The Idea of a Greater Croatia by Pavao Ritter Vitezović (I)

Hits: 608

Introduction

The article will examine the model for the creation of a Greater Croatia designed by a Croatian nobleman, publicist and historian Pavao Ritter Vitezović (1652–1713). The article will offer a new interpretation of the substance and significance of Vitezović’s political ideology. Many historians have viewed Vitezović’s political thought and his developed ideological framework of a united South Slavic state as part of a wider pan-Slavic world. According to the prevailing notion, Vitezović was a precursor of the idea of Yugoslavism (a united South Slavic nation-state) and even Pan-Slavism – a pan-Slavic cultural and political reciprocity. Yet a closer look at Vitezović and his contemporaries’ writings suggests an alternative model for outlining the borders of modern ethnic states among the South Slavs. P. R. Vitezović argued for the creation of a Croat national state, based on the integration of alleged Croat “ethnic territories” and their consolidation along ethnolinguistic lines. The analysis of Vitezović’s understanding of nationhood explains how the borders of an envisioned early modern Croat ethnic state had been perceived as including vast territories from the Adriatic Sea to Moscow and from the Baltic Sea to the Black Sea. In this respect, Vitezović’s views on the Lithuanians and the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth will show that the argument used to substantiate his claims for a Croatian national state was based on an ethnolinguistic kinship.

This article will focus on the territorial and ideological mapping of the borders of an early modern Croatian state in the second half of the 17th century. It will deal with three main issues:

  1. It will explain how the borders of the areas populated by the Slavs were shaped and reshaped through the political ideas articulated in the writings of Vitezović and his contemporaries.
  2. It will answer the question which arguments were used to claim a Pan-Slavic ethnolinguistic kinship and construct the concept of Pan-Croatianism?
  3. The article will explain why Vitezović placed Lithuania on his mental map of a Croatian national state.

The analysis of P. R. Vitezović’s political writings, therefore, will show that in the 17th century Croatian intellectuals constructed a model of a modern nation-state based on territory, ethnic origins and language, and excluding religion.

An ideological concept of the Pan Croatianism and a Greater Croatia

A Croatian nobleman of ethnic German origin from Senj, Pavao Ritter Vitezović (1652–1713), was the person who transformed old Dalmatian Pan-Slavic idea into the ideological concept of Pan-Croatianism that included all Slavic population into the membership of the Croatian nationality. Dalmatian, and especially Ragusian (Dubrovnik) humanists, in the 16th century, accepted the old domestic popular tradition that all Slavs originated in fact in the Balkans and the south Danubian region. It means that according to this tradition and several historical sources, the South Slavs are autochthonous inhabitants at both the Balkan Peninsula and its neighboring south Danubian region. More precisely, the entire Slavonic population had its progenitors in the ancient Balkan Illyrians, Macedonians, and Thracians. Principally, the ancient Illyrians were considered as the real ancestors of the South, Eastern and Western Slavs who have been living in the central and western territories of the Balkans. Consequently, according to this belief, the forefathers of present-day Eastern and Western Slavs emigrated from the Balkans and nearby Danubian lands and settled on the wider territory of Europe from the Elbe River on the West to the Volga River on the East.[1] However, the South Slavs remained in the Balkans – the peninsula that was considered as the motherland of all Slavonic people (Istorija naroda Jugoslavije 1960: 224–227). Subsequently, all famous historical actors who originated in the Balkans were appropriated as members of the Slavdom: Alexander the Great and his father Philip II of Macedon, Aristotle, St. Jerome (Hieronymus), Diocletian, Constantine the Great, SS. Cyril and Methodius, etc.[2] On the territory of present-day Serbia, for instance, eighteen Roman Emperors of the Illyrian (Slavic?) origin were born among whom Constantin the Great became most famous.

