavia. 38.

48Barbara Jelavich, History of the Balkans: Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries: Volume 1 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983), 162.

49Frank J. Bundy, The Administration of the Illvrian Provinces of the French Empire. 1809 - 1913 (New York: Garland Publishers, 1987), passim.

soSee, for example: Susana S. Macesich, "The Illyrian Provinces: A Step Towards Yugoslavism," Southeastern Europe 1, no. 2 (1974): 128-157; Leopoldina Plut-Pregelj, "The Illyrian Provinces: The South Slavs and the French Revolution," in Donald D. Horward and John C. Horgan, eds.. The Consortium on Revolutionary Europe. 1750-1850. Proceedings. 1989 to Commemorate the Bicentennial o f the French Revolution (Tallahassee: Rose Printing Co., 1990), 603-604; Jill Benderly and Evan Kraft, eds., Independent Slovenia: Origins. Movements. Prospects (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1994); Elinor M. Despalatovic, Liudevit Gaj and the Illvrian Movement (Boulder: East European Monographs, 1975), 2, 22; Seton-Watson, The South Slav Question: Leften S. Stavrianos, Balkan Federation: A History of the Movement Toward Balkan Unitv in Modem Times (Hamden: Archon Books, 1964), 23.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 29

After Napoleon's defeat, the Congress of Vienna returned the Habsburg territories.

Austria sought to impose greater unification on her territories by attempting to introduce

German as the national language. Croatia and Hungary joined forces to veto this

proposal, but soon afterwards the Hungarians attempted to force the Croatians to use the

Magyar language in a "mistaken belief that no human or national rights were violated if

the use of the non-Magyar language was limited to private life."51 The Croats tried to

counter Magyarization with an alternative national program, Illyrianism, at the core of

which was a common, South Slav, language, based on the popular Stokavian dialect.

The Illyrian program asserted the fraternity of the South Slav peoples, particularly

the Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes. The use of the term "Illyrian,” and later "Yugoslav.”

allowed the Illyrians to attract a more diverse following than would likely have been

possible under any existing ethnic name. Despite this, the Illyrian movement was popular

only in Croatia. Residents of Slovenia. Bosnia, and Serbia found little compelling in the

program. Within Croatia, however, the Illyrians were able to contribute to the emerging

5lBy 1840, despite protests, Magyar had officially superseded Latin as the official language of the Hungarian Diet. All speeches delivered in languages other than Magyar were to be regarded as not having been made. In 1843 Magyar was made the official language of the government, legislature, official business, and, at least theoretically, of public education. In 1848 the Magyar Parliament passed the Magyar Language Law which effectively removed Latin as the language of governance in the political relationship between Croatia and Hungary. For cited quote see: George Barany, "The Awakening of Magyar Nationalism before 1848," The Austrian History Yearbook 2 (1966): 37. All other references are found in: R. W. Seton-Watson, German. Slav, and Magyar A Study in the Origins of the Great War (London: Williams andNorgate, 1916), 26-27; R.W. Seton-Watson, Racial Problems in Hungary (New York: Howard Fertig, 1972), 42-43; and Mario Spalatin, "The Croatian Nationalism of Ante Starievic, 1845- 1871." Journal of Croatian Studies 16 (1975): 42.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 30

sense of nationhood, particularly in regards to language.52

During the revolutionary year of 1848 the Hungarians attempted to create a legal

separation from the Austrian Empire, and under the reign of Louis Kossuth (1802-1894)

that was nearly accomplished.53 Kossuth pushed too far, however, when he insisted that

all inhabitants of "Greater Hungary" were to begin using the Magyar language. The

Croats, Serbs, Romanians, Slovaks, and Germans -- who outnumbered the Magyars in

"Greater Hungary" -- did not see Kossuth as their leader, and mobilized their forces.54

Baron Josip Jelacic (1801-1859) was appointed by the Habsburg Emperor as the "Ban of

Croatia and Slavonia, Governor of Dalmatia and Rijeka, and Supreme Commander of all

Croatian troops."55 His troops "invaded" Hungary on September 14, 1848.56 The Croats

were quickly defeated but so too was Kossuth's claim to the legality of his independence;

Hungarian troops were simultaneously swearing allegiance to, and fighting a war against.

52For more on the Illyrian program and its role in the linguistic reform movements of the nineteenth century, see Chapter 3: Language and South Slav Nationalism.

53For an excellent history of Kossuth's rule see: Istvan Deak, The Lawful Revolution: Louis Kossuth and the Hungarians. 1848 - 1849 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1979.)

54Deak, Lawful Revolution. 351.

55Ivan Babic, "Military History" in Croatia: Land. People. Culture. 2 vols. ed. Francis H. Eterovich and Christopher Spalatin (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1964), vol. 1, 147.

“ For an excellent history of Croatia's war against Hungary see: Gunther E. Rothenberg, "Jelacic, the Croatian Military Border, and the Intervention against Hungary in 1848," The Austrian History Yearbook 1 (1965): 45-68.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Hungary.

Soon afterwards the new Austrian Emperor Franz Joseph (1848 - 1916) asked for

assistance from the Russians, and with their help the Hungarian revolution was crushed.'7

Jelacic probably assumed that Croatia's substantial efforts against Hungary would be

rewarded by the Emperor. Instead, Austria chose to pacify the vanquished by granting

her special status within the Monarchy, rather than reward the victor. A key feature of the

agreement, commonly known as the Ausgleich of 1867, was that Austria would rule over

the German portion of the Monarchy while the Magyars would have authority over the

other assorted nationalities.58 A common feeling among the Croats was that they received

as a reward that which the Magyars received as a punishment.

In the following year Croatia negotiated an agreement, known as the Nagodba,

with Hungary in order to effect devolution of power within the new Austro-Hungarian

57Peter II of Montenegro seems to have been the only Balkan leader who saw the potential for a Yugoslav program in 1848. He sensed that Jeladic had the ability to effect national union at this juncture, and on December 20, 1848, he wrote to Jeladic urging him to adopt an independent Yugoslav policy: "Mysterious fate, illustrious Ban, has placed you at the head of the South Slavs. You have just saved the Habsburgs, their dynasty, in fact everything, and as a reward they put Dalmatia under a yoke of fire ... occupy Dalmatia at once and let us unite.. . I am ready to come to your aid with my Montenegrins." Jeladic sent back an evasive reply, referring to the necessity of taking into consideration the European diplomatic situation. Jelacic's reply was baffling to the Montenegrin Prince. "I had hoped for an instant," he wrote to Count Pozza of Ragussa, "but I am convinced that Yugoslavism for the moment, is only an empty word. All is useless, since our brothers do not understand the word liberty." See Stavrianos, Balkan Federation. 60.

58Robert A. Kann, "The Austro-Hungarian Compromise of 1867 in Retrospect. Causes and Effect" in Per Osterreichisch Ungarische Ausgleich. 1867: Materialien CReferate und Diskussion) der Intemationalen Konferenz in Bratislava 28. 8. - 1.9. 1967 ed. Anton Vantuch (Bratislava: Der Slowakischen Akademie Der Wissenshaften, 1971).

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Empire.59 Croatia was granted autonomy in matters of legislation, internal affairs, justice,

and education. Military, economic, and financial affairs were to be dealt with under joint

control.60 It soon became obvious, however, that Croat autonomy would be minimal at

best.61 In addition, the Ban, or governor, of Croatia was to be appointed by the Emperor

upon the recommendation of the Hungarian Prime Minister and was to be responsible to

the Hungarian Government.62 In short, the Nagodba assured Croatian autonomy while

maintaining its status as a vassal to the Magyar state.

Following the revolutionary year of 1848, and particularly after the neglect of

Croatian interests in 1867 and 1868, the Illyrian party began to splinter. The

manifestation most akin to the original Illyrian movement came to be known as the

Yugoslav movement and was headed by Bishop Juraj Strossmayer. The central tenet of

this program was religious cohesion.6j

59A translated text of the "Hungarian - Croatian Compromise" is provided in Seton-Watson. The Southern Slav Question. Appendix VI, 361 - 379. See also Pallua, "Constitutional History of the Kingdom of Dalmatia, Croatia, and Slavonia."

“ Seton-Watson, Southern Slav Question. Appendix VI. 361 - 379.

61 Robert A. Kann and Zdenek V. David. A History of East Central Europe. Volume VI: The Peoples of the Eastern Habsburg Lands. 1526-1918 (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1984). 397-400.

“ Gabor P. Vermes, "South Slav Aspirations and Magyar Nationalism in the Dual Monarchy" in Nation and Ideology: Essavs in Honor of Wavne S. Vuchinich ed. Ivo Banac, John G. Ackerman, and Roman Szporluk (New York: Columbia University Press, 1981), 182.

“ For more on Strossmayer's program of Yugoslavism, and particularly his efforts to negate the religious differences inherent among a peoples divided between Eastern Orthodoxy, Roman

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Three other political programs that had their birth in Illyrianism are directly

relevant to the national awakening of the Croats: 1. the Croatian Party of Rights

(Hrvatska Stranka Prava) led by Ante Starcevic (1823-1896); 2. the Party of Pure Right

(Cista Stranka Prava), which splintered off from Starcevic's party following his death,

and was led by Dr. Josip Frank (1844-1911); and 3. the Serbo-Croat Coalition

government formed in 1905 which dominated Croatian politics until the end of the First

World War. These programs had substantial intellectual differences, but all were

essentially integrationalist (i.e., each asserted that all South Slavs were one in ethnicity

and should be united) and thus shared a deep seated commonality.

Starcevic's Croatian Party of Rights introduced the concept of Greater

Croatianism which, like Illyrianism, asserted that all South Slavs shared one ethnic origin,

although in this view they were all Croats. This program was produced largely in

reaction to the Serb rejection of the Illyrian movement and to the Greater Serbia

programs, inherent in the linguistic reforms of Vuk Karadzic and propagated (albeit still

secretly) in the political program of Ilija Garasanin (1812-1874).64

Starcevic's Jacobin instincts were expressed in a theory of "political nationhood"

Catholicism, and Islam, see Chapter 5: Religion.

^Serbian political programs, including the NaCertanije developed by Ilija Garasanin, are discussed in more detail below.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 34

that diametrically opposed Illyrianism in virtually all respects.65 The resulting program of

nationalism borrowed intellectually from the liberal and assimilationist concepts of

citizenship as practiced in Hungary and parts of western Europe.66

Originally Starcevic refused to acknowledge even the existence of a Serbian

nation within Croatia, though he was willing to allow the minority Serb population to

reside in Croatia and practice their religion.67 By 1852, however, he had laid out his

theory that all South Slavs, with the exception of the Bulgars, were Croats.68 He was

frequently quoted as saying "the noblest part of the Croatian people lives in Serbia."69 He

seems to have genuinely believed that one day all Serbs would accept their "Croatian

65This political theory was created by Starcevic in conjunction with the Croatian historian Eugene Kvatemik (1825-1871). Kvatemik's earlier works, though ostensibly histories of Croatia, were clearly written so as to "demonstrate that the Croats had a separate national individuality and to enlist support for the creation of an independent Croatian state after the fall of the Habsburg Monarchy." See Mirjana Gross, "Croatian National-Integretional Ideologies from the End of Illyrism to the Creation of Yugoslavia." The Austrian History Yearbook vol. 15-16(1979-1980): 15-16; and Banac. National Question in Yugoslavia. 85. For more on Stardevic and his unique brand of nationalism see Spalatin, "The Croatian Nationalism of Ante Stardevic.”

“ Ivo Banac, "Nationalism in Southeastern Europe," in Nationalism and Nationalities in the New Europe, ed., Charles A. Kupchan (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1995), 114.

67Hugh and Christopher Seton-Watson, The Making of a New Europe: R.W. Seton-Watson and the Last Years of Austria-Hungarv (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1981), 58.

68Gross, "Croatian Ideologies," 18-19.

69Additionally, Stardevic suggested that Tsar Dusan and the entire Nemanjic dynasty of Serbia were Croatian, and thus, all of Serbia was Croatian. See Ostovic, Truth About Yugoslavia. 48-49; and Spalatin, "The Croatian Nationalism of Ante Stardevic.”

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. ancestry" and become "Croats" without the use of force to convert them.70

While Starcevic's attitudes towards the Serbs diminished his potential basis for

support, his policy of negating religious differences in examining qualifications for

national affiliation appealed to many Muslim intellectuals, who, under the millet system

had been taught that religion was to be the primary determining characteristic.71 A

number of Muslims became members of the Party of Right and worked to further

propagate the Croatian national idea among their fellow Bosnian Muslims. Even among

the Orthodox of Bosnia there was some acceptance of the abandonment of religion as a

qualification for national identification, and there was some talk of establishing a

Croatian Orthodox Church.72

By the time of the Ausgleich in 1867, however, most Serbs residing in Croatia

saw in Starcevic's program nothing but an attack on their identity and security. They

could not identify with the Croat cause of resisting Magyar domination, and, on the

contrary, were willing to accept continued guarantees of their special status from the

Hungarian authorities. This policy of divide et impere was immensely popular among

Hungarian and Austrian politicians when dealing with the lesser ethnicities, and in this

70Gross, "Croatian Ideologies," 19.

71 Ante Cuvalo, The Croatian National Movement. 1966-1972 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1990), 17.

^Cuvalo. Croatian National Movement. 17-18.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 36

case it was extremely successful.73

After the Ausgleich, and subsequent Nagodba. Starcevic's party became the

standard-bearer of opposition to Hungarian rule. In this role it was extremely successful

in attracting followers among the growing Croatian bourgeoisie. Starcevic was able to

oversee its climb to prominence in the Croatian political arena before his death in 1896;

the party, however, did not survive intact.74

The Party of Pure Right, led by Dr. Josip Frank, largely upheld the Croatian

nationalism of Starcevic, but his program differed substantially in its attitudes towards

religious tolerance and the Serbs. Frank insisted that the Serbs of Croatia were actually

"Orthodox Croats" and demanded that they be forced to accept Catholicism or be

expelled.7S The party's political jingoists consistently depicted Serbs as "sub-human,

barbaric, infected with Byzantine duplicity and cunning, in contrast to the Croats ’western'

73Each new Hungarian guarantee to the Serbs provoked Starcevic's outcries of betrayal of the Croatian nation; the increased rhetoric, however, simply made the Serb minority more concerned about their future safety and more desirous of further protections. For a further discussion of Serbian attitudes towards StarCevic's political program see Srdjan Trifkovic, "The First Yugoslavia and the Origins of Croatian Separatism," East European Quarterly 26, no. 3 (1992): 345-369. For detailed discussions of Habsburg political machination see Barbara Jelavich, The Habsburg Empire in European Affairs. 1814-1918 (Chicago: Rand McNally and Co., 1969); and Robert A. Kann, The Habsburg Empire: A Study in Integration and Disintegration (New York: Frederick A. Praeger. 1957): Kann, Multinational Empire.

74Banac, National Question in Yugoslavia. 89.

7SRichard B. Spence, "Yugoslavs, the Austro-Hungarian Army, and The First World War." (Phd Diss., University of California Santa Barbara, 1981), 8.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 37

Roman Catholic heritage and 'culture'."76

Both Starcevic's and Frank's parties, however, were losing ground by the end of

the nineteenth century. Indeed, in the two decades before the First World War, "the

salient feature of Croat politics was the predominance of the proto-Yugoslav idea," writes

Srdjan Trifkovic of Stanford University's Hoover Institution.77 Until 1905 the Yugoslav

idea would be most noticeable in the religious and cultural programs of Bishop

Strossmayer's Yugoslavism, but after 1905 the struggle became political and was fought

by the newly formed Serbo-Croat Coalition.

By 1905 the Hungarians began to consider new ways of dealing with the restless

Croats. At the same time there were substantial shifts of population. One result of these

population shifts was a marked increase in the number of Croats residing in Dalmatia.

This aided in making the Croatian question, pro forma, part of a larger, Yugoslav,

question. External changes, including the Hungarian challenge to the Emperor's Army in

1848, the apparent weakness of Russia in its contest with Japan, and the revolutionary

wave of 1905, contributed to a "feeling that the Croats and Serbs had to depend upon

each other ..." according to historian Iva Lukac.78 The first concrete sign of this new

76Trifkovic, "The First Yugoslavia", 348.

77Trifkovic, "The First Yugoslavia,” 348.

78Iva Lukac, "Stjepan Radic and the Croatian Peasant Party, 1914 - 1928." (Ph.D. diss.. University of Cincinnati, 1989), 11.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 38

rapprochement was found in the creation of the Serbo-Croat Coalition in 1905 by Serb

and Croat politicians of Croatia and Dalmatia.79 The policy of the coalition was

formulated into a set of principles and signed, almost simultaneously, in the towns of

Rijeka (in Croatia) and Zadar (in Dalmatia). The program called for cooperation between

Serbs and Croats of the Empire to protect their common interests, though it could be

argued that the ultimate goal of the program was to form a South Slav State.80

79The Coalition was an alliance of Croatia's Serbian political parties (the Serbian National Radical Party and the Se rbian National Independent Party), both of which had supported Hungary against Croat parties previously, and three Croatian Political Parties: the Croatian State Right Party, the Progressive Party, and the Social Democratic Party, each of which had previously supported a trial ist solution to the South Slav question. (Trialism is the name given to the political program which advocated replacing the Dual Monarchy, as established in 1867, with a Triple Monarchy by adding a third unit consisting of all the Slavic provinces. It is commonly believed that Franz Ferdinand was a trialist and that he might have attempted to fulfill such a plan had he not been assassinated.) An additional independent group known as the Progressive Youth also joined in the coalition. The Progressive Youth in particular, though not exclusively, were dominated by a new generation of Serbs and Croats who had lived their entire lives with Illyrian or Yugoslav ideas. Additionally, many of the members had been students of the famous Czech T.G. Masaryk whose views on nationalism were immensely persuasive. Two of the main supporters of this new course were Frano Supilo (1870 - 1917), who drafted the resolutions, and Ante Trumbic (1864 - 1938). Both of these men would be instrumental in the Yugoslav Committee, an emigre organization during World War One, that is widely recognized as deserving much credit for making the creation of a unified Yugoslav state possible. For more on the role of Supilo and Trumbic in the Serbo - Croat coalition, see Dedijer, et al., eds., History of Yugoslavia. 445-446, and Gross, "Croatian National-Integretional Ideologies." For more on the Yugoslav Committee, see Gale Stokes, "The Role of the Yugoslav Committee in the Formation of Yugoslavia" in The Creation of Yugoslavia. 1914-1918, ed. Dimitiije Djordjevic (Santa Barbara: Clio Books, 1980,) 51-72. In addition, several publications of the Yugoslav Committee are available and worth consulting. These include: Jugoslav Committee in London, The Southern Slav's Appeal (Cleveland: Milan Marjanovic, November, 1916); Jugoslav Committee in London, The Southern Slav Library: Volume I. The Southern Slav Programme (London: Nisbett & Co., Ltd., 1915); Jugoslav Committee in London, The Southern Slav Library: Volume II. The Southern Slavs: Land and People (London: Nisbett & Co., Ltd., 1916); and, Jugoslav Committee in London, The Southern Slav Library: Volume III. A Sketch of Southern Slav History (London: Nisbett & Co., Ltd.. 1915 or 1916.)

80Gross, "Croatian Ideologies," 39-44.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 39

According to Iva Lukac, from 1905 until the end of the First World War the

Serbo-Croat Coalition was "the single most influential voice for unity among the South

Slavs."81 In 1906 the Coalition had forty-three seats in the Croatian Diet, compared with

only twenty seats held by its fiercest opponents, the Frankist Party of Pure Right.82 Two

years later the Coalition held fifty-seven seats out of a total of only eighty-eight.8j

The Coalition pursued a policy of thinly disguised separatism that quickly aroused

the ire of the Imperial Government. For a brief time the Hungarians showed some

leniency towards the Coalition, but, once they realized its true goals, the Hungarians

joined with the Austrians in fabricating a plan to destroy the Coalition. In early 1909 the

Austrian-Hungarian Embassy in Belgrade fabricated a series of documents that seemed to

prove that Croatian and Serbian members of the Serbo-Croat Coalition were in the pay of

the Serbian government. These papers were subsequently leaked to the noted Austrian

historian Heinrich Friedjung, and beginning in March 1909 he published a series of

articles which led to the arrest of fifty-three leaders of the Coalition on charges of

treason.84 From the beginning the trial seemed to many observers to be a farce. R.W.

Seton-Watson, residing at the time in Zagreb, wrote a long editorial about the trial for the

8lLukac, "Stjepan Radic," 12.

82Seton-Watson, New Europe. 60.

83Seton-Watson, New Europe. 60.

84Dedijer, et al., History of Yugoslavia. 446-447.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 40

British Morning Post in which he concluded that "the whole trial is a travesty of justice,

inspired and controlled by what to English ideas is a despotic government."85 In the end

thirty-one Coalition members were found guilty and some sentenced to as long as twelve

years in prison. By December 1909, however, the tables had turned and Friedjung was

brought before an Austrian Court on charges of libel; at this trial it was proven that all of

Friedjung's documents were forgeries.86

Austria's attempt to destroy the nascent Yugoslav movement was a complete

fiasco; rather than diminish the movement, it strengthened it. The misguided effort to

drive a wedge between the Croat people and their elected leaders in the Serbo-Croat

Coalition, and to persuade the Croats that they were being betrayed by the Serbs into

treason against the Monarchy, "only succeeded in showing to both parties alike that there

was justice for none but Germans or Magyars" in the Habsburg Empire according to the

British historian R.G.D. Laffan.87 The persecution of imagined revolutionaries soon

produced real ones.

In summary, the history of the Croat Nationalists from the Napoleonic era to the

eve of the First World War reveals considerable tension between the Croats and their

85Hugh and Christopher Seton-Watson, "Seton-Watson and the Yugoslavs" in R.W. Seton-Watson and the Yugoslavs: Correspondence. 1906-1914 2 vols. ed. Hugh and Christopher Seton - Watson (London: British Academy, 1976,) vol. 1. 16-17.

86Dedijer, et al., History of Yugoslavia. 446-447.

87R.G.D. Laffan, The Serbs: The Guardians of the Gate (New York: Dorset Press, 1989), 110-111.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 41

ethnic Serb cousins, but there was also a steady development of national identity among

the Croats who were increasingly willing to participate in cooperative South Slavic

political movements. Each of the Croat national movements of this period sought a wider

ethnic identity in which to place their nationalist aspirations. Throughout the period there

was always some level of support for the idea of ethnically derived national unity among

Serbs and Croats, and, to a lesser degree, among all South Slavs.

Serbia

As with the Croatians. Serbian concepts of nationalism grew and matured during

the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. The Serbs succeeded in gaining their

independence earlier than any of the other South Slavic peoples, and thus were less needy

of a wider context in which to place their nationalist aspirations. As a result, they often

managed to stand aloof from the political issues that infected Croat relations with their

suzerains. But most Serbian political parties still acknowledged the ethnic homogeneity

of the South Slavs and strove to form a closer union with the Southern Slavs still under

foreign yoke.

