Graduate School of Humanities
Masters in East European Studies Master’s Thesis Submission
Medieval Encounters: Flaws in the Historiographical Legacy on
the Origins of Bosnians
Submitted by: Eldina Pranjga July 2016
Table of Contents
1. Preface and Introduction
2. 19
thCentury Historical Debates and Theories on the Origins of Bosnians
3. Historical Background and Context on Medieval Religions of East and West
Europe and their Political Alliances in relation to Medieval Bosnia
4. Yugoslav Discourse on Bosnian National Identity
5. Socialist Yugoslav Literature Revises Medieval Bosnian Cultural Identity
and Heritage
Preface
“Where do Bosnians come from if they are not Serbs or Croats?” is a question that is asked by many during the Yugoslavian period yet it still lingers as an unanswered enquiry. The basis of a society to flourish and for their culture and traditions to remain for generations to come lay in the basis of their origins and their roots. Many scholars, historians, anthropologists and writers have all asked the question posed above starting from the 19th century until present day. There is still room for discussion regarding the topic on the genesis of the Bosnian Muslims which to some degree differentiate themselves from other Bosnians and/or Serbs and Croats. When I initially started to plan out this paper, it was more of a personal exploration of my own roots coming from a Bosniak ancestry myself. The closer I looked into the matter however, the more I was left confused and curious about what is still left uncovered and what was the truth. As a historian, we can only try to begin solving the world’s greatest mysteries through evidence and sources. This journey however, involved not only written documents but personal interviews conducted with family members and members of the Bosnian community that in return became more of like a project rather than an academic essay. The findings I discovered from talking and asking these individuals questions opened many doors and not yet has one closed. They have inspired me to keep searching. Finding the truth, the historical truth, on a subject matter so diverse, so
interchangeable, so complex, needs time. With the limited time that I had on this paper, I have realized that I may have only gotten a little bit closer to the truth than I would have liked. With that being said, I would like to thank my parents for their firmness in maintaining my Bosnian language, culture and interest in Bosnia after living in Canada for 16 years. I would also like to thank my former professor, Milena Methodieva who sparked my interest of Balkan history in general and later of medieval Bosnia from whom I have learned plenty. Lastly, I would like to thank Michael Kemper who believed in this work, who has advised me with many ideas and has been there to make it succeed.
Introduction
To travel back in time within a certain amount of words is in itself, limiting. An academic paper can only achieve so much with a limited framework and because of this, it should be stressed that this paper too could not possibly cover every basis of medieval Bosnia and all of the historical works dealing with the origins of Bosnians. Much has been left out for the sake of focusing the thesis on the overall academic and historical views on the subject matter. Whilst some scholars will have more influence in this paper than others- it is not to say that those not mentioned or authors who are not covered in great detail did not provide any influence on the historiographical development on the origins discourse of Bosnians. Scholars in the former Yugoslavia especially have answered a series of fundamental questions on the origins discourse and national identity discourse of Bosnians and later Bosnian Muslims. It is because of them that the study of this field would be possible today. Scholars such as John V.A. Fine Jr. has
influenced the very basis of this paper as he is cited throughout the paper. This is because his emphasis on the origins of Bosnians and its history was rationalized by Fine Jr. basing his medieval historical knowledge and directing it towards a Bosnian history that left much more to discover. Fine Jr. is a known author and academic that has had a major impact on the discourse of Bosnian medieval history specifically the Bosnian Church beginning in the 1970’s. However for the purpose of this paper, which is to identify the flaws on the historiography towards medieval Bosnian history and historical legacy that speaks to the Bosniak identity discourse, his work will not be dealt with in depth. That is, on whether the Bosnian Church was heretical or not. The paper will focus on scholarly works regarding Bosnian ancestry within the discourse of the Bosnian Church because it paved the way for medieval Bosnian history to be dealt with on a more serious manner because of its connection to the Bosniak identity. However, emphasis will be placed on the overall medieval historical legacy left outside of the Bosnian Church itself. The overall historical development of the identity discourse of Bosnians therefore lays on the
foundation of the medieval unorthodox Bosnian Church and the questions raised on whether Bosnians are direct descendants of the said Church and whether or not the Church was heretical. However, the research regarding the Bosnian Church and Bosnian ancestry during socialist Yugoslavia became a critical point in the historical legacy of medieval Bosnia. The question of the conversions of Bosnians towards Islam during the arrival of the Ottomans gained popularity in the academic society within the Yugoslavian state that layered a socialist approach to Bosnian
medieval historiography. It is here where the paper will primarily demonstrate some of the flaws of the legacy of work that was left behind during this time which in return the work of more present authors that have unfortunately repeated this pattern.
The search into Bosnian historiography would be a tough task for any scholar and as mentioned previously, to include every single account on said topic would be an impossible assignment. This paper will present the historiographical legacy on some of the scholarly work that has been done on the question that had predominantly been raised during the Yugoslav era: “Who does Bosnia belong to?” which had stemmed a large amount of discussions and debates within the Yugoslav state. Although much work had been done on the said question specifically during the socialist government, this paper will argue that some of this work has flaws either historically or theoretically and has to be therefore presented and analyzed so future work on this topic is not fragmented. Nevertheless, it is not to say that the work done on the topic should be ignored or neglected. Much of the fundamental scholarly work that had been prepared during this time had allowed other historians and scholars to develop the theories and historical development much further. As mentioned above, without the work of these scholars it has been possible to fully research, improve and revise the staple arguments which still lingers today especially in Bosnia, “Are Bosnians Bogomils?” and “Where do Bosnians come from?”.1 Medieval legacy still holds a forefront as the answer to the above questions and should therefore be summarized and critiqued as to why the medieval historiography and history still holds a firm supporting role in the debate on the origins of Bosnians. This would be evident by the last chapter in this paper which will demonstrate Bosnia’s medieval past used in popular literature originating from Yugoslavia.
This paper will thus be categorized into four main chapters in attempt to organize as much information as possible- leaving evidence within its own time frame. Certainly, achieving to place every single record and documentation of ranging and varying historical viewpoints into a paper is challenging. It is of great difficulty to stay within a chronological timeline for a subject this broad and complex but nevertheless it will make some mentions of other scholars from a different era for comparison reasons. Therefore, to avoid generalizations and time jumps into
1 Vladimir Bobetić, “Kralj Tvrtko, putokaz narodima u BiH,”Al Jazeera, 22 Septembar 2012. Popular media especially in Bosnia discuss the Bosnian Kingdom and its King as evidence of centuries of tolerance amongst ethnic groups in Bosnia.
different spaces and time, this paper will focus on the historiographical views on Bosnia regarding the inhabitant’s origins- specifically the Bosnian Muslims. The paper will thus be organized into four themes in four chapters: firstly, the Austro-Hungarian period of the 19th century where the theories regarding the Bosnian Church and the Bosniak identity emerge. Secondly, it will assess the medieval period first dating from the 10th to the 13th century to distinguish the historical truth and viewpoints regarding Bosnia’s medieval political and
religious past in order to discuss in the third chapter the socialist Yugoslavian period beginning in the period of 1940 (where the first account of Aleksandr Solovjev’s account of Bogomilism in Bosnia took place in historical records) up until 1980 (where the collapse of Socialist Yugoslavia was coming shortly and thus the academic research into the subject matter). Lastly, the theme of literature works of fiction will be presented in the end as those are the most present works mentioned in this paper.