P. R. Vitezović, “plemeniti i hrabreni gospn hërvatski i senski vlastelin” (“noble and brave gentleman and feudal lord from Senj”) (Bogišić 1970: 143), a Senj’s delegate to the Hungarian feudal Parliament (Diet) in Sopron, a representative of the Croatian feudal Parliament (Sabor) at the Imperial Court in Vienna, developed its ideology of Pan-Croatianism in the following writings: Kronika, aliti szpomen vszega szvieta vikov (“Chronicle, or a Remembrance of all the Times of the World”), Zagreb, 1696; Anagrammaton, Sive Lauras auxiliatoribus Ungariae liber secundus (“The Second Book of Anagrams, or a Laurel to the Helpers of Hungary”), Vienna, 1689; Croatia rediviva: Regnante Leopoldo Magno Caesare (“Revived Croatia…”), Zagreb, 1700; and in Stemmatographia, sive Armorum Illyricorum delineatio, descriptio et restitutio (“Stemmatography, or the Delineation, Description, and Restoration of the Illyrian Coat of Arms”), Vienna, 1701. Nevertheless, the fundamental political purpose of these four works was to indicate to the Habsburg Emperor Leopold I (1658–1705) the “Croatian” historical lands that should be united under the Habsburg imperial crown, but not to be divided between three Balkan superpowers: the Republic of San Marco (Venice), the Ottoman Sultanate and the Habsburg Monarchy (Bratulić 1994: 74; Istorija naroda Jugoslavije 1960: 948–949). Especially his Croatia rediviva… was a political protest against the Austro-Ottoman Peace Treaty of Sremski Karlovci, in present-day Serbia, (in German Karlowitz), which, according to Vitezović, deprived Croatia of her alleged ancient historical and ethnical territories (Ritter 1700; Šišić 1934: 44).

According to the Peace Treaty of Sremski Karlovci, the border between the Habsburg Monarchy and the Ottoman Sultanate was fixed on the Morish and Tisa Rivers. Therefore, Transylvania and Hungary became now parts of the Habsburg Monarchy, the Banat of Temeshvar of the Ottoman Sultanate while the region of Srem (Sirmium) was divided between these two empires. The state border of the Habsburg Monarchy became moved from the Kupa River to the Una River (in present-day Bosnia) and to Velebit Mt in Dalmatia. However, the European peace was established next year when on June 13th the Russian Empire and the Ottoman Sultanate signed a bilateral treaty in Istanbul (Constantinople) that was valid for the next thirty years. According to this treaty, Russia got Azov, stopped to pay annual tribute to the Tatar Han, received a right to freely visit the Christian holy places in Palestine and to have its own diplomatic representative in Istanbul (Dimić 1999: 266−267).

P. R. Vitezović clearly pointed out in his Kronika… that entire ex-Roman province of Illyricum should be understood as a land populated by the Slavs (Vitezovich 1696: 6). However, he implied the term Illyricum to the entire Balkan Peninsula that was settled by the Slavs including and the Albanians who were (wrongly) considered as direct descendants of the ancient Illyrians. Moreover, taking into consideration the fact that some of the South Slavic (Roman Catholic) Renaissance authors (wrongly) applied the name Illyrians and Illyricum to the Croats and Croatia, Vitezović, in fact, called all descendants (the Slavs and Albanians) of the Illyrians as Croats. Thus, the main portion of the Balkans, from the Istrian Peninsula and the Adriatic Sea to the Black Sea, the Danube River, and the Aegean Sea belonged exclusively to the Croatdom. Vitezović stressed that the idea of Illyrian-Slavic nationhood, or the Croatdom, was based on linguistic unity and community for the simple reason that all of these territories and their inhabitants spoke and wrote “szlavni nas (i.e., the Croatian) Illyrski aliti Szlovenski jezik” (“our glorious Illyrian or Slavic language”) (Vitezovich 1696: 199; Blažević 2000, see the map on p. 225).

A Roman province of Illyricum was established during the time of the Roman Emperor Augustus’ conquest of the Western Balkans in the years of 35 B.C. – A.D. 9. During the time of Emperor Constantine I (Great), one of (four) imperial praefecturas/prefectures (the largest administrative-territorial unites of the Roman Empire) was the Illyricum which covered almost the whole Balkans (except present-day Bulgaria and the European portion of Turkey) and the parts of present-day Hungary and Austria. The Preafectura Illyricum was divided into the following dioceses: Achaia, Thessalia, Macedonia, Dacia, Moesia Prima, Epirus Vetus, Epirus Nova, Praevalitana, Dalmatia, Pannonia Prima, Pannonia Secunda, Savia, Noricum Ripense and Noricum Mediterraneum (Westermann 1985: 38–39, 42–43). It partially covered the territories of modern Austria, Slovenia, and Hungary, but covered all present-day Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Serbia, Montenegro, Greece (without the West Thrace) and Albania. Nevertheless, in his Anagrammaton…, Vitezović included the entire territory of the Balkans and a part of South-East Europe into the Illyricum that was later described in his Croatia rediviva… as South Croatia (Ritter 1689; Ritter 1700).

P. R. Vitezović actually divided the whole world into six ethnolinguistic, historical, cultural and geographical areas, civilizations and cultures as they are:

I) Germania, which embraced the whole German-speaking world: the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation, headed by Austria, the Kingdom of Sweden (Sweden, Norway, Finland), Denmark, East Prussia, Curonian Isthmus (Kuršių Neria) with the Curonian Bay or the Courish Lagoon (Kuršių Marios), Memel (Klaipėda). However, Angliae regnum (Scotland, England, Wales, and Ireland) was included into Germania as well.