The Serbians, though politically assimilated into the Ottoman realm, were not

model citizens during their period of foreign rule. During the Habsburg-Ottoman wars of

1716-1718, 1737-1739, and 1788-1791, for example, many Serbs joined the Habsburg

Free Corps and fought against the Turks.88 Much of the animosity was caused by the

“ Barbara and Charles Jelavich, The Establishment of Balkan National States. 1804-1920 (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1977), 27. See also Rothenberg, Military Borders in Croatia.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 42

Spahis and Janissaries, rebel soldiers of the Ottoman Empire who had been forced to

leave Constantinople during the seventeenth century, and who had made life extremely

difficult for the Christians citizens of the Empire. In Serbia, the Spahis instituted a

repressive one-tenth levy on the sale of all produce; additional fees were collected on the

death of any family head and the marriage of all daughters. Murders, kidnappings, and

extortion were commonplace.89

In 1796, the Sublime Porte issued three decrees aimed specifically at appeasing

the Serbs. Together these orders redefined the relationship between the Ottoman

government and its Serbian citizens. The decrees allowed Serbs to collect their own

taxes, bear arms, form militias, and enjoy a wide degree of political autonomy. Most

importantly, these decrees called for the Janissaries and Spahis to leave the Christian

lands.90 These rebel soldiers refused to leave, however, and in 1798, with the support of

Hadji Mustafa, the governor of the Pashalik of Belgrade, Christian militias attacked and

defeated the Janissaries.91 The image of Christian warriors defeating Turks proved too

potent, and in the following year the Sultan ordered Mustafa to allow the Janissaries to

return. Upon their return the Janissaries reacted even more fiercely than before and

89Stavrianos, Balkan Federation. 22.

“"Jelavich, Balkan National States. 27-28.

9ILeften S. Stavrianos. The Balkans Since 1453 (New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1958), 244-245.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 43

quickly initiated a process of preventive massacres to insure that no Serbian militia could

oppose them again.92 Serbia's intellectual class, already in shambles, was largely

destroyed.93

A protest in 1805 -- initially designed as another attempt to bring about minor

political and social reforms -- turned into all-out revolt. The Serbs (in what was to

become the first of many nineteenth-century eastern European Christian revolts against

the Muslim Turks), drunk with success, demanded independence.94 In 1807 the Porte

offered the revolution's leader, Karadjordje Petrovic (1768-1817), generous peace terms

that would have provided Serbia with substantial autonomy. Karadjordje, incorrectly

believing Russian support to be imminent, refused, insisting on complete independence.

Five years later his rebellion was defeated, and the Serbs once again found themselves in

a position of being conquered by the Turks, though the events of the period helped to

ignite a desire among many Serbs for an independent homeland.95 It is important to note

92Stavrianos, Balkans Since 1453. 245.

93The Muslim assault on Serbia's intellectual class was immensely effective. By 1830 it had largely been completed and it has been observed that at this stage in Serbian history there was "not even a semblance of an educated class" remaining in Serbia. For more on the sad state of Serbian intellectualism during this period please see Traian Stoianovich, "The Pattern of Serbian Intellectual Evolution, 1830-1880," Comparative Studies in Society and History 1, no. 3 (1959): 242-272.

94For more on the Serbian uprising, see Wayne S. Vuchinich, ed., The First Serbian Uprising. 1804-1813 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1982.)

95See, for example, Nicholas Moravcevich, "Karageorge Petrovich: The Great Serbian Vozd of the First Serbian Insurrection" in Vasa D. Mihailovich, ed., Landmarks in Serbian Culture and History: Essavs (Pittsburgh: Serb National Federation, 1983); Charles Jelavich, "Serbian Nationalism and the

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 44

here that the First Serbian Uprising was supported not just by Serbs in the administrative

unit controlled by Karadjordje, nor even just Serbs in Ottoman-controlled provinces, but

by South Slavs from Macedonia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, southern Hungary, and Austria.96

In this episode one can see further evidence of a developing sense of a "Yugoslav"

national consciousness.

The second Serbian uprising began in 1815 and was led by Milos Obrenovic

(1780 - 1860). Milos, who had fought in the first uprising, but following a general

pardon in 1813 had returned to official life, gained a relatively prestigious position in the

Turkish administration. In this role he endeavored to convince the Serbs within his

assigned district to submit willingly to Turkish rule. When a small revolt broke out in

1814 Milos orchestrated a surrender and terms of pardon from the Sultan. The pardon

was not honored, however, and over 200 Serbians were executed. With rumors of

widespread retribution in the air, Milos accepted the leadership of a new insurrection on

Palm Sunday, 1815.97

The Serbs struck fast and the Ottomans were taken off guard. Four quick victories

later, the new insurrection had gone far to prove itself more than ephemeral and began to

Question of Union with Croatia in the Nineteenth Century" Balkan Studies 3, no. 1 (1962); and Stephen Fisher-Galati, "The Habsburg Monarchy and Balkan Revolution" The Austrian History Yearbook 2 (1966k 1-11.

^Vladislav R. Savic, South-Eastern Europe: The Main Problem of the Present World Struggle (New York: Fleming H. Revell, Co., 1918), 77.

97Singleton, A Short History of Yugoslavia. 83.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 45

attract a large following among the masses. The revolution picked up momentum after

Napoleon was removed to St. Helena, and the Russians were once again able to focus

their attention on their "Slavic brothers" in the Balkans. The Turks, recognizing that a

war with Russia would be disastrous, decided to cut their losses; when Milos asked to be

offered the same terms Karadjordje had turned down in 1807, the Turks accepted. The

Serbs were granted full amnesty, allowed to retain their arms, and to form a national

assembly. Milos was promoted to Supreme Knez (Prince) of the Pashalik of Serbia, and

within each province both Serbian and Ottoman officials were to serve as judges.98

The Serbs, unlike the Croats, had taken up arms against their sovereign. The

success of this venture firmly established Serbia as a power in the region and allowed the

Serbs to move beyond national development centered on gaining authority over their own

peoples; now they would be concerned primarily with expanding their physical borders

and bringing more South Slavs into the Serbian state.

With the outbreak of the Greek War of Independence in 1821 Milos again felt the

time was ripe to push for further concessions from the Porte. Over the following seven

years Serbia moved, through a series of diplomatic maneuverings, closer to independence.

In 1828 Russia, angered by Ottoman resistance to both the Greek War of Independence

and the Serbian movements for autonomy, declared war on the Sultan. The Russians

captured Adrianople, very near to Constantinople, early the next year, causing the Sultan

98 Additionally a national chancery was established in Belgrade as the highest court o f the land. See Jelavich, Balkan National States. 36; and Stavrianos, The Balkans. 249.

I ft, I

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 46

to sue for peace. The Treaty of Adrianople was signed on September 14, 1829. Article

VI of that treaty called for the "immediate restitution of the six districts detached from

Servia, so as to secure for ever the tranquility and welfare of that faithful and devoted

nation."99

The Hatti-Sheriff issued by the Porte to the "Servian Nation" on October I, 1829.

went far towards implementing the terms demanded by the Russians. Serbians were to be

allowed to freely exercise:

their mode of Worship, and to follow their own Religion; that they might elect their own Chiefs from amongst themselves; that the administration of the Internal Affairs of their country might be under their own authority; that the Detached Provinces of Servia might be added and united to it;.. . that... they might have the liberty and permission, with their own passports in hand, to pass and go through the dominions of the Sublime Porte as Servian merchants; that they might erect and build Hospitals, Schools and Printing office in their own country; and lastly, the Mussulmans or Turks, except those who are to guard the castles, should be prohibited to live in Servia.100

A year later the Porte issued a second Firman to "give her [Serbia] another proof of my

Imperial bounty and favour."101 This proof came in the form of a guaranty of hereditary

succession to the family of Milos Obrenovic, the newly recognized "Prince of Servian

"Article VI of the "Treaty of Peace Between Russian and Turkey" is reprinted in: Snezana Trifunovska, Yugoslavia Through Documents: From its Creation to its Dissolution (Dordecht: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1994), 8.

100"Hatti-Sheriff Issued by the Sublime Porte to Servia" reprinted in: Snezana Trifunovska, Yugoslavia Through Documents. 9-10.

10I"Firman of the Sultan of Turkey Relating to Servia" is reprinted in: Snezana Trifunovska, Yugoslavia Through Documents. 11.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 47

Nation."102 This officially turned Serbia into a vassal principality of Turkey, but the

Finnan also promulgated a rudimentary Constitution and Bill of Rights by which Serbia

was to be ruled and its citizen's rights guaranteed.103

After a coup in 1842, Milos was forced to step down. The new "Defender"

regime engineered the election of Prince Aleksandar Karadjordje (r. 1842-1860).

Aleksandar's reign had two major residual impacts on Serbian history: it established the

precedent for the existence of two rival dynasties in Serbia, and it created and outlined the

first official policy of the Serbs towards the other South Slavs.

The latter task was assigned to Ilija Garasanin, Aleksandar's Interior Minister.

The principal assertion of Garasanin's Nacertanije (Outline), developed in 1848, was that

Serbia:

must realize that she is still small, that she cannot remain so. and that she can achieve her future only in alliance with other surrounding peoples.. . .She cannot limit herself to her present frontiers but must seek to attract herself to all Serbs who surround her. Unless Serbia pursues this policy firmly . . . she will be thrown here and there by foreign storms like a small boat until she finally strikes bare rock and is broken up.104

Garasanin envisioned the aggrandizement of Serbia in three stages: first all Serbs

l02"Firman of the Sultan of Turkey Relating to Servia" in: Trifunovska, Yugoslavia Through Documents. 11.

l03"Firman of the Sultan of Turkey Relating to Servia" in: Trifunovska, Yugoslavia Through Documents. 11.

104Reprinted in David MacKenzie, Hiia Garasanin: Balkan Bismarck (New York: Columbia University Press, 1985), 56.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 48

and Montenegrins under Turkish rule to be freed and joined to the principality; second,

liberation of all South Slavs under Ottoman rule and their union with a Serbo-Bulgarian

state; finally the South Slavs under Austrian rule to be liberated and all South Slavs to

unite in a greater, "Yugoslav," state, presumably under a Serbian King.105 This policy, he

advised, would allow for a gradual dismantling of the Ottoman Empire without provoking

Austrian or Russian partition of the Balkans. The Russians and Austrians were both to be

pacified at all costs in the near future.

Garasanin's plan has been aptly compared to other integrationalist Balkan

nationalist programs such as those of Greater Croatia, Poland, and Bulgaria.106 However,

the strong influence on the role of Serbia in this program removes it from the tradition of

a true "Yugoslav" program. Under Garasanin's plan Serbia would be the liberator and

dominant power in a new South Slav union, something more than just another equal

power. Unfortunately for the future South Slav union, this is exactly the manner in which

Serbia approached union from 1844 on. According to the historian Fred Singleton, the

Nacertanije was the "leitmotif of Serbian policy until 1918.”107

During the Russo-Turk War of 1877-1878, the Serbs sided with the Russians.

105David MacKenzie, "Serbian Nationalist and Military Organizations and the Piedmont Idea, 1844- 1914," East European Quarterly 16, no. 3 (1982): 324.

106See Mackenzie, Balkan Bismarck. 57-58.

l07Singleton, Short History of the Yugoslav Peoples. 93.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 49

During this period Serbia experienced a great upsurge in nationalist feelings. It was

assumed that following a Russian victory Serbia would gain independence and add to her

territory through the "liberation" of the Bosnians and Montenegrins. The Treaty of San

Stefano, signed in 1878, officially recognized Serbia as a fully independent Kingdom, but

thwarted her substantial territorial aspirations by creating a territorially aggrandized

Bulgaria and leaving Bosnia as an Ottoman possession.108 Later that year Russia bowed

to western pressure and renegotiated the borders, increasing Serbian territory minimally,

at the Congress of Berlin (June 13-July 13, 1878). At this point Bosnia was transferred

from Ottoman control and was designated as an area to be temporarily administered by

Austro-Hungary.109

For the next four decades Serbian Nationalism continued to base itself on the

principles laid out in Garasanin's Nacertanije. Because of this, the occupation of Bosnia-

Herzegovina by Austro-Hungary in 1878, and subsequent annexation in 1908, proved to

be a substantial blow to Serb nationalism. Just before the outbreak of World War One.

however, Serbian national pride, fueled by a string of impressive military victories,

rebounded.

In addition to bolstering the cause of Serbian nationalists, the Balkan Wars of

108Jelavich, Balkan National States, chap. 10. The effect of this Russian "betrayal" on Serbian nationalist development has not yet been studied, though it certainly deserves further investigation

109Jelavich, Balkan National States, chap 10 and chap. 11; and Dedijer, et al., History of Yugoslavia. 396-397.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 50

1912 and 1913 provided an impetus, particularly for Croats and Slovenes, to desire unity.

In the First Balkan War (October 8, 1912 - May 30, 1913) Serbia, a small and somewhat

backwards nation, in alliance with Montenegro and Bulgaria, soundly defeated Turkish

forces. The Treaty of London (May 30, 1913) essentially stripped the Ottoman Empire of

all of its possessions in Europe.110 In the Second Balkan War (June 29, 1913 - August 10.

1913) Serbia once again confirmed her strength by defeating Bulgarian forces.111 By the

autumn of 1913 Serbia emerged as a victorious power of nearly doubled increased size

and immensely bolstered reputation; as news of her victories spread, other South Slavs

came increasingly to approve of their brothers to the South. In the eloquent words of

R.W. Seton-Watson:

the splendid victories of their Balkan kinsmen fell like a match into a magazine of inflammable material. Kosovo is avenged; with the ancient glories of the Servian Empire has been revived the half-extinguished faith in the future of a race. The dream of Southern Slav unity no longer seems a mere dream. From the Carinthian Alps to the Bocche di Cattaro form the Banat of Temesevar to the Dalmatian Islands there is a growing movement... inspired by the feeling that Croat and Serb are but two names of one and the same race.... it is no exaggeration to say that while a year ago Austria was faced by the problem of how to retain the sympathies and loyalty of the Southern Slavs, to-day she has to consider how it is possible to regain them.112

1I0Dedijer, et al. History of Yugoslavia. 424-425.

luDedijer, et al. History of Yugoslavia. 425-427.

,,2R.W. Seton-Watson, "New Phases of the Balkan Question," The Contemporary Review vol 9. 1913. Reprinted in Hugh Seton-Watson and Cornelia Bodea, eds., R.W. Seton-Watson and the Romanians. 1906-1920. 2 Volumes (Bucharest: Editura §tiinpfica Enciclopedica, 1988.) vol 2. 683.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 51

The Serbs and Croats under Habsburg rule followed Serbia's exploits in the war

carefully. According to Richard Spence, reports of Serbian victories were seen as a

tangible sign that the South Slavs could be the master's of their own fate, and were

celebrated all night long in Sarajevo cafes.113 Additionally, a Sarajevo committee to

support the Serbian Army was started.114 Simultaneously a wave of pro-Serb, and

specifically Yugoslav, demonstrations occurred in Croatia, Dalmatia and in parts of

Bosnia. At least one rally in Zagreb drew a crowd of approximately ten thousand

people.115 Additionally, a stream of volunteers to the Serbian and Montenegrin armies,

including some deserters from the Imperial Army and Gendarmerie, crossed into Serbian

territory to offer their services.116 Austro-Hungarian intelligence estimated that there

were over 20,000 volunteers from Bosnia-Herzegovina alone in the Serbian Army.117

After the initial victories in 1912, Serb propaganda became increasingly Yugoslav

II3Spence, "Yugoslavia, the Austro-Hungarian Army, and the First World War," 28.

ll4Milorad Ekmecic, "Impact of the Balkan Wars on Society in Bosnia and Herzegovina" in War and Society in East Central Europe. Vol. XVII: East Central European Society and the Balkan Wars eds., Bela K. Kiraly and Dimitrije Djordjevic (New York: Columbia University Press, 1987), 267.

" 5Ekme£ic, "Impact of the Balkan Wars on Society in Bosnia and Herzegovina," 267. When similar, albeit smaller, demonstrations began in Sarajevo, the Habsburg Army was placed on full war time alert.

ll6Spence, "Yugoslavs, the Austro-Hungarian Army, and the First World War," 29.

" 7Ekmecic, "Impact of the Balkan Wars on Society in Bosnia and Herzegovina," 274.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 52

in its emphasis."8 The concept of Yugoslav unity was rapidly entering into popular

consciousness. As early as November, 1912, Josip Smodlaka, a Dalmatian politician,

wrote to R.W. Seton-Watson, stating that "all the Croatian youth, even those o f the Party

of Right, are [now] fervent Yugoslavs... . for us [this war] is a national resurrection . ..

the future of 17 million Yugoslavs is guranteed."119

At least one group of South Slavs was not thrilled with Serbia's victories,

however. Bosnia's Islamic citizens now began to regard the Serbs as "their greatest

foe."120 Popular Islamic newspapers portrayed the First Balkan War as "a Christian

crusade against Islam."121 Of course the exaggerated views of wartime diminished as

peace settled upon the region, but it would be correct to say that through the summer of

1914 the Bosnian Muslims maintained a degree of enmity towards the Serbs.

Bosnia

In Bosnia, as Croatia and Serbia, one sees considerable centrifugal and centripetal

H8Spence, "Yugoslavs, the Austro-Hungarian Army, and the First World War," 29.

,I9It is interesting to note that Smodlaka's original letter was in Italian, and as such he needn't have been constrained by the South Slav word Jug, but clearly chose the term (Yugoslavs) on purpose. Unfortunately, Seton-Watson's response to this provocative letter is unavailable as Smodlaka, fearing arrest by Austro-Hungarian authorities, destroyed virtually all his papers following the outbreak of World War One. See Seton-Watson, eds., Correspondence, vol. 1, 116-117; and Seton-Watson, New Europe. 90.

l20Ekmecic, "Impact of the Balkan Wars on Society in Bosnia and Herzegovina," 262-63.

l21Ekme6ic, "Impact of the Balkan Wars on Society in Bosnia and Herzegovina," 262-63.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. forces in the period of national awakening. Especially in Bosnia it now appears as if the

forces of disunity have won, leading some to argue that such a destiny was ordained.

Closer examination of the period, however, reveals surprising trends towards unity.

The Ottoman forces occupying Bosnia until the late nineteenth century brought

with them both Islam and an administrative program known as the millet system that

established patterns for determining "national" affiliation. As stated earlier, under the

millet system one's nationality was determined by religious affiliation. This program

seriously derailed the development of a Bosnian nationalism, substituting instead a

myriad of religious affiliations. The vast majority of Catholics now considered

themselves Croats, and the Orthodox were perceived as Serbs.

At the Congress of Berlin Austria insisted that Turkey could no longer effectively

govern Bosnia and that the Habsburgs should occupy the state as "friends" to "restore the

peace and prosperity of which for centuries you have been deprived."122 The dominant

powers of the day agreed and shortly thereafter Austro-Hungarian troops occupied the

‘-Quoted from the official proclamation from the "Emperor of Austria and King of Hungary" to all "Bosnians and Herzegovinans" as translated by the British Consul in Bosna Serai, Edward B. Freeman and sent to both the Rt. Honourable Austen Layard, His Majesty’s Ambassador to Constantinople, and the British Foreign Office. The letter, with the proclamation enclosed, was dated July 10, 1878. [FO 195/1212] Reprinted in Anita L. P. Burdett, The Historical Boundaries Bevween Bosnia. Croatia. Serbia: Documents and Maps. 1815 - 1945 (Southampton: Archives International Group, 1995), 361-366.

Despite repeated Austrian claims that annexation of Bosnia was not a long-term objective, British Foreign Office records show that in fact Count J. Andrassy (1823-1890), the Habsburg Foreign Minister, "declared secretly, but explicitly, that the circumstances of the situation demand [Bosnia and Herzegovina's] annexation to Austria-Hungary." See FO 881/3638. Reprinted in Burdett, Historical Boundaries. 241.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 54

region.

In 1908 Bosnia-Herzegovina was officially annexed by the Austro-Hungarian

Empire.123 To avoid shifting the balance of power between the two autonomous states

that were at the nucleus of the Dual Monarchy, it was agreed that the new territory would

be jointly ruled.124 Both Serbian and Croat nationalists were injured by this action, as the

plans for national aggrandizement of both states included the possession of Bosnia. Croat

and Serb nationalists living in Bosnia were particularly angered as they had come to

believe in the possibility that their home towns would be annexed by their perceived

homelands. The repercussions were unfathomable to even the most prognostic observer.

Six years later, on June 28, 1914, in Sarajevo, the capital of Bosnia-Herzegovina,

Gavrillo Princip, a Bosnian Serb, assassinated the Austrian Archduke Franz Ferdinand,

thus igniting the fuse of the First World War, and, ultimately, creating the circumstances

from which Yugoslavia was bom.125

World War One

The assassination of the Archduke Franz Ferdinand, heir to the Austro-Hungarian

123Although outdated, the best single work on this period continues to be Bemadotte E. Schmitt. The Annexation of Bosnia. 1908-1909 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1937.)

l24Schmitt, Annexation of Bosnia, passim.

125The nationality problem in Yugoslavia, and particularly that in Bosnia, was of great concern to the governments established after the First and Second World War. Each tried, in its own way, to diffuse the issue and instill a nation of national oneness, though, obviously, neither succeeded.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 55

throne, on June 28, 1914, sparked a strong feeling of "outrage and outpouring of patriotic,

or at least dynastic, feeling throughout the Empire."126 In contrast to the pro-Serb rallies

of 1912 and 1913, anti-Serb rallies now took to the streets. According to the historian

Richard Spence, the popular attitude in the Monarchy as a whole appears to have been

focused around the obligation of the Monarchy to "defend its own interests [and] those of

Western Civilization as well against such 'barbarism.'"127 There were even documented

instances of Christian and Islamic citizens attacking Serbs and destroying Serb-owned

businesses in Sarajevo.128

Austria did not blame Serbia directly for the assassination, but instead accused her

of tolerating and supporting anti-Habsburg organizations, thus fostering a climate where

such an act could take place. A list of concessions was drawn up that would have

severely limited Serbia's ability to function as an independent nation. The Serbian

Government approached the situation in a cautious manner. Emphasizing their sorrow

and compassion for the loss of Ferdinand, it accepted all but one of the concessions.129

l26Spence, "Yugoslavs, the Austro-Hungarian Army, and the First World War," 62.

127Spence, "Yugoslavs, the Austro-Hungarian Army, and the First World War," 62.

l28Spence, "Yugoslavs, the Austro-Hungarian Army, and the First World War," 62.

129While the official Government response was conciliatory, it is worth mentioning that popular opinion in Serbia, and, to a lesser degree in Montenegro, was one of "subdued satisfaction. The assassination was seen as an act of nationalist protest against... the policy of Vienna that prevented the unification of the South Slavs." For quote see Spence, "Yugoslavs, the Austro-Hungarian Army, and the First World War," 64. Also see Dragan R. 2ivojinovic, "Serbia and Montenegro: The Home Front, 1914- 1918" in War and Society in East Central Europe. Vol. XIX: East Central European

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 56

This was not acceptable to Vienna, and war was declared by the Austrians on July 28.

1914.

Despite the anti-Serbian climate evidenced in the rest of the South Slav lands, the

Serbian Kingdom, anticipating a rapid victory, wasted no time in formulating plans for

future unity of the South Slavs under Serbian rule.130 As early as August 4, 1914, Regent

Alexander issued a proclamation that hinted at future Yugoslav goals. In it he spoke of

"the cries of millions of our brothers from Bosnia, Herzegovina, the Banat, Backa.

Croatia, Slavonia, the Srem and our rocky coastal Dalmatia."131 Nikola Pasic, the Serbian

Prime Minister, asked Jovan Cvijic (1865-1927), a well-known Serbian geographer, to

produce an academic work that affirmed the national unity of the South Slavs. The

resulting essay, "Unity and Psychological Types of the Dinaric South Slavs" was

published in Belgrade in November 1914 to much fanfare.132 A diplomatic circular from

Society in World War I. Eds., Bela K. Kiraly, Nandor F. Dreisziger, and Albert F. Nofi (New York: Columbia University Press, 1985), 239-240.

l30The anticipation of an early victory by Serbia (they believed that the war would last between two and three months) and allied pressure to acquiesce to Bulgarian and Italian demands in order to secure allies, aided in determining the direction of Serbian diplomacy. The greater the stated aims the more likelihood that some, if not all of it, would come to fruition. See Milorad EkmeCic, "Serbian War Aims" in The Creation of Yugoslavia. 1914-1918 ed., Dimitrije Djordjevic (Santa Barbara: Clio Books, 1980), 20.

m Ekrnedic, "Serbian War Aims," 241.

