Two decades ago the article ‘Mountain Wreath and our language, linguistic and social reality’ was published (Maroyevich, 2002:pp.63–93). The basic postulates of the study were later reflected in a ...debate on lexical homonymy in a critical issue of the edition of the epic The Mountain Wreath (Maroyevich, 2005:pp.366–400). Following a series, the final part of Nyegosh’s epic trilogy encompassing The Ray of Microcosm, the epic The Mountain Wreath and the epic Stephen the Little, are considered as ‘a revelation of Nyegosh’ by which some contemporary events and phenomena can be explained. The current issue of this topic deals with the contemporary usurper, students of divinity and language creators and particularly some ethnics. The name Crnogorci had only geographical and territorial meaning ‛The Serbs the inhabitants of Montenegro’, but today there is a tendency to establish this name as the name for one special nation. The name Boshnyaci had also only geographical and territorial meaning ‛the Serbs from Bosnia independent of their religion’, and nowadays there is tendency to proclaim them as being only a special nation of Islamic religious and cultural tradition. The name Arbanаsi is the name of a particular nation described in the epic Stephen the Little from the standpoint of view of aspects of their etnical characteristics that are actual even nowadays. That term is morphologically and semantically related to the area of Arbana (in Serbian as a result of metathesis of liquids: Rabana) where the Shiptars (their ethnical self term) first settled. The concept of swear word (bound by oath) with the Serbs and (new)Turks is also analysed in this paper: that concept within the overall macroconcept of face is respected by the Islamised Serbs in the Turkish camp, while the Turkish solid faith as a variant of the concept turned into a means of deception.
Distanciranje Crne Gore od državne zajednice sa Srbijom otpočinje krajem 1990-ih, u vremenu u kojem je promotorima srpske velikodržavne ideologije izrazito sužen prostor da takvo što spriječe silom. ...Stoga se posegnulo za drugim instrumentima usmjerenima na uništenje ili minoriziranje identitetne konstrukcije nacionalnog crnogorstva među pravoslavnom populacijom Crne Gore te na njezino nadomještanje nacionalnim srpstvom, uz ispravnu procjenu da je nacionalno crnogorstvo glavna snaga u samosvojnom uobličavanju Crne Gore. Takva kojoj je najbolje suprotstaviti od dijela nekadašnjih nacionalnih Crnogoraca oblikovani »srpski narod u Crnoj Gori« kako bi se tu zemlju zadržalo, odnosno, nakon postizanja neovisnosti 2006. vratilo pod srpsko državno okrilje. U ovome radu dat ćemo prikaz povijesnog razvoja koji je omogućio da prikazani vid srpskog velikodržavnog djelovanja u Crnoj Gori bude relativno uspješan, a zatim i uvid u postojeće političke i nacionalne-demografske suodnose u toj zemlji. Ujedno, analizirat ćemo uzroke koji utječu na to da se nacionalno crnogorstvo teško nosi s pokušajima vlastite identitetne destrukcije te istaknuti razloge zbog kojih bi u svojim naporima za samoodržanjem trebali dobiti sasvim konkretnu podršku regionalnih i euroatlantskih struktura.
The distancing of Montenegro from the state union with Serbia began in the late 1990s, a time when proponents of the Greater Serbian nationalist ideology had significantly limited capacity to prevent it by force. Therefore, they resorted to other instruments aimed at the destruction or marginalization of identity construction of Montenegrin nationalism among the Orthodox population of Montenegro, and its replacement with Serbian national identity. They correctly assessed that Montenegrin nationalism was the main force in shaping an independent Montenegro. To counter this, they used the “Serbian people in Montenegro” formed from a faction of former Montenegrin nationals, with the aim of retaining, and after achieving independence in 2006, also returning the country under Serbian state protection. This paper will provide an overview of the historical development that enabled this relatively successful implementation of the form of Serbian Greater nationalist activity in Montenegro, as well as an insight into the existing political and national-demographic inter-relations in the country. Additionally, we will analyze the factors that make it difficult for Montenegrin nationalism to cope with attempts of its own identity destruction, and emphasize the reasons why they should receive concrete support from regional and Euro-Atlantic structures in their self-preservation efforts.