The first chapter will discuss the start of enquiring about the Bosnian Church and the
Bogomils by scholars which is the essence of this paper. Theories and debates especially became a popular subject amongst scholars during the Austro-Hungarian Empire’s annexation of Bosnia. As a state funded project, the development of a historiographical look into the origins of
Bosnians came at a time of national inclination in the Bosnian state. While neighbours of Bosnia, Serbia and Croatia, were making headlines to claiming Bosnia as its own, Austro-Hungary seeked to provide evidence through academic research to bring awareness that Bosnians are fundamentally different and are an indigenous ethno group of people to Bosnia- objecting Serbia and Croatia’s claim to the now Austro-Hungarian land. Two main arguments will be presented about the Bogomil theory and the Bosnian Church through the achievement of these scholars, most notably Safvet Bašagić. During the 19th century, historical debates and theories on the origins of Bosnians were presented as a basis for a ‘Bosnia for Bosnians’. The end of the Austro-Hungarian era in Bosnia would create a high number of scholarly work on medieval Bosnia and its relation to Bosnian ethno genesis and thus laying much ground work on the topic until the introduction of a state funded initiative by the socialist government in the 1950’s.
The second chapter, Historical Background and Context on Medieval Religions of East and West Europe and their Political Alliances in relation to Medieval Bosnia, will provide the context and background on medieval Bosnian politics, geography and spiritual life. The paper will resume
with the context of the medieval ages of Bosnia because it is this information the paper will rely on. The time frame is an important factor mentioned in this chapter as it is the first topic
discussed. The time frame is important because it sets the timeline of society and politics during medieval Bosnia and thus helps us to understand contextually the dynamics of Bosnia’s
inhabitants and overall in Europe. As there are plenty of different timelines regarding medieval Bosnia, this paper will use the timeline of Mušeta-Aščerić as her paper analyzes and critiques the very nature of why this certain timeline that she uses is plausible. Bosnia’s special geographical location is the second mention here. Bosnia became positioned in the middle between East and Western dominant religions of Catholicism in the West and Orthodoxy in the East. Bosnia’s geography would become a major component as to why both main religions of Europe in the 10th century did not transmit into Bosnia as rapidly as in other medieval states. The most promising reason for this is due to Bosnia’s terrain and mountainous region that had made mobilization slower and therefore also conversions to any of the two religions. Thirdly, the establishment of the Catholics and Orthodox on Bosnia’s west and eastern borders played a crucial part into the religious views within Bosnia later into the 11th and 12th centuries. Religion outside of Bosnia especially impacted Bosnian society and peasantry but also the presence of these religions emerging into Bosnia by the arrival of missionaries from the Catholic Church. Another religious institution that was not predominantly represented in this time was the Bosnian Church. The Bosnian Church would start to have a role in state affairs whilst the conventional religious institutions of the Orthodox Church and Catholic Church would deem it as a heretical sect. Lastly, the local rivalries between nobles and royals and the role they played used their position for power; dynastic claims, hereditary and acquired claims of land and the Bosnian Crown. This point will focus on how the Bosnian Church was deemed as a Bogomil sect whilst nevertheless rulers claimed to have been members of the Bosnian Church like Ban Kulin by means to hold on to power. Other powers in Europe used Bogomilism as an accusation of heresy in order to gain authority and influence like the Hungarian Crown, to intervene and attempt to annex Bosnia. The purpose of this chapter will not be to argue whether the Bosnian Church was Bogomil or not but rather provide an introduction and context into why it would become a controversial subject matter later in Bosnia’s history.
Using the information provided in the first chapter concerning the leading debates on the topic and using the context of the second chapter, the national question of “Who does Bosnia belong to?” leads the third chapter. Bosnian Muslims on the grounds of autochthonism claimed that they were the right descents of Bosnia and should therefore be recognized as such. This intent made progress during the discourse of the 1950’s until the very latest, 1980’s. A short overview of some of the work done by scholars in local literature discourse on the national identity of Bosnian Muslims became the central focus of academia during this time. On Bosnia and the origins of Bosnian Muslims, scholars used the Bogomil theory to claim the foundation of
Bosnian ancestry and thus an indigenous group that has lived in Bosnia, dating back especially to the medieval era. This was done most significantly by Islamic scholars that were tracing back their origins from the Ottoman period and further back into the medieval period. Using the Bogomil theory, Islamic and oriental scholars worked on advocating for a Muslim nation as a different ethno group in Bosnia and Hercegovina. Whilst others claimed for a Bosniak nation. This association with the Bogomils allowed Bosniak historians to construct a distinct origin of the Bosniak nation. They also argued that the Bogomils (i.e. later Bosnian Muslims) have been victims of their Orthodox and Catholic neighbors since the pre-Ottoman (Byzantine) era. These scholars would also use the Bogomil theory as a basis for mass conversions to Islam at the arrival of the Ottomans. Thus, these theories would provide authenticity as to why Bosnian Muslims are not Serbians or Croatians ethnically bur rather their own individual ethno group. This would then explain and demonstrate that Bogomils (i.e. later Bosnian Muslims) converted to Islam and not Serbs or Croats.
Lastly, the paper will present how academic discourse can influence the overall historical legacy in Bosnia outside of the academic world. Examples of some noteworthy authors such as Mak Dizdar, Meša Selimović and Skender Kulenović will show the influence of Bosnia’s medieval past shared by literary groups of Bosnian writers during the Socialist era of Yugoslavia. Fictional books allowed what the academic world on the discourse of the origins of Bosnians could not do-present medieval Bosnian history of a lost or forgotten culture, people and history in a form where Bosnians and non-Bosnians in the Yugoslav state could discover and learn from outside of political frameworks. In conclusion, the paper would have demonstrated that there indeed is a historical legacy of works regarding the origins of Bosnians however there are also flaws within these works. Researchers, academics and scholars must be aware of the consequences of not
examining carefully these types of works- it leaves more complication for future work on this topic especially. There needs to be a standardized and approved version of Bosnia’s medieval past in order to base further research on correct and accurate grounds.
Chapter 1: 19th Century Historical Debates and Theories on the Origins of Bosnians
Foundation Myth or not?
A series of peasant uprisings started to form in the region of Bosnia from 1875-1878 under Ottoman rule. This uprising became to be known as the Herzegovinian Uprising were Bosnian Serb rebellions rejected the Ottoman rule in Bosnia because of harsh treatment of Bosnian Muslim landowners. In the 19th century, Ottoman official registrars of the census was based off of one’s religion as a predominant identification factor and thus a category of differentiating ethnic majorities and minorities in Bosnia. The categories included Catholic, Orthodox, Muslims and Others. These categories were also read as national categories by census takers where Orthodoxy was associated with Serbs, Catholicism with Catholics and Islam with Bosnian Muslims.2 This census would create friction between these groups as Bosnian Muslims appeared to own more land than their Christian counterparts. Ironically, the landowning Bosnian Muslims would also encounter another rebellion in the 20th century which would act as component of a socialist historiography to study class dynamics in Bosnia. This will be discussed in more detail in the third chapter.