132Cvijic later enlarged his theory into a series of lectures that were presented at the Sorbonne in Paris, and were published under the title The Balkan Peninsula. For more please see Ekmecic. "Serbian War Aims," 241-242.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 57

the Serbian Ministry of Foreign Affairs to Serbian legations abroad, dated September 4.

1914, stressed that the future South Slav state was to be of "one ethnic and economic

region with a compact mass of one [South Slav] people."133 One month later the Serbs

added a cultural platform to this plan in an attempt to assuage the fears of the Croats and

Slovenes. This program included the preservation of the cultural features of each

ethnicity, including complete religious tolerance, maintenance of the alphabet, equality

before the law, and a Parliamentary government.134 By the end of September 1914, the

Serbian Government had delineated the frontiers of the future state. This new state's

borders closely resembled the final borders of the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats, and

Slovenes.135

Increased Serbian attention to the situation outside of her borders, along with

well-designed propaganda that addressed issues of key concerns to South Slavs living

within the Monarchy, soon bore fruit. While it is true that there were still some in late

1914 who viewed Serbia's promise to liberate her "brothers" as only a thinly veiled plan

l33Ekmedic, "Serbian War Aims," 20.

134Dragan R. Zivojinovic, "Serbia and Montenegro: The Home Front, 1914 - 1918" in War and Society in Fast Central Europe. Vol. XIX: East Central European Society in World War I. eds. Bela K. Kiraly, Nandor F. Dreisziger, and Albert F. Nofi (New York: Columbia University Press, 1985), 242.

l352ivojinovic, "Serbia and Montenegro," 242.

I______

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 58

to annex additional territory, many more began to warm to Serbian plans.136 Particularly

helpful in this change was, surprisingly, the Habsburg Monarchy, and the draconian

measures taken to suppress information in their Slavic provinces.137

In late November 1914, another advance on the path towards Yugoslav union

occurred in, of all places, Florence, Italy. Here a prominent group of Serb, Croat,

Slovene, Dalmatian, and Bosnian politicians, artists and academics gathered to form the

Yugoslav Committee. The leading figures in this organization were the Dalmatian

politicians Frano Supilo and Ante Trumbic, both of whom had been instrumental in the

creation of the Serbo-Croat Coalition in 1905.138 At this meeting a platform of basic

l36Dedijer, et al., History of Yugoslavia. 478-483.

,37Usurpation of judicial and administrative powers by Austrian military authorities had, according to Richard Spence, "an immense effect not only in undermining civil authority, but also in alienating the population as a whole." Almost immediately the numbers of Habsburg soldiers surrendering or defecting to the Serbian ranks, including those of Croat and Slovene origin, jumped sharply. Habsburg authorities further alienated the populace by implementing a draconian martial law, accusing all those who disagreed with the aggression against Serbia of high treason, arbitrarily hanging suspected spies, and summarily executing any civilian suspected of harboring Serbian irregulars. Additionally, the Austrian military went to great lengths to squelch unhealthy rumors and control the presses, even banning the Cyrillic script because of its perceived connection with the Serbs. See Dedijer, et al., History of Yugoslavia. 479; Spence, "Yugoslavs, the Austro-Hungarian Army, and the First World War," 45, 79, 359; and Mark Cornwall, "New, Rumor and Control of Information in Austria-Hungary, 1914-1918," History: The Journal of the Historical Association 77, no. 249 (1992): 55, 59.

138At least with regards to name recognition, one additional member of the Yugoslav Committee deserves mention, namely the famous Croatian sculptor Ivan Mestrovic (1883-1962). For more on Mestrovic, both as a politician and artist, see M. Curdin, ed., Ivan Mestrovic: A Monograph (London: Williams and Norgate, 1919); Dusko Keckemet, Ivan Mestrovic (New York: Mc-Graw-Hill, nd.); Laurence Schmeckebier, Ivan Mestrovic. Sculptor and Patriot (Syracuse: Syracuse University Press, 1959.)

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 59

principles was created, the main tenet of which was that the committee members would

fight "for the creation of a united Yugoslav or eventual Serbo-Croatian State, rejecting the

possibility of the creation of an independent Croatian or Croata-Slovenian State under the

Habsburg Monarchy."139 The total equality of all South Slav peoples in any future

• political unit was, in a show of political astuteness, deemed absolutely necessary.140

Summary

The age of South Slav national awakenings reveals much about the differences

and tensions in the histories of the peoples who came together in 1918. Serbia had a

national revival that succeeded in establishing a solidly ethnic, Serbian state; Montenegro,

too, succeeded in creating an ethnically homogenous. Serbian state, though there is little

evidence of the existence of an actual national awakening of the masses. None of the

other South Slavs were able to achieve independence, nor even substantial self-rule, in

the years preceding the First World War. This discrepancy affected not just issues of late

nineteenth and early twentieth century politics, but also feelings of national pride and/or

superiority, styles of governance, and reasons for desiring increased union with other

l39George Grlica, "Trumbic's Policy and Croatian National Interests from 1914 to the Beginning of 191 S." Journal of Croatian Studies 14-15, (1973-1974). See also: Stokes, "Role of the Yugoslav Committee," 51-72; Jugoslav Committee in London, The Southern Slav Library: Volume 1. The Southern Slav Programme (London: Nisbett & Co., Ltd., 1915); and Jugoslav Committee in London. The Southern Slav's Appeal (Cleveland: Milan Marjanovic, November, 1916.)

,40Over the next four years the Yugoslav Committee would be at the core of the movement for union of the South Slav peoples. Their propaganda materials targeted both the rulers of the Allied powers and the South Slavs themselves, whose knowledge of their ethnic homogeneity was thus greatly increased.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 60

South Slavs.

Serbia had established a principality as early as 1830, and a fully independent,

internationally-recognized Kingdom in 1878. Following the Balkan Wars of 1912 and

1913, Serbia greatly increased in size and reputation. Despite the failure to annex Bosnia,

the Serbian ruling classes could feel secure in their accomplishments; they did not need

any wider context in which to place their nationalism (viz. Pan-Slavism, Illyrianism,

Yugoslavism, etc.. .) other than Serbianism, in order to protect and assert their identity.

The Croatians politicians, on the other hand, did.

By the middle of the nineteenth century, Croatia, as a geographical concept, had

come to mean substantially less than it once had. In fact, according to most Magyar

nationalists, Croatia was no more than the three counties surrounding Zagreb, commonly

known as Civil Croatia or Croatia Proper.141 Additionally, it was common for Magyar

nationalists to refer to the region as Partes Adnexae (annexed lands).142 Combined with

the pressure of linguistic and cultural Magyarization policies, present since the early

nineteenth century, it is easy to understand why nearly all Croatian nationalist programs

had a defensive character, especially those that attempted to place the Croat nationality

within a larger context.

While the historical differences, and even animosities, among the South Slavs are

14lSpalatin, "The Croatian Nationalism of Ante Stardevic," 42.

l42Spalatin, "The Croatian Nationalism of Ante StarSevic," 42.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 61

easy to discern in this period, it is important not to lose sight of the marked similarities as

well as the growing feelings of unity that are found. Perhaps the most striking similarity

is found in the universal philosophical acceptance of a concept of a shared South Slavic

ethnicity. Some suggested that the Croats and Serbs were different "tribes" of the same

peoples; others believed that all South Slavs were Serbs; and still others thought all South

Slavs were Croats. Conversely, however, this period reveals a growing feeling of

camaraderie between Serbs and Croats. This is best evidenced by the establishment and

political dominance of the Serbo-Croat Coalition in Croatia and Dalmatia, the aspirations

for unity evidenced at the outbreak of World War One, and by the historical movements

towards linguistic and religious cohesion examined in the following chapter.

I ______

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. CHAPTER 3: LANGUAGE AND SOUTH SLAV NATIONALISM

Language, normally a single language that allows native speakers to quickly and

reliably differentiate themselves from "others," is a common building block of nearly all

national movements. Among most of the Balkan peoples there are small variations in the

vernacular usage of what is, essentially, a common tongue. These differences have

frequently offered ways for one group to stand apart as somehow ethnically different.

Particularly in the hands of ultra-nationalists, the differences have been exploited to cause

discord. Relevant too is the fact that at the time when the most attention was being paid

to linguistic issues in the Balkans, Germany and Italy were also beginning to struggle

with similar, if not more pronounced, linguistic problems.

Serbian and Croatian, or Serbo-Croatian as it was commonly called until a few

years ago, are virtually identical, though Serbian utilizes a Cyrillic alphabet while

Croatian uses the Latin script. According to R.W. Seton-Watson, throughout Yugoslavia,

"the differences of dialect are infinitely less marked than in Italy between Genoa, Naples,

and Venice, or in Germany between Holstein, Swabia, and Styria."143 Serbian bears such

l43R. W. Seton-Watson, "Mestrovic and the Jugoslav Idea", in Ivan Mestrovic: A Monograph ed. M. Curdin, M., ed. (London: Williams and Norgate, 1919), 56. Seton-Watson was, of course, writing at a time when regional vernaculars were still very much alive in Italy and Germany. The fact that in Italy, Germany, and elsewhere the acceptance of a standard language has diffused this issue illustrates the ease with which, under the proper conditions, language can be overcome as an obstacle to union. Despite the current Ebonics and multi-cultural debates brewing in the U.S., it is clear that America

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 63

a close resemblance to Montenegrin and Bulgarian (both written in Cyrillic) that native

speakers from any of the countries can easily converse amongst one another with little

more difficulty than speakers of British and American English. While languages have

often had a divisive impact in Yugoslav history, perhaps it is more useful to view disputes

over language as a "cultural flag which symbolizes, rather than causes, the confrontation"

as the linguist Jon Kimpton suggests.144

Language can also be used by historians as a gauge of nationalist feelings.

According to the Slavic linguist Roland Sussex, "a vital part of the political

consciousness of the Slavs was centered on, and nurtured through, language."145 In Serbia

and Croatia, linguistic reform was at the heart of early nationalist, and particularly

integrationalist, national programs (i.e., programs of Greater Serbia, Greater Croatia, or

Yugoslavism). In Slovenia linguistic revival spurred nationalist revival. According to

Roland Sussex, language has been an "accurate .. . [barometer] of the internal health and

vitality of each of the emerging Slavonic nations."146 This chapter will attempt to use

too must have been seen by culturally and politically aware Yugoslavs prior to World War One as further proof that even the most disparate unions of peoples were possible.

l44Jon R. Kimpton, "What is French For?" The French Review 48, no. 4 (1975): 736.

14SRoland Sussex, "Lingua Nostra: The Nineteenth-Century Slavonic Language Revivals" in Culture and Nationalism in Nineteenth-Centurv Eastern Europe ed. Roland Sussex and J.C. Eade (Columbus: Slavica Publishers, Inc., 1983,) 113.

I46Sussex, "Lingua Nostra," 113.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 64

language in this manner, as a barometer of nationalist sympathies among the educated

portion of the populace, for the century from 1814 to 1914.

The year 1814 is a monumental one in the history of the South Slavic linguistic

movement; it is the year the Serbian linguist Vuk Stefanovic Karadzic (1787-1864)

published his first collection of Serbian folk tales, one of only a handful of works ever to

be printed in the Stokavian dialect of Herzegovina which, not coincidentally, is strongly

akin to modem day standard Serbo-Croatian. Prior to this time Slaveno-Serb, an

artificially created language which combined aspects of Russian and Old Church

Slavonic, was the accepted vernacular among educated Serbians.147

Karadzic is perhaps the single greatest literary and linguistic figure in Serbian

history.148 By 1805, Vuk, still in high school, was reading the works of the eighteenth-

century Orthodox cleric Dositej Obradovic (1742-1811), the first Serbian linguist to

discuss seriously the possibility of employing the vernacular language in scholarly

147As in most European nations the popular vernacular in Serbia was largely replaced during the middle ages in favor of a "literary language." In the case of Serbia that literary language was a blend of Old Church Slavonic and Russian known as Slaveno-Serb. The peasantry, however, continued to speak in the vernacular. The Cyrillic script, still in use today in Serbia, was employed by both o f these languages. In discussing Slaveno-Serb, Obradovic asked: "What benefit can we have from a language, which in our nation only one out of every 10,000 understands well, and which is foreign to my mother and sisters." The specific reference of Obradovic's sisters and mother is particularly interesting as it sheds light on the degree to which, even among the educated classes, Slaveno-Serb was unknown to most females. For the quote by Obradovic please see Biljana Sljivic-Simsic, "Vuk Stefanovic Karadzic (1787-1864)" in Landmarks in Serbian Culture and History: Essavs ed., Vasa D. Mihailovich (Pittsburgh: Serb National Federation, 1983), 179.

148For the single best monograph on Karadzic please see Duncan Wilson, The Life and Times of Vuk Stefanovic Karadzic. 1787-1864: Literacy. Literature, and National Independence in Serbia. (Ann Arbor: Oxford University Press, 1970.)

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 65

works.149 Nine years later he published the first of many collections of Serbian folk tales

which soon catapulted him to literary fame in Europe.150 That same year he published the

first Serbian grammar, and by the time of the second edition, four years later, he had

begun to make substantial changes to the Serbian alphabet, introducing phonetic spelling

and beseeching his countrymen to "Pisi kao sto govoris" ("write as you speak.")151 Again,

in these works, Vuk utilized the Stokavian dialect, which he considered to be a "pure

Serbian dialect."152

Vuk's works were not immediately embraced by his fellow countrymen.153 His

,49NikoIa R. Pribic, "Dositej Obradovic" in Landmarks in Serbian Culture and History: Essays ed.. Vasa D. Mihailovich (Pittsburgh: Serb National Federation, 1983), 136 and 137; and Sljivic-Simsic, "Vuk Stefanovic Karadzic," 178 and 179. See also Nikola R. Pribic, "Dositej Obradovic (1742-1811): Enlightenment, Rationalism, and the Serbian National Tongue," Canadian Review of Studies in Nationalism 10, no. 1 (1983).

Obradovic's works, widely read by the intellectual elite in Serbia, were written first in the vernacular of his native Banat, and later in the Stokavian dialect which he learned while living in Dalmatian monasteries. However, Obradovic often found it necessary to switch to Slaveno-Serb, or even Russian, in order to "convey philosophical ideas or moral views and reflections" as the vernacular was not yet sufficiently developed for such intellectual uses. Obradovic has often been chastised for this, though in truth he had little choice as there was not a single grammar or dictionary of the vernacular yet available.

,50The German writers Grimm, Ranke and Goethe were all early admirers of Karadzic's work and were instrumental in bolstering his popularity throughout western Europe.

,slSljivic-Sim sic, "Vuk Karadzic," 185.

l52Banac, "Nationalism in Southeastern Europe," 113.

l53Vuk was tireless in his efforts, however, and finally, four years after his death, in 1 868, Vuk's alphabet and orthography were officially recognized by the Serbian government. See Sljivic-Simsic, "Vuk Karadzic," 189.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 66

linguistic-based nationalism was taken as an affront by many non-Serb South Slavs as

well, some of whom used the Stokavian dialect and did not consider themselves to be

Serbs.154 His suggestions for the elimination of Slaveno-Serb and the reform of the

Serbian orthography, likewise, caused problems.155 Many, in fact, saw in his attacks on

the Old Church Slavonic based Slaveno-Serb an indirect attack on Orthodoxy, and in

particular on the idea that Serbdom and Orthodoxy were identical.156 Additionally, Vuk's

literary program, steeped in the western ideas of Johann Gottfried Herder (1744-1803)

and the eighteenth-century rationalists, appeared to some as too liberal and progressive.157

Several years before Vuk published his first works, thus beginning the

154Sljivic-Simsic, "Vuk Karadzic," 189.

,55See Butler, "War for a Serbian Language and Orthography," 1-81.

156Banac, "Nationalism in Southeastern Europe," 113.

The secularization of Serbian nationality, which he defined, for the first time, by linguistic, rather than religious, characteristics, was among the most portentous of Vuk's reforms. No longer was Serbian nationhood intimately linked with religion. This change meant that the targets of assimilation were no longer the Orthodox Bulgars, Macedonians, Albanians, or Vlachs, as discussed in Chapter 5: Religion, but instead were the speakers of Stokavian. The latter, of course, were primarily represented by the inhabitants of Bosnia, Dalmatia, and Croatia-Slavonia. In his nationalistic claim that all speakers of Stokavian were ethnic Serbs, however, he may have unwittingly contributed to the destruction of a united Yugoslav state.

1S7In fact the argument about liberalizing influences inherent in Karadzic's linguistic plan, while seemingly little more than political diatribe, appears in retrospect to have had some validity. The consequences of Vuk's "philological reforms were reflected in the general democratization of Serbian culture, which, having its roots in Russian and Old Slavonic sources, was definitely turning to the European West." See Dedijer, et al., History of Yugoslavia. 297.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 67

resurrection of the Serbian vernacular, the Croatian language also began to thrive.

Ironically, Croatian began its rebirth not through the literary works of a Croat but through

attacks on Croatian by Hungarians and Germans. Prior to the nineteenth century, the

Croatian literary language had largely failed; its use was relegated almost solely to the

peasantry. Since before the time of the Pacta Conventa (1102) Latin had served as the

language of government and high society in the Hungarian Kingdom.158 Latin had served

the Magyars well, effectively masking the fact that they made up less than one half of the

people in the Hungarian Kingdom.159

Joseph II (1765-1790) began the attack on Croatian (and Magyar simultaneously)

when he attempted to replace Latin with German throughout the Habsburg Empire. The

Croatians and Magyars joined together to defeat this plan, but from this time on there

would always be a mild but prevalent form of Germanization of Habsburg citizens.160 In

1827 the Hungarians, influenced strongly by a fear of Germanization and the prediction

by Herder that the Slavs, Germans, Romanians, and other surrounding peoples would

l5*Banac, National Question in Yugoslavia. 59.

l59Despalatovic. Ljudevit Gai. 16.

,60The process of Germanization was particularly strong among men of the Habsburg Empire, all of whom were required to serve in the Imperial Army, and learn at least rudimentary German commands. An interesting example of the Germanization policies is provided by none other than Marshall Josip Tito (1892-1980). In an interview with a German reporter he was once asked how it was that he came to speak German so well. "Didn't you know" he replied "that I was an underofficer in the K.u.K Infantry Regiment 16?" See Spence, "Yugoslavs, the Austro-Hungarian Army, and the First World War," 41-43.

* S

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 68

absorb the Magyar race, decided to discard Latin and replace it with their native tongue.161

This policy was to be implemented in stages, but by 1843 it had been made clear to the

Croatians that they had only six more years before they would be required to use Magyar

for all official business, including education.162

In reaction to these Magyar policies the Illyrian movement of Ljudevit Gaj grew.

At its core, Gaj's program was one of South Slav cultural unity. He saw a common

language as a key to future cohesion of the South Slavs.163 In 1835, in his annual

declaration printed in the Illyrian literary magazine Danica Horvatska Slavonska (The

Croatian, Slavonian and Dalmatian Morning Star) Gaj wrote:

In Illyria there can only be one true literary language. But we do not search for this language in any one region, or in any one state, but in all of the areas comprising this great Illyria. The Germans have organized their

'“ Barany, "Magyar Nationalism before 1848," 31.

l62Seton-Watson, German. Slav, and Magyar. 26.

‘“ There is still no consensus on whether it is more than a coincidence that Gaj found his Illyrian language in the Stokavian dialect of the Dubrovnik intelligentsia, while Karadzic found his "true Serbian" language in the Stokavian dialect of mountainous Herzegovinan peasants. Regardless, the two reformers, in so doing, made a major contribution towards Serb-Croat unity. For more on this controversy see Banac, National Question in Yugoslavia. 76-78 and 209-210.

It is also worth noting that Gaj’s linguistic movement, while adapting the Stokavian dialect did not accept Vuk's orthographic reforms lock, stock, and barrel. In fact, the Croats used a unique blend of Stokavian that was enriched substantially by elements of the Cakavian and Kajkavian dialects, both of which were strongly represented in the Croatian literary tradition. The full program of Vuk Karadzic was only implemented, with some resistance, under the Banship of Khuen-Hedervary, (r. 1893-1903) whose government was most noted for its draconian suppression of Croatian national rights. For more see: Ivo Banac, "Main Trends in the Croat Language Question," in Aspects o f the Slavic Language Question, vol. 1. Church Slavonic - South Slavic - West Slavic ed. Riccardo Picchio and Harvey Goldblatt (New Haven: Yale Concilium on International and Area Studies, 1984.)

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 69

literary language out of the dialects of Germany and the Italians have sung their sweet words derived from all the dialects of Italy. Our grammar and our vocabulary comes from all Illyria. In this great garden there are very beautiful flowers; let us pick the best and make one wreath which will never wither among out people, but with growth will be decorated all the more abundantly and beautifully.164

In short, Croatian Illyrianism attempted to compensate the Croats for their weak

political position within the Habsburg Monarchy by turning their national struggle into

part of a larger, South Slav movement. Perhaps, had the Serbs also suffered from a weak

sense of nationalism at this stage, the acceptance of the use of Stokavian as the

preeminent character of national belonging could have revolutionized the movement for

South Slavic unity. It would have been conceivable for the Serbs and Croats to bond over

their common language and do away with concepts of limited national cohesion. The

Serbs, however, were a proud people. Having fought for and won their independence,

they were not about to abandon their state, their monarchy, nor even their language to a

Croatian program. Instead, the Serbs continued to believe, as Karadzic had hypothesized,

that anyone who spoke the Stokavian dialect was, simply, a Serb. The alternative could

have been genuine Yugoslavism in which the smaller national groups all subjoined their

identity for a larger, "Illyrian" one.

This point, while central to the Illyrians, was largely missed by the Serbs, few of

whom could see any advantage in renouncing a nationality that, while still in its infantile

stages of development, had many proud moments, great works of literature, and a

l64Spalatin, "Ante StarCevic," 27.

ir ... ..______

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 70

functioning state structure. Vuk himself wrote "it is hard to induce them [the Serbs] to

acknowledge that they are Serbs, and we would be crazy if we agreed to abandon our

famous name and adopt another one [Illyrian], which is dead and today has no meaning in

itself."165 Gaj too was aware of the developed existence of the Serbian ethnic identities.

; As early as 1839 he asserted that "a Serb will never be a Croatian or a Slovene, and the

latter two not being Serbs can in no way ever become Serb."166

For Gaj the recognition of independent and separate ethnic heritage did not mean

that a larger union could not be forged. His dream was not to separate the South Slav

ethnicities but to bring them together linguistically and politically; his recognition that in

order for this process to occur a new identity had to be created was, for the time, near

genius. "Our intention," he wrote "is not to abolish particular identifications, but just to

unify them under a common name because each particular identification united together

make up the substance of the general Illyrian nationality."167

!65Quoted in Singleton, Short History of the Yugoslav Peoples. 74.

166Quoted in Spalatin, "Ante Stardevic," 2.

,67Quoted in Spalatin, "Ante Stardevic," 27.

