Herzeg-Bosna in the present day

Oh and not every person living in Bosnia and Herzegovina is Bosnian. Saying to a Herzegovinian that he is a Bosnian is like say to Welsh or Irish they are English. Though there is no Herezgovinian ethnicity, merely a regional name for Croats and Serbs living in the region. At the same time I have yet to hear a Bosnian/Bosniac person living in Herzegovina to say he is a Herzegovinian.

Cheers

Bosnian is short version, since country itself is often called Bosnia and not Bosnia and Hercegovina, which is official name. Not entirely correct but close enough. Though even non-bosniacs use term Bosnian to describe themselves but with addition of Serb/Croat i.e. Bosnain Serb/Croat, that is person of such ethnicity living in the territory of Bosnia (and Hercegovina, if you wish to use proper but longer form)
 
Bosnian is short version, since country itself is often called Bosnia and not Bosnia and Hercegovina, which is official name. Not entirely correct but close enough. Though even non-bosniacs use term Bosnian to describe themselves but with addition of Serb/Croat i.e. Bosnain Serb/Croat, that is person of such ethnicity living in the territory of Bosnia (and Hercegovina, if you wish to use proper but longer form)

Close to the truth but not correct. Croats living in Bosnia will say they are Bosnian Croats, but Croats in Herzegovina will never say they are Bosnian Croats, they see themselves as Herzegovinians and in their minds saying "I am Herzegovinian = I am Croat". Even "Bosnian Croats" will only rarely say they are Bosnian Croats. When you ask them who they are they will say I am a Croat from Rama/Posavina/Uskoplje/Varoš etc. and will usualy avoid the word Bosnian as the plague. The term Bosnian Croats is mostly used by Croats in Croatia and all others elsewhere as well as in BiH who are not "Bosnian Croats". Confusing, yes? :D
 
:confused:

What are you implying that Croats and Serbs aren't descendants of medevial slav population and turkish invaders(along with some others) with varying deegrees of genetic influence separated by religion and chosen idnetity?

I was simply trying to say that Bosnians should not be coveted by either Croats or Serbs.
That is exactly what I'm implying, it is a consensus among the majority of historian that very little mixing occurred after the Ottoman conquest of the Balkans. This is even supported by recent genetic testing (not that I have much faith in these anyway, but), so what makes you say that West Balkan Slavs (what a mouthful) have a significant amount of "Turkish blood"? If anything, it's the significant amount of 'Illyrian' (or proto-Albanian if another anachronistic label is to be believed) blood we have that made us, genetically speaking, different from other Slavs.
Though, I whole-heartedly agree with you that is is wrong for either Croats or Serbs to appropriate Bosnian Muslims as turkicized/islamicized Serbs or Croats.

There is a problem with the term Bosniac (Bošnjak), prior to 1960's Croats in Bosnia used that term to differe from Bosnian (Bosanac) which was used predominantly by Bosnian Muslims. Both of these terms should not be confused with Bošnjanin which was a medieval term for the people living in the medieval state of Bosnia. After 1960's when Bosnian Muslims could declare Muslim by nationality they slowly started using the term Bošnjak as their ethnic name which created a false impression among Croatian nationalists that they want to join with the rest of the Croats. Also when a Croat or a Serb thinks of Bosnians/Bosniacs they will in 99% of cases say they are Bosnians not Bosniacs. Also it should not be forgoten that though Bosnians/Bosniacs are predominantly Muslim there are people of other religions sharing the ethnic idenitity.
From what I have been able to gather, Bosnian Muslims used the name Bošnjaci to refer to each other since the Ottoman period at the earliest, thereby replacing the archaic Bošnjani. Though I think, they would use the term to refer to all inhabitants of Bosnia, not just Muslims (to distinguish between themselves and Christians they would use "Muslim" and "Vlach", respectively).

Oh and not every person living in Bosnia and Herzegovina is Bosnian. Saying to a Herzegovinian that he is a Bosnian is like say to Welsh or Irish they are English. Though there is no Herezgovinian ethnicity, merely a regional name for Croats and Serbs living in the region. At the same time I have yet to hear a Bosnian/Bosniac person living in Herzegovina to say he is a Herzegovinian.

Cheers
You'd be surprised. ;)

You really think a Bosniak from Mostar would call himself "Bosanac"? Dream on. :p When Bosniaks in Mostar say "Bosanac" thez usually refer to people from Bosnia proper, that is, everything north of Prozor.
 