II) Italia cum parte Greciae (Italy with the part of Greece) referred to the Apennine Peninsula, Corsica, Sardinia, Sicily, Attica, Peloponnesus (Morea) and the main number of the Aegean and the Ionian Islands, Malta, and Crete.

III) Illyricum that was the whole Balkans (except Attica and Peloponnesus with the adjoining islands), Wallachia (Dacia and Cumania), Transylvania, and Hungary.

IV) Hispania, which was composed by Spain and Portugal and their European possessions and overseas colonies in Africa, Asia, Latin America with Florida and California.

V) Sarmatia that was composed by the territories of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (the Republic of Two Nations) with Moldavia and Muscovy (i.e., the Russian Empire).

VI) Gallia that was France (Ritter 1689: 69–117).

A real ideological source for such division of the whole world was the Slavic idea which decisively influenced Vitezović who recognized that all Slavs belonged to a single ethnolinguistic community. Nevertheless, he metamorphosed this idea of Pan-Slavism eleven years later into the idea of a Pan-Croatianism and a Greater Croatia. In fact, Vitezović claimed that all Slavs are the Balkan Illyrians who were autochthonous inhabitants of Illyricum. However, for him, it was clear that ancient Illyrians were modern Croats and ancestors of all Slavs. This ideology of Croatian-Slavic ethnogenesis Vitezović developed in his work Croatia rediviva… that was an outline for a more ambitious general history of the Croats and Croatia, i.e. the entire Slavic population. In this work, Vitezović divided the total territory of ethnic, historical and linguistic Croatia into two parts: I) Croatia Septemtrionalis (North Croatia), and II) Croatia Meridionalis (South Croatia). The boundary between them was the Danube River. North Croatia encompassed the entire territories of Bohemia, Moravia, Lusatia (Łužica or Łužyca in East Saxony and South Brandenburg) (The Sorbs in Germany 1998: 5), Hungary, Transylvania, Wallachia, Muscovy, Poland, and Lithuania (Ritter 1700: 109). The people who were living in North Croatia were divided into two groups: North-West Croats, called the Venedicos (the Wends) and North-East Croats, named as the Sarmaticos (the Sarmatians). The Wends consisted of the Czechs, Moravians, and Sorbs (Sorabi, who lived in Lusatia), whereas the Sarmatians who were living in Muscovy, Poland and Lithuania (Ritter 1700: 10), i.e., were the Rus’, Poles and Lithuanians.

P. R. Vitezović found that the ancestors of all North Croats (the Wends and the Sarmatians) were the White Croats (Belohrobatoi, from the Byzantine historical sources) who lived in the early Middle Ages around the upper Dniester River and the upper Vistula River, i.e., Galicia and Little Poland (Engel 1979: 10–11; Westermann 1985: 50–51, 54–55; Macan 1992: 15–16; Klaić 1971: 18–22). A traditional name from the sources for White Croatia was a Greater Croatia or an Ancient Croatia (Ćorović 1993: 34; Klaić 1971: 21). At the time of Vitezović’s writing of Croatia rediviva… this territory was an integral part of the Republic of the Two Nations (the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth).

South Croatia, or Illyricum (the Balkans), was subdivided by Vitezović into two parts: Croatia Alba (White Croatia), and Croatia Rubea (Red Croatia). Croatia Alba was composed by Croatia Maritima (central and maritime Montenegro, Dalmatia and East Istria), Croatia Mediterranea (Croatia proper and Bosnia-Herzegovina), Croatia Alpestris (Slovenia and West Istria), and Croatia Interamnia (Slavonia with a part of Pannonia). Croatia Rubea consisted of Serbia, North-East Montenegro, Bulgaria, Macedonia, Epirus, Albania, Thessaly and Thrace (Vitezović’s Odrysia) (Ritter 1700: 32). Therefore, there have been Vitezović’s “limites totius Croatiae” (“borders of whole Croatia”) that was settled, according to him, by ethnolinguistic Croats (Vitezović 1699; Ritter 1699; Vitezović 1997: 188–215; Perković 1995: 225–236). However, Vitezović recognized the reality that his Greater (United) Croatia and a Pan-Croatian national identity was not a unified in whole. In other words, he acknowledged differences in borders, names, emblems, and customs: “cum propriis tamen singularum limitibus etymo, insignibus, rebusque ac magis memorabilibus populi moribus” (Ritter 1700: 32; Ritter 1701). After all, he believed that these distinctions were of lesser importance than the common Croatian nationhood of all of these people and lands. His apotheosis of the common Croat name especially for all South Slavs (the ancient Balkan Illyrians) with regional and historical differences was expressed in Vitezović’s heraldic manual Stemmatographia… where he presented all “Croatian” historical and ethnolinguistic lands in South-East Europe, like Serbia, Bulgaria, Romania, etc. (Ritter 1701; Banac 1993: 223–227).