It is possible to see in this comparison of linguistic movements the beginnings of an argument for the open, inclusive, nationality program developing in Croatia and against the similarly inclusive program in Serbia. This hypothesis, while on the surface appealing, is incorrect and dangerous. Serb and Croat nationalities developed along what, in retrospect, are logical paths. The Croats needed a broader base of support to combat the larger and more powerful Hungarians and Germans, and thus turned to the other South Slavs for support. Conversely, the Serbs were a proud and successful people and thus turned to "help" their brothers by including them in their ethnic group. Critical in this discussion, however, is the realization that some Serb and Croat writers were actively looking at each other as the natural extensions of their own states. The manner in which these territories were to be incorporated

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 71

Despite Serbian intransigence, Gaj continued his recruiting efforts, attempting to

bring Slovenes, Bosnians, Macedonians, and even Bulgarians into his program.

Particularly among the Bosnian Croats and Muslims there was some excitement for the

Illyrian program.168 The Slovenes were also aware of Gaj's program of political and

cultural unity, though the linguistic cohesion movement that was at the core of Illyrianism

failed to make inroads among the Slovenes, who already had a well-developed and unique

literary language that they had embraced since the time of the French Revolution.169 This

is less important than the fact that at some point it was believed the two states would combine.

,6*Befitting this cultural confusion, there is ample linguistic confusion. During the years of Yugoslav statehood, Bosnians, officially, spoke Serbo-Croatian. Since the war, however, that language is less and less recognized, and academics and philologists in the respective states are actively attempting to cultivate more distinguishable languages. Under these confusing situations the Bosnians have tended to follow the trend and have begun to refer to their spoken tongue as Bosniak. Increasingly this language is incorporating words commonly used only by the older generations of Muslims in an attempt to differentiate itself from Serbian and Croatian and lend an air of cultural uniqueness to itself. In the period before the First World War, however, no clear linguistic differentiation can be made other than to say that several sub-variations of the Stokavian dialect were in use in the region. See David A. Dyker, "The Ethnic Muslims of Bosnia -- Some Basic Socio- Economic Data," Slavic and East European Review 50, no. 119 (1972); Bringa, Being Muslim the Bosnian Wav, xviii; and Banac, National Question in Yugoslavia. 47-50.

169During the Protestant Reformation in Slovenia, Primoz Trubar, a Slovenian cleric, translated the New Testament into Slovene, and thus, in the manner of Germany's Luther, founded the "Slovene" vernacular. The counter reformation was severe in Slovenia, however, and the prestige of Slovenian as a literary language soon returned practically to none. Nearly two and a half centuries later Jemej Kopitar (1780-1844) reinvigorated the language when he published the first Slovene grammar.

Between 1809 and 1814, Slovenia was incorporated into Napoleon's Illyrian province. Marshall Marmont, the French ruler of the Illyrian province, attempted to establish universal education in the "Illyrian" language, which he believed to be best represented by the Stokavian dialect. This, as mentioned above, was the dialect most commonly used by the Dubrovnik intellectuals and the mountainous Herzegovinan peasants, and, incidentally, the dialect selected by both Vuk Karadzic and Ljudevit Gaj in their respective orthographic reforms. The Slovenes, however, in a surprising show of early cultural awareness, rejected that model and managed to convince the French that among the

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 72

despite the works of several prominent Slovene intellectuals, most notably the writer

Stanko Vraz, who championed the Illyrian movement in Slovenia and began writing

solely in the Stokavian dialect of the Illyrisists.170 The result was that the Slovenes

maintained a substantial degree of cultural and linguistic uniqueness at a time when the

greatest progress in linguistically homogenizing the South Slavs was being made.171

The curse of the Illyrian program was that it would always be viewed as a largely

Slovenes there was a distinctly different language. Soon afterwards public instruction began in the Slovene language as established by Kopitar and Preseren. Thus, Slovene nationalism was "based on the modem [Slovene] literary language." For the Slovenes the use of the vernacular during the period o f French administration was a critical reform. As observed by the historian Leopoldina Plut-Pregelj, "no longer was Slovene reserved for religious education, or barely tolerated because the pupils could not understand anything else..."; now it was the official language of instruction. One of the most long- lasting results of the French administration on the Slovene educational system derived from the simple necessity that teaching in Slovene required new textbooks. Valentin Vodnik, (1758-1819) a Slovene priest, poet, and principal of the Ecole Primaire in Ljubljana was given the task of writing the new textbooks. In 1811 he published the first Slovene primer, Abeceda za Perve Sole (The ABCDs for Elementary Schools) and also the first Slovene grammar book designed for public education. Pismenost ali Gramatika (Literacy of Grammar). While the Illyrian province was ephemeral — it lasted barely three years after the publication of Vodnik's first primer -- the textbooks remained in circulation for many years. As such, for the Slovenes, they are clearly "the most enduring acquisition of French rule."

For more on he language situation in Slovenia please see: Henry R. Cooper, Jr., "Primoz Trubar and Slovene Literature of the Sixteenth Century," Slovene Studies 7, (1985): 35-50. See also, Boris Patemu, "Protestantism and the Emergence of Slovene Literature," Slovene Studies 6, (1984); Carole Rogel, The Slovenes and Yugoslavism. 1890-1914 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1977). 5 and 9; Sljivic-Simsic, "Vuk Stefanovic Karadzic," 175; Despalatovic. Ljudevit Gaj. 22; Butler, "Yugoslavia’s Slavic Languages"; Banac, "Nationalism in Southeastern Europe," 112; Plut-Pregelj. The Illyrian Provinces,” 607.

170Vraz would later begin publication of a new Illyrian literary journal, Kolo,that far surpassed Gaj's Danica Hrvatskaand soon became "one of the most important vehicles for the best in Illyrian writing." For more on Vraz see Lord, "The Nineteenth-Century Revival of National Literatures.”

mBanac, "Nationalism in Southeastern Europe," 111.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 73

Croatian movement.172 This was at least in part due to the nature of the Illyrian's main

objective, namely keeping Magyarization at bay; apart from the Serbs and Slovenes living

within the boundaries of Hungarian control, few could do more than sympathize with the

Illyrian cause. In the end the Illyrian movement appears to have been doomed by its

limited intent.

Summary

Language differences among the Yugoslav peoples are largely negligible. After

the respective orthographic struggles in Serbia and Croatia it would be absurd to claim

that the emergent languages were anything but identical. In 1914 the Serbian writer

Jovan Skerlic went so far as to advocate the complete fusion of Serbian and Croatian into

a single language with a single alphabet.173 Even taking into consideration the Slovene’s

desire not to use the Stokavian dialect, the nineteenth century must be viewed as a time

when powerful forces for consolidation were at work. Relevant too is the fact that at the

time when the most attention was being paid to linguistic issues in the Balkans, both

Germany and Italy were also beginning to struggle with similar, if not more pronounced,

problems.

172Dedijer, et al., History of Yugoslavia. 304.

173 According to Skerlic's plan the Serbs would have surrendered their Cyrillic script in favor of the Roman alphabet; The Croats, meanwhile would have given up their Ijekavian (or western) dialect in favor of the Ekavian (or eastern) dialect common to Serbia. See Christopher Spalatin, "Language Situation in Croatia Today". Journal of Croatian Studies. 14-15 (1973-1974), 3-4.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 74

Unfortunately, secondary issues arose around language, obfuscating the

importance of a shared tongue. As the Croatian historian Srdjan Trifkovic noted in a

recent article in the East European Quarterly. "[l]inguistic kinship could not conceal the

fact that, as Europe stood on the brink of The Great War, the traditions of Serbia and

Croatia were based on two different sets of values, and distinct philosophies and

experiences."174

This trend of constant fluctuation towards and away from political and linguistic

union is to be expected. A straight line towards union, with no detours or oscillations,

would be abnormal. In fact, it is the chaotic moments that are the essence both of the

Yugoslav story and of the Yugoslav tragedy. The multi-cultural, multi-historical, multi

lingual, and multi-faith region is not a place for simple answers to complex questions.

Often simply reaching a conclusion seems impossible in this land; reaching consensus

probably is. This saga of national impulse and separatist tendencies will be played out

many times throughout Yugoslav history.

174Trifkovic, "The First YugosIavia,"349.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. CHAPTER 4: EDUCATION

Information about the way and degree to which the populace of the South Slavs

were educated can reveal much. Besides providing an insight into such things as literacy

rates and average educational levels, an in-depth study of educational systems —

particularly one that examines the textbooks used by the students — should give us some

idea of what was being learned. Unfortunately this has only been undertaken by one

American historian of Yugoslavia, the now retired Indiana University historian Charles

Jelavich. His study, published in 1990, and a few additional articles, are, basically, the

only scholarly sources available, and they cover only Serbia, Croatia, and Slovenia.175

Clearly this is a subject that deserves further research.

Serbia

In 1882, the first year that four-year, compulsory, education was legislated in

Serbia, there were approximately 200.000 children between the ages of six and twelve

l75It can be assumed that the number of students enrolled in primary school substantially increased over the following years as the Serbian population grew from 1,377,000 in 1870 to 2,331,000 just thirty years later. See: Kann, Multinational Empire. 299-307; Jelavich, South Slav Nationalisms: Jelavich, "Serbian Textbooks," 601-619; and Jelavich, "The Issue of Serbian Textbooks,” 214-233.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 76

enrolled in public schools.176 Education was provided in the Serbian language, as

formulated by Vuk Karadzic, and roughly 50 percent of classroom time was spent

studying issues directly relating to Serbia, such as Serbian language, religion, geography,

and history. The study of "Serbian lands outside the Kingdom" was purposely stressed.177

This was done, however, in a rather ethnocentric manner; there war. little study of Croats.

Slovenes, or Bosnians. For example, it was highlighted that the other South Slav lands

were Serbian and that they must be "liberated and united to the Serbian Kingdom."178 It

was not until 1913 that Serbian textbooks began to reflect influences of Yugoslavism. and

talk substantively about the other South Slav nationalities.179 Austria-Hungary was

consistently portrayed as the real enemy of the Serbian nation.180 Jelavich estimates that

at least 85 percent of the Serbian population "lived in rural areas where textbooks were

the primary source for the education and indoctrination of youth."181

l76Jelavich, South Slav Nationalism. 34. Prior to the I880's education in Serbia was virtually unheard of. A small percentage of educated elites were trained abroad but aside from that there was "not even a semblance of an educated class" in Serbia. For more please see Stoianovich, "The Pattern of Serbian Intellectual Evolution," 242-272.

177Jelavich, South Slav Nationalism. 35.

178Jelavich, "Serbian Textbooks and World War I," 218.

t79Jelavich, "Serbian Textbooks: Toward Greater Serbia or Yugoslavia," 614.

l80Jelavich, "Serbian Textbooks and World War I," 218.

l81Jelavich, "Serbian Textbooks and World War I," 233.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 77

In the new state that was created after the First World War there were a substantial

number of moderately well educated Serbs. They knew how to read and write, and they

knew about the glories of the Serbian past.182 They were, however, essentially ignorant

about their ethnic brothers, and if they were indoctrinated with any political program it

was that of Greater Serbia, not the Yugoslav idea. The first generation to learn

systematically about the Croats and Slovenes would not come of age until the Kingdom

of Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes was a reality. By then it may have been too late as those

who instantly became Yugoslavs in 1918 too often were unaware of the intimate bond

they shared with their ethnic, and now national, brothers.

Croatia

In some respects, educational development in Croatia-Slavonia, and to a lesser

extent in the Croatian lands of Istria and Dalmatia, mirrored that in Serbia. While Serbia

as an independent state conducted its own educational policy, Croatia too gained control

of her educational system following the enactment of the Nagodbain 1868. The 1874

education bill required four years of free, compulsory education, in Croatian, though with

both Latin and Cyrillic alphabets available. As in Serbia, all textbooks had to receive

state approval.183 In order to placate the substantial Serb minority in Croatia-Slavonia

some concessions had to be met. Among these were the rights of Serbs to read Church

l82JeIavich, South Slav Nationalism. 40.

183Jelavich, South Slav Nationalism. 41-45.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 78

Slavonic texts in their religious education, and the right to call their language of

instruction "Croatian or Serbian."184

In contrast to the Serbian textbooks, all Croatian works made reference to the

Serbian nation to the east. In general, the Serbs were "presented in a favorable light.. .

but as a separate South Slavic nation.'"85 The Slovenes were more or less ignored by the

Croats as well as the Serbs.

Slovenia

The Slovenes were not placed into a single administrative unit until after World

War One. During the period of national awakenings prior to 1914, the Slovene "nation"

was spread out across several Habsburg territories. As such they had no control of their

educational system, unlike the Croats or Serbs. Habsburg authorities ran the Slovene

schools under laws passed virtually without Slovene input.186 While this placed the

Slovenes at a slight tactical disadvantage, it is worth noting that the Habsburg educational

system was exceptionally well run and that the Slovene lands had the best educated

citizens of any of the South Slav states. In 1914 the Slovenes had a remarkable 91.2

t84JeIavich, South Slav Nationalism. 47.

185Jelavich, South Slav Nationalism. 61 and 243.

l86Jelavich, South Slav Nationalism. 244.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 79

percent literacy rate.187

That said, however, it is interesting to note that along with the expected lessons

about loyalty to the Empire and Catholic Church, there were also numerous references to

the Slovenian nation, and in fact, according to the historian Jozo Tomasevic, the authors

of Slovene textbooks, "used every opportunity to develop the self-esteem and national

self-awareness of the Slovene students."188 Finally, in Slovene textbooks, there was

repeated reference to both the Serbian and Croatian peoples, though little, if any, support

was given directly to the idea of South Slav unity or Yugoslavism.189

Summary

In the three core states of the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes, there was a

great discrepancy in the quality and substance of elementary education. In particular the

lack of education, in Serbia and Croatia especially, about the other South Slavs hindered

the creation of a sense of national oneness. All discussions of religious, social, linguistic,

and economic differences among the South Slavs must be prefaced with the fact that only

a small percentage of the populace had any knowledge of these issues or had been

l87Toma§evic, Peasants. Politics, and Economic Change. 199. According to the Austrian Census of 1910 the total number of Slovenes was 1,253,000. See: Seton-Watson, Southern Slav Question. 12; and Kann, Multinational Empire. 299 - 307.

l8gTomasevic- Peasants. Politics, and Economic Change. 199.

189Tomasevic, Peasants. Politics, and Economic Change. 244 and chap. 6.

r i

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 80

presented with a forum in which to discuss the possibility of union. An additional

tragedy is found in the Serbian educational authorities' decision to classify all South Slavs

as Serbs. This is a recurrent theme in the Serbian nationalist agenda; thus it is not

surprising to find these concepts embedded in Serbian textbooks.

i ______

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. CHAPTER V: RELIGION

Man is the only animal that loves his neighbor as himself, but cuts his throat if his theology is not right. — Mark Twain

Religion is among the most divisive of issues. Countless souls have been

exterminated in the name of some "true" god. In the Yugoslav lands the situation is no

different. When the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes was formed in 1918 there

were three official religions: Eastern Orthodoxy, Roman Catholicism, and an extremely

non-fundamental form of Islam as practiced in Bosnia. Each of these religions enjoyed a

claim to paramount importance among the ethnic groups that practiced them, and based

their social coherence upon them. Efforts have been made throughout the bleak history of

the Yugoslav nation to lessen the division caused by religion in order to bring harmony to

the South Slavs. Particularly with regard to the differences between the Eastern Orthodox

and Roman Catholic faiths some progress was made, though not enough to allow religion

to pass into the background as a non-issue. When Yugoslavia was formed in 1918, and

when it fell apart in 1989, religion was an issue that the disgruntled or fearful could use to

rally the masses.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 82

Croatia

The Croatian Catholic Church never served as a nationalist institution within

Croatia; its focus was primarily oriented towards Rome, and only in rare instances did

church officials consider themselves to be Croats first and Catholics second. Christianity

was introduced to Croatia during the reign of Charlemagne, and Croatia has been a

largely, though by no means exclusively, Roman Catholic country ever since.

Throughout the history of the Croat state, and particularly from the time of the

establishment of the Croatian Military Border, or Vojvodina, in the fifteenth century,

there were many members of the Orthodox faith residing within the borders of Croatia.

At the beginning of the twentieth century there were roughly 1,750,000 Catholics in the

state of Croatia-Slavonia and 650,000 members of the Orthodox religion. In Dalmatia

and Istria, two historically Croatian provinces, there were 700,000 Catholics and

approximately 100,000 Orthodox.190 Thus the Croats, while firmly attached to their own

Catholicism, did not see it as a prerequisite of their nationality.191

Serbia

Serbia's Orthodox Christian Church, unlike Croatia's Catholic Church, was largely

a national organization that aided in defining what it was to be a Serb. Developed during

the Byzantine domination of Serbia (950-1150 a.d.), the Church had distinctly Eastern

190Seton-Watson. Southern Slav Question. 12.

l9‘Banac, National Question in Yugoslavia. 66-68.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 83

traditions. Prince Rastko Nemanjic, son of Stefan Nemanja, and better known as Saint

Sava (1175-1235 or 1236), was primarily responsible for making "the Orthodox Church

in Serbia Serbian" and making "the Serbian nation Orthodox."192 Later, while Serbia was

occupied by an Islamic power, the Orthodox Church was a conspicuous aspect of Serb

individuality.193 Additionally, according to Barbara and Charles Jelavich, it served as "a

major vehicle in the transmission and preservation of past traditions. .. . The Church as a

whole kept alive the idea that its members were distinct and superior and that the

Muslims were transgressors on Christian territory."194

Bosnia

The process of Islamization was moderate in most captured areas of Turkish

control, but in Bosnia-Herzegovina, which formed the border between Islam and

Christendom, it was more intense, and considerably more successful.195 The Bogomil

heresy, similar to that of the Cathars in western Europe or the Albigensians in France, had

192Mateja Matejic, "Saint Sava" in Landmarks in Serbian Culture and History: Essavs ed. Vasa D. Mihailovich (Pittsburgh: Serb National Federation, 1983), 29.

193Veselin Kesich, "The Spiritual Heritage of the Serbian Church" in Landmarks in Serbian Culture and History: Essavs ed. Vasa D. Mihailovich (Pittsburgh: Serb National Federation, 1983.)

l94Jelavich- History of the Balkans: Volume 1. 174.

19SBringa. Being Muslim the Bosnian Wav. 15-18.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 84

won over most Bosnians during the twelfth and thirteenth centuries.196 The Bosnian kings

had even established a Bosnian (Bogomil) Church.197 While many Orthodox and

Catholics Slavs fled the Turkish advances, in Bosnia "heretics" found the Muslims to be

more tolerant than their Christian brethren had ever been. Islam, which seems to have

had some substantial similarities with the way religion was practiced in the Bosnian

Church, may have seemed both "attractive and liberating" according to the sociologist

Tone Bringa.198 Furthermore, the Turks gave preferential treatment to all who accepted

Islam, including lower taxes and a greater degree of self-govemance.199

In 1489 only 18.4 percent of the Bosnian population practiced Islam. By 1520

that number had skyrocketed to 46 percent, and within the new city of Sarajevo it was

I96The Bogomil heresy was a religious schism bom out of a long line of schismatic movements dating back to Manichaeism in third-century Mesopotamia. Bogomilism first appeared in Europe as a neo-Manichaean movement in the ninth century, and it had many supporters in Macedonia and Bosnia-Herzegovina. Both Byzantium and Rome felt themselves threatened by the Bogomils and attempted to suppress the "heretics." Consistent pressure was applied to Bogomil areas, including invasions and Crusades. The antagonism created by these actions made the eventual occupation by Ottoman forces substantially easier, and many Bogomils found life under Islam less draconian than life under Christian rulers.

I97John Fine, The Bosnian Church: A New Interpretation fBoulder: East European Quarterly. 1975,) 9.

198Bringa. Being Muslim the Bosnian Wav. 17.

l99Colin Heywood, "Bosnia Under Ottoman Rule, 1463-1800" in The Muslims of Bosnia- Herzegovina: Their Historic Development from the Middle Ages to the Dissolution of Yugoslavia ed. Mark Pinson (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1993); and Banac, National Question in Yugoslavia. 41.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 85

reported that 100 percent of the residents exercised the Islamic faith.200 Thus, since the

fifteenth century, there has been a substantial Muslim population in Bosnia, retaining

little religious, and subsequently less cultural, affiliation with their Slavic cousins.201 In

fact, according to Columbia University professor Ivo Banac, the Bosnian Muslims "often

referred to themselves as Turks by virtue of their Turkish faith.'"202 That said, however, it

must be mentioned that when Bosnia was incorporated into Yugoslavia it was "not

nationally conscious."203 Interestingly enough, even as late as 1991, when the idea of a

Bosnian nationality was beginning to come into vogue, the state still had the highest

percentage of peoples in the nation registering themselves as Yugoslavs, as opposed to

Muslims, Serbs, Croats, Slovenes, Montenegrins, Gypsies, Albanians, or Ukrainians, the

other nationalities represented in the census for Bosnia-Herzegovina.204

Slovenia

Under the rule of Charlemagne Christianity was introduced in Slovenia. Most

200Singleton. Short History of the Yugoslav Peoples. 19-20.

201PauI Mojzes, Yugoslav Inferno: Ethnoreligious Warfare in the Balkans. (New York: Continuum, 1994), 30-31.

202Banac, National Question in Yugoslavia. 41.

203Banac, National Question in Yugoslavia. 58.

204Bringa, Being Muslim the Bosnian Wav. 24, 26.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 86

residents were Germanized to such an extent that the Slovene language disappeared from

use completely among the middle and upper classes. The Protestant Reformation

emanating from the Teutonic lands was extremely popular among the Slovenes.

Protestant use of the Slovene vernacular sparked a cultural and linguistic revival that

could have led to an early form of Slovene national affirmation.203 During the Habsburg

Counter-Reformation, however, the Slovenes were successfully converted back to

Catholicism. Only those Slovenes residing in the Hungarian province of Prekemuije

remained Protestant, thanks to the grant of religious freedom in Hungary in 1606.206 The

Slovene pride in their language and literature did not die out with their Protestant faith,

however, and probably kept the Slovenes in the Monarchy from being totally culturally

absorbed by the Germans over the following centuries.207

Montenegro

The population of Montenegro was incorporated into the Serbian Kingdom at the

time of the Serbs' creation of their own Serbian Orthodox Church. Since that time the

vast majority of Montenegrins have practiced Eastern Orthodoxy, and belonged to the

Serbian Orthodox Church. As in Serbia, the Orthodox faith was central to national

205Banac, National Question in Yugoslavia. 45.

206Kann and ZdenSk, A History of East Central Europe. 50.

207Rogel, The Slovenes and Yugoslavism. passim.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 87

belonging. The Montenegrins believed themselves to be Serbs precisely because of their

Serbian, religious, heritage. In the words of the author Milovan Djilas, in Montenegro.

"Religion and nationality became as one.... Eventually, even resistance to taxes and

serfdom became religious, and as such national, resistance movements."208

Macedonia

Prior to the incorporation of Macedonia into the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats, and

Slovenes, and the subsequent ninety years of consistent Yugoslav, and particularly

Serbian, influences, Macedonia's population was "an ethnic amalgam containing, in

addition to the Turks, Greeks, and Bulgarians, large numbers of Albanians, Vlachs,

Gypsies, Armenians, Jews, and marginally, Serbs."209 As such it was represented by at

least three religions, and, in the case of the Orthodox, several distinct branches of the

Church. Perhaps it is not surprising then, under these circumstances, that "Macedoine"

entered the French language as a synonym for mixture.210 Unlike in the other regions of

the future Yugoslavia, religion divided rather than united the peoples of Macedonia.

208Djilas, Njegos. 20.