The Ottomans could no longer control the Bosnian state as the rebellion grew from
Herzegovina to other parts of Bosnia with the aid of Serbia and Montenegro. Istanbul could no longer support their authority in Bosnia due to their own international conflicts. The Congress of Berlin settled the dispute- Serbia and Montenegro will gain independence and Austria-Hungary will gain power over Bosnia. After Austria-Hungary acquired Bosnia at the Congress of Berlin in 1878, it knew that it had to give Bosnia “special treatment” as it was assigned jointly by Austria and Hungarian Ministry of Finance instead of any other ministry to be able to fund proper infrastructure and a new administration. It is because the new government knew it will encounter difficulty and challenges creating a new administration following the breakup of Ottoman Bosnia which had been under its control over 400 years. Bosnians would start in the Austro-Hungarian period to gain an inclination towards nationalism and a path towards their own nationality. Although there is some evidence that Bosnians were self-aware of their differences from their neighbours, it isn’t until the Austro-Hungarian era where policies came into place to settle self- national identity in Bosnia once and for all. The Austro-Hungarians erected the National
2 Edin Hajdarpašić, Whose Bosnia? Nationalism and Political Imagination in the Balkans (1840-1914), (Cornell University Press, 2015), 8.
Museum in Sarajevo determined to focus on local Bosnian history and culture that had been supressed under the Ottomans, undermining its influence in the country.3 Under the Austro-Hungarian Empire, Bosnia became its colonized territory and the history of the origins of Bosnians took a turn by the intelligentsia and the rest of the academic world.
Few years later after the Congress of Berlin, a new provincial government for Bosnia was established that was run by the officials from both Austria and Hungary. The first generation of these officials was enterprising minister Benjamin von Kallay from 1882- 1903. He stated that he would use “western” reform to undergo a once-disorderly “oriental” land, i.e. Bosnia, as part by a civilizing mission much reflected in its colonial nature and time. Under Kallay’s command starting in 1888, cultural and political projects were constructed and created in Bosnia during the Austro-Hungarian occupation as part of the western reform.4 At the same time, movements towards nationalism were already running their course by Serbia and Croatia as they made claims to Bosnia. As it was happening in Greece and Bulgaria, Serbia pursued to make territorial expansions around its borders and claiming it as “Serbian” particularly Macedonia and Bosnia. Beginning in the 1860’s, many activists in the Croatian, Serbian and Bosnian region disagreed with Serbia’s claims however they did share the same view that Bosnia was considered as an “unliberated land central to their [national] projects.”5 Both Croatian and Serbian loyalists including even some members from Bosnia itself, began to intervene through journalism and politics to demonstrate their own national projects. National disputes during the 1870’s came as a wave from Croatian and Serbian discourses and arguments suggesting that “Bosnia is Serbian” or “Bosnia is Croatian”.6
Governor Kallay hoped to counter these movements of nationalism with a central goal to bring notion of “Bosnianess” (Bošnjastvo) – a concept that would encompass all residents of Bosnia and Herzegovina that shared a similar culture and language regardless of national ancestry.7 In an effort to express Bosnian culture and thus steer away any connection to its Serb and Croat neighbours, the Austro-Hungarians promoted a search for a Bosnian local identity.
3 Amila Buturović, “Medieval Cemeteries as Sites of Memory: The Poetry of Mak Dizdar,” in Islam and Bosnia:
Conflict Resolution and Foreign Policy in Multi-Ethnic States, ed., Maya Shatzmiller, (Quebec City: McGill-Queen’s
University Press, 2002), 38. 4 Ibid.
5 Hajdarpašić, Whose Bosnia? Nationalism and Political Imagination in the Balkans (1840-1914), 10. 6 Ibid., 11.
They did this through numerous ways but one particular example was by discovering and excavating local heritage that emphasized aspects of an individual and singular Bosnia. Pan-Bosnianess was an idea that implied to aid in including all ethnic groups living in Bosnia and would de facto counter threats from Serbian and Croatian nationalists within Bosnia and abroad. Whether this idea succeeded or not, it is not clear. However, what is apparent is that the
Bosnianess idea became a segment of adapting and making a modern Muslim identity. This is evident especially through sponsorship of print media and codification of Muslim folklore.
The creation of journals like Bošnjak (Bosniac or Bosniak) was created in 1891 and printed in Latin script- an important feature because Bosnian Muslims were more informed with Ottoman Turkish, Turkish or Arabic before whilst Serbs were more informed in Cyrillic. The journal conducted in Latin deemed to bring together an understanding to all peoples of Bosnia. The journal was worked alongside with Kallay himself to promote a Bosnian platform that emphasized on reform, education and economic development. The journal influenced many intellectuals during this time including local scholars and foreign academics which will be discussed in more detail later but it should be noted here that even during this time in the 1890’s Muslim intellectuals proclaimed that: “we will never deny that we are parts of the Yugoslav tribe, but we want to clearly show that we are Bosniacs first and foremost.”8 The journal was created to provide a platform where Muslim elites (that is to say political figures, intellectuals) could search into Bosnia’s history and showcase national pride.9 At the same time, the Austro-Hungarian administration censored press that vocalized any expression of Serbian or Croatian nationalist views but supported “non-national Pan-Bosnian views” like the Bošnjak journal. Clearly, although this idea was supposed to include all ethnic groups within Bosnia, the Austro-Hungarian Empire really did open the platform mostly for these Muslim elites to represent the muslim majority in Bosnia which the Austro-Hungarians considered well under represented at this time. By focusing on the Muslims of Bosnia who were deemed as oriental and backward in comparison to the rest of Europe, the administration would “fix” the ethnic problem and
Europeanize them accordingly. As a result, it unfortunately neglected any attention on other aspects of indigenous culture outside of the Islamic religion. Although Kallay and the
Austro-8 Ibid., 179. 9 Ibid., 179.
Hungarian officials tried to give Bosnians a conscious national self-awareness, no “unified Bosnian” nation emerged out of his policies during this time.
Along with this idea of pan-Bosnianess came Kosta Hormann- a prominent Habsburg official in Bosnia who contributed to a major folklore collection characterized specifically as “Muslim.” The goal of the collection was to establish a greater Muslim presence through cultural literature. Making evident that Muslims had their own unique culture different from their neighbours. Governor Kallay noted Hormann’s work on his writings of Bosnian culture however he stressed the historical elements of folklore as evidence of Muslims “Bosnian ancestry” and “old Bosnian customs”.10 The 19th century was a time of revolutionary national movements and a time where national historiographies started to really evolve in Europe. The history of medieval Bosnia was embedded into projects from the Austro-Hungarian Empire in a way that was lacking a scientific method where the purpose was to establish Bosnia’s own national history. Therefore, the
references to customs and ancestry by the legal administration and specifically from Kallay evoked even more historical debates and theories claiming that Bosnian Muslims were direct descendants of the medieval heretical community Bogomils. Consequently, by asserting the Bosnian Muslims’ difference ancestrally, from Catholics and Orthodox before the conversion to Islam, the Bogomil theory was supposed to provide sense of national continuity and imply defiance of pressures opposed by their Croat and Serb neighbours.