The sources of ideological background of P. R. Vitezović’s Pan-Croatianism

The ideological background of P. R. Vitezović’s Pan-Croatianism lies undoubtedly in the 16th–17th centuries developed a Pan-Slavic idea, which is presented in the first part of this article. Vitezović accepted the main point of this idea – all Slavs constitute a single ethnolinguistic community of kinship.[3]

The basic elements of this assumption he found in the well-known and widely-read East Slavonic Povest’ vremennyh let or Nestor’s Chronicle (“Primary Chronicle” – a compilation from the early 12th century, containing both oral and earlier written material), which main ideological construction, i.e., tradition of the three Slavic progenitors – brothers Czech, Lech and Rus’, who originated in the Balkans and Pannonian Plain around the Danube River (Povest’ vremennyh let 1884: 4; Conte 1986: 14–15). This source became further developed in the various medieval Dalmatian, Czech, and Polish chronicles and Renaissance-Baroque Slavic histories written by the South Slavic authors, especially by those living in Dalmatia.[4]

Constructing his own ideology of a Pan-Croatianism, P. R. Vitezović, on the first place, used information from the next four historical sources relating to the early history of the Slavs, their origin, ethnogenesis and their settlement at the Balkans:

1) Already mentioned above Povest’ vremennyh let.

2) Letopis Popa Dukljanina or Barski rodoslov (“Chronicle of the Priest from Dioclea” or “Bar’s Genealogy”). This is a mid-12th-century chronicle, possibly originally written in the Slavic language, but surviving only in its Latin translation. The only survived copy of this manuscript can be found in the Manuscript Collection of Library of Vatican under the signature: Vat. Lat. 6958. The main part of this chronicle is based on oral tradition. It is the most detailed source for the early history of Montenegro and Herzegovina and important source on the history of Bosnia, Croatia, and Macedonia.

3) Historia Salonitana (“History of Split”). This is the most important, but a biased historical source for the history of the Dalmatian city of Split from the 7th to the 13th centuries. There is as well as an expanded version of this work from the 16th century that is known as Historia Salonitana maior by Thomas the Archdeacon of Split who died in 1268.

4) De Administrando Imperio (“On governing of the state”). This unfinished work is dealing with the foreign policy of the Byzantium, diplomatic techniques, and sketches of the neighboring Slavic and non-Slavic people. It is written by a Byzantine Emperor Constantine VII Porphyrogenitus, 913–959.

P. R. Vitezović, became ideologically influenced and by three specific South Slavic authors who were the principal South Slavic champions of a Pan-Slavic national and linguistic reciprocity: Vinko Pribojević, Mavro Orbin, and Juraj Križanić. In addition to them, a Central European writer, Georg Horn – the 17th-century author who wrote in 1666 the so-called Georgii Horni, sive Historia imperiorum et regnorum, a conditio orbe ad nostra tempora – left as well a distinct ideological impression on Vitezović.

Surprisingly, P. R. Vitezović in his work reconciled, on one hand, the legend from Povest’ vremennyh let and information from Historia Salonitana that the Croats (called in this latter work as the Curetes) were living in the Balkans in the 1st  century B.C. with, on another hand, the information about the Croat settlement in the Balkans that he found in Porphyrogenitus’ De Administrando Imperio. Actually, for Vitezović the most interesting part of Porphyrogenitus’ work was the chapter № 30 where the Byzantine Emperor pointed out that the Balkan Croats lived in former time “on the other side of Bavaria, where the White Croats can be found today” (Klaić 1972: 3). Vitezović from this information derived a conclusion that the Croats lived out from the Balkans too, and consequently, he divided all Croats (from the Balkans and outside the Balkans) into “Transdanubian” and “Cisdanubian” Croats. Furthermore, combining information from Povest’ vremennyh let and those from Orbin’s Il Regno degli Slavi, Vitezović concluded firstly that the brothers Czech, Lech and Rus’ (i.e., the Czechs, Moravians, Poles, Russians and entire population of Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth including and the Lithuanians) were not only the natives of Illyricum (i.e., Croatia, according to him), but as well as that all of them were actually ethnolinguistic Croats. He used Porphyrogenitus’ text to claim and that the Serbs were of the Croat origin for the reason that the Emperor wrote that the Croats bordered themselves with the Slavic Serbs “who are called Croats” (Klaić 1972: 3; see as well as, Moravcsic 1949; Bury 1906). Finally, the name “Red Croatia” (Croatia Rubea) from Letopis Popa Dukljanina (Ljetopis Popa Dukljanina 1967, 196), which was related to the mediaeval Montenegro (called Duklja or Dioclea, Doclea), Herzegovina and North Albania, Vitezović extended to the whole territory of East Balkans populated by the Slavs (i.e., Illyrians or Croats in his opinion); whereas the name “White Croatia” (Croatia Alba) from the same source (Ljetopis Popa Dukljanina 1967, 194–195) that was related to East Adriatic littoral, he extended to the whole portion of West Balkans.