209Marin Pundeff, "Bulgaria" in The Columbia History of Eastern Europe in the Twentieth Century ed. Joseph Held (New York: Columbia University Press, 1992), 69.

2I0Pundeff, "Bulgaria," 69.

i ______

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 88

Religious Tolerance Movements

By 1857 the Illyrian Political Party, based largely on the unifying force inherent in

a single national tongue, was dead. The next year the party even shed its name, and in so

doing, its raison d’etre. The new name chosen by the remaining Illyrians was the Croatian

National Party. Beginning in the early 1860s, however, an Illyrian revival, this time

under the name Yugoslavism, was bom. Yugoslavism's most eminent exponents came

from the Catholic Church, and as Illyrianism professed the power of linguistic cohesion,

Yugoslavism would pronounce religious cohesion and social tolerance as the cornerstone

o f South Slavic unity.211

The man most responsible for the birth of Yugoslavism and the articulation of its

goals and beliefs was the Catholic Bishop of Djakovo. Juraj Strossmayer (1815-1905). It

2I,It is worth mentioning, however, that Strossmayer too was cognizant of the unifying power found in the mutual use of a shared tongue. He regarded the vernacular as "a means which God may use in the future to reunite the Yugoslav nations in faith..." and in 1859, with the aid of his long time friend Francis Radki (1828-1894) he drafted a Pro Memoria to Pope Pious IX urging him to accept the use of the vernacular in church services. In response the Pontiff issued a decree stating that this topic "must be discussed without delay and as far as it is possible it ought to be put into practice." In an impassioned speech to the Diet of Zagreb in 1861, Strossmayer argued that no nation or race can "progress and grow culturally or scientifically as long as that nation or race is divided linguistically." To this end he suggested that all dialects be abolished and that a single literary language be accepted by all South Slavs. In this oration Strossmayer drew parallels with the Germans and Italians, neither of whom had made much progress in their campaigns for national unity until they had resolved their linguistic disputes. Later he was also instrumental in drawing up an agreement between the Vatican and Montenegro, making one of the conditions of the agreement the right of Slavs to listen to divine service in their own tongue. He even induced the Church to have various religious texts, including the New Testament, printed in Old Church Slavonic. See Lovett F. Edwards, Yugoslavia ( London: B.T. Batsford, Ltd.,) 1971, 220; and Ivo Sivric, Bishop J.G. Strossmayer: New Lights on Vatican I. (Chicago: Franciscan Herald press), 39 and 275.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 89

cultivated Strossmayer’s political beliefs.212 Kollar was a Pan-Slavist in the most sincere

form; he believed that Pan-Slavism was a religion "within which there was room for free

worship for Lutherans, Calvinists, Orthodox and Catholics."213 Additionally, it was

Kollar’s belief that there was only one basic Slavic language, with four acceptable

dialects: Russian, Czech, Polish, and Illyrian or Yugoslav.214 Once a standard sub-dialect

had been found within each of the four, all the other forms of speaking were to be

considered rogue dialects and eliminated as rapidly as possible. Here too it seems

apparent that Strossmayer was profoundly influenced by Kollar's proposal and "remained

faithful to it, even in founding the Yugoslav Academy of Arts. .. ."215

Strossmayer went one step farther, however, arguing that there was essentially no

2l2AdditionaIly it is known that during his years as a student in Vienna (December 1840 to August 1842) and later when he came back to Vienna as a court chaplain and prefect of the Augustineum (the college where the ecclesiastical students lived) he was often found in the company of progressive politicians from Croatia and neighboring nations. Among his acquaintances we can count Metel Ozegovic, John Kukuljevic, Andrew Brlic, and Josip Jeladic, who later was appointed Ban of Croatia during the revolutionary year of 1848. All of these men were strong protagonists of the ideas of modernity and nationalism "which were so rampant all over Europe in those years." See Sivric, Strossmayer. 65.

2l3Sivric, Strossmayer. 65 and 275. Another figure of substantial importance in Croatian history who is known to have been strongly affected by Kollar’s thinking was Ljudevit Gaj, the founder of the original Illyrian movement. Despite Kollar's clearly demonstrable importance to the development of South Slav nationalist ideology, no biography or monograph is available, and most works on Yugoslav history touch on him only briefly. The authoritative History of Yugoslavia (originally published in Serbo-Croatian as Istorija Jugoslaviie') does not even mention Kollar once.

2l4Hans Kohn, Panslavism: Its History and Ideology: Second Edition (New York: Vintage Books, I960,) 11.

2l5Sivric, Strossmayer. 275.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 90

difference between the Roman Catholic and Greek Orthodox churches; for many years he

advocated the union of these churches in the hope that by so doing the nine hundred-year-

old feud that, according to Strossmayer, prevented the union of the Southern Slavs, could

be laid to rest.216

Strossmayer's founding of the Yugoslav Academy of Arts and Sciences in Zagreb

in 1867 was a huge step in his campaign for South Slav Unity.217 Strossmayer appears to

have realized the critical need for a national university as early as 1848; he began

campaigning and fund raising almost immediately. The financial campaign alone lasted

from 1860 to 1867, when the university opened; the majority of the funds, in the end,

came from Strossmayer himself.218 The purpose of the Academy, Strossmayer explained

2l6Ostovic, Truth About Yugoslavia. 50.

2,7Francis RaCki, Strossmayer’s long time friend and confidant, was appointed as the first President of the Academy and the Serbian scholar, Djuro DaniCic, was appointed as Secretary. Danicic's first assignment was to create a suitable Serbo-Croatian vernacular dictionary for use in the Academy, a further sign of Strossmayer's commitment to the linguistic goals of his predecessors, the Illyrians.

At this point the Yugoslav idea was not yet fully embraced by the residents of Croatia. Many in Zagreb, particularly, felt slighted by the naming of the Academy "Yugoslav" in the capital city of Croatia and in the beginning the institution met with "great criticism on the part of the Croats." Even twenty-five years later Ra£ki, on the occasion of his anniversary report of the Academy, went to great lengths to explain why it was still the "Yugoslav" rather than Croatian Academy of Arts. For more on the Yugoslav Academy and the struggles it created within Croatian society See Sivric. Strossmayer. chap. 7.

2l8James Bukowski, "Yugoslavism and the Croatian National Party in 1867," Canadian Review of Studies in Nationalism 3, no 1,(1975): 72. In fact it was not unusual for Strossmayer to make donations to cultural organizations, particularly those that aided in the cohesion of the South Slavic peoples. Among his recipients were several universities, museums, art galleries, and other educational institutions. See Sivric, Strossmayer. 43; and Seton-Watson, South Slav Question. 120-124.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 91

in a public letter, was to provide an institution of higher learning "in which all of the best

Croatian, Serbian, Slovenian, and Bulgarian minds would have to flow together and unite,

to deliberate on how would be the best means to form one national literature in the

Slavonic South, and how to include under its auspices all branches of human

knowledge."219 The student of Croatian nationalism, Mirjana Gross, notes that in its

operation the Yugoslav Academy "exerted its effort to build a basis for creative activities

adapted to the "national spirit" by awakening and strengthening the national

consciousness" of the Croats, and in so doing bring all South Slavs together.220

It was Strossmayer's belief that the "Yugoslavs" belonged together, but, that

before union could take place, a groundwork had to be laid for mutual understanding and

appreciation. Chief among his aims was the development of a shared national literature

and educational structure. Clearly the Yugoslav Academy was a major step in pursuit of

these goals, but Strossmayer knew that substantially more work was needed.221 In a letter

2l9Bukowski, "Yugoslavism and the Croatian National Party," 72.

Strossmayer, following in the tradition of Croatian intellectual development, sought to make his Yugoslav program as inclusive as possible. For this reason he attempted, with only minimal success, to convert not just Serbs, Croats and Slovenes to his program, but to welcome the South Slavic Bulgarians as well. For more please see: Ante Kadic, "Strossmayer and the Bulgarians," East European Quarterly 5, no. 2 (1971).

22°Gross, "Croatian Ideologies," 15-16.

—'It is unfortunate, to say the least, that there have not been more men like Strossmayer in Yugoslavia's history. There have been too many junctures in Yugoslav history where understanding and appreciation were needed, but what were found instead was vitriol and

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 92

to the historian Eugen Kvatemik (who is best remembered in Croatian history for

developing the platform of the original Croatian Party of Right) Strossmayer reminded

him that:

We [South Slavs] are indeed dwarfs, completely unprepared, regarding this question. One part of us languishes under Turkish and Greek yoke. Another part is divided and cut off by Italian and Serbian influence.. .. One part of the South Slavs lie under the yoke of Germandom, from which we [Croats] neither have emancipated ourselves completely.... It is true that our mission is great, but we are still completely unprepared.222

He was, of course, correct. Even in 1918, when Yugoslavia was created, there was not a

substantially developed sense of national oneness, a flaw in the union that would be

exploited time and time again. Strossmayer may have been on the right track, but the

obstacles were too pronounced for even a handful of great men to combat;223 popular

support was needed, and, due to the dearth of methods for propaganda and/or

indoctrination, it was seldom achieved.224

incriminations. Perhaps had there been more support for Strossmayer's program of cultural unity prior to the creation of a Yugoslav state a more secure groundwork could have been laid from which a stronger union could have blossomed.

222As quoted in Bukowski, "Yugoslavism and the Croatian National Party," 73. For more on Kvatemik please see footnote 65 in Chapter 2: National Awakenings.

223According to R.W. Seton-Watson, the well-known Italian statesmen Marco Minghetti once told him that "he [Minghetti] had the opportunity of observing at close quarters almost all the eminent men of his time." There were only two, he added, who "gave the impression of belonging to another species than ourselves. These two were Bismarck and Strossmayer." See Seton- Watson, Southern Slav Question. 118.

“ 4The most effective and common method of indoctrination, structured education, will be discussed in more detail in the following chapter.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 93

It remains for us to wonder how Strossmayer envisioned the organization of the

Balkans were they ever to be successfully liberated from Turkish rule, or even if he

expected such an event in his lifetime. His writings indicate, however, that he desired

each independent "tribe" live within its own territory, though perhaps affiliated with the

other South Slavic tribes in a loosely structured federalist state.225 The fate of Bosnia-

Herzegovina seemed to be of little importance to Strossmayer; so long as it was annexed

by Serbia or Croatia he would be content. "Foreign" (non South Slavic) domination,

however, was unacceptable.226

Strossmayer's notion of Catholic and Orthodox unity was more than just a goal; in

his eyes it was a personal Christian mission; a mission from God. One may safely say

that, for Strossmayer, Croatian national interests were seen in the light of substantially

broader goals. South Slavic solidarity, too, was just another building block; his efforts

towards creating increased social, cultural, or linguistic cohesion were little more than

stepping stones in the process of building fellowship between the two Christian faiths, of

"building a bridge between East and West."227

^Strossmayer, along with both Ra£ki and DaniCic, believed that the "Serbs, Croats, Bulgarians, and Slovenians are one and the same nation; they are simply the tribes and their respective languages are dialects." As quoted in Sivric, Strossmayer. 276.

^“ See Strossmayer's correspondence with Lord Gladstone in the Appendix to Seton-Watson, Southern Slav Question. 420; and Sivric, Strossmayer. 305-306.

~7Cuvalo, The Croatian National Movement. 14.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 94

Despite his apparently virtuous and well-meaning goals, many saw in

Strossmayer’s actions a threat. Serbian nationalists, in particular, who, as mentioned

above, viewed their faith as an integral piece of their national affiliation, were genuinely

scared of Strossmayer. According to the Serbian politician and academic, Pavle Ostovic.

"The Serbian Clergy, and a good part of the Serbian intelligentsia with it, viewed the

Yugoslav movement... as a trap intended to induce them to renounce their Church."228

Strossmayer, who in virtually all historical accounts has been cleared of any such

manipulative machinations, was pained to refute these allegations. In an address to the

Orthodox Bishops of Karlovci, Kotor, and Zadar, all of whom had accused Strossmayer

of attempting to destroy their faith, Strossmayer said:

God knows and sees that I am telling you the truth when I state that I love our [Slav] race with equal love regardless of how each nation is called; and what is more, I would like to free them from all the evils which are vexing them with the sacrifice of my life. Whatever I have done so far, I have done for our entire [Slav] race . . . and whatever I will do in the future I will do for both [Catholics and Orthodox.]229

Summary

Religious differences in Yugoslavia provide a barrier to the peaceful integration of

the nationalities. In 1914 this was perhaps even more so the case than today. As with

language, religion provides a simple method for people to differentiate themselves.

~8Ostovic, Truth About Yugoslavia. 51.

~9Quoted in Sivric, Strossmayer. 57.

i ______

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 95

Modem observers have paid particular attention to the Islamic community in Yugoslavia,

though it should be remembered that tension existed between members of the Orthodox

and Catholic faiths as well.

Differences in faith can be overcome, however, and in virtually every nation

currently in existence there are members of minority faiths. No major religious-based

conflict existed in Yugoslav history prior to 1914; there was little or no reason to view

Yugoslavia's multi-faith community as being instable. In fact, the religious reforms of the

nineteenth-century and the Yugoslav movement led by Bishop Strossmayer provided

reason to be particularly hopeful about the ability of the Yugoslavs to transcend religious

differences. There were still many problems with Yugoslav union in 1914, but religious

differences appeared to be fading into the background.

I ______

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. CONCLUSION

This paper has examined the historical validity and status, both politically and

culturally, of Yugoslavism from the time of the arrival of the first Slavs on the Balkan

Peninsula in the sixth century a.d. through the months following the assassination of

Franz Ferdinand on June 28, 1914. The region as a whole was blamed by many for

providing the initial impetus for conflict that followed Ferdinand's assassination, and

those with the liberty to concentrate on matters other than the immediate threat posed to

Europe by Germany soon began to concentrate on how to solve the so-called "Eastern

Question." By the time the war ended a general outline of the future conglomerative

unions of the Balkan and East European peoples had been devised. The Czech and

Slovakian people were to be grouped into a new nation called Czechoslovakia, and the

Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes, as well as the less well recognized Bosnians, Montenegrins,

and Macedonians, were to come together in the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes.

Many historians of the First World War have suggested that in 1914 the concept

of South Slavic unity, let alone of breaking up the Habsburg Monarchy, was

inconceivable. A.J.P. Taylor, no friend of the Habsburg Monarchy, remarked that in

1914 "every nationality in Austria except the Italians and a minority of the Germans,

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 97

preferred the Habsburg Monarchy to any conceivable alternative."230 Even R.W. Seton-

Watson, the staunch supporter of Yugoslavism, considered the Habsburg Monarchy to be

an interminable institution almost until the end of 1914. With the declaration of war in

July his opinions began to change, though it was not until October 28, in a letter to his

friend George Morianu, that Seton-Watson was able to suggest that "if my friend [Austro-

Hungary] commits suicide, after I warned him and besought him not to do so, then there

is nothing left but to bury him! And that is my present position towards Austria."231

Richard B. Spence suggested that "The Habsburg Monarchy provided a certain

degree of stability, prosperity and prestige that an independent state could never

realistically hope to realize."232 He believed union with Serbia was a prospect that "most

non-Serbs viewed with considerable trepidation. Not only was Serbia considered

backward but its Karadjordjevic dynasty carried the taint of the regicide which brought it

to power in 1903." To many, Spence continued, "the choice between the Empire and

Serbia seemed to be one between civilization and barbarism."233 And yet, by the end of

the war the status quo had shifted; the ancient Austrian Monarchy, much like the fictional

Humpty-Dumpty, had fallen and couldn't be put back together again.

^Quoted in Kohn, "Reflections on Austrian History," 14.

^ ‘Quoted in Arthur J. May, "R.W. Seton-Watson and British Anti-Habsburg Sentiment," Slavic Review 20. 1 (1961): 47.

232Spence, "Yugoslavs, the Austro-Hungarian Army, and the First World War," 24.

233Spence, "Yugoslavs, the Austro-Hungarian Army, and the First World War," 24.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 98

Finally, an increasing number of modem scholars have argued that Yugoslavia

was doomed to fail. This school of thought holds that Yugoslavia was thoughtlessly

pieced together and that the South Slavs could never live peacefully together because of

centuries of ethnic hatred between the various nationalities.234

Data has been presented to support the pessimistic views of Spence, Taylor and

; their colleagues. For example, virtually no Croatian or Slovenian intellectuals publicly

supported a union with Serbia, though it is impossible to judge how much of this was in

response to the illegality of such statements.235 Additionally the ferocity of the fighting

between the largely Croat and Slovenian Habsburg units and the Serbian forces at the

start of the war has been used by some to project an image of two peoples at each others

throats as distinct from one people attempting to come together. Richard Spence writes

that the initial skirmishes between Serbs and the largely Croatian Habsburg forces along

the front lines was "among the most savage of the entire war" largely because ethnic

hatred had been nurtured on both sides.236 Finally, historians such as Ivo Lederer have

^See, for example, Goodrich, "Old Animosities," 1; and Clark, Bosnia. 1-2.

235An excellent letter from Ivo Lupis-Vukic, a Croatian publicist and politician, to his friend R.W. Seton-Watson dated October 17, 1909, nicely expresses this lingering attachment to the Habsburg Monarchy. "Needless to say," Lupis-Vukic wrote, "I sympathize strongly with the idea of Croato-Servian unity, but I am convinced that it can only be realised within the boundaries of the Habsburg Monarchy....the sole alternative -- union with Servia and Montenegro — has in my opinion—.enormous drawbacks." For the full text of this letter please see Seton-Watson, eds.. Correspondence. 50-54.

^Spence, "Yugoslavs, the Austro-Hungarian Army, and the First World War," 63. Spence does admit in his dissertation that some of the cause for the fighting was that due to proximity, the Habsburg forces on the front lines were often largely Slavic, and often in a position of defending their hometowns.

i ______

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 99

made light of the fact that among the dominant world powers "the emergence of the

Yugoslav state was not foreseen when the war began."237 What Lederer fails to point out.

however, is that only a very few maverick western scholars, let alone political leaders,

were familiar with the political situation in the Balkans at the time; during at least the

first three years of the war, the Allies were too preoccupied with the German threat to

Europe to bother planning the future status of Europe in advance of their success.2-58

While it is true that the concept of Yugoslav unity was largely unknown among

those outside the region, it is substantially less correct to argue that in 1914 there was

little or no knowledge or support of Yugoslavism among the South Slavs. In fact, in

every period of South Slav national development, substantial movements towards

unification can be found.

The South Slavs who migrated to the Balkan Peninsula in the sixth century a.d„

although they arrived in waves, were of the same ethnicity and originated form the same

region. Each of several distinct tribes formed into separate administrative units over the

following 700 years, thus beginning the process of the splintering of the South Slavs.

Over the course of these centuries, additional non-organic variations in language,

^Ivo J. Lederer, Yugoslavia at the Paris Peace Conference: A Study in Frontiermaking (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1963), 3.

238For an excellent discussion of this phenomenon, albeit structured around the Czechoslovakian, rather than Yugoslav, perspective, see: Dagmar Homa-Perman, "The Making of a New State: Czechoslovakia and the Peace Conference, 1919," in ed. Gerhard L. Weinberg, Transformation o f a Continent: Europe in the Twentieth Century (Minneapolis: Burgess Publishing Co., 1975), 59-149.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 100

alphabet, religion, economies, culture, and political allegiance further eroded the unity of

the South Slavs. In the Middle Ages several of the South Slav states managed to

establish large and powerful Empires, the borders of which encompassed numerous South

Slav nationalities, thus further blurring the line between Serbs, Croats, Bosnians,

Slovenes, Macedonians and Montenegrins.

Oppression by different foreign powers eventually followed, the result of which

was an increase in non-organic differences among the South Slavs. Foreign dominance,

however, eventually brought with it the desire to revolt; it was through moves for

independence that the South Slavs rediscovered their ethnic similarities and mutual

interests.

The period of national awakenings in the nineteenth century brought with it much

pain, as it was at this time that each of the Yugoslav "tribes" began to clearly define who

did and did not belong. Serbian nationalists broadly defined what it was to be a Serb,

opening the door for the theory that every South Slav was a Serb. Croatian national

programs were equally inclusive, though they tended to recognize the possibility of

uniting under a new name such as Illyrian or Yugoslav. Eventually, however, extreme

Croatian nationalists began to argue that all South Slavs were, in fact, Croatians. The

possibility for conflict is clear. What is often overlooked, however, is the potency of the

recognition by both Serbs and Croats that the two were intimately related peoples.

Language is another area in which the differences between the South Slavs has

diminished over the years. During the 1800s, when there were linguistic reform

movements both in Serbian and Croatia, the localized dialects began to vanish as a

I ______

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 101

standardized version of Serbo-Croatian, based on one of the more common dialects, rose

to prominence. Limited linguistic differences lingered, the most visible of which was the

use of separate alphabets. Despite this tangible intricacy, the movements made great

progress in bringing together the South Slavs and increasing the chances for the success

of a future union.

A study of the educational system in Serbia, Croatia and Slovenia is also relevant

for our understanding of the growth of South Slav unity. Unfortunately in none of these

countries did the educational system pave the way for unity. In Serbia there was virtually

no discussion of other South Slav nationalities until 1913; in Croatia the Serbs were

presented as having a wholly separate ethnic identity; and in Slovenia there was virtually

no discussion of the Slovenes as a Slavic people. This situation improved only somewhat

with the start of the Balkan Wars of 1912 and 1913, the assassination of Franz Ferdinand

in June 1914, and the start of World War One, each of which contributed to the rise in

knowledge about the Yugoslav peoples and the South Slav unity movement.

Finally, in the chapter on religion, we have seen another potentially divisive issue

that in 1914 appeared to be well on its way to becoming benign. Nationalism, however,

was strongly connected to religion in the Balkans, thus keeping the issue from completely

disappearing into the background.

From our survey of Yugoslav history, linguistic differences, educational systems,

and religious beliefs, we can conclude that the intellectual classes among the South Slavs,

while by no means unanimous in desiring unification, were clearly well on their way to

building consensus in 1914. In this discussion of the attitudes of South Slavs towards

i ______

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 102

Yugoslav unity, however, it is critical to distinguish between those expressed by the

politically active intelligentsia, and those expressed by peasants and town folks, with

whom the intellectuals had little contact and less understanding. South Slav intellectuals,

regardless of their nationality, were prone to conceit. Rather than try to judge the

thoughts of the people they "tended to express what in their opinion the people ought to

think."239 This is not to say, however, that the average Orthodox peasant in Bosnia or day

laborer in Slovenia had no interest in politics. Quite the opposite in fact. Especially by

the mid to late nineteenth century they wanted political change, but not because of

intellectual concepts of brotherly unity. Social change was, in their minds, a route to

economic change. Any program that could offer the peasantry increased control of their

lives was bound to draw some support. The Yugoslav program could certainly be

interpreted as offering hope of such change. The gentry and bourgeois intellectuals,

meanwhile, had little interest in social change, unless it clearly would benefit their own

classes. Thus, a serious dichotomy existed between the Yugoslav leadership and the

population that they presumed to speak for. This problem was not resolved by 1914, nor

even by the time of unification in 1918. Peasants, be they for, against, or totally ignorant

of, the concept of Yugoslavism never had their most immediate concerns addressed. This

would remain, alongside the Croat-Serb divisiveness, one of the leading problems in the

post-war Yugoslav state.240

239Trifkovic, "The First Yugoslavia," 349.