How the Debate Started
The idea of Bosnianess and the question regarding Bosnia’s ethnic diversity was thus beginning to spread across major cities of Bosnia within the intelligentsia. Since the 19th century, the debate on Bosnian origins of ancestry had been present in political aspects but also under academics. Under the works of Franjo Racki, like his articles published in 1869-1871, he had set to establish that the Bosnian Church was indeed an offshoot of Bogomils. The Bogomil theory encompasses many aspects however some are more clear than others. Bogomil, priest and founder of Bogomilism was a member of a dualist religious sect that flourished in the Balkan region between the 10th and 15th century. Emerging from Bulgaria, the local Slav movement intended to reform evangelical Christianity through the Bulgarian Orthodox Church. The
Bogomil fundamental philosophy was based on a dualistic cosmology. A world in which the material world was created by the devil. Therefore, they rejected any notion of incarnation and ignored matter as it is the creation of the devil. They disallowed Christian teachings especially like concepts of marriage, eating meat, the Eucharist, baptism and the organization of the Orthodox Church.11 Racki is very well known to be the founder of the modern study of the Bosnian Church which he believed was a sect of Bogomilism. He later wrote a much more detailed account into the fight for national independency in South Eastern Europe and its relation to Bogomils.12
Noel Malcom, a history specialist who has written an extensive amount of works on the Balkan region was accused by scholars of being bias in his Bosnia: A Short History because Malcolm argued that Serbs were the major factor to the destruction of Bosnia and the Bosnian national identity. This suggests that although Malcolm agrees that Croatian historians held an interest in the origins of the Bosnia Church- it should not be ignored that many other historians in the Balkan region shared this common interest. Malcolms’ book provided an on-going discussion regarding Bosnians’ past of self-identity and the path to a unified Bosnian state. It influenced the justification of the independent Bosnian state and the Bosniak national identity. This is due to two major themes which encompass his work: first, because the idea of Bosnia as a free-standing nation is not new but rather well established and that the idea of Bosnians really being Croat or Serb is unsupportable as Malcom provides evidence of ancient genealogy of Bosnian Serbs which showed that they were not even Slav. Secondly, he argued against the “ancient hatred” theory (theory that many Western scholars argued as to why the dissolution to Yugoslavia occurred and why the ethnic problems in Bosnia exist was due to ancient hatred of these ethnic groups since before nationalism) claiming that it wasn’t due to ancient hatred but rather due to outside influences outside of the region that conducted much of its dissolution. This is the case especially when investigating into Bosnia’s medieval past. Malcolm’s comments and opinions regarding Racki was that although Racki was a Croatian historian, the Bosnian Church stimulated historians in all over Serbia, Croatia and Bosnia for the mere fact that it is a history so
11 Encyclopedia Britannica Online, s. v. "Bogomil", accessed August 14, 2016
12 Noel Malcolm, Bosnia: A Short History, (London: Macmilian, 1994), 27. Malcolm has in fact dedicated a lengthy chapter solely on the Bosnian Church. A detailed account into the beginning of the Bogomil theory can be looked at in Franjo Rački’s Borba južnih Slovena za državnu neodvisnost : Bogomili i Patareni, ed. Jovan Radonić, (Beograd: Srpska Kraljevska Akademija, 1931).
intertwined and complex and a unique Bosnian phenomenon.13 This is evident by a number of scholars who have tried to connect the inscribed gravestones (stećci) along with the Bosnian Church due to their similar and close geographical locations. The first scholar who tried to interpret these gravestones through the Bogomil theory was Hungarian writer Janos Absoth in the 1880’s and famously continued by Aleksandr Solovjev later in the 1940’s.
The Bogomil theory became even more so popular in the late 19th century; historians began to apply serious techniques to their investigation of medieval Bosnia and the enquiry into the ancestry of Bosnian Muslims. Investigations were infused with ethnic-national romanticism with a formation in mind of a historically “ethnic” community indigenous to the land that was short of a recognized past (or had only a peripheral past) in traditional histories of the Greco-Roman world. As the state emphasized on local heritage and culture, this also provided an opportunity for academic research into the medieval period. The Bogomil theory presented by Racki was prevalent at the time because it offered explanations at a time where national questions started to arise as explained above: it explained the “mysterious” nature of the Bosnian Church, but it also provided a justification on why a large part of the Bosnian population had converted to Islam during the Ottoman Empire. Malcom suggests that most of Racki’s theories regarding the Bosnian Church as Bogomil is “wishful thinking” and that it would have been perhaps “natural” to interpret the mass conversion of Bogomils to Islam because they had faced years of persecution by the Orthodox and Catholic Church (here he does agree with Fine Jr. and does use him as supporting argument to claim that most likely the Bosnian Church was not dualist sect of any kind). Malcolms’ statement does coincide with what Racki argued however- that perhaps those who converted shifted their allegiance over to the Ottomans in return for their own safety. This theory was mainly popular by the Bosnian Muslims later during the 20th century in Socialist Yugoslavia however, scholarship has rejected this claim (by many such as Fine Jr. and Vaso Glušac).14 This is due to the lack of evidence and has been widely accepted that many factors played a role into the conversion to Islam (for example the Ottoman devsirme system and special tax privileges). Bogomil or not, the members of the Bosnian Church numbered to about only 635
13 Ibid.
14 Vaso Glušac had eld high skecpticism in regards to Racki’s interpretation of evidence as he stated that Racki ignored or neglected any opposing views to his own. For more analysis look into Vaso Glušac, “Srednjovekovna ‘bosanska crkva,’” Prilozi, Vol. 4, (1924). As well as his Istina o Bogomilima, Beograd 1945.
registered members from the 1469 until the end of the 17th century Ottoman registrars.15 Even if the Bogomil theory may have been correct, these other factors would still be considered as the more prominent reasons for mass conversions than the conversion of members of the Bosnian Church. Members of the Bosnian Church held very little numbers compared to other religions.
Other groups of intellectuals like the famous Safvet beg Bašagić became a literary-political figure as a contributor to the Bosnjak journal in the 1890’s. Bašagić was inclined towards the Bogomil theory because it provided a “historically independent existence of their [Bosniak] people, and who—despite the unfavorable attitude toward Bosniak Muslims’ ethnic question widespread at the time—stressed their quest for recognition of the Bosniak Muslim ethnicity under the new circumstances, that is to say in the multiethnic Austro-Hungarian imperial context”.16 Other intellectuals associated with the concept of an individual Bosniak ethnicity was Mehmed Kapetanović Ljubušak who in the first place created and developed a systematic (organization of concepts that Bosniaks differ from their neighbours Croats and Serbs) idea of “Bosniakhood”. Other than the primary idea of Bosniak Muslims being a completely separate ethnicity, he also emphasized that Bosniaks were different from ethnic Serbs and Croats. Within the Austro-Hungarian political context of the time, it is not surprising that the intelligentsia of Bosnia during this time wanted to differentiate themselves from their neighbours, as threats of nationalism were on the rise on both sides of the border. Bašagić also held the belief that Bosnian Muslims were historically rooted in medieval Bosnia which connected the medieval period with that of the Ottoman period and thus towards the Austro-Hungarian rule. Concluding the political context of the Austro-Hungarian rule, assistant professor Edin Fejzić describes the changeability of self-declared identity that made the difficulty of Bosnian historiography on the origins of Bosnians that much more challenging for historians:
A significant number of educated Bosniaks in Bosnia and Herzegovina of the time did not uphold the idea of being ethnically distinct and many saw national identity and ethnic identity as
interchangeable. In some cases they would even take a Serbian or Croatian ethnic name as their own. This can, in part, be attributed to the pan-Serbian and pan-Croatian expansionist politics
15 M. D. Lambert, Medieval Heresy: Popular Movements from the Bogomils to Hus, (London: Edward Arnold Publishers Ltd, 1977), 150.