Since the scope of the territory which can be brought into relation with the term Sandžak has varied during history, and considering that it does not form an administrative unit with the defined ...spatial frame, it is essential to define the areas belonging to Sandžak. For the duration of the Ottoman rule it was the easternmost part of the Eyalet of Bosnia. After the occupation of Bosnia and Herzegovina (hereinafter: B&H) by Austria-Hungary, that part remained under Ottoman rule within the territory of Kosovo Vilayet. In terms of territory, it functioned as a kind of geopolitical wedge between Serbia and Montenegro. Considering that it occasionally represented a unique administrative unit, that part of the former Ottoman Bosnia was commonly referred to as the Sandžak of Novi Pazar. Nonetheless, during the final stage of Ottoman rule, it was divided into the Sandžaks of Pljevlja, Sjenica, Peć and Priština. The whole area was divided in 1912, during the First Balkan War between Serbia and Montenegro. The division had been short-lived as it was followed by World War I (1914–1918) and by the occupation of the two countries. After the war, Montenegro was incorporated into the territory of Serbia, which later became part of the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes / Yugoslavia (1918–1941). Sandžak was again divided after World War II (1939–1945) due to federalization of socialist Yugoslavia. Approximately following the line of 1912, its northern part was annexed to Serbia, and southern to Montenegro. The territory of Sandžak was finally defined upon administrative division of the Yugoslav republics into municipalities, carried out at the end of the 1950s. Its Serbian region became part of the municipalities of Priboj, Nova Varoš, Prijepolje, Sjenica, Novi Pazar and Tutin, and the Montenegrin one was incorporated into Pljevlja, Bijelo Polje, Ivangrad (which was its name until 1949, since 1992 it has been “Berane”), Rožaj (since the 2003 list; “Rožaje '') and Plav. Sandžak occupies 8.687 km², with its Serb part amounting to an area of 4.499 km² (51.8%) and the Montenegrin to 4.188 km² (48.2%). The number of municipalities we can consider as part of Sandžak has increased. While the municipality of Andrijevica was formed from the southern part of Berane municipality in 1990, Petnjica municipality was established from the northern part in 2012.Mitrovica (Kosovo, Tito’s) and its surroundings were also part of the Sandžak of Novi Pazar. After World War II it was integrated into Kosovo and has been perceived as its part. On the other hand, the modern notion of Sandžak includes the town of Plav in Montenegro, which did not use to be perceived as its part. Although Sandžak remains recognisable as a separate formation, it is essentially a historical perception maintained by the distinctiveness of its ethnic features. It is seen as a region inhabited by Bosniaks (predominantly in the east, towards Kosovo) as well as Serbs and Montenegrins (mostly in the west, towards B&H). This paper presents the data of all modern population censuses providing a more or less clear image of the ethnic features of Sandžak. The censuses included are those carried out between 1921 and 2011 within several countries, namely in the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes (SHS) (as of 1929; the Kingdom of Yugoslavia), socialist Yugoslavia, Federal Republic of Yugoslavia / the State Union of Serbia and Montenegro (1992–2003 / 2003–2006) and in independent Serbia and Montenegro (since 2006). The indicators presented refer to the total population of Sandžak, providing basis for various analyses, comparisons and conclusions. The attached paper was focused on the Bosniak community. We have attempted to determine the extent to which the Sandžak Bosniaks have expressed their ethnicity or national affiliation in accordance with the Bosniaks in B&H. The attempt was made both at the level of the entire Sandžak and of its Serbian and Montenegrin part. At the same time, the analysis conducted enabled the comparison of Bosniaks’ census declaration in those two parts of Sandžak. With regard to the objectives stated, the first two censuses, the ones from 1921 and 1931, are virtually unusable considering that they did not register ethnicity. As they contain data on religious affiliation and mother tongue, data on ethnicity may only be obtained indirectly, i.e. by combining the former two indicators. However, one should bear in mind that the data thus obtained only have approximate value, considering that the population might not have declared their ethnicity as such, had they had the opportunity in those years. Nevertheless, those censuses have a reference significance for the subsequent periods, so their indicators are also included in the paper.The subjects of the analysis were primarily the results of the censuses conducted from 1948 until 2011, that is, the censuses allowing for an insight into the ethnic or national positioning of all the groups, including the Bosniaks. In the case of Bosniaks; in accordance with the political circumstances, the first three censuses conducted in socialist Yugoslavia were not aligned with the reality of their autonomy. However, they nevertheless offered