:40Spence, "Yugoslavia, the Austro-Hungarian Army, and the First World War," 24-25.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 103

Among the educated peoples, however, it is clear that union was increasingly

becoming desirous. The process Vuk Karadzic, Ljudevit Gaj, and Bishop Strossmayer

began a century ago was substantially aided by Serbian victories in the Balkan Wars and

by the tumultuous events of 1914. While it is impossible to say what percentage of the

populace, even of the educated populace, were supporters of South Slav union at the end

of 1914, this thesis and particularly its survey of the period between 1814 and 1914.

clearly show a continuing growth of support for the Yugoslav program.

Scholars will probably never reach consensus as to why Yugoslavia fell apart at

the end of the twentieth century. However, those who suggest that such a fate was

predestined or that Yugoslav unity was a mistake clearly have not understand the forces

impelling towards union in Yugoslav history. The South Slav peoples who arrived in the

Balkans over a millennium ago shared what the South Slavs call a narodna jedinstvo. or

national oneness; they were, in short, one ethnically identical peoples. The majority of

the inhabitants of the regions who came together in the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and

Slovenes in 1918 were not prepared for union any more than in 1914. Perhaps had union

been delayed a few years the results would have been better. But this sort of anti-

historical second guessing can achieve little. A sober examination of the situation in

1914, however, can achieve much. Germany, Italy, Romania, and even the United States

provided a model for the successful union of divergent peoples. The identifiable

differences, namely those in religion, alphabet, and to a lesser extent language and

culture, were, and continue to be, non-organic, and therefore reversible. Actually, until

quite recently, the trend in Yugoslav history has been towards union. Language reforms

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 104

in Croatia and Serbia, and even to a lesser extent in Slovenia and Bosnia, have removed

most dialects, leaving spoken Serbo-Croatian virtually identical in Belgrade, Zagreb and

Sarajevo. Religious differences, historically the grounds for antagonism and persecution,

had, until a few years ago, been apparently relegated to the background. Even before

socialism came to Yugoslavia and religion of any sort was discouraged, there were

substantial movements to negate the differences among Islam, Catholicism, and Eastern

Orthodoxy. Yugoslavia may eventually have failed, but in 1914 there was substantial

cause to be optimistic about its potential.

4 ______

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. BIBLIOGRAPHY

Primary Sources

Andonov-Poljanski, Hristo ed., Documents on the Struggle of the Macedonian People for Independence and a Nation-State. Volume 1: From the Settlement of the Slavs in Macedonia up to the End of the First World War. Skopje: The University of Cyril and Methodius, 1985.

Bourne, Kenneth and D. Cameron Watt, eds., British Documents on Foreign Affairs" Reports and Papers From the Foreign Office Confidential Print: Part II. From the First World War to the Second: Series I. The Paris Peace Conference of 1919: Volume I. Preparations for the Conference and Earlv Meetings, n.p.: University Publications o f America, 1989.

Bourne, Kenneth and D. Cameron Watt, eds., British Documents on Foreign Affairs" Reports and Papers From the Foreign Office Confidential Print: Part II. From the First World War to the Second: Series I. The Paris Peace Conference of 1919: Volume 10. The Peace Settlement and Hungary. Czechoslovakia. Roumania. Bulgaria. Montenegro. Yugoslavia and Italy: the Fiume Issue n.p.: University Publications o f America, 1991.

Burdett, Anita L.P. The Historical Boundaries Between Bosnia. Croatia. Serbia: Documents and Maps. 1815-1945. Southampton: Archives International Group, 1995.

Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Report on the Intematioanl Commission to Inquire into the Causes and Conduct of the Balkan Wars. Reprinted in Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, The Other Balkan Wars. Washington, D.C.: Carnegie Endownment, 1993.

Chotzidis, Angelos, Basil C. Gounaris, and Anna A. Panayotopoulo, The Events of 1903 in Macedonia as Presented in European Diplomatic Correspondence. Thessaloniki: Museum of the Macedonian Struggle, 1993.

Cooke, W. Henry and Edith P. Stickney, eds., Readings in European International Relations Since 1789. New York: Harper & Brothers Publishers, 1931

105

i ______

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 106

Dockrill, M. British Documents on Foreign Affairs: Reports and Papers from the Foreign Office Confidential Print. Part II. From the First to the Second World War. Series I. The Paris Peace Conference of 1919. Volume 10. The Peace Settlement amd Hungary. Czechoslovakia. Roumania. Bulgaria. Montenegro. Yugoslavia and Italy: the Fiume Issue. University Publications of America, 1991.

Jugoslav Committee in London. The Southern Slav's Appeal. Cleveland: Milan Maijanovic, November, 1916.

Jugoslav Committee in London. The Southern Slav Library: Volume I. The Southern Slav Programme. London: Nisbett & Co., Ltd., 1915.

Jugoslav Committee in London. The Southern Slav Library: Volume II. The Southern Slavs: Land and People. London: Nisbett & Co., Ltd., 1916.

Jugoslav Committee in London. The Southern Slav Library: Volume III. A Sketch of Southern Slav History. London: Nisbett & Co., Ltd., 1915 or 1916.

Jugoslav Committee in London. The Southern Slav Library: Volume VI. Political and Social Conditions in Slovene Lands fCamiola. Carinthia. Illyrian Littoral and StvriaV London: The Near East, Ltd., 1916.

Kemer, Robert Joseph. The Jugoslav Movement. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. 1918.

Naval Intelligence Division. B.R. 493A fRestrictedl Geographical Handbook Series: Jugoslavia: Volume II. History. Peoples, and Administration. Naval Intelligence Division, October 1944.

Paris Peace Conference. The Treaty of Versailles and After: Annotations of the Text of the Treaty. New York: Greenwood Press, 1968.

Savic, Vladislav R. South Eastern Europe: The Main Problems of the Present Struggle. New York: Fleming H. Revell, Co., 1918.

Seton-Watson, Christopher and Hugh Seton-Watson, et. al., eds., R.W. Seton-Watson and the Yugoslavs: Correspondence. 1906-1914. 2 Volumes. London: British Academy, 1976.

Seton-Watson, Hugh and Cornelia Bodea, eds., R.W. Seton-Watson and the Romanians. 1906-1920. 2 Volumes. Bucharest: Editura §Tiinpfica Enciclopedica, 1988.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 107

Steed, Wickham. Through Thirty Years: 1892 - 1922. A Personal Narrative. New York: Doubleday, Page & Co.,) 1924

Seeds of Conflict Series. Hungary. Vols. I and II. Nendeln: Kraus Reprint, 1973.

Suljak, N. Dinko. Croatia's Struggle for Independence: A Documentary History. Arcadia: Croatian Information Service, 1977.

Trifiinovska, Snezana. Yugoslavia Through Documents: From its Creation to its Dissolution. Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1994.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 108

Books

Adams, John C. "Serbia in the First World War" in Robert J. Kemer, ed., Yugoslavia. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1949.

Almond Nina and Ralph H. Lutz, eds., The Treaty of St. Germain: A Documentary History of its Territorial and Political Clauses. With a Survey of the Documents of the Supreme War Council of the Paris Peace Conference. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1935.

Anderson, M.S. The Eastern Question. 1774-1923: A Study in International Relations. New York: St. Martin's Press, 1966.

Andric, Ivo. The Bridge on the River Drina. trans. Lovett F. Edwards. New York: Macmillan, 1959.

Amakis, George. "The Role of Religion in the Development of Balkan Nationalism" in Barbara and Charles Jelavich, eds., The Balkans in Transition: Essays on the Development of Balkan Life and Politics Since the Eighteenth Century. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1963.

Augustinos, Gerasimos ed., Diverse Paths to Modernity in Southeastern Europe: Essays in National Development. New York: Greeenwood Press, 1991.

Babic, Ivan. "Military History" in Francis H. Eterovich and Christopher Spalatin, eds.. Croatia: Land. People. Culture. 2 Volumes. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. 1964.

Baerlein, Henry. The Birth of Yugoslavia. 2 Volumes. London: Leonard Parsons, 1922.

Banac, Ivo. The National Question in Yugoslavia: Origins. History.Politics. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1984.

______. "Ministration and Desecration: The Place of Dubrovnik in Modem Croat National Ideology and Political Culture" in Ivo Banac, John G. Ackerman, and Roman Szporluk, eds., Nation and Ideology: Essavs in Honor of Wayne S. Vuchinich. New York: Columbia University Press, 1981.

______. "Nationalism in Southeastern Europe" in Charles A. Kupchan, ed., Nationalism and Nationalities in the New Europe. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1995.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 109

______. "Main Trends in the Croat Language Question," in Riccardo Picchio and Harvey Goldblatt, eds., Aspects of the Slavic Language Question, vol. 1. Church Slavonic - South Slavic - West Slavic. New Haven: Yale Concilium on International and Area Studies, 1984.

______. "South Slav Prisoners of War in Revolutionary Russia" in Samuel R. Williamson, Jr. and Peter Pastor, eds., War and Society in East Central Europe. Vol. V: Essays on World War One: Origins and Prisoners of War. New York: Columbia University Press, 1983.

Bertrand, Charles L. Revolutionary Situations in Europe. 1917-1922: Germany. Italv. Austria-Hungarv. Montreal: Interuniversity Centre for European Studies, 1977.

Benderly, Jill and Evan Kraft, eds., Independent Slovenia: Origins. Movements. Prospects. New York: St. Martin's Press, 1994.

Benes, Eduard. Mv War Memoirs. New York: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1928.

Betts, Reginald. "Masaryk's Philosophy of History," in Essays in Czech History. London: The Athalone Press, 1969.

Bimbaum, Henrik. "Langauge, Ethnicity, and Nationalism: On the Linguistic Foundation of a Unified Yugoslavia" in Dimitrije Djordjevic, ed., The Creation of Yugoslavia. 1914-1918. Santa Barbara: Clio Books, 1980.

Borsody, Stephen. "Hungary's road to Trianon: Peacemaking and Propaganda." in Kiraly. Bela K., Peter Pastor, eds., War and Society in East Central Europe: Vol VI: Essavs on World War I: Total War and Peacemaking. A Case Study on Trianon. New York: Columbia University Press, 1982.

Bracewell, Wendy. "National Histories and National Identies Among the Serbs and Croats" in Mary Fulbrook, ed., National Histories and European History. Boulder: Westview Press, 1993.

Brailsford, H.N. Macedonia: Its Races and their Future. New York: Amo Press, 1971.

Bridge, F.R. Great Britain and Austria-Hungary. 1906-1914: A Diplomatic History. Trowbridge: Redwood Press, Ltd., 1972.

______. The Habsburg Monarchy among the Great Powers. 1815-1918. New York: St. Martin's Press, 1990.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 110

______. From Sadowa to Sarajevo: The Foreign Policy of Austria-Hungarv. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1972.

Bringa, Tone. Being Muslim the Bosnian Way: Identity and Community in a Central Bosnian Village. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1995.

Brock, Peter and H. Gordon Skilling, eds., The Czech Renascence of the Nineteenth Century: Essavs Presented to Otakar Odlozilik in Honour of His Seventieth Birthday. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1970.

Bundy, Frank J. The Administration of the Illyrian Provinces of the French Empire. 1809-1913. New York: Garland Publishers, 1987.

Calder, Kenneth J. Britain and the Origins of the New Europe. 1914-1918. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1976.

Clark, Arthur L. Bosnia: What Every American Should Know. New York: Berkley Books, 1996.

Le Clercq, J.G. Clemenceau, Trans., Count Carlo Sforza, Fifty Years of War and Diplomacy in the Balkans: Pashich and the Union of the Yugoslavs. New York: Columbia University Press, 1940.

Clogg, Richard, ed., Balkan Society in the Age of Greek Independence. Totowa: Barnes & Noble Books, 1981.

Coon, Carelton S. "Racial History" in Robert J. Kemer, ed., Yugoslavia. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1949.

Cornwall, Mark, ed., The Last Years of Austria-Hungarv: Essavs in Political and Military History. 1908-1918. Exeter: University of Exeter Press, 1990.

Cmobmja, Mihailo. The Yugoslav Drama. Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1994.

Curcin, M., ed., Ivan Mestrovic: A Monograph. London: Williams and Norgate, 1919.

Cuvalo, Ante, The Croatian National Movement. 1966-1972. New York: Columbia University Press, 1990.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Ill

______. "The Decline and Fall of Habsburg Hungary, 1914-1918" in Ivan Volgyes. Hungary in Revolution. 1918-1919: Nine Essavs. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1971.

Deak, Istvan. The Lawful Revolution: Louis Kossuth and the Hungarians. 1848 - 1849. New York: Columbia University Press, 1979.

Dedijer, Vladimir, Ivan Bozic, Sima Cirkovic, and Milorad Ekmecic, eds.. History of Yugoslavia. New York: McGraw - Hill, 1974.

Denitch, Bogdan. Ethnic Nationalism: The Tragic Death of Yugoslavia. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1994.

Despalatovic, Elinor M. Ljudevit Gai and the Illvrian Movement. New York: Columbia University Press, 1975.

Djilas, Milovan. Njegos: Poet. Prince. Bishop. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc., 1966.

Djordjevic, Dimitrije, ed., The Creation of Yugoslavia. 1914-1918. Santa Barbara: Clio Books, 1980.

______. "The Idea of Yugoslav unity in the Nineteenth Century" in Dimitrije Djordjevic, ed., The Creation of Yugoslavia. 1914 - 1918. Santa Barbara: Clio Books, 1980.

______. "Serbian Society, 1903 - 1914" in Kiraly, Bela K. and Dimitrije Djordejevic. eds., War and Society in East Central Europe. Vol. XVII: East Central European Society and the Balkan Wars. New York: Columbia University Press, 1987.

______. "Fascism in Yugoslavia: 1918-1941" in Peter F. Sugar, ed.. Native Fascism in the Successor State. 1918-1945. Santa Barbara: Clio Book, 1971.

______. "The Yugoslav Phenomenon" in Joseph Held, ed, The Columbia History of Eastern Europe in the Twentieth Century. New York: Columbia University Press, 1992.

______. "The Serbs: A Historical Survey" in Vasa D. Mihailovich, ed., Landmarks in Serbian Culture and History: Essavs. Pittsburgh: Serb National Federation, 1983.

Djordjevic, Dimitrije and Stephen Fischer-Galati. The Balkan Revolutionary Tradition. New York: Columbia University Press, 1981.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 112

Donia, Robert. Islam Under the Double Eagle: The Muslims of Bosnia And Hercegovina. 1878-1914. New York: Columbia University Press, 1981.

Donia, Robert and William G. Lockwood, "The Bosnian Muslims: Class, Ethnicity, and Political Behaivor in a European State" in Suad Joseph and Barbara L.K. Piilsbury, eds., Muslim-Christian Conflicts: Economics. Political, and Social Origins. Boulder: Westview Press, 1978.

Dragnich, Alex N. Serbia. Nikola Pasic. and Yugoslavia. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1974.

______. Serbs afld Croats: The Struggle in Yugoslavia. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovannovicli, 1992.

______. ed., Serbia's Historical Heritage. New York: Columbia University Press, 1994.

______. "Serbia's Political Development and Western Europe's Political Tradition" in Alex Dragnich, ed., Serbia's Historical Heritage. New York: Columbia University Press, 1994.

______. "Nikola Pasic" in Vasa D. Mihailovich, ed., Landmarks in Serbian Culture and History: Essavs. Pittsburgh: Serb National Federation, 1983.

______. "The Serbian Government, the Army, and the unification of Yugoslavs" in Dimitrije Djordjevic, ed., The Creation of Yugoslavia. 1914-1918. Santa Barbara: Clio Books, 1980.

Edwards, Lovett F- Yugoslavia. London: B.T. Batsford, Ltd., 1971.

Ekmecic, Milorad- "Impact of the Balkan Wars on Society in Bosnia and Herzegovina" in Kiraly, Bela K.. and Dmitrije Djordejevic, eds.. War and Society in East Central Europe. Vol. XVII: East Central European Society and the Balkan Wars. New York: Columbia University Press, 1987.

______. "Serbian War Aims" in Dimitrije Djordjevic, ed., The Creation of Yugoslavia. 1914-1918. Santa Barbara: Clio Books, 1980.

Eley, Geoff and Ronald Grigor Suny, eds. Becoming National: A Reader. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 113

Emmert, Thomas A. Serbian Golgotha: Kosovo. 1389. New York: East European Monographs, 1990.

______. "Kosovo: Development and Impact of a National Ethic" in Ivo Banac, John G. Ackerman, and Roman Szporluk, eds.. Nation and Ideology: Essavs in Honor of Wavne S. Vuchinich. New York: Columbia University Press, 1981.

Erikson, John. "The Preparatory Committee of the Slav Congress, 1848-1849" in Peter Brock and H. Gordon Skilling, eds., The Czech Renascence of the Nineteenth Centurv: Essays Presented to Otakar Odlozilik in Honour of His Seventieth Birthday. Toronto: University o f Toronto Press, 1970.

Eterovich, Francis H. and Christopher Spalatin, eds., Croatia: Land. People. Culture. 2 Volumes. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. 1964.

Ferguson, Alan. "Montenegrin Society 1800-1830" in Richard Clogg, ed., Balkan Society in the Age of Greek Independence. Totowa: Barnes & Noble Books, 1981.

Fest, Wilfried. Peace or Partition: The Habsburg Monarchy and British Policy. 1914- 1918. London: George Prior, 1978.

Fichtner, Paula S. "Americans and the Disintegration of the Habsburg Monarchy: The Shaping of an Historiographical Model" in Robert A. Kann, Bela K. Kiraly. and Paula S. Fichtner, eds.. The Habsburg Empire in World War I: Essavs on the Intellectual. Military. Political and Economic Aspects of the Habsburg War Effort. New York: Columbia University Press, 1977.

Fine, John. The Bosnian Church: A New Interpretation. New York: Columbia University Press, 1975.

French, David. British Strategy and War Aims. 1914-1916. London: Allen and Unwin. 1986.

Fulbrook, Mary ed., National Histories and European History. Boulder: Westview Press. 1993.

Fischer-Galati, Stephen and Bela Kiraly, eds., War and Society in East Central Europe. Vol. XXII: Essavs on War and Society in East Central Europe. 1740-1920. New York: Columbia University Press, 1987.

Fischer-Galati, Stephen. "The Melting Pot: Solution or Crystallization?" in Anton Vantuch, ed., Per Osterreichisch Ungarische Ausgleich. 1867: Materialien

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 114

(Referate und Diskussionl der Intemationalen Konferenz in Bratislava 28. 8. - 1 . 9. 1967. Bratislava: Der Slowakischen Akademie Der Wissenshaften. 1971.

______. "Effects of the Balkan Wars on East Central European Societies" in Kiraly. Bela K. and Dimitrije Djordejevic, eds., War and Society in East Central Europe. Vol. XVII: East Central European Society and the Balkan Wars. New York: Columbia University Press, 1987.

Gazi, Stephen. A History of Croatia. New York: Philosophical Library, 1973.

Gellner, Ernest. Encounters with Nationalism. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, Ltd., 1994.

______. Nations and Nationalism. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1983.

Gewehr, Wesley M. The Rise of Nationalism in the Balkans. 1800-1930. New York: Henry Holt and Co., 1931.

Gianaris, Nicholas V. Geopolitical and Economic Changes in the Balkan Countries. London: Praeger, 1996.

Glatz, Ferenc, ed., Hungarians and Their Neighbors in Modem Times. 1867-1950. New York: Columbia University Press, 1995.

Goldstein, Erik. Winning the Peace: British Diplomatic Strategy. Peace Planning, and the Paris Peace Conference. 1916-1920. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1991.

Graham, Malbone W. New Governments of Central Europe. New York: Henry Holt and Co., 1926.

Graham, Stephen. Alexander of Yugoslavia: The Storv of the King Who Was Murdered at Marseilles. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1939.

Greenfeld, Liah. Nationalism: Five Roads to Modernity. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1992.

Gross, Miijana. "The Union of Dalmatia with Northern Croatia: a Crucial Question of the Croatian National Integration in the Nineteenth century" in Mikulas Teich and Roy Porter, eds., The National Question in Europe in Historical Context. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994.

Guibemau, Montserrat, Nationalisms: The Nation State and Nationalism in the Twentieth Century. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, Ltd., 1996.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 115

Halpem. Joel. A Bibliography of English Language Sources on Yugoslavia. 2nd Edition. Amherst: University of Massachusettes, 1969.

Hanak, Harry. Great Britain and Austria-Hungarv During the First World War: A Study in the Formation of Public Opinion. London: Oxford University Press, 1962.

Hantsch, Hugo, and Alexander Novotny, Festschrift fur Heinrich Benedikt: o.o. Professor fur Neuere Geschichte an der Universitat in Wien Uberreicht zum 70- Geburtstag. Wien: Notring der wissenschaftlichen Verbande Osterreichs. 1957.

Harkins, William E. "Chapter 13: Literature" in Charles Jelavich, ed., Langauge and Area Studies: East Central and Southeastern Europe. A Survey. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1969.

Held. Joseph, ed.. The Columbia History of Eastern Europe in the Twentieth Century. New York: Columbia University Press, 1992.

______. "The Heritage of the Past: Hungary Before World War One" in Ivan Volgyes, Hungary in Revolution. 1918-1919: Nine Essavs. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1971.

Heywood, Colin. "Bosnia Under Ottoman Rule, 1463-1800" in Mark Pinson, ed.. The Muslims of Bosnia-Herzegovina: Their Historic Development from the Middle Ages to the Dissolution of Yugoslavia. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1993.

Himka, John-Paul. "Nationality Problems in the Habsburg Monarchy and the Soviet Union: The Perspective of History" in Richard L. Rudolph and David F. Good, eds., Nationalism and Empire: The Habsburg Empire and the Soviet Union. New York: St. Martin's Press, 1992.

Hobsbawm, Eric J. Nations and Nationalism Since 1780: Programme. Myth. Reality Second Edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990.

Homa-Perman, Dagmar. "The Making of a New State: Czechoslavakia and the Peace Conference, 1919," in Gerhard L. Weinberg, ed., Transformation of a Continent: Europe in the Twentieth Century. Minneapolis: Burgess Publishing Co., 1975.

Horvath, Eugene. "Diplomatic History of the Treaty of Trianon," in Justice for Hungary. London: Longmans, Green, & Co. Ltd., n.d.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 116

Horward, Donald D. and John C. Horgan, eds., The Consortium on Revolutionary Europe. 1750-1850. Proceedings. 1989 to Commemorate the Bicentennial of the French Revolution. Tallahassee: Rose Printing Co., 1990.

Irvine, Jill. The Croat Question: Partisan Politics in the Formation of the Yugoslav Socialist State. Boulder: Westview Press, 1993.

Javarek, Vera. "Petar Petrovic Njegos (1813 - 1851)" in Vasa D. Mihailovich, ed.. Landmarks in Serbian Culture and History: Essays. Pittsburgh: Serb National Federation, 1983.

Jazzi, Oscar. The Dissolution of the Habsburg Monarchy. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1929.

Jelavich, Barbara. The Habsburg Empire in European Affairs. 1814-1918. Chicago: Rand McNally and Co., 1969.

______. Modem Austria: Empire and Republic. 1815-1986. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987.

______. History of the Balkans: Eighteen and Nineteenth Centuries. Volume 1. Cambridge: Cambridge Llniversity Press, 1983.

______. History of the Balkans: Twentieth Century. Volume 2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983.

______. "Tsarist Russia and Balkan National Liberation Movements: A Study in Great- Power Mythology" in Roland Sussex and J.C. Eade, eds., Culture and Nationalism in Nineteenth-Centurv Eastern Europe. Columbus: Slavica Publishers. Inc.. 1983.

Jelavich, Barbara and Charles Jelavich, The Balkans. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1965.

______. A History of East Central Europe. Volume VIII: The Establishment of the Balkan National States. 1804-1920. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1977.