Close to the truth but not correct. Croats living in Bosnia will say they are Bosnian Croats, but Croats in Herzegovina will never say they are Bosnian Croats, they see themselves as Herzegovinians and in their minds saying "I am Herzegovinian = I am Croat". Even "Bosnian Croats" will only rarely say they are Bosnian Croats. When you ask them who they are they will say I am a Croat from Rama/Posavina/Uskoplje/Varoš etc. and will usualy avoid the word Bosnian as the plague. The term Bosnian Croats is mostly used by Croats in Croatia and all others elsewhere as well as in BiH who are not "Bosnian Croats". Confusing, yes? :D

True, some simply cout out Bosnian part and refer to themselves as their basic ethnicity, that is Serb or Croat. Though to be honest the Bosnain + ethnicity is more often used by Serbs, even when refering to themselves. For "Bosnain Croat" term you may be right that is used by other Croats to describe their kin over the border.
 
Close to the truth but not correct. Croats living in Bosnia will say they are Bosnian Croats, but Croats in Herzegovina will never say they are Bosnian Croats, they see themselves as Herzegovinians and in their minds saying "I am Herzegovinian = I am Croat". Even "Bosnian Croats" will only rarely say they are Bosnian Croats. When you ask them who they are they will say I am a Croat from Rama/Posavina/Uskoplje/Varoš etc. and will usualy avoid the word Bosnian as the plague. The term Bosnian Croats is mostly used by Croats in Croatia and all others elsewhere as well as in BiH who are not "Bosnian Croats". Confusing, yes? :D
I've heard anecdotes of Croats from Herzegovina going to work in Zagreb, and going scarlet when called "Bosanci" by the Zagrebians. :p
 
I've heard anecdotes of Croats from Herzegovina going to work in Zagreb, and going scarlet when called "Bosanci" by the Zagrebians. :p

I think the word you are looking for is "dotepenec" :p

Oh you got me wrong, I didn't even remotely think there is significant amount of Turkic blood among the western south slavs. I am fully aware of the most recent genetic studies. Lets just say that I inaproprietly expressed myself trying to say that Bosnians are not Croats or Serbs.

The Ottoman name Bosnak is very close to Bošnjak and more exact historical linguistic research that what had been done will be needed to acertain the closeness of these words. At first glance they look and sound very similar, that I do agree.


I have had quite some interaction with Bosniacs south of Prozor and though I agree they didn't referee to themselves as "Bosanci" they did not say they were "Hercegovci" (or the correct local pronauncitaion 'ercgovci :D) but Bošnjaci.


Cheers
 
I think what I said was misconstrued. When Bosnia was an independent kingdom, it was Catholic. We can therefore assume that it was ethnically Croat, as Bosnia is (or at least was) a geographical, rather than ethnic unit. Bosniaks were Catholic until the Ottoman conquest. The Ottomans introduced the Jizya (extra tax on non-muslims). As most people in Bosnia were rural peasants, they could either not afford to pay the tax, or wanted better opportunities, which being a muslim allowed in the Ottoman Empire, so many Bosnians/aks converted to Islam. At the time, Bosnia was known in the west as "Turkish Croatia". Religion doesn't change ethnicity. I am agnostic and hate it when people divide themselves on ethno-religious lines. The reason that the Bosniaks became a separate identity was due to 3 major factors: 1) religious differences led to cultural differences, which in turn led to a separate identity. 2) The Turks tried to persuade the Bosniaks that they were a separate people to stop the bosniaks collaborating with Austria. 3) Under the millet system, Bosniaks were equal to Turks and superior to Croats and Serbs. This also led to Croats and Serbs thinking that Bosniaks are Turks. I don't mean to say that Bosniaks should go Catholic again, I don't care about religion, I just think that Croat-Bosniak unity stabilises the whole region and is good for both parties. I also think its stupid to think of Bosniaks as Turks. And its not so much "coveting". I don't see Bosnia as a prize, just as a legitimate part of Croatia.
 
Medieval kingdom of Bosnia was ruled by catholic dynasty which does not mean that the majority of population was catholic, for that matter it is more logical to presume that the bigger part of the population was part of the "Bosnian church" or Bogumils which was the heretical form of orthodox christianity formed in Bulgarian Empire.

When Ottomans entered Bosnia the situation was interesting. Nobles fighting among each other and the king, catholics and orthodox distrusting each other but both persecuting the Bogumils. As soon as the Turks came the voluntary conversion process of the B's has begun since they saw it as a gateway out of their opressive status since they didn't have strong backing of any political entity in the kingdom and tax brake that came with conversion was a welcome news.

Tema kojoj nikad kraja ( Topic that never ends ).
 
And its not so much "coveting". I don't see Bosnia as a prize, just as a legitimate part of Croatia.

And I'm sorry to be the bearer of bad news my friend but then you are in a very small majority. Living in Zagreb I can safely say that almost 95% of the pop. don't care for Bosnia one bit. We are more concerned how to pay our ever rising credit rates, spitting on politicians on a daily basis and thinking how to rob every single tourist out of their dollars and euros.
 