16 Elvis Fejzić, “Political Thought in Bosnia and Herzegovina During Austro-Hungarian Rule, 1878–1918,” East
toward Bosnia and Bosniaks, but also to the flawed nationality politics of the Austro-Hungarian authorities. In the Bosnian political thought of the time, Šukrija Kurtović and Smail aga Ćemalović could be described as self-Serbianizing Muslims, while Fadil Kurtagić, Alija Hotić, and Osman Nuri Hadžić can be classified as self-Croatizing Muslims. Moreover, other Bosniak intellectuals and politicians of the time—such as Safvet beg Bašagić—also expressed certain
aspects of this insecure wandering political identity that was particularly widespread among Bosniak writers of the time.17
To continue, Bašagić for instance, proclaimed that the same medieval aristocracy was heavily connected to the elite created by the Ottomans and thus they still hold their high positions within the Austro-Hungarian rule. He also proclaimed on the basis of Ottoman sources concerning janissary law stated that the conquest of Bosnia near Jajce in 1463 showed large groups of Bogomils that have bowed down to the sultan Mehmed II and “all received Islam on that occasion.”18 Bašagić also proclaimed that the higher and lower aristocracy accepted Islam not to limit themselves on their properties and power and therefore instead have increased their privileges which made them adapt (unlike before under Christian persecution) to the Ottoman government and later on became useful subjects for the Austro-Hungarian rule.19 The use of literature to showcase an individual Bosniak identity was emphasized by Bašagić. He asserted, “there is something that is not transient, that not even a mere accident or the worst enemy can destroy—and these are inventions of the mind, that we call literature.”20 Even some of his own works such as his book on the history of Bosnia published in 1900 tended towards a nationalist inclination that helped to establish a sense of patriotism of a Bosnian Muslim distinction from their neighbours. Although Bašagić, would in his early years defend the idea of Bosniakhood (that is, Bosnian Muslim distinctiveness) he would later on accept the pro-Croatian political opinion that Bosniaks are connected to Croats linguistically and would evidently halt on discussing Bosniakhood directly as he used to before. This proves Fejzić’s opinion that identity and nationality even from the most patriotic and prominent Bosniak writers of the time was
17 Fejzić, “Political Thought in Bosnia and Herzegovina During Austro-Hungarian Rule, 1878–1918,” 210. 18 Ramiza Smajić, “The Churches and Early Ottoman Governance in Bosnia: The Reality and Historiographic Generalisations in 20th Century,” Journal of Southeast European Studies, Vol. 15, (2009), 129.
19 Safvet Bašagić, “Bošnjaci i Hercegovci u islamskoj književnosti: prilog kulturnoj historiji Bosne i Hercegovine” [Bosnians and Herzegovinians in Islam literature: contributions to the cultural
history of Bosnia and Herzegovina]. As cited in Smajic, “The Churches and Early Ottoman…,” 129. It should also be noted that Bašagić used Johan von Absoth’s documents as sources for this claim which Bašagić himself translated. 20 --- Glasnik Zemaljskog muzeja u BiH Vol. 24 (Sarajevo, 1912). As cited in Fejzić, “Political Thought in Bosnia and Herzegovina During Austro-Hungarian Rule, 1878–1918,” 209.
interchangeable. Thus, relying on primary sources even from intellectuals regarding the subject of medieval Bosnia and the path towards self-identity development is proven difficult. With the sources that we do have especially during this era, it is challenging but not impossible to decipher sources where authors frequently change their position regarding a very crucial project that involves a whole group of a nation. Although there are no real flaws in Bašagić’s work- one must be careful when examining even the most famous of characters’ statements and position during their lifetime. The use of literature would become a popular mechanism to discuss the idea of Bosnian individual ethnic identity later in Tito’s Socialist era. A chapter will be dedicated in this paper to discuss the ways that literature that was created in Austro-Hungarian Bosnia held influence in the way literature would be used to discuss Bosnia’s historical roots in the socialist era.
Author and Editor in Chief Ivan Lovrenović of the predominant newspaper Svjetlost suggested that “the accusation of Bogomilism was a 19th century academic invention”.21 This probably comes from the immense development of ideas such as “Bosniakhood” and
“Bosnianess” discussed above. He claims that the first and oldest theory from Racki, that the Bosnian Church was heretical (due to its separation from the Orthodox institution of the time and that it had similarities with the teaching and organization of the dualistic heresies) is the basis for all other “fancy theories” that emerged in the Austro-Hungarian period. This is because in the Austro-Hungarian period intellectuals tried to introduce the notion of Bosnianism to later
Socialist (safe to say in Yugoslav era), to the theory of “anti-clericalism” by the Bosnians, “down to fairy tales about a ‘Bogomil nation’ that went over en masse to Islam after the Turkish
invasion”.22 In conclusion, Lovrenović claims that the Bosnian Church was there as an actor for the substitution of the bishopric of Bosnia who was sent to Slovenia and that it continued to exist because the Catholic Church failed to Latinize Bosnia.
Lovrenović obviously undermines Racki’s Bogomil theory that the Bosnian Church was heretical in nature. Yet he also does not acknowledge the existence of the Bosnian Church in its entirety or acknowledge any aspects of the role of the Orthodox Church that influenced religious life. Meaning, he does not mention nor expand his view regarding the Bosnian Church or any
21 Ivan Lovrenović, Bosnia: A Cultural History, (New York University Press: New York, 2001), 54. 22 Ibid., 52.
other outside factors that may have played a role. This becomes highly problematic as historians do not use the words ‘never, always’ exclusively for any claims as new evidence can always revolutionize any theory. For Lovrenović to be so stern in his claims suggests that although he may be an intellectual- his understanding or his lack of communicating the density of Bosnian history issue is not efficient enough to make such statements, such as the Bosnian Church not being heretical, without providing evidence and source work. The lack of evidence in his writing is perhaps because he is a predominant literature writer and not a historian. Although he is a Croat himself, he clearly does suggest a subtle Croat national point of view in his writing because he undermines any strength of the Bosnian Church and therefore a separate Bosnian ethno group linking it to the Bogomil theory. This also poses many other problems: Firstly, no footnotes or sources have been used to claim such a theory or accusations by Lovrenović. Even though there is a bibliography, one has to go through the bibliography to determine which source was used to claim any statement. This also makes it problematic as one cannot determine which statement is a historical fact and which is fiction. Secondly, he mentions that the words
Patarenes, Cathars, Manichaens, and/or The Bosnian Plague are abusive terms used only in foreign sources to apply to Bosnians and members of the Bosnian Church. Yet, he does not even mention which foreign sources these are nor does he make a note of them. There is no evidence on this claim that these abusive terms are only mentioned in foreign sources.
The language that Lovrenović uses when discussing that “The Bosnian Church has been a constant preoccupation of scholars (both serious and less serious)” undermines the hard work of scholars and academics around the world that have to some extent, based their whole lives on research about the origins of Bosnians.23 Lovrenović is respectably well at making popular history however for academics, scholars and serious intellectuals, mocking theories that you do not agree with only cause unseriousness and unwillingness to further discuss these points. If Lovrenović extended his argument and provided sufficient amount of evidence, polemics would in some way be understandable. Although he poses many academic abuses in his writing- he does agree with Fine and Friedman that there is evidence of the absence of Bogomilism in Medieval Bosnia and that the Bosnian Church was not connected to Bogomils whatsoever but rather was the creation of the lack of religious and spiritual life of the Catholic Church. The overall general problem of his work is that it is difficult for other readers within the academic
world to take his claims seriously but more so the problem lies for others outside of academic society who could treacherously believe that his statements are historical truth. Reader would be lead to a more romantic version of Bosnian history rather than understanding the complexity and vast majority of other theories that exist regarding the issue. Other modern historical views on this subject manner will be discussed in a later chapter however it does brings us to the main arguments that historians tend to lean on most.