______., eds., The Balkans in Transition: Essays on the Development of Balkan Life and Politics Since the Eighteenth Century. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1963.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 117

______eds., The Establishment of Balkan National States. 1804 - 1920. Seattle: University of Washington Press. 1977.

Jelavich, Charles. South Slav Nationalisms - Textbooks and Yugoslav Union before 1914. Columbus: Ohio State University Press. 1990.

______. Tsarist Russia and Balkan Nationalism: Russian Influence in the Internal Affairs of Bulgaria and Serbia. 1879-1886. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1958.

______., ed., Langauge and Area Studies: East Central and Southeastern Europe. A Survey. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1969.

Jensen, John H. "National and Cultural Revivals: The Relationship between them, as Exemplified by Romanian and Serbian Experiences" in Roland Sussex and J.C. Eade, eds., Culture and Nationalism in Nineteenth-Centurv Eastern Europe. Columbus: Slavica Publishers. Inc., 1983.

Jeszensky, Geza. "Hungary through World War I and the End of the Dual Monarchy" in Peter Sugar, Peter Hanak, and Tibor Frank, eds.. A History of Hungary. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1990.

______. "Scotus Viator and Hungary" in Ferenc Glatz, ed.. Hungarians and Their Neighbors in Modem Times. 1867-1950. New York: Columbia University Press, 1995.

Joseph, Suad and Barbara L.K. Pillsbury, eds., Muslim-Christian Conflicts: Economics. Political, and Social Origins. Boulder: Westview Press, 1978.

Kadic, Ante. From Croatian Renaissance to Yugoslav Socialism: Essavs. The Hague: Mouton, 1969.

Kann, Robert A. The Multinational Empire: Nationalism and National Reform in the Habsburg Monarchy. 1848-1918. New York: Columbia University Press, 1950.

______. The Habsburg Empire: A Study in Integration and Disintegration. New York: Frederick A. Praeger, 1957.

Kann, Robert A., Bela K. Kiraly, and Paula S. Fichtner, eds., The Habsburg Empire in World War I: Essavs on the Intellectual. Military. Political and Economic Aspects of the Habsburg War Effort. New York: Columbia University Press, 1977.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Kann, Robert A. and Zdenek V. David. A History of East Central Europe. Volume VI: The Peoples of the Eastern Habsburg Lands. 1526-1918. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1984.

Kann. Robert A. "The Austro-Hungarian Compromise of 1867 in Retrospect. Causes and Effect" in Anton Vantuch, ed., Der Osterreichisch Ungarische Ausgleich. 1867: Materialien fReferate und Diskussioni der Intemationalen Konferenz in Bratislava 28. 8. - 1. 9. 1967. Bratislava: Der Slowakischen Akademie Der Wissenshaften. 1971.

______. "Trends Towards Colonialism in the Habsburg Empire, 1878-1918: The Case of Bosnia-Hercegovina, 1878-1914" in Don Karl Rowney and G. Edward Orchard, eds., Russian and Slavic History. Columbus: Slavic Publishers, Inc., 1977: 164-180.

Keckemet, Dusko. Ivan Mestrovic. New York: Mc-Graw-Hill, nd.

Kemer, Robert J. ed., Yugoslavia. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1949.

Kemer, Robert J. "The Yugoslav Movement" in Robert J. Kemer, ed., Yugoslavia. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1949.

______. "Yugoslavia and the Peace Conference" in Robert J. Kemer, ed., Yugoslavia. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1949.

Kerr, Alexander, Trans., Leopold Ranke, The History of Servia and the Servian Revolution with a Sketch of the Insurrection in Bosnia. London: Harrison and Sons, 1853.

Kesich, Veselin. "The Spiritual Heritage of the Serbian Chruch" in Vasa D. Mihailovich, ed., Landmarks in Serbian Culture and History: Essavs. Pittsburgh: Serb National Federation, 1983.

Kiraly, Bela K. ed., War and Society in East Central Europe. Vol. XIV: The Crucial Decade: East Central European Society and National Defense. 1859 - 1870. New York: Social Science Monographs, 1984.

Kiraly, Bela K., Peter Pastor, eds., War and Society in East Central Europe: Vol VI: Essavs on World War I: Total War and Peacemaking. A Case Study on Trianon. New York: Columbia University Press, 1982.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 119

Kiraly, Bela K., Nandor F. Dreisziger, and Albert F. Nofi, eds., War and Society in East Central Europe. Vol. XIX: East Central European Society in World War I. New York: Columbia University Press, 1985.

Kiraly, Bela K. and Dmitrije Djordejevic, eds., War and Society in East Central Europe. Vol. XVII: East Central European Society and the Balkan Wars. New York: Columbia University Press, 1987.

Kiraly, Bela K. and Albert A. Nofi, eds., War and Society in East Central Europe. Vol. XXV: East Central European War Leaders: Civilian and Military. New York: Columbia University Press, 1988.

Kiraly, Bela K. and Laszlo Veszpremy, eds., War and Society in East Central Europe. Volume XXXII. Trianon and East Central Europe: Antecedents and Reprecussions. New York: Columbia University Press, 1995.

Kirschbaum, Stanislav J. ed., East European History: Selected Papers on the Third World Congress for Soviet and East European Studies. Columbus: Slavica Publishers, Inc., 1988.

Kohn, Hans. A History of Nationalism in the East. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Co.. 1929.

. Panslavism: Its History and Ideology: Second Edition. New York: Vintage Books, 1960.

Kostelski, Z. The Yugoslavs: The History of the Yugoslavs and their States to the Creation of Yugoslavia. New York: Philosophical Library, 1952.

Kovago, Laszlo. "From South Slav State to Yugoslavia" in Ferenc Glatz, ed., Hungarians and Their Neighbors in Modem Times. 1867-1950. New York: Columbia University Press, 1995.

Kressel, Neil J. Mass Hate: The Global Rise of Genocide and Terror. New York: Plenum Press, 1996.

Kupchan, Charles A. ed., Nationalism and Nationalities in the New Europe. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1995.

Laffan, R.G.D. The Serbs: The Guardians of the Gate. New York: Dorest Press, 1989.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 120

Lampe, John. "Belated Modernization in Comparison: Development in Yugoslavia and Bulgaria to 1948" in Gerasimos Augustinos, ed., Diverse Paths to Modernity in Southeastern Europe: Essavs in National Development. New York: Greeenwood Press, 1991.

______. "Austro-Serbian Antagonism and the Economic Background to the Balkan Wars" in Kiraly, Bela K. and Dmitrije Djordejevic, eds., War and Society in East Central Europe. Vol. XVII: East Central European Society and the Balkan Wars. New York: Columbia University Press, 1987.

______. "Unifying the Yugoslav Economy, 1918 - 1921: Misery and Early Misunderstandings" in Dimitrije Djordjevic, ed.. The Creation of Yugoslavia. 1914-1918. Santa Barbara: Clio Books, 1980.

Lansing, Robert. The Peace Negotiations: A Personal Narrative. New York: Houghton Mifflin, 1921.

Lederer, Ivo J. Yugoslavia at the Paris Peace Conference: A Study in Frontiermaking. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1963.

______. "Nationslism and the Yugoslavs" in Peter Sugar and Ivo J. Lederer, Nationalism in Eastern Europe. Seattle: University of Washington Press. 1969.

Lowrie, Donald Alexander. Masarvk of Czechoslovakia: A Life of Tomas G. Masarvk. First President of the Czechoslovak Republic. London: Oxford University Press, 1937.

Maass, Peter. Love Thv Neighbor: A Storv of War. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1996.

Macartney, C.A. The Habsburg Empire. 1790-1918. New York: The Macmillan Press, 1969.

______. Hungary and her Successors: The Treaty of Trianon and its Consequences: 1919-1937. London: Oxford University Press, 1937.

______. National States and National Minorities. New York: Russell & Russell, 1968.

Macartney, C. A. and A.W. Palmer. Independent Eastern Europe: A History. London: Macmillan & Co., Ltd., 1962.

MacKenzie, David. Ilija Garasanin: Balkan Bismarck. New York: Columbia University Press, 1985.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 121

______. "Officer Conspirators and Nationalism in Serbia, 190-1914" in Stephen Fischer-Galati and Bela Kiraly, eds., War and Society in East Central Europe. Vol. XXII: Essavs on War and Society in East Central Europe. 1740-1920. New York: Columbia University Press, 1987.

______. "Ilija GaraSanin, Serbia's National Leader. 1843-1967" in Bela Kiraly and Albert A. Nofi, eds., War and Society in East Central Europe. Vol. XXV: East Central European War Leaders: Civilian and Military. New York: Columbia University Press, 1988.

Magocsi, Paul. Historical Atlas of East Central Europe. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1993.

Malcolm, Noel. Bosnia, a Short History. London: MacMillan, 1994.

Mamatey, Victor S. The United States and East Central Europe. 1914 - 1918: A Study in Wilsonian Diplomacy and Propaganda. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1957.

Markovic, Marko. "The Secret of Kosovo" in Vasa D. Mihailovich, ed., Landmarks in Serbian Culture and History: Essavs. Pittsburgh: Serb National Federation. 1983.

Markovich, Olga. "Michael Pupin" in Vasa D. Mihailovich, ed., Landmarks in Serbian Culture and History: Essavs. Pittsburgh: Serb National Federation, 1983.

Marriot, John A.R. The Eastern Question: An Historical Study in European Diplomacy. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1917.

Matejic, Mateja. "Saint Sava" in Vasa D. Mihailovich, ed.. Landmarks in Serbian Culture and History: Essavs. Pittsburgh: Serb National Federation, 1983.

May, Arthury. "Woodrow Wilson and Austria-Hungary to the End of 1917" in Hugo Hantsch and Alexander Novotny. Festschrift fur Heinrich Benedikt: o.o. Professor fur Neuere Geschichte an der Universitat in Wien Uberreicht zum 70. Geburtstag. Wien: Notring der wissenschaftlichen Verbande Osterreichs, 1957.

Mayer, Amo J. The Politics and Diplomacy of Peacemaking: Containment and Counterrevolution at Versailles. 1918-1919. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1967.

McCarthy, Justin. "Ottoman Bosnia, 1800-1878" in Mark Pinson, ed., The Muslims of Bosnia-Herzegovina: Their Historic Development from the Middle Ages to the Dissolution of Yugoslavia. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1993.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 122

Mee, Charles L., Jr. The End of Order: Versailles. 1919. New York, E.P. Dutton, 1980.

Messinger, Gary. British Propaganda and the State in the First World War. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1992.

Mihailovich, Vasa D., ed., Landmarks in Serbian Culture and History: Essavs. Pittsburgh: Serb National Federation, 1983

Mijuskovic, Peatr Trans., Antun Barac, A History of Yugoslav Literature. Ann Arbor: University of Michigain, 1977.

Mitrovic, Andrej. "The 1919-1920 Peace Conference in Paris and the Yugoslav State: An Historical Evaluation" in Dimitrije Djordjevic, ed.. The Creation of Yugoslavia, 1914-1918. Santa Barbara: Clio Books, 1980.

Mojzes, Paul. Yugoslavian Inferno: Ethnoreligious Warfare in the Balkans. New York: Continuum, 1994.

Moravcevich, Nicholas. "Karageorge Petrovich: The Great Serbian Vozd of the First Serbian Insurrection" in Vasa D. Mihailovich, ed.. Landmarks in Serbian Culture and History: Essavs. Pittsburgh: Serb National Federation, 1983.

Morrow, Ian F.D., Trans., Alfred F. Pribram, Austria-Hungary and Great Britain. 1908- 1914. London: Oxford University Press, 1951.

Namier, Sir Lewis. Facing East: Essavs on Germany, the Balkans, and Russia in the Twentieth Century. New York: Harper and Row, 1966.

Newman, Bernard. The New Europe. New York: The Macmillam Company, 1943.

Newman, Edward William Poison. Masarvk. London: Campion Press, 1960.

Niederhauser, Emil. "The National Question in Hungary" in Mikulas Teich and Roy Porter, eds., The National Question in Europe in Historical Context. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994.

Nowak, Karl Friedrich. The Collapse of Central Europe. New York: E.P. Duton & Co.. 1924.

Noyes, George R. "The Serbo-Croatian Langauge" in Robert J. Kemer, ed., Yugoslavia. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1949.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Nyrop, Richard, ed., Yugoslavia: A Country Study. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1982.

Oldson, William. The Historical and Nationalist Thought of Nicolae lorga. New York: Columbia University Press, 1973.

Ostovic, Pavle D. The Truth About Yugoslavia. New York: Roy Publishers, 1952.

Pavlowitch, Stevan K., "Society in Serbia, 1791-1830" in Richard Clogg, ed., Balkan Society in the Age of Greek Independence. Totowa: Barnes & Noble Books, 1981.

______. Yugoslavia. New York: Praeger Publishers, 1971.

Paxton, Roger V. "Identity amd Consciousness: Culture and Politics among the Habsburg Serbs in the Eighteenth Century" in Ivo Banac, John G. Ackerman, and Roman Szporluk, eds., Nation and Ideology: Essays in Honor of Wayne S. Vuchinich. New York: Columbia University Press, 1981.

Pearson, Raymond. The Longman Companion to European Nationalism: 1789-1920. New York: Longman, 1994.

______. National Minorities in Eastern Europe. 1848-1945. New York: St. Martin's Press, 1983.

Pecze, Ferenc. "Reaction in Hungary to Trialistic Aspirations in the Early Seventies" in Anton Vantuch, ed., Der Osterreichisch Ungarische Ausgleich. 1867: Materialien tReferate und Diskussioni der Intemationalen Konferenz in Bratislava 28. 8. - 1. 9. 1967. Bratislava: Der Slowakischen Akademie Der Wissenshaften, 1971.

Perry, Duncan M. The Politics of Terror: The Macedonian Liberation Movements. 1893- 1903. Durham: Duke University Press, 1988.

Petrovich, Miodrag B. A History of Modem Serbia. 2 Volumes. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1976.

______. "Srpski Knjiievni Glasnik and the Yugoslav Idea, 1901-1914" in Stanislav J. Kirschbaum, ed., East European History: Selected Papers on the Third World Congress for Soviet and East European Studies. Columbus: Slavica Publishers, Inc., 1988.

£ S

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 124

______. "The Serbian Tsar Stephen Dushan The Mighty" in Vasa D. Mihailovich, ed.. Landmarks in Serbian Culture and History: Essavs. Pittsburgh: Serb National Federation, 1983.

Petrovich, Michael B. "Russia's Role in the Creation of the Yugoslav State, 1914-1918" in Dimitrye Djordjevic, ed., The Creation of Yugoslavia. 1914-1918. Santa Barbara: Clio Books, 1980.

______. "Prince Milos Obrenovic (1780? - 1860): A Paradoxical Hero" in Vasa D. Mihailovich, ed., Landmarks in Serbian Culture and History: Essays. Pittsburgh: Serb National Federation, 1983.

Picchio, Ricardo and Harvey Goldblatt, eds., Aspects of the Slavic Language Question, vol. 1. Church Slavonic - South Slavic - West Slavic. New Haven: Yale Concilium on International and Area Studies, 1984.

Pilon, Juliana G. The Bloody Flag: Post-Communist Nationalism in Eastern Europe. Spotlight on Romania. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers, 1992.

Pinson, Mark, ed., The Muslims of Bosnia-Herzegovina: Their Historic Development from the Middle Ages to the Dissolution of Yugoslavia. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1993.

______. "The Muslims of Bosnia-Herzegovina Under Austro-Hungarian Rule, 1878- 1918" in Mark Pinson, ed., The Muslims of Bosnia-Herzegovina: Their Historic Development from the Middle Ages to the Dissolution of Yugoslavia. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1993.

Pipa, Arshi and Repishti, Sami, eds., Studies on Kosova. New York: Columbia University Press, 1984.

Pleterski, Janko. "The Southern Slav Question, 1908-1918" in Mark Cornwall, ed.. The Last Years of Austria-Hungarv: Essavs in Political and Military History. 1908- 1918. Exeter: University of Exeter Press, 1990.

Plut-Pregelj, Leopoldina. "The Illyrian Provinces: The South Slavs and the French Revolution," in Donald D. Horward and John C. Horgan, eds., The Consortium on Revolutionary Europe. 1750-1850. Proceedings. 1989 to Commemorate the Bicentennial of the French Revolution. Tallahassee: Rose Printing Co., 1990.

Preveden, Francis R. A History of the Croatian People From Their Arrival on the Shores of the Adriatic to the Present Day. With some Account of the Gothic. Roman.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 125

greek. Illvrian. and Prehistoric Periods of the Ancient Illvricum and Pannonia. 2 Volumes. New York: Philosophical Library, 1955.

Pribic, Nikola R. Vuk Stefanovic Karadzic - Founder of Comparative Balkan Folklore. Bucharest: Academiei Republicii Socialiste Romania, 1975.

______. "Dositej Obradovic" in Vasa D. Mihailovich, ed., Landmarks in Serbian Culture and History: Essavs. Pittsburgh: Serb National Federation, 1983.

PundefF, Marin. "Bulgaria" in Joseph Held, ed., The Columbia History of Eastern Europe in the Twentieth Century. New York: Columbia University Press. 1992.

Resanovic, Emilija. "Serbian Folk Poetry" in Vasa D. Mihailovich, ed., Landmarks in Serbian Culture and History: Essays. Pittsburgh: Serb National Federation. 1983.

Rogel, Carole. The Slovenes and Yugoslavism. 1890-1914. New York: Columbia University Press, 1977.

Romanenko, Sergei A. "National Autonomy in Russia and Austro-Hungary: A Comparative Analysis of Finlad and Croatia-Slavonia" in Richard L. Rudolph and David F. Good, eds.. Nationalism and Empire: The Habsburg Empire and the Soviet Union. New York: St.Martin's Press, 1992.

Rothenberg, Gunther E. The Military Borders in Croatia. 1740-1881: A Study of an Imperial Institution. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1966.

Rothenberg, Gunther E., Bela Kiraly, and Peter Sugar, eds., War and Society in East Central Europe. Vol. II: East Central European Society and War in the Pre- Revolutionarv Eighteenth Century. New York: Columbia University Press, 1982.

______. "The Habsburg Army om the First World War: 1914-1918" in Robert A. Kann, Bela K. Kiraly, and Paula S. Fichtner, eds., The Habsburg Empire in World War I: Essays on the Intellectual. Military. Political and Economic Aspects of the Habsburg War Effort. New York: Columbia University Press, 1977.

______. "The Nationality Problem and the Habsburg Army: A Survey, 1740 - 1918" in Stephen Fischer-Galati and Bela Kiraly, eds., War and Society in East Central Europe. Vol. XXII: Essavs on War and Society in East Central Europe. 1740- 1920. New York: Columbia University Press, 1987.

Rothwell, V. H. British War Aims and Peace Diplomacy. 1914-1918. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1971.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 126

Rowney, Don Karl and G. Edward Orchard, eds., Russian and Slavic History. Columbus: Slavic Publishers, Inc., 1977.

Rudolph. Richard L. and David F. Good, eds.. Nationalism and Empire: The Habsburg Empire and the Soviet Union. New York: St. Martin's Press, 1992.

Rusinow, Dennison. "Ethnic Problems in the Habsburg Monarchy and Successor States: Three "Answers" to the National Question" in Richard L. Rudolph and David F. Good, eds., Nationalism and Empire: The Habsburg Empire and the Soviet Union. New York: St.Martin's Press, 1992.

Thomas Sakmyster, "Great Britain and the Making of The Treaty of Trianon," in Kiraly, Bela K., Peter Pastor, eds., War and Society in East Central Europe: Vol VI: Essavs on World War I: Total War and Peacemaking. A Case Study on Trianon. New York: Columbia University Press, 1982.

Schmeckebier, Laurence. Ivan Mestrovic. Sculptor and Patriot. Syracuse: Syracuse University Press, 1959.

Schmitt, Bemadotte E. The Annexation of Bosnia. 1908-1909. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1937.

______. "Serbia, Yugoslavia, and the Habsburg Empire" in Robert J. Kemer, ed.. Yugoslavia. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1949.

Seton-Watson, Hugh. Nations and States: An Enquiry into the Origins of Nations and the Politics of Nationalism. London: Metheun, 1977.

______. The "Sick Heart" of Modem Europe: The Problems of the Danubian Lands. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1975.

______. "R.W. Seton-Watson and the Trianon Settlement" in Bela K. Kiraly and Laszlo Veszpremy, eds., War and Society in East Central Europe. Volume XXXII, Trianon and East Central Europe: Antecedents and Reprecussions. New York: Columbia University Press, 1995.

______. "R.W. Seton-Watson and the Romanians, 1906 - 1920" in Hugh Seton-Watson and Cornelia Bodea, eds., R.W. Seton-Watson and the Romanians. 1906-1920. 2 Volumes. Bucharest: Editura §Tiin{ifica Enciclopedica, 1988.

t ______

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 127

Seton-Watson, Hugh and Christopher Seton-Watson. The Making of a New Europe: R.W. Seton-Watson and the Last Years of Austria-Hungary. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1981.

Seton-Watson, R.W. German. Slav, and Magyar: A Study in the Origins of the Great War. New York: Howard Fertig, 1968.

______. Masarvk in England. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1943.

______. Racial Problems in Hungary. New York: Howard Fertig, 1972.

______. The Rise of Nationality in the Balkans. New York: Howard Fertig, 1966.

______. Sarajevo: A Study in the Origins of the Great War. London: Hutchinson and Co., 1925.

______. The Southern Slav Question and the Habsburg Monarchy. New York: Howard Fertig, 1969.

______. Treaty Revision and the Hungarian Frontiers. London: Eyre and Spottiswoode Ltd., 1934.

______., ed., Prague Essavs. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1949.

Seton-Watson, R.W., J. Dover Wilson, Alfred E. Zimmerman, and Arthur Greenwood. The War and Democracy. London: Macmillan and Co., Ltd., 1914.

Seton-Watson, R.W. "Mestrovic and the Jugoslav Idea." in Curcin, M., ed.. Ivan Mestrovic: A Monograph. London: Williams and Norgate, 1919.

Shotwell, James T. At the Paris Peace Conference. New York: The Macmillan Co., 1937.

Singleton, Fred. A Short History of the Yugoslav Peoples. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985.

Sivric, Ivo. Bishop J.G. Strossmaver: New Lights on Vatican I. Chicago: Franciscan Herald Press, 1975.

Sked, Alan. The Decline and Fall of the Habsburg Empire 1815-1918. New York: Longman Group, 1989.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 128

Skilling, Gordon. Masarvk: Against The Current. 1882 - 1914. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1994.

Sljivic-Simsic, Biljana. "Vuk Stefanovic Karadzic (1787 - 1864)" in Vasa D. Mihailovich, ed., Landmarks in Serbian Culture and History: Essavs. Pittsburgh: Serb National Federation, 1983.

The Socialist Republic of Bosnia-Hercegovina. Facts About Bosnia-Hercegovina. Belgrade, 1977.

Soulis, George Christos. The Serbs and Rvzantium During the Reign of Tsar Stephen Pusan fl331-1355") and his Successors. Washington, D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks Library and Collection, 1984.

Spence, Richard B. "The Yugoslav Role in the Austro-Hungarian Army, 1914 - 1918" in Bela K. Kiraly, Nandor F. Dreisziger, and Albert F. Nofi, eds., War and Society in East Central Europe. Vol. XIX: East Central European Society in World War I. New York: Columbia University Press, 1985.

Stavrianos, Leften S. The Balkans. 1815-1914. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1963.