From the sentence “Clarius Constant. Porphyrogenitus Imper. …qui Sarmatas Belochrobatos, id est Albos, sive magnos, aut terram multam posidentes, appellat” is clear that Constantine VII Porphyrogenitus’ De Administrando Imperio served to Vitezović to claim that all Western and Eastern Slavs, i.e., the Czechs, Sorbs, Moravians and all inhabitants of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and Russia, originated in Belohrobatoi (White Croats) who are also called by Vitezović as the Sarmatians.

The author of Croatia rediviva… accepted an old idea of the Sarmatian origin of the Slavs, especially of the Poles, by reading at his lifetime very popular following four publications:

1) The Polish historian Matthew Miehowita’s Tractatus de duabus Sarmatiis Asiana et Europeana (“Treatise about two Sarmatias – Asian and European”), Cracow, 1517, for whom ancient Sarmatians were contemporary Russians.

2) The Polish poet Ian Kohanowski (1530–1584).

3) The Polish historian Martinu Kromer’s, De origine et rebus gestis Polonarum (Basel, 1555), who supported the idea of ethnic and linguistic Sarmatian-Slavic symbiosis telling that the Slavic Sarmatians came to Central and South-East Europe from “Asian Sarmatia” (north from the Black Sea) (Cromer 1555; Cynarski 1968, 6–17).

4) The Polish historian Matthew Stryjkowski’s Kronika Polska, Litewska, Žmudzka i wszystkiej Rusi (“Chronicle of Poland, Lithuania, Žemaitija/Samogitia, and all the lands of Rus’”), Königsberg, 1582. Vitezović became particularly affected with Stryjkowski’s association of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania (the GDL) with the “Polish Sarmatian Empire”.

P. R. Vitezović accepted from these four works of the Polish Renaissance authors the notion that “European Sarmatia” encompassed Poland, Lithuania, Byelorussia, and Ukraine, i.e. the lands under the scepter of the “Polish” Jagiellonian royal dynasty, which was, in fact, of the Lithuanian origin (Bumblauskas 2007: 172−179; Zinkevičius 2013: 162−167).

The ideological principles that guided M. Stryjkowski’s chronicle undoubtedly strengthened both a Pan-Slavic ideology and the ideology of Sarmatism that dominated Poland at the second half of the 16th century and the first half of the 17th century, consolidating at the same time a Polish position within the Grand Duchy of Lithuania (Kiaupa et al. 2000: 292–293). The “Sarmatian myth” was transformed by the Poles from a geographic term to the ethnic dimension and became finally political program under the motto: “Polonia caput ac Regina totius Sarmatiae” (Conte 1986: 301).

P. R. Vitezović, in general, accepted old writings about the Slavs, or at least the peoples whom he believed to be the Slavs. For that reason, he accepted the Polish “Sarmatian ideology” based on the writings of the ancient Greek and Roman historians and geographers (for instance, Strabo 63 B.C. – 23 A.D., Ptolemy 100–168) who divided the territory of contemporary Poland into two parts: Germania (West Poland) and Sarmatia (East Poland) (Conte 1986: 292). Ptolemy named the whole territory of Central and East Europe as Sarmatia (Sulimirski 1945: 26). It should be emphasized that the Roman Empire succeeded to establish between the years of 16 B.C. and 9 A.D. three new provinces – Raetia, Noricum, and Pannonia – and to firm its own position along the Danube, only after the military victories over two Sarmatian peoples: Roxolanes and Iazyges. However, both of them were occupying the Roman province of Moesia Inferior (that is today Bulgaria) from 69 B.C. The region of Pannonia and North-East Balkans (i.e. “Hungary and Bulgaria”) are considered in Povest’ vremennyh let as the birth-places of the three brothers – Slavic progenitors (Povest’ vremennyh let 1884: 4). For Vitezović, it was quite logical to conclude that the Slavic progenitors from Povest’ vremennyh let originated in Pannonian-Danubian-Balkan Sarmatians, who are mentioned in the Roman annals.