Main Academic Theories and why they Matter
There are two main points of argument of the historical overview on the origins of Bosnians related to Bosnian medieval religion. The first argument is that the origins of Bosnians are a direct line of ancestors of Bogomils. These Yugoslav historians and scholars that supported this argument from approximately 1940’s to mid-1960’s made this claim by using early medieval documents originating under Pope Pius II.24 These scholars concluded that the Bogomil existence first arose in Bulgaria, spread to the Mediterranean and eventually reaching Bosnia as discussed in detail earlier. This theory was supported by schools of thought both in Serbia and in Bosnia including V. Corović from Belgrade, Historija Bosne and A. Babić from Sarajevo, Bosanski heretici.25
The other side of the argument, and the more controversial one, is that the first theory claimed by historians was not entirely true. This new argument was championed by John V.A. Fine Jr., and others much later in the late 80’s and 90’s (as well as outside of Yugoslavia itself).26 Fine Jr. and others were convinced that the Bosnian Church was a local institution that broke from the Catholic Church because of their differences in doctrine. This new theory ended up disputing the Bogomil theory of heresy and its influence in Bosnia. They contradicted the widely accepted
24 Francine Friedman, The Bosnian Muslims: Denial of a Nation, (Westview Press, 1996), 12.
25 The historians that supported the theory of Bosnians being direct descendants of Bogomils can be found in: V. Corović, Historija Bosne, (Belgrade: Srpska Akademija Nauka I Umestnosti, 1940); A. Babić, Bosanski heretici (Sarajevo: 1963); and Sima Cirković, Istorija srednjovekovne bosanske države, (Belgrade: Srpska književna zadruga, 1964).
26 Other historians that agreed with Fine Jr., as cited in Friedman, pg. 24: Vatro Murvar, Nation and Religion in Central Europe and the Western Balkans- The Muslims in Bosnia, Hercegovina and Sandžak: A Sociologcial Analysis (Brookfield: FSSSN Colloquia and Symposia, University of Wisconsin, 1989); Colin Heywood, “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, 1994).
hypothesis that the discovery of the stećci (medieval tombstones found in Bosnia dating from the 11th, 12th and 13th centuries) proved the existence of the Bogomils. Instead, Fine and the others argued that the decoration on the stećci was frequent resemblance of Christian tombstones that had some symbols of the trinity and the cross and therefore they would have held some
mainstream Christian beliefs.27 The scholars then concluded that the Bogomil heresy had been incorrectly confused with the Bosnian Church which constituted an indigenous separatist and schismatic sect. These scholars also argued that the original Bosnian Church originated as a result of the Bosnian refusal of Hungarian attempts to control Bosnian Catholicism by appointing a Hungarian bishop. Fine’s theory would conclude contrary to Racki’s original Bogomil theory. According to Fine, Bosnian Church adherents and not Bogomils were among the ancestors of today’s Bosnian Muslims and other members of medieval religions who later converted to Islam. That, there indeed existed the Bosnian Church as an institution however it was not heretical in nature. Francis Friedman, professor of political science and a primary focus in researching former Yugoslavia, seems to accept Fine’s theory as she herself indicated that “the view of Bosnian religious practises is more compelling than the Bogomil version, which would have invested Bogomilism with greater strength in Bosnia than the evidence indicates”.28
The famous stećci (medieval gravestones) was another factor in why the Bogomil theory seemed probable. Stećci found in mainly the Hercegovina region dating from the 14th and 15th century are also where most Bosnian Churches have been found to have been located during this time (see map below). The stećci bond the historical and linguistic culture of Bosnians and Bosnia because of the inscriptions placed on them. These inscriptions could therefore also be a prominent factor in determining the connection of the religious and spiritual life of medieval Bosnia, as gravestone inscriptions can help determine any religious affiliation with how the dead are buried through anthropological excavation.29 An immense number of publications on stećci, their meanings and their connection to the Bosnian heritage can be found in the Sarajevo University and the National Library of Bosnia and Hercegovina however this paper will also discuss the role of stećci found in literature in a separate chapter as their findings and their meanings vary. The rejection of the Bogomil theory however and the theory that Bogomilism is a
27 Friedman, The Bosnian Muslims, 13. 28 Ibid.
29 Dragana Bogdanović, "Epigrafska književnost – Stećci,” BOSNIACA - časopis
direct connection to Islamization of Bosnians later on in the 20th and 21st century, does not disapprove the theory itself. However, it had obligated historians to look at more concrete written records concerning the Bosnian Church itself rather than look at anthropological evidence as it only created more speculation rather than historical truth. The fascination amongst scholars regarding the origins of Bosnians is truly unique. Whether the origins of Bosnians originated from the Bosnian Church, or from Bogomils, the journey to the discovery of Bosnian’s ethno-genesis has been a popular subject. Many historians and scholars discuss the different approaches in determining whether Bosnians have a distinct individual identity separating them from their neighbours. The political context, religious environment, periodization and geography place a large component to the historical truth about the Bogomils and Bosnia’s medieval past. It is therefore necessary to include what we already know about Bosnia’s Middle Age history to better understand not only the Bogomil theory itself, but how that history would be used at a much later time within a framework of socialist historiography.
30
30 The map above shows the relationship between the Catholic Church, Orthodox Church and the Bosnian Church. In relation to this map, it is visible that most Bosnian Churches have been concentrated in central Bosnia and thus away from the Western and Eastern borders of the country. For more information on the geographical location of the churches and their relationship to the nobility of the Bosnian Kingdom, it is advised to investigate further into John V.A. Fine Jr., The Bosnian Church: a new interpretation: a study of the Bosnian Church and its place in state
Chapter 2: Historical Background and Context on Medieval Religions of East and West Europe and their Political Alliances in relation to Medieval Bosnia
Periodization and the Early middle Ages of Bosnia
To examine the Bosnian Church within the context of Medieval Bosnia, it is important to make sure to standardize the periodization. Not only are historical developments and events overlapped in medieval Bosnian historiography but there has not been enough of an individual standardized periodization model used by all scholars to better simplify Bosnia’s past. Scholars such as John V.A. Fine Jr. were able to standardize and categorize the medieval Bosnian state and it’s affairs chronologically, facilitating a deeper and easier analysis of its history. Although some models are used to appropriately distinguish Bosnia’s medieval historiography in
chronological order, for the purpose of this paper it must be shortened as most of the
historiography presented in this argument will be on the basis of historical events rather than history itself. The one periodization model that seems to fit key historical events into the timeline comes from the work of Vesna Mušeta-Aščerić. In her own words she states that periodization “is a starting point in defining the term of the middle Ages in the overall history of Bosnia and Herzegovina.”31 Therefore the paper will begin by ensuring that a timeline that fits best
according to major historical events is used to simplify and coordinate the time period of the said subject. The periodization model is essential to regulate basic traits, the connection towards the general history of Bosnia and Herzegovina and a periodical timeline that connects to the present times. Thus, it is important to note that each corresponding time period discussed below
summarizes major features that occurred within the timeframe.