I think what I said was misconstrued. When Bosnia was an independent kingdom, it was Catholic. We can therefore assume that it was ethnically Croat, as Bosnia is (or at least was) a geographical, rather than ethnic unit. Bosniaks were Catholic until the Ottoman conquest.
No we can't. Your seem to have a highly distorted view of history. Calling a hypothetical catholic population of Balkan Slavs "Croats" solely based on religion is ludicrous and anachronistic. Croats as a national identity didn't emerge until the early 19th century. As evidence, I'd like to present that Dalmatia wasn't even considered part of Croatia until the integration of Croatia-Slavonia-Dalmatia in th 19th century. Dalmatians were considered culturally and linguistically different, even more so than today, but nationalism and a number of historical events changed that. Bosnia never had a majority catholic population. They had catholic kings who married into the Serbian royal dynasty, but they never considered, nor called themselves Croats. This is a bogus notion invented in the 19th century by Croat nationalists in response to Serb nationalism. In all official documents the Bosnian kings referred to themselves and their people as Dobri Bosnjani. What that means no-one is absolutely certain, but as Noel Malcom said, the only thing we can be certain is that they were a South Slavic people who lived in Bosnia.

The Ottomans introduced the Jizya (extra tax on non-muslims). As most people in Bosnia were rural peasants, they could either not afford to pay the tax, or wanted better opportunities, which being a muslim allowed in the Ottoman Empire, so many Bosnians/aks converted to Islam. At the time, Bosnia was known in the west as "Turkish Croatia". Religion doesn't change ethnicity. I am agnostic and hate it when people divide themselves on ethno-religious lines. The reason that the Bosniaks became a separate identity was due to 3 major factors: 1) religious differences led to cultural differences, which in turn led to a separate identity. 2) The Turks tried to persuade the Bosniaks that they were a separate people to stop the bosniaks collaborating with Austria. 3) Under the millet system, Bosniaks were equal to Turks and superior to Croats and Serbs. This also led to Croats and Serbs thinking that Bosniaks are Turks. I don't mean to say that Bosniaks should go Catholic again, I don't care about religion, I just think that Croat-Bosniak unity stabilises the whole region and is good for both parties. I also think its stupid to think of Bosniaks as Turks. And its not so much "coveting". I don't see Bosnia as a prize, just as a legitimate part of Croatia.
No. Again, highly distorted view of history. It doesn't work that way. While it is true that most of the Bosnian population were peasants, the people who converted (not en masse as some think, this is a misconception, conversion was a process which happened over a span of centuries, not years or decades) most were the land-owners and they did this so they could keep their lands. That's why Bosnia had such a huge population of begs (beys/lords), agas and so on. They could all trace their lineage back to the old Bosnian nobility, which was not uniformly catholic. Some were catholic, some were orthodox, but arguably most were member of the Bosnian church, which was alive and kicking even in the 15th century after a crusade or two. The reason the Bosnian kings converted to catholicism was to avoid the wrath of the Hungarian king and a papal crusade, but many, up until the last few kings secretly remained members of the Bosnian church and often had to present to the pope evidence of their fidelity to the church. The Bosnian church is one of the most misunderstood sects in Europe. Their portrayal has been marred by papal, Serbian and Croat nationalist writers. Recent studies have shown that they were actually not a manichean heresy, but a pre-Schism isolate church which over time acquired some "heretical" notions, but in no way had "patarene", "bogumil" or "cathar" influences until the 13th-14th century, by the time it was already established as the majority religion in Bosnia.

The reason so many converted to Islam was because they felt like they were stuck between a rock and a hrad place: most of the nobility that followed the Bosnian church converted to Islam, while the church had shrunk significantly from persecution at the hands of the catholic church and loss of influence among the last few Bosnian kings. It was pure necessity and survival which made these people make a choice. Thus, they were never forcibly converted as some nationalistic writers who want to bring them "back into the fold" like to think wishfully.

Bosnia is not, nor has it ever been a legitimate part of Croatia, hell, until the 15th century the Bosnian kingdom owned Croatia from Dubrovnik to Zadar and was a far more powerful state at the time. We could argue endlessly about this, but these arguments are anachronistic and completely illogical. The fact of the matter is: Bosnia and Herzegovina is an independent, sovereign state with a multiethnic population and is, nor will it ever be part of Croatia or Serbia, who have already done enough damage by persuading Bosnian Croats and Bosnian Serbs that Bosnia wasn't their country, which is why we are in the state we are today. Not that I blame Croatia and Serbia today, it's all ancient history now. I just wish some people would realize that too and move on. ;)
 
It is probably hardest in BiH if you are Croat, as you don't have any real representation like the Serbs and Bosniaks have. I agree that Herceg-Bosna should still exist. And about the definition of Serb or Croat, Bosniaks are Muslim Croats. Many Bosniaks don't identify with that because of differences in religion and differences in culture largely stemming from religion. Although there will likely be differences in opinion and many will not agree with my statement, that is my opinion and I think that Bosnia and Croatia should be re-united.