The Stryjkowski’s chronicle strengthened the idea of Pan-Slavism in the eyes of J. Križanić, but in the eyes of P. R. Vitezović this Pan-Slavic ideology was converted into the Pan-Croatian one. Furthermore, Vitezović was familiar with the theory of the Sarmatian origin of all Slavs that was developed in 1606 in the short history De slowinis seu Sarmatis written by Dalmatian historian, inventor, philosopher and lexicographer from Šibenik – Faust Vrančić. The next step used by Vitezović was to identify Porphyrogenitus’ “White Croats” with the Slavi Vandali (the Vandalic Slavs), whose were divided in Georgii Horni’s Sive historia imperiorum et regnorum, a conditio orbe ad nostra tempora (1666) into Venedicos (the Wends) and Sarmaticos (the Sarmatians).[5] Finally, Vitezović was influenced at the great extent by the works of Juraj Križanić and Martin Cromer with regard to the Pan-Slavic unity and reciprocity, but he rejected their teaching that all Slavs originated in Rus’ (Cromer 1555; Križanić 1661–1667; Križanić 1859).[6] In sum, combining the works of Stryjkowski, Vrančić, Križanić, Cromer, and Horn, Pavao Ritter Vitezović effectively claimed all West, South and East Slavs to be of the Croat ethnolinguistic origin.

Ultimately, in dealing with the Balkan Croatia, he accepted an idea of the Croatian 17th –century historian from Dalmatia – Ivan Lučić – who divided a whole Croatia into three provinces: Maritima, Mediterranea, and Interamnensis sive Savia. However, Vitezović added additional two provinces of the Balkan Croatia: Citerior (Istria and Slovenia) and Ulterior (Serbia). These were further divided into “županije” (counties) and “comitatus” (judicial districts) (Vitezović 1997: 195).

To be continued

Endnotes

[1] About the western borders of Slavic extension in the early Middle Ages, see in (Engel 1979: 36).

[2] About the idea of Pan-Slavic ethnolinguistic kinship in Dalmatia and Croatia, see in (Sotirović 2014).

[3] Ideology, from a pure geopolitical perspective, as social phenomena is, in essence, a scope of meanings that practically “serves to create and/or to maintain relationships of domination and subordination, through symbolic forms such as texts, landscapes and spaces” (Cloke et al. 2009: 358). Therefore, it can be interpreted that P. R. Vitezović’s ideological concept of Pan-Croatianism was founded on a geopolitical idea of subordination of all Slavic people and their lands to the Croat national interest for the creation of a nation-state. A nation-state is a form of political organization that involves a framework of different institutions which has to govern the inhabitants within a particularly defined (state) territory. A nation-state, at any case, claims allegiance and legitimacy from its own inhabitants likewise from the other states, but on the fundamental basis that the government of the nation-state represents a group of people living on its controlled territory that they are defined in cultural, ethnolinguistic and political terms as a “nation”.

[4] Povest’ vremennyh let was finally written around the year of 1113 when a monk-chronographer Nestor finished the text as a compilation of several older chronicles and other texts. This chronicle is the fundamental source about the early history of the Kievan Rus’ and East Slavs but primarily of Russians and Russia (Anisimov: 46).

[5] About the problem of the homeland of the Venetae, see in (Darden 1997: 430–435)

[6] About the Slavic origin, see in (Gołąb 1991).

References and Used Bibliography

Anisimov J., 2014: Rusijos istorija nuo Riuriko iki Putino. Žmonės. Įvykiai. Datos. Vilnius.

Banac I., 1983: The Confessional “Rule” and the Dubrovnik Exception: The Origins of the “Serb-Catholic” Circle in Nineteenth-Century Dalmatia, Slavic Review-American Quaterly of Soviet and East European Studies, № 42 (3). 448–474.

Banac I., 1984: The National Question in Yugoslavia. Origins, History, Politics. Ithaca and London.

Banac I., 1991a: Hrvatsko jezično pitanje. Zagreb.

Banac I., 1991b: Grbovi biljezi identiteta. Zagreb.

Banac I., 1993: The Insignia of Identity: Heraldry and the Growth of National Ideologies Among the South Slavs, Ethnic Studies, vol. 10. 215–237.

Barišić F., 1961: Vizantijski izvori u dalmatinskoj istoriografiji XVI i XVII veka, Zbornik radova Vizantološkog instituta, 7. 227–257.

Basanavičius J., 1898: Lietuviškai Trakiškos Studijos. Shenandoah.

Bazala V., 1954: Stric Grgur i nećak Toma Budislavić, Republika, 10, № 2–3. 255–259.