Mušeta-Aščerić’s model will be applied in the following ways: the early middle Ages will be used to develop context and historical background of the political and religious life of Bosnians, the High Middle Ages as an important and crucial period where transformation of religious life of Bosnia occurred as well as politically and lastly the late middle ages where the discussion regarding the arrival of the Ottomans and thus Islam becomes a major factor and component of the origins discourse during the Yugoslav era. Her model presents each specific period as established by changes that took place in the organization of Bosnia’s overall social
31 Vesna Mušeta-Aščerić, Advocating a New Approach to the Bosnian Middle Ages, Bosnian Studies. Vol. I, No. 1 (Sarajevo, 2007), 75.
development. Using Mušeta-Aščerić’s exact model, there are clearly “three basic phases of historical development of the medieval Bosnian state”:
1. Early Middle Ages (5th -11th century) - the period in which social and political territory of medieval Bosnia was formed. The physical political territory was the one included and was controlled by the borders of the Bosnian state. The aspect of what Mušeta-Aščerić calls “social territory” is much broad as some physical borders of the state shifted permanently or
conditionally. The origin of the ethno-cultural identity was forming in medieval Bosnia and was thus not contained within its physical political boundaries because they changed so often but rather the “social territory” residents were within. Geography thus provides one of the most basic features in forming the ethnic identity that played a role in forming a social understanding of identity.
2. High Middle Ages (12th – 14th century) - the period in which the Bosnian state fully developed as a state power. Full dynasties became formed as well as political symbols of the Crown (most notably the Kotromanić dynasty, discussed later) which also made a base for medieval Bosnia’s political relations with Serbia and Croatia. Aspects of a feudal society is found during this time, full bodied spoken language, and distinguishing graphics were used, for example, the engravings on medieval gravestone (stećci) found largely within the Bosnian state. This shows a society that has been formed with their own Bosnian medieval alphabet-
‘Bosančica and a spiritual aspect in burying the deceased.
3. Late Middle Ages (15th – 16th century) – the period in which the Bosnian state started to collapse. This is the period that lasted until the Bosnian Kingdom fell under the Ottoman Rule in 1463 and the period of transformation of the Bosnian medieval society into the Ottoman feudal system began. The Bosnian Kingdom continued to function legally under the royal House of Berislavić by agreement with the Ottoman supervision but came to an end finally in 1527 after the fall of its capital city Jajce. The first Ottoman occupation administration was established that same year.32
It should be noted that there are a few concerns with this model. Firstly, that it may be a Eurocentric view to suggest that the fall of the Bosnian Kingdom and thus its modernization into
32 Mark Pinson, The Muslims of Bosnia-Herzegovina, the Historic Development from Middle Ages to the Dissolution
modern age ended due to the arrival of the Ottomans. Generally however in the history of Europe, the Middle Ages or (as some call it the medieval period neither is incorrect) lasted from the 5th to the 15th century. The fall of the Western Roman Empire marks the ending to the middle Ages and the beginning into the Renaissance and the Age of Discovery. The Middle Ages symbolizes “the middle period of the three traditional divisions of Western history: classical antiquity, the medieval period, and the modern period. The medieval period is itself subdivided into the Early, High, and Late Middle Ages.”33 The decline of the middle ages and thus the characterization of its end in the 15th century is often associated with the fall of Constantinople to the Ottomans in 1453 to “the triumph of barbarism and religion.”34
Ivan Lovrenović brought attention to historical records, in particular records to do with certain Bosnian towns and their relevance in the 10th century. Lovrenović suggested that the medieval feudal development occurred in the towns of Desnek, Katero, Hum, Trebinje and Konavlje because they were largely urbanized. Due to Bosnia’s geographical location however little is known during this period regarding the medieval feudal society. By the Oxford definition, feudalism means:
“The dominant social system in medieval Europe, in which the nobility held lands from the Crown in exchange for military service, and vassals were in turn tenants of the nobles, while the peasants (villains or serfs) were obliged to live on their lord’s land and give him homage, labour,
and a share of the produce, notionally in exchange for military protection.”
What Lovrenović means by the term feudal is not discussed in his book. However he does seem to speculate that these towns had developed enough and thus could have had feudal characteristics because the society in these towns had to have been organized in some form due to its urbanization. However, we can only speculate whether these towns were by definition feudal as provided above in his statement as he does not mention which historical records or evidence he used to make this claim. It is in this period where we see much of the historians and scholars suggest that because of Bosnia’s terrain and impenetrable interior, much about Bosnia was not recorded, leaving much speculation about the organization of the state, religion and
33 Encyclopedia Britannica Online, s. v. "history of Europe", accessed June 28, 2016. https://www.britannica.com/topic/history-of-Europe/The-Middle-Ages.
society of medieval Bosnia.35 Noel Malcolm on the other hand does mention more about the idea of medieval feudalism in Bosnia. He suggests that although the political and social system in Bosnia was fundamentally feudal, it was not the strictest compared to other countries in the European continent such as France where noble estates would be returned to the crown if they did not execute their military duties; “nobles were independent landowners, and were often able to dictate the succession to the Bosnian crown from their position of territorial power.”36 Malcolm then makes the suggestion that because of this lenient system of feudalism in Bosnia, the politics of Bosnia during the middle Ages was unstable. The topic of feudalism would be brought again by scholars in the 20th century discourse on the Bosnian case of national self-identity. It would thus become the major factor of rebellions amongst Croats, Serbs and Bosnians after World War I which will be covered in more detail in the next chapter.
Geographical location seems to be of particular relevance during this period where a lack of sources and material leave an absence of information that could possibly be vital to our
understanding of early stages of the Bosnian Middle Ages. It’s extremely mountainous terrain and isolated local groups therefore created a delay in the development of states. Due to the type of environment these local groups lived in, it is true that in the Balkan area the society is formed by evidence of indigenous groups flocking towards water sources, making much of Bosnia and the rest of the Balkan population living closer to the Adriatic Sea.37 However, the early
migrations of Slavs and Turkic Avars in the sixth century allowed their settlement patterns to be unstable due to influx of invading group attacks. More so, the Byzantine Empire attacked the region sometimes successfully and sometimes not, as it tried to gain control of the area and the indigenous groups that lived there that composed groups of Slav and Turkic Avar origin.38 Until the seventh century however, the Avars could not uphold their fight against the Frankish King Charlemagne. The Slavs had no choice but to accept his rule and his control over the Balkan interior. John V.A. Fine Jr. also mentions that two migration stories can be generally accepted in this case if we were to use evidence of Constantine’s Porphyrogenitus accounts in De
35 Francine Friedman, The Bosnian Muslims: Denial of a Nation, (Westview Press, 1996), 10. Geography as a factor for lack of information of medieval Bosnia can also be found in John V.A. Fine Jr.’s “Review of Sima Cirkovic, “Istorija
srednjovekovne bosanske drzave, Belgrade, 1964” Speculum 41 (July 1966), 527.
36 Noel Malcolm, Bosnia: A Short History, (London: Macmilian, 1994), 13.
37 John V.A. Fine Jr., The Early Medieval Balkans: A Critical Survey from the Sixth to the Late Twelfth Century, (The University of Michigan Press, 1983), 3, 4.
adminstrando imperio’; firstly, a large migration of Slavs arrived in the Balkans by the Avars and secondly that c. 620’s a second migration of Iranian Croats and Serbs migrated into the Balkans, “drove out the Avars, subjected the Slavs, and in time were assimilated by them.”39 This becomes a crucial factor in how the relationship between the East and the West will continue as Slavs now became placed between the Romanized West and Byzantine East. Slavs will become an important factor on how the two empires on each side of the Balkans’ communicate with each other. In this case, the communication would lack between the two empires for centuries causing friction and divide within the Balkan area and specifically in Bosnia.