In my readings on the Medieval Balkans, this is somewhat true. Basically, Bosnia was originally Catholic (albeit always somewhat marginally), and most of the Bosnian Muslim population was descended from converts, not settlers from elsewhere.

In contrast, the Bosnian Serb population were in large part migrants from Serbia who were encouraged by the Ottomans. The thought was as the time the Patriarch was essentially a puppet of the Ottomans, whilst there was no control over the Pope, hence Orthodox subjects would be more loyal than Catholic ones.

However, if you went back to the pre-modern era, "Bosnian Croats" wouldn't have seen themselves as Croatian at all. Hell, the terms Serbian and Croatian are still unsure in terms of origin - both could have been Iranian groups which ruled over different parts of the dominant ethnic group, called the Slaveni.

Thus, it's right to say that Bosnian Catholics and Muslims are endemic, while the Serbs settled over the last 500 years. But it's wrong to say that the Bosnians were Croatian to begin with.
 
In my readings on the Medieval Balkans, this is somewhat true. Basically, Bosnia was originally Catholic (albeit always somewhat marginally), and most of the Bosnian Muslim population was descended from converts, not settlers from elsewhere.

In contrast, the Bosnian Serb population were in large part migrants from Serbia who were encouraged by the Ottomans. The thought was as the time the Patriarch was essentially a puppet of the Ottomans, whilst there was no control over the Pope, hence Orthodox subjects would be more loyal than Catholic ones.

However, if you went back to the pre-modern era, "Bosnian Croats" wouldn't have seen themselves as Croatian at all. Hell, the terms Serbian and Croatian are still unsure in terms of origin - both could have been Iranian groups which ruled over different parts of the dominant ethnic group, called the Slaveni.

Thus, it's right to say that Bosnian Catholics and Muslims are endemic, while the Serbs settled over the last 500 years. But it's wrong to say that the Bosnians were Croatian to begin with.

Exactly. The whole point is that modern nationalism conveniently ignores how anachronistic these terms are. If you asked an inhabitant of one of the Dalmatian cities or western Herzegovina if he were a Croat 400 years ago, they would stare at you quizzically.
 
Marko, ti li si?:eek:

I am still here, I have just been on an excavation for the past month and had no net access. :)


Calcion@ you are quite probably right about Dalmatian costal towns but it could be debated about western Hercegovina.

The hinterlands of Dalmatian coast between Zadar and Split known today as "Zagora" where known as "Hrvati" (Croats) in the middle ages and all the way up to the late 19th century, even in early 20th century some people from the costal towns would say "Idem u Hrvate" - "I am goining in the Croats" when they wanted to say they are going to the hinterlands. Today Zagora is limited by the border between Croatia and BiH. In the middle ages it is possible the name "Hrvati" also included the fields of Livno and Duvno which were part of the original setteling area of Slavic groups that formed the medieval Croatian state. So though it is a long stretch there is a solid posibility that people of western Hercegovina in the middle ages would recoginse themselves as Croats. But that identity would be closer to great migration tribal idenitity than 19th century national idenity.

Cheers
 
Exactly. The whole point is that modern nationalism conveniently ignores how anachronistic these terms are. If you asked an inhabitant of one of the Dalmatian cities or western Herzegovina if he were a Croat 400 years ago, they would stare at you quizzically.

*sigh* this was not about how anachronistic the terms are. I'm talking about that at that time, they were what would be NOW considered a Croat. If we're talking about whether or not a peasant from Medieval Zahumlya would call themselves a Croat, we might as well say they wouldn't understand because we're speaking English. It's just nit-picky.
 
Bože moj... A discussion about ethnic identity in the very-former-Yugoslavia... This should be fun...

Did I say fun? I meant excruciating.

Well, it's fairly obvious what the true answer is.

4.6 billion years ago, the Serbian gene came from space to live on the newly formed earth. A billion years later later the Croats appeared, then the amoebas, then the Jews. Bosnians are the interbreeding of Serbs and amoebas. This is proved by the fact that Sanskrit is actually 99% composed of Serbian words. After 4 billion years, Serbians perfected their greatest invention: The Jevrek pastry.
 
Well, it's fairly obvious what the true answer is.

4.6 billion years ago, the Serbian gene came from space to live on the newly formed earth. A billion years later later the Croats appeared, then the amoebas, then the Jews. Bosnians are the interbreeding of Serbs and amoebas. This is proved by the fact that Sanskrit is actually 99% composed of Serbian words. After 4 billion years, Serbians perfected their greatest invention: The Jevrek pastry.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA, yeah, the gene got here by an asteroid from the Alpha Centauri system that was thrown off-course by Alien Space Bats.:)
 
Top