opportunities to express their own identity, albeit indirectly. In 1971, in the context of political recognition of the national distinctiveness of Bosniaks, then known as “Muslims”, new circumstances emerged in terms of quality, to be reflected in the subsequent two censuses. They have changed somewhat due to the replacement of the Muslim national name with the name “Bosniaks” in the early 1990s. This is also evidenced by the results of the censuses covering Sandžak after the disintegration of socialist Yugoslavia. The following conclusions may be drawn from the insights into census results as well as from their analysis and comparison.Although the Communist government generally approached the Bosniaks as a separate ethnic entity, it took a long time to issue a political acknowledgement of the Bosniak national distinctiveness. This reality was already reflected in the first census carried out in 1948, in which the Bosniaks were given the opportunity to declare themselves as “undeclared Muslims” in order to demonstrate their own autonomy. In B&H, almost 90% of Bosniaks identified themselves as such. In Sandžak, such declarations were rare and only occurred in its Serbian part, where Bosniaks mostly declared themselves as Serbs. In the Montenegrin part, they almost completely identified themselves as Montenegrins. Within the 1953 census, Bosniaks were provided an opportunity to declare themselves as “undeclared Yugoslavs”, which was done by 95% of them in B&H. In the Serbian part of Sandžak, the majority of Bosniaks also identified themselves as such, but a significant part of them declared themselves as Turks. Unlike the Serbian part of Sandžak, where Bosniaks decreasingly identified themselves as Serbs, in the Montenegrin part, they continued to refer to themselves as Montenegrins. In that census, as well as in the subsequent ones, a smaller number of the Montenegrin Bosniaks identified themselves as Turks. In that and in the subsequent two censuses, expression of Turkish nationality was closely related to the then mass emigration of Sandžak Bosniaks to Turkey. Acceptance of Turkish national identity was supposed to facilitate the process of overcoming the constraints that have stood in the way of emigration from the homeland and immigration in the country specified.In the 1961 census, Bosniaks were able to declare themselves as “Muslims in terms of ethnicity”. In B&H, almost the entire population of Bosniaks opted for that possibility, as well as the one that had been offered as the alternative possibility in the previous census (“undeclared Yugoslavs”) In the Serbian part of Sandžak, the vast majority of Bosniaks declared themselves as “Muslims in terms of ethnicity”, but again, a substantial number identified themselves as Turks. In the Montenegrin part; in 1961 the Bosniak population declared themselves as “Muslims in terms of ethnicity” and as Montenegrins in equal measure.After the constitution of the nation of “Muslims” was politically accepted in the late 1960s, almost all Bosniaks from B&H and Sandžak opted for that entry in the 1971 census. In the Serbian part, only a small number identified themselves as Turks. The 1981 and 1991 censuses are significant as they confirmed the 1971 rule, with a significant part of B&H Bosniaks, together with Croats and Serbs, declaring themselves as “Yugoslavs”. Such declaration was scarce in Sandžak. As the Bosniaks accepted the replacement of their former national name in 1993, a new situation emerged, which was registered in the subsequent censuses. Within them, the reality of Bosniak nationality was accepted, but a possibility was left for declaring oneself as “Muslim” both in the territory of Serbia and Montenegro and of B&H. Of the total number of declared Bosniaks and Muslims, the 2002 census counted close to 6% of Muslims in the Serbian part of Sandžak, while the 2003 census counted as much as 26% of them in Montenegro. It could be said that a part of the population declared in those censuses had not yet adequately perceived the significance of the changes relating to national affiliation, but would do so eventually. That situation was similar to the 1961 census, when a significant part of Bosniaks in B&H did not declare themselves as “Muslims in terms of ethnicity” but as “undeclared Yugoslavs” in accordance with the previous census. In B&H, that “anomaly” was bypassed already in the subsequent census. However, not in the case of Sandžak. In the 2011 census, Muslims comprised 8% of the total number of declared Bosniaks and Muslims in the Serbian part of Sandžak, while there were almost 20% of them in the Montenegrin part. As opposed to that, in the first census that was held in B&H after 1991, i.e. the 2013 census, Muslims compris
Rat koji je vođen na teritoriju Bosne i Hercegovine završen je potkraj 1995. dolaskom snaga UN i potpisivanjem Daytonskog sporazuma. Bosna i Hercegovina koja je u bivšoj SFRJ predstavljala simbol ...bratstva i jedinstva, postala je zemlja u kojoj žive tri duboko zavađena i podijelena naroda. Šest godina kasnije, bilo je zanimljivo istraživati koliko su građani Federacije Bosne i Hercegovine i Republike Srpske spremni uspostaviti socijalne odnose među sobom, ali i s drugim narodima nekadašnje SFRJ.