______. The Balkans Since 1453. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1958.

______. Balkan Federation: A History of the Movement Toward Balkan Unity in Modem Times. Hamden: Archon Books, 1964.

Steed, Henry Wickham. Through Thritv Years. 1892-1922: A Personal Narrative. 2 Volumes. Garden City: Doubleday, Page, & Co., 1924.

Stokes, Gale. Legitimacy Through Liberalism: Vladimir Jovanovic and the Transformation of Serbian Politics. Seattle: University of Washington Press. 1975.

______., ed., Nationalism in the Balkans: An Annotated Bibliography. New York: Garland Press, 1984.

______. "The Role of the Yugoslav Committee in the Formation of Yugoslavia" in Dimitrije Djordjevic, ed., The Creation of Yugoslavia. 1914-1918. Santa Barbara: Clio Books, 1980.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 129

______. "Milan Obrenovic and the Serbian Army" in Bela K. Kiraly, Nandor F. Dreisziger, and Albert F. Nofi, eds., War and Society in East Central Europe. Vol. XIX: East Central European Society in World War I. New York: Columbia University Press, 1985.

______. "The Social Role of the Serbian Army Before World War I: A Synthesis" in Stephen Fischer-Galati and Bela Kiraly, eds., War and Society in East Central Europe. Vol. XXII: Essavs on War and Society in East Central Europe. 1740- 1920. New York: Columbia University Press, 1987.

______. "In Defense of Balkan Nationalism" in Gale Stokes, Nationalism in the Balkans: An Annotated Bibliography. New York: Garland Press, 1984.

Sugar, Peter. A History of East Central Europe. Volume V: Southeastern Europe under Ottoman Rule. 1354-1804. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1977.

______. Industrialization of Bosnia-Hercegovina. 1878-1918. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1963.

______. "Unity and Diversity in the Lands of Southeastern Europe in the Eighteenth Century" in Gunther E. Rothenberg, Bela Kiraly, and Peter Sugar, eds.. War and Society in East Central Europe. Vol. II: East Central European Society and War in the Pre-Revolutionarv Eighteenth Century. New York: Columbia University Press, 1982.

______. "External and Domestic Roots of Eastern European Nationalism: in Peter Sugar and Ivo J. Lederer, Nationalism in Eastern Europe. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1969.

______. "The Reaction of the Croats, Romanians and Slovaks to the Ausgleich, 1867- 1875" in Anton Vantuch, ed., Der Osterreichisch Ungarische Ausgleich. 1867: Materialien fReferate und Diskussion'l der Intemationalen Konferenz in Bratislava 28. 8. - 1. 9. 1967. Bratislava: Der Slowakischen Akademie Der Wissenshaften, 1971.

______. ed., Ethnic Diversity and Conflict in Eastern Europe. Santa Barbara: ABC- Clio, 1980.

Sugar, Peter and Ivo J. Lederer, Nationalism in Eastern Europe. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1969.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 130

Sugar, Peter, Peter Hanak, and Tibor Frank, eds., A History of Hungary. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1990.

Sussex, Roland. "Lingua Nostra: The Nineteenth-Century Slavonic Language Revivals" in Roland Sussex and J.C. Eade, eds.. Culture and Nationalism in Nineteenth- Centurv Eastern Europe. Columbus: Slavica Publishers, Inc., 1983: 111-127.

Sussex, Roland and J.C. Eade, eds., Culture and Nationalism in Nineteenth-Century Eastern Europe. Columbus: Slavica Publishers, Inc., 1983.

Szporluk, Roman. The Political Thought of Thomas G. Masarvk. New York: Columbia University Press, 1981.

Taylor, Griffith. "The Geographical Scene" in Robert J. Kemer, ed., Yugoslavia. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1949.

Teich, Mikulas and Roy Porter, eds., The National Question in Europe in Historical Context. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994.

Temperley, Harold W.V. History of Serbia. New York: Howard Fertig, 1969.

Thomas, Raju G.C. and H. Richard Friman, eds., The South Slav Conflict: History. Religion. Ethnicity, and Nationalism. New York: Garland Publishing, Inc., 1996.

Tomasevic, Jozo. Peasants. Politics, and Economic Change in Yugoslavia. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1955.

Traynoe, Kim, A History of Modem Hungary. 1867-1994. Second Edition, trans., Jorg K. Hoensch, New York: Longman, 1996.

Treadway, John D. The Falcon & the Eagle: Montenegro and Austria-Hungary. 1908- 1914. West Lafayette: Purdue University Press, 1983.

Tudjman, Franjo. Nationalism in Contemporary Europe. New York: Columbia University Press, 1981.

Tunstall, Graydon A., Jr., War and Society in East Central Europe. Volume XXXI: Planning for War Against Russia and Serbia: Austro-Hungaria and German Military Strategies. 1871-1914. New York: Columbia University Press, 1993.

Valiani, Leo. The End of Austria-Hungarv. London: Seeker and Warburg, 1973.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Vantuch, Anton, ed., Der Osterreichisch Ungarische Ausgleich. 1867: Materialien ('Referate und Diskussion) der Intemationalen Konferenz in Bratislava 28. 8.-1. 9. 1967. Bratislava: Der Slowakischen Akademie Der Wissenshaften, 1971.

Vermes, Gabor P. "South Slav Aspirations and Magyar Nationalism in the Dual Monarchy" in Ivo Banac, John G. Ackerman, and Roman Szporluk, eds., Nation and Ideology: Essavs in Honor of Wayne S. Vuchinich. New York: Columbia University Press, 1981.

Voinovitch, Count Louis, Dalmatia and the Yugoslav Movement. London: George Allen & Unwin, Ltd., 1920.

Volgyes. Ivan. Hungary in Revolution. 1918-1919: Nine Essavs. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1971.

Vuchinich, Wayne S., ed., The First Serbian Uprising. 1804 - 1813. New York: Columbia University Press, 1982.

Vuchinich, Wayne S. "The Formation of Yugoslavia" in Dimitrije Djordjevic, ed.. The Creation of Yugoslavia. 1914- 1918. Santa Barbara: Clio Books, 1980.

______. "Prince-Bishop Danilo and His Place in Montenegro's History" in Gunther E. Rothenberg, Bela Kiraly, and Peter Sugar, eds., War and Society in East Central Europe. Vol. II: East Central European Society and War in the Pre-Revolutionarv Eighteenth Century'. New York: Columbia University Press, 1982.

______. "Croatian Illyrism: Its Background and Genesis" in Stanley B. Winters and Joseph Held, eds., Intellectual and Social Developments in the Habsburg Empire From Maria Theresa to World War I. Boulder: East European Quarterly Press, 1975: 55-113.

______. "Mlada Bosnia and the First Worid War" in Robert A. Kann, Bela K. Kiraly, and Paula S. Fichtner, eds., The Habsburg Empire in World War I: Essays on the Intellectual. Military. Political and Economic Aspects of the Habsburg War Effort. New York: Columbia University Press, 1977.

______. "Ausgleich and Vojvodina" in Anton Vantuch, ed., Der Osterreichisch Ungarische Ausgleich. 1867: Materialien (Referate und Diskussioni der Intemationalen Konferenz in Bratislava 28. 8. - 1.9. 1967. Bratislava: Der Slowakischen Akademie Der Wissenshaften, 1971.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 132

Wallace, Lillian Parker and William C. Askew, eds.. Power. Public Opinion, and Diplomacy: Essavs in Honor of Eber Malcolm Caroll Bv His Former Students. New York: Books for Libraries Press, 1968.

Weinberg, Gerhard L., ed., Transformation of a Continent: Europe in the Twentieth Century. Minneapolis: Burgess Publishing Co.. 1975.

Williamson, Samuel R., Jr. and Peter Pastor, eds.. War and Society in East Central Europe. Vol V: Essavs on World War One: Origins and Prisoners of War. New York: Columbia University Press, 1983.

Wilson, Duncan. The Life and Times of Vuk Stefanovic Karadzic. 1787-1864: Literacy. Literature, and National Independence in Serbia. Ann Arbor: Oxford Universty Press, 1970.

Winters, Stanley B., ed., Robert A. Kann: Dynasty. Politics and Culture. Selected Essavs. New York: Columbia University Press, 1991.

Winters, Stanley B. and Joseph Held, eds., Intellectual and Social Developments in the Habsburg Empire From Maria Theresa to World War I. Boulder: East European Quarterly Press, 1975.

Wolff, Larry. Inventing Eastern Europe: The Map of Civilization on the Mind of the Enlightenment. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1994.

Wolff, Robert Lee. The Balkans in Our Time. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1974.

Zivojinovic, Dragan R. America. Italy, and the Birth of Yugoslavia 11917 - 19191. New York: Columbia University Press, 1972.

______. "Serbia and Yugoslavia: Past, Present, and Future" in Alex Dragnich, ed., Serbia's Historical Heritage. New York: Columbia University Press, 1994.

______. "Serbia and the Wars of 1859 and 1866" in Kiraly, Bela K. ed., War and Society in East Central Europe. Vol. XIV: The Crucial Decade: East Central European Society and National Defense. 1859 - 1870. New York: Social Science Monographs, 1984.

______. "Serbia and Montenegro: The Home Front, 1914 - 1918" in Bela K. Kiraly, Nandor F. Dreisziger, and Albert F. Nofi, eds.. War and Society in East Central

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 1 -1 1J J

Europe. Vol. XIX: Hast Central European Society in World War I. New York: Columbia University Press, 1985.

i ______

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 134

Articles

Adler, Philip J. "Nation and Nationalism Among the Serbs of Hungary, 1790-1870." East European Quarterly. 13, no. 3 (1979).

______. "Serbs, Magyars, and Staatsinteresse in Eighteenth Century Austria: A Study in the History of Habsburg Administration," The Austrian History Yearbook. 12- 13 (1976-1977).

Augustinos, Jerry. "The Dynamics of Modem Greek Nationalism: The "Great Idea" and the Macedonian Problem," East European Quarterly. 6, no. 4 (1972).

Barany, George. "The Awakening of Magyar Nationalism before 1848," The Austrian History Yearbook. 2 (1966): 3-47.

Bukowski, James B. "The Catholic Church and the Croatian National Identity From the Counter - Reformation to the Early Nineteenth Century," East European Quarterly. 13, no. 3 (1979): 65-83.

______. "Yugoslavism and the Croatian National Party in 1867," Canadian Review of Studies in Nationalism. 3, no. 1 (1975).

Butler, Thomas. "The Origins of the War for a Serbian Language and Orthography," Harvard Slavic Studies. 5 (1970): 1-81.

______. "Yugoslavia's Slavic Languages: A Brief Historical Perspective," Review of National Literatures. 5, no. 1 (1974).

Cooper, Henry R., Jr. "Primoz Trubar and Slovene Literature of the Sixteenth Century." Slovene Studies. 7, nos. 1 -2 (1985): 35-50.

Cornwall, Mark. "News, Rumour and the Control of Information in Austria-Hungary, 1914-1918," History: The Journal of the Historical Association. 77, no. 249 (1992).

Curcin, Ivo. "The Yugoslav Nova Europaand its British Model: A Case of Cross- Cultural Influence," The Slavic and East European Review. 68, no. 3 (1990): 461- 475.

Djordjevic, Dimitrije. "Yugoslavism: Some Aspects and Comments," Southeastern Europe. 1, no. 2 (1974).

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 135

______. "The Serbs as an Integrating and Disintegrating Factor," The Austrian History' Yearbook. 3, pt. 2 (1967).

Drganich, Alex N. "The Anatomy of a Myth: Serbian Hegemony" Slavic Review. 50. 3 (1991).

Dyker, David A. "The Ethnic Muslims of Bosnia — Some Basic Socio-Economic Data." Slavic and East European Review. 50, no. 119 (1972).

Fisher-Galati, Stephen. "The Habsburg Monarchy and Balkan Revolution" The Austrian History Yearbook. 2 (1966): 1-11

Gazi, Stjepan. "Stjepan Radic: His Life and Political Activities, (1871 - 1928)," Journal of Croatian Studies. 14-15,(1973-1974).

Goldblatt, Harvey. "Orthodox Slavic Heritage and National Conciousness: Aspects of the East Slavic and South Slavic National Revivals," Harvard Ukranian Studies. 10 (1986).

Goodrich, Lawrence J. "Old Animosities, Exploited Today, Underline Complex Balkan Puzzle," Christian Science Monitor. 17 May 1993, sec. 1:1, p. 1.

Grlica, George. "Trumbic's Policy and Croatian National Interests from 1914 to the Beginning of 1918," Journal of Croatian Studies. 14-15, (1973-1974).

Gross, Miijana. "Croatian National-Integretional Ideologies from the End of Illyrism to the Creation of Yugoslavia," The Austrian History Yearbook. 15-16 (1979-1980): 3-44.

______. "On the Integration of the Croatian Naion: A Case Study in Nation Building," East European Quarterly. 15, no. 2 (1981): 209-225.

Guldescu, Stanko. "Nacertanije: A 19th Century Serbian Political Program," Balkania. 6, no. 1 (1972).

Halecki, Oscar. "Austria and the Balkan States," New Europe. 1, no. 7 (1941).

Hantsch, Hugo. "Pan-Slavism, Austro-Slavism, Neo-Slavism: The All-Slav Congresses and the Nationality Problems of Austria-Hungary," The Austrian History Yearbook. 1 (1965).

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 136

Hashi, Iraj. "The Disintegration of Yugoslavia: Regional Disparities and the Nationality Question," Capital and Class. 48 (1991): 41-77.

Hoffman, Geroge W. "The Political-Geographic Bases of the Austrian Nationality Problem," The Austrian History Yearbook. 3, pt. 1 (1967).

Holbom, Hajo. "The Final Disintegration of the Habsburg Monarchy," The Austrian History Yearbook. 3, pt. 3 (1967).

Jelavich, Charles. "The Croatian Problem in The Habsburg Empire in the Nineteenth Century," The Austrian History Yearbook. 3, pt. 2 (1967).

______. "The Issue of Serbian Textbooks in the Origins of World War I" Slavic Review. 48, 2 (1989): 214-233.

______. "Nationalism As Reflected in the Textbooks of the South Slavs in the Nineteenth Century," Canadian Review of Studies in Nationalism. 16, nos. 1 - 2 (1989).

______. "Nikolas P. Pasic: Greater Serbia of Jugoslavia?," Journal of Central European Affairs. 11, no. 2 (1951).

______. "Serbian Nationalism and the Croats: Vuk Karadzic's Influence on Serbian Textbooks," Canadian Review of Studies in Nationalism. 17, nos. 1 -2 (1990).

______. "Serbian Nationalism and the Question of Union with Croatia in the Nineteenth Century" Balkan Studies. 3, no. 1 (1962).

______. "Serbian Textbooks: Toward Greater Serbia or Yugoslavia" Slavic Review. 42,4(1983): 601-619.

Kadic, Ante. "Strossmayer and the Bulgarians," East European Quarterly. 5, no. 2 (1971).

Kimpton, Jon R. "What is French For?" The French Review. 48, no. 4 (1975): 728-745.

Kohn, Hans. "Reflections on Austrian History" The Austrian History Yearbook. 1, (1965): 4-22.

Koljevic, Svetozar. "Introduction: A Metaphor of Diversity," Review of National Literatures. 5, no. I, (1974).

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 137

Kondis, Basil. "Aspects of the National Movements of Serbia, Greece, and Bulgaria in the Nineteenth Century" Balcanica. 7 (1976): 139-151.

Krizman, Bogdan. "The Slovenes and The Habsburg Monarchy," The Austrian History Yearbook. 3, pt. 2 (1967).

Lencek, Rado. "The Enlightenment's Interest in Language and the National Revival of the South Slavs," Canadian Review of Studies in Nationalism. 10, no. 1 (1983).

Lord, Albert B. "The Nineteenth-Century Revival of National Literatures: Karadzic, Njegos, Radicevic, the Illyrians, and Preseren." Review of National Literatures. 5. no. 1,(1974).

MacKenzie, David. "Serbia as Piedmont and the Yugoslav Idea 1804-1914," East European Quarterly. 28, no. 2 (1994).

______. "Serbian Nationalist and Military Organizations and the Piedmont Idea 1844- 1914," East European Quarterly. 16, no. 3 (1982): 323-349.

Macesich, Susana S. "The Illyrian Provinces: A Step Towards Yugoslavism," Southeastern Europe. 1, no. 2 (1974): 127-137.

Mamatey, Victor S. "Legalizing the Collapse of Austria-Hungary at the Paris Peace Conference," The Austrian History Yearbook. 3, pt. 3 (1967).

May, Arthur J. "R.W. Seton-Watson and British Anti-Habsburg Sentiment." Slavic Review. 20, 1 (1961): 39-54.

Meriage, Lawrence P. "The First Serbian Uprising (1804 - 1813); National Revival or a Search for Regional Security," Canadian Review of Studies in Nationalism. 4, no. 2(1977).

Miller, Nicholas J. "R.W. Seton - Watson and Serbia During the Reemergence of Yugoslavism, 1903 - 1914," Canadian Review of Studies in Nationalism. 15, nos. 1 -2(1988).

Mulnix, Michael. "Mestrovic in Vienna," Journal of Croatian Studies. 24, (1983): 36-50.

Narochnitskii, A.L. "The Nature and Significance of the First Serbian Insurrection, 1804- 1913," Soviet Studies in History. 20, no. 4 (1982).

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 138

Novak, Bogdan. "At the Roots of the Slovene National Individuality," Papers in Slovene Studies. 1 (1975).

Oldson, William. "Nicolae Iorga: The Romanian Nationalist As Historian," East European Quarterly. 6, no. 4 (1972).

Palan, Ronen. "Misguided Nationalism: The Causes and Prospects for Slovenian Independence," Contemporary Review. 259, no. 1508 (1991): 119-127.

Pallua. Emilio. "A Survey of the Constitutional History of the Kingdom of Dalmatia, Croatia, and Slavonia," Canadian American Slavic Studies. 24, no. 2 (1990): 129- 154.

Pasic, Najdan. "Factors in the Formation of Nations in the Balkans and Among the South Slavs," International Social Science Journal. 23, no. 3 (1971).

Patemu, Boris. "Protestantism and the Emergence of Slovene Literature," Slovene Studies. 6, nos. 1 -2(1984).

Paxton, Roger Viers. "Nationalism and Revolution: A Re-Examination of the Origins of the First Serbian Insurrection 1804-1807," East European Quarterly. 6, no. 3 (1972).

Pfaff. William. "Invitation to War," Foreign Affairs. 72, no. 3 (1993): 97-109.

Pogacnik, Joze. "The Cultural Significance of the Protestant Reformation in the Genesis of the South Slavic Nations," Slovene Studies. 6, nos. 1 -2 (1984).

Pribic, Nikola R. "Dositej Obradovic (1742 - 1811): Enlightenment, Rationalism, and the Serbian National Tongue," Canadian Review of Studies in Nationalism. 10, no. 1 (1983).

Purivatra, Atif. "The National Phenomenon of the Moslems of Bosnia-Hercegovina." Socialist Thought and Practice. 12, no. 12 (1974).

Rogel, Carole. "The Slovenes and Political Yugoslavism on the Eve of World War I," East European Quarterly. 4, no. 4 (1971): 408-418.

Rothenberg, Gunther E. "The Croatian Military Border and the Rise of Yugoslav Nationalism," Slavic and East European Reivew. 43, no. 100 (1964).

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 139

______. "Jelacic, the Croatian Military Border, and the Intervention against Hungary in 1848," The Austrian History Yearbook. 1 (1965): 45-68.

______. "The Struggle Over the Dissolution of the Croatian Military Border, 1850- 1871" Slavic Review. 23, 1 (1964).

Schopflin, George. "Nationality in the Fabric of Yugoslav Politics," Survey: A Journal of East and West. 25, no. 3 (1980): 1-19.

Sekulic, Dusko, Randy Hodson, and Garth Massey. "Who Were the Yugoslavs? Failed Sources of a Common Identity in The Former Yugoslavia," American Sociological Review. 59 (1994): 83-97.

Seton-Watson, R.W. "Historical Revisions: Serbia and the Jugoslav Movement," History. 6,(1921).

Shahsko, Philip. "Yugoslavism and the Bulgarians in the Nineteenth Century," Southeastern Europe. 1, no. 2 (1974).

Spalatin, Christopher. "Language Situation in Croatia Today," Journal of Croatian Studies. 14-15,(1973-1974).

______. "The Rise of the Croatian Standard Langauge," Journal of Croatian Studies. 16, (1975).

Spalatin, Mario. "The Croatian Nationalism of Ante Starcevic, 1845 - 1871," Journal of Croatian Studies. 16, (1975).

Stoianovich, Traian. "The Pattern of Serbian Intellectual Evolution, 1830 - 1880," Comparative Studies in Society and History. 1, no. 3 (1959): 242-272.

Stokes, Gale. "The Absence of Nationalism in Serbian Politics Before 1840," Canadian Review of Studies in Nationalism. 4, no. 1 (1976).

______. "Church and Class in Early Balkan Nationalism," East European Quarterly. 13, no. 3(1979).

______. "Dependency and the Rise cf Nationalism,"

______. "Yugoslavism in the 1860's?," Southeastern Europe. 1, no. 2 (1974).

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 140

Sugar, Peter. "The Rise of Nationalism in the Habsburg Empire," The Austrian History Yearbook. 3, pt. 1 (1967).

Trifkovic, Srdjan. "The First Yugoslavia and the Origins of Croatian Separatism," East European Quarterly. 26, no. 3 (1992): 345-369.

Vucinich, Wayne. "The Serbs in Austria-Hungary," The Austrian History Yearbook. 3, pt. 2 (1967).

Williams, Carol J. "Bound by the Call of Blood,” Los Angeles Times. 2 February 1994. sec. A l, p. 1.

Zwitter, F. "The Slovenes and The Habsburg Monarchy," The Austrian History Yearbook. 3, no. 2 (1967).

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 141

Theses and Dissertations

Augustin, Donald Joseph. "Yugoslavia: Her Formation, the Inter-War Period and the Influence of the United States." Unpublished Master’s Thesis: California State University at Fullerton, 1978.

Bacic, Jakov. "The Emergence of the Sklabenoi (Slavs), Their Arrival on the Balkan Peninsula, and the Role of the Avars in these Events. Revised Concept in a New Perspective." Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation: Columbia University, 1983.

Lukac. Iva. "Stjepan Radic and the Croatian Peasant Party, 1914-1928." Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation: University of Cincinnati, 1989.

Macesich, Susana S. "The Military Frontier in Croatia and the Serbian Orthodox Church Diocese of Upper Karlovac, 1522-1873." Unpublished Master's Thesis: Florida State University, 1969.

Meriage, Lawrence P. "Russia and the First Serbian Revolution." Published Doctoral Dissertation: Indiana University, 1975.

Mestrovic, Michael. "Yugoslav Union and the beginning of the Serb-Croat Conflict, 1918-1923." Unpublished Master's Thesis: Columbia University, 1957.

Paxton, Roger V. "Russian and the First Serbian Revolution: A Diplomatic and Political Study. The Initial Phase, 1804 - 1807." Published Doctoral Dissertation: Stanford University, 1968.

Schmidt, Amy K. "The Croatian Peasant Party in Yugoslav Politics." Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation: Kent State University, 1984.

Spence, Richard B. "Yugoslavs, the Austro-Hungarian Army, and the First World War." Unpublishd Doctoral Dissertation: University of California Santa Barbara, 1981.

von Vliet, John Edward. "Wilsonian National Self-Determination and State Legitimacy in the Yugoslav Lands." Unpublished Master's Thesis: University of Waterloo, 1992.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.