Vesna Mušeta-Aščerić’s periodization model somewhat contradicts Francis Friedman’s timeline. He calls the beginning of the Balkans Middle Ages in the tenth century as a high point of political and demographic development whereas for Mušeta-Aščerić, the tenth century is still placed in the early Middle Ages in regards to the Bosnian state. It is interesting to note that according to Friedman, if Bosnia’s neighbour Serbia in the ninth century accepted the Eastern Church (as discoursed by Cyril and Methodius) and Croatia on Bosnia’s Western border accepted wholeheartedly Roman Catholicism also in the ninth century, then by de facto one would think that these two states would be of a higher point of development in regards to politics, religion and society than that of Bosnia because of the lack of local sources telling us anything in regards to Bosnia. Therefore, to place the Balkan Middle Ages in the tenth century as a whole into the category rather than as the early middle ages for the specific case of Bosnia is somewhat unmindfulby Friedman. Periodization is crucial to the study and research of the historiography of Medieval Bosnia and understandably, Mušeta-Aščerić has done justice to providing a simple yet accurate timetable for this period. Friedman’s argument and the suggestion from other scholars on the lack of sources about Bosnia during this early period would give way to Croats and Serbs later in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries following the introduction of the nationalist discourse. Consequently, both Serb and Croat nationalists would make claims on Bosnia according to times of possession of Bosnia’s lands between the early middle age and beginning of the high middle ages of Bosnia. This point will be discussed in more detail later and its role of land claims by nationalists when historiography is the core argument of this paper.
Religious Aspects in Bosnian High Middle Ages
The High Middles Ages is the period which is considered by Mušeta-Aščerić the time where Bosnia flourished as a state. The basis in which she determines this is not mentioned but it does hold credibility. The first military intervention in Bosnia-Herzegovina was in 1168 when the Pope decided to engage in a tripartite religious clash that split the country then as now. The great schism in 1054 had separated Christendom into an Eastern Orthodox Church at Constantinople and a Catholic Church at Rome that went through the middle of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the central South Slav state.40 During the reign of Ban Kulin (1180-1204), trade links made with Dubrovnik were essential for Bosnia’s cultural heritage especially on the impact of cultural life because it was during this time frame where the first threats of “punitive expeditions and crusades” occurred due to the first Papal accusations of heresy.41 The accusation was against Bosnian heretics known then as “Bogomils” that derived from Bulgaria. They used gospels and doctrines to spread their message and religion through literature. These pieces of literature such as the Secret Book was taken to Italy in the 12th century and translated into Latin in order for the papacy to understand the heresy and fight against it. The priest Cosmas went as far as to write a book titled Discourse Against the Recent Heresy of Bogomil has been one of the most influential works of literature to a better understanding of the said religious movement.42 It wasn’t until the reign of Tvrtko I Katromanic (1353-1377 as ban and 1377-1391 as king) where Bosnia expanded to its maximum size in its history and the emergence of the Bosnian Franciscan Vicariate
appeared.
Under Tvrtko I, Bosnia was the “most powerful state within the western Balkans.”43 But before its independence, Hungary and neighbouring Serbia were the dominant powers
throughout this period as they were militarily powerful. Hungary held much of Bosnia’s land but in the 1160’s and 1170’s, Bosnia was briefly again under Byzantine rule after the campaign of Emperor Manuel Comnenus. After his death, Bosnia, now free of Hungarian control and neither under Byzantine control or influenced by Croatia, virtually became an independent state.44
40 Richard West, “HERETICS OF HERZEGOVINA; Richard West examines the first of three key moments in the troubled history of Bosnia,” The Guardian (London). August 18, 1992. Section: THE GUARDIAN FEATURES PAGE; Pg. 17.
41 Bosnia: A Cultural History, 47.
42 Francis Dvornik, The Slavs Their Early History and Civilization, (Boston, 1956), 184- 185. 43 Malcolm, Bosnia: A Short History, 13.
Malcolm also does stress that Serbia during this time, although an important powerful kingdom, never attempted to conquer Bosnia.45 Although Serbia may have not attempted to conquer Bosnia, there is no actual evidence of such claim.
Bosnia was consistently under pressure from Hungary especially in taking over the bishopric of Bosnia from the Catholic Church. The Bosnian Franciscan Vicariate began to operate in Bosnia at the end of the 13th century where the work of the Dominicans failed and the Bosnian bishopric was sent to Slovenia. Lovrenović seems to suggest that the missionaries migrated to Bosnia but then later the mission was continued by people born in Bosnia because the
missionaries were bilingual, both in Latin and in Bosnian, this gave comfort to the local communities to gain political autonomy from Hungarian pressure and from the Catholic
bishopric in Slovenia. This shows that the Catholic Church was present in not only spiritual life but these missionaries also were locals which traded and were craftsmen and ultimately,
members of the community.46 Hungarian pressure came in c. 1232 when the papacy kept sending requests to Hungarian rulers to drive out diocese of Bosnia- a justification of religious purposes to invade Bosnia.
The role of the Orthodox Church was predominant in the 15th century mostly in Hercegovina supported by Sandalj Hranić and later Duke (Herceg) Stjepan Kosaca. The territorial lords Hrvoje, Sandalj and Pavao Radinović acted out of self interest in order to gain the crown for themselves as they formed alliances within Christian institutions. They did so because of the potential reach and communication they could have with the locals and would use Christian institutions as agency to do so. Lovrenović however does not go into depth about the Orthodox Church in Hercegovina and only briefly mentions it which potentially suggests that Orthodoxy was not an important aspect at this time. Clearly, more research needs to be done on the role of the Orthodox Church in both Bosnia and the Hercegovina region which Lovrenović neglects. For the purposes of this paper, I will not include details of the role of the Orthodox Church however it should be noted that it plays a major role in the affairs between the borders of Bosnia and Bosnia itself. It also would play a major role as the Bosnian locals and nobles pledged allegiance and spiritual life to religious institution including the Orthodox Church in this course of the time period.
45 Ibid., 13.
Bans and succeeding rulers practised to some degree toleration and were to some extent indifferent to the variety of religious entities in Bosnia’s territory. Even when the Bosnian rulers would become Catholic from the mid-fourteenth century and onwards, the toleration of the Bosnian Church was extended.47 Understanding authority in Medieval Europe in general has been profoundly inclined by religion, as present in medieval Bosnia. There is a formal
communication of understanding the nature of authority and the role religion played in politics during this time. In the period of middle Ages in Bosnia, the authority was established on the Christian vision of the world of the time. This of course impacted heavily on the peasantry of Bosnia as religion i.e. Christianity, started to take a position on the social ladder where Christianity was inflowing all sectors of “social life making an impact on all standards, institutions, customs, beliefs and practically all aspects of human life.”48 The Bosnian nobility had accepted Christianity in some instances as a tool to provide a foundation to base the Bosnian society at the same time ensuring that their own nobility and their position in power would remain. The use of religion during the unsettled political dealings in the Bosnian territory during the middle ages would become a tool of everyday politics and the primary component for
protecting their position and thus had infiltrated the nobles’ ruling ideology. However, one religious institution seems to have had a more controversial role within Bosnian historiography and that would be the Bosnian Church.
Chapter 3: The Yugoslav Discourse on Bosnian National Identity The Problem
Using the context and information above- the existence of the Bosnian Church and of the Bogomil theory followed its way into the 1940’s until present day. Although three religious institutions were present in Bosnia’s medieval past, the introduction of a new religion, Islam, created a whole new dynamic to the debate. In Caner Sanckaktar's Historical Construction and
47 Friedman, The Bosnian Muslims, 14.
48 Goran Behmen,”The Character of Law and Authority in Medieval Bosnia,” SURVEY Periodical for Social Studies, Vol. 1 (2009), 197.