Bérenger J., 1994: A History of the Habsburg Empire, 1273–1700. London and New York.

Bérenger J., 1997: A History of the Habsburg Empire 1700–1918. London and New York.

Bideleux R., Jeffries I., 1999: A History of Eastern Europe. Crisis and Change. London and New York.

Blažević Z., 2000: Croatia on the Triplex Confinium: Two Approaches, in Roksandić D., Štefanec N., (eds.), 2000: Constructing Border Societies on the Triplex Confinium, International Project Conference Papers 2, “Plan and Practice. How to Construct a Border Society? The Triplex Confinium c. 1700–1750” (Graz, December 9–12, 1998). 221–238. Budapest.

Bogišić R., (ed.), 1970: Pavao Ritter Vitezović, “Plorantis Croatiae saecula duo” in Hrvatski latinisti II: Pisci 17–19 stoljeća, vol. 3 of Pet stoljeća hrvatske književnosti, Zagreb.

Bratulić J., (ed.), 1994: Pavao Ritter Vitezović. Izbor iz djela. Zagreb.

Bumblauskas A., 2007: Senosios Lietuvos istorija, 1009−1795. Vilnius.

Bury J. B., 1906: The Treatise De Administrando Imperio, Byzantinische Zeitschrift, XV. 517–577.

Cassio B., 1604: Institutionum linguae illyricae libri duo. Authore Bartholomeo Cassio Curictensi Societatus Iesu. Rome.

Cloke P., Crang Ph., Goodwin M. (eds.) 2009: Introducing Human Geographies, Second edition. London.

Conte F., 1986: Les Slaves. Aux origines, des civilisations d’ Europe centrale et orientale (VI–XIII siècles). Paris.

Ćorović V., 1993: Istorija Srba. Beograd.

Cromer M., 1555: De origine et rebus gestis Polonarum. Basel.

Cronia A., 1952: Contributo alla grammatologia serbo-croata, Ricerche slavistiche, 1. 22–37.

Cronia A., 1953: Contributto alle lessicografia del Dictionarum quinque nobilissimaram Europae linguarum di Fausto Veranzio, Ricerche slavistiche, 2.

Cynarski S., 1968: The shape of Sarmatian ideology in Poland, Acta Poloniae Historica, № 19. 6–17.

Darden B. J., 1997: On Zbignew Gołąb, the Homeland of the Slavs, the Indo-Europeans, and the Venetae, Balkanistica, vol. 10. 430–435.

Davies N., 1981: God’s Playground: A History of Poland, vol. I, The Origins to 1795. Oxford.

Davies N., 1982: God’s Playground: A History of Poland, vol. II, 1795 to the Present. Oxford.

Derkos I., 1832: Genius patriae super dormientibus suis filiis. Zagreb.

Difnik F., 1986: Povijest Kandijskog rata u Dalmaciji (Historia della guera seguita in Dalmatia tra Ventiani e Turchi dall’anno 1645 sino alla pace e separatione de confini). Split.

Dimić Ž., 1999: Veliki Bečki rat i Karlovački mir 1683–1699. Hronologija, Beograd, 1999.

Drašković J., 1832: Disertacija iliti razgovor. Zagreb.

Dukat V., 1925: Rječnik Fausta Vrančića, Rad JAZU, 231. 102–136.

Engel J. (redactor), 1979: Großer Historischer Weltatlas. Zweiter Teil. Mittelalter. München.

Fedorowicz J., (ed.): 1982: A Republic of Nobles: Studies in Polish History to 1864. Cambridge.

Fine J., 1994: The Early Medieval Balkans. A Critical Survey from the Sixth to the Late Twelfth Century. Ann Arbor.

Franičević M., 1983: Povijest hrvatske renesansne književnosti. Zagreb.

Fürst-Bjeliš B., 2000: Cartographic Perceptions of the Triplex Confinium and State Power Interests at the Beginning of the 18th century, in Roksandić D., Štefanec N., (eds.), 2000: Constructing Border Societies on the Triplex Confinium, International Project Conference Papers 2, “Plan and Practice. How to Construct a Border Society? The Triplex Confinium c. 1700–1750” (Graz, December 9–12, 1998). 205–220. Budapest.

Gabrić-Bagarić D., 1976: Institutiones linguae illyricae Bartola Kašića i težnje ka standardizaciji jezika, Književni jezik, 1–2. 55–68.

Gabrić-Bagarić D., 1984: Jezik Bartola Kašića. Sarajevo.

Gaj Lj., 1835: Horvatov Szloga y Zjedinjenye, Danicza Horvatzka, Slavonzka y Dalmatinzka, January 7th.

Gaj Lj., 1863: Leljiva, Danica ilirska, June 27th.

Gaj Lj., 1965: Horvatov sloga i sjedinjenje, in Hrvatski preporod, vol. I. Zagreb.

Gimbutas M., 1985: Primary and Secondary Homeland of the Indo-Europeans, Journal of Indo-European Studies, 13. 185–202.

Gluck W., 1939: Toma Nadalić Budislavić, Pregled, 3, vol. 15, № 183–184. 150–154.

Gołąb Z., 1991: The Origin of the Slavs: A Linguist’s View. Columbus.

Golub I., 1976: Juraj Križanić, Hrvat iz Ozalja-Georgius Krisanich Croata-ili Križanićeva ukorjenjenost u zavičaju, Kaj, časopis za kulturu, 9–12. 100–103.

Gortan V., 1958: Šižgorić i Pribojević, Filologija, 2. 149–152.

Gregoire H., 1944–1945: L’origine et le nom des Croates et des Serbes, Byzantion, XVII. 88–118.

Guibernau M., Rex J., (eds.), 1999: The Ethnicity. Nationalism, Multiculturalism and Migration. Oxford.

Hammond, MCMLXXXIV: Historical Atlas of the World. Maplewood.

Hobsbawm E., 2000: Nations and Nationalism since 1870. Programme, Myth, Reality. Cambridge.

Hutchinson J., Smith A. D. (eds.), 1994: Nationalism. Oxford, New York.

Istorija Jugoslavije (group of authors), 1973. Beograd

Istorija naroda Jugoslavije (group of authors), 1960: Beograd.

Jelić L. (ed.), 1906a: Fontes Historici Liturgiae Glagolito-Romanae a XII ad XIX saeculum, saec. XIII. Krk.

Jelić L. (ed.), 1906b: Fontes Historici Liturgiae Glagolito-Romanae a XII ad XIX saeculum, saec. XIV. Krk.

Jelić L. (ed.), 1906c: Fontes Historici Liturgiae Glagolito-Romanae a XII ad XIX saeculum, saec. XVIII. Krk.

Johnson L. R., 1996: Central Europe. Enemies, Neighbors, Friends. New York and Oxford.

Kamiński A., 1983: The Szlachta of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and their government, in Banac I., Bushkovitch P., Yale Concilium, 1983: The Nobility in Russia and Eastern Europe. New Haven.

Kann R. A., 1990: A History of the Habsburg Empire, 1526–1918. Berkeley, Los Angeles, London.

Kapleris I., Meištas A., 2013: Istorijos egzamino gidas: Nauja programa nuo A iki Ž. Vilnius.

Kašić B., 1997: Izabrana štiva. Zagreb.

Kiaupa Z., Kiaupienė J., Kuncevičus A., 2000: The History of Lithuania before 1795. Vilnius.

Klaić N., (ed.), 1972: Izvori za hrvatsku povijest do 1526. godine. Zagreb.

Klaić N., 1971: Povijest Hrvata u srednjem vijeku. Zagreb.

Klaić V., 1914: Život i djela Pavla Rittera Vitezovića (1652–1713). Zagreb.

Kojelavičius (Koialowicz) A. W., 1650/1669 (reprint 1989): Historiae Litvaniae. Dancige, Antverpene.

Kolendić A., 1962: Šest latinskih knjižica štampanih u Krakovu u čast Dubrovčanina Tome Natalisa Budislavića, Zbornik istorije književnosti, SANU, 3. 211–240.

Kovačević E., 1973: Granice bosanskog pašaluka prema Austriji i Mletačkoj republici po odredbama Karlovačkog mira. Sarajevo.

Križanić J., 1661–1667: Razgowori ob wladatelystwu. Cracow.

Križanić J., 1859: Gramatično izkazânje ob Rúskom jezíku. Moscow.

Kvaternik E., 1971: Politički spisi. Zagreb.

Laszowski E., 1923: Putovanje Bartula Kašića po Srijemu g. 1612–1618, Hrvatski list, 4, № 264. 2.

Lettere del Cavaliere Ritter: 1700; Biblioteca Universitaria di Bologna, Fondo Marsili, vol. 709, XIX, letter № 2. Bologna.

Ljetopis Popa Dukljanina, 1969: Титоград.

Lučić I., 1986: O kraljevstvu Dalmacije i Hrvatske. Zagreb.

Lucius J., 1668; De regno Dalmatiae et Croatiae libri sex. Amstelodami.

Macan T., 1992: Povijest hrvatskoga naroda. Zagreb.

Maczak A., 1992: Poland, in Porter R. and Teich M. (eds.), 1992: The Renaissance in National Context. Cambridge