Rezultati istraživanja nam pokazuju da građani Bosne i Hercegovine imaju veliku distancu prema narodima s kojima su do prije deset godina živjeli u jednoj državi. Razloga za odbijanje određenih odnosa s pojedinim narodima ima mnogo: otvoreno neprijateljstvo tijekom rata, nepoznavanje načina života drugih naroda, stereotipi i predrasude o drugim narodima, nedostatak točnih informacija i zatvorenost tih društava i dr.
U Bosni i Hercegovini povjerenje među narodima je vrlo slabo i trebat će mnogo dobre volje, vremena i truda da bi se ponovno povratilo. Tek tada se može očekivati smanjenje etničke distance prema narodima u Bosni i Hercegovini, ali i prema drugim narodima. Smanjenje etničke distance prema drugim narodima bit će jasan pokazatelj svima da je Bosna i Hercegovina postala demokratska država u kojoj se pojedinac cijeni po svojim kvalitetama, a ne po tome kojem narodu pripada.
Na reprezentativnom uzorku odraslog stanovništva Hrvatske provedeno je istraživanje s ciljem mjerenja socijalne distance prema Crnogorcima, Bošnjacima, Slovencima i Srbima u 2002., 2005. i 2008. ...godini. Rezultati istraživanja prikupljeni Bogardusovom skalom pokazali su da je socijalna distanca prema svim narodima velika i da se značajno razlikuje od naroda do naroda. Građani najveću socijalnu distancu izražavaju prema Srbima, a najmanju prema Slovencima. Te su razlike ponajviše uzrokovane ratnim sukobima prilikom raspada Jugoslavije. Sa Srbima Hrvati su bili u najvećem sukobu, dok sa Slovencima nisu bili u ratnom sukobu. Pored toga, rezultati pokazuju da se socijalna distanca s vremenom smanjuje. U 2008. godini uočava se smanjenje socijalne distance prema pripadnicima crnogorskog i bošnjačkog naroda. Utvrđen je i značajan pad u socijalnoj distanci prema pripadnicima srpskog naroda u 2008. godini u odnosu na 2002. godinu. Međutim, suprotni trend uočava se u izraženosti socijalne distance prema Slovencima koja je 2008. godine veća nego 2005. godine. Razlog tome su neriješena granična pitanja koja Slovenija želi riješiti u svoju korist otežavanjem ulaska Hrvatske u EU.
U povijesnoj i publicističkoj literaturi XIX. i XX. st. te današnjoj, u analizi migracijskih pravaca prema Istri, polazi se od pretpostavke kako je Crna Gora u vremenu od XVI. do XVIII. st. u ...kulturološkom smislu uglavnom kompaktni prostor podijeljen na pravoslavni i islamski svijet. Je li to baš tako? Nekoliko primjera s istarskoga poluotoka na sjevernome dijelu Jadranskoga mora (dio hrvatskoga prostora) dokazuje drugačiju socijalnu strukturu u Crnoj Gori iz koje su neke obitelji iselile u tadašnju mletačku pokrajinu, u dijelu Istre. Upisi nekih imena i prezimena kao i opaske u rubrikama matičnih knjiga katoličkih župa dokazuju kako je na istarski poluotok naseljeno više desetaka katoličkih obitelji iz tzv. ‘’Stare Crne Gore’’ – ‘’da Montenegro’’. Radi se o ljudima koji dolaze iz Crne Gore – dijela Osmanskog Carstva. Najveća je koncentracija takvih doseljenika u Poreču, Vodnjanu, Balama i Fažani. Oni su se pridružili doseljenicima koji su u Istru stigli iz mletačke pokrajine Dalmacije (južna Hrvatska), a u izvorima se najčešće spominju kao Paštrovići. Teško je samo na temelju toga prezimena utvrditi kada se radi o etničkom Hrvatu ili Crnogorcu, jer ono može označavati i čovjeka koji se doselio i s područja Paštrovića. Jedan od poznatijih bio je Domenico Pastrovichio, dugogodišnji katolički župnik i kanonik kolegijalne crkve sv. Blaža u Vodnjanu. Duhovnu je skrb o ljudima vodio upravo u vrijeme doseljenja pravoslavnih Crnogoraca i njihova građanskog provizorija kao ‘’habitantes nuovi’’. No, koliko je poznato, nije pokazivao zanimanje za upravo doseljene pravoslavce.
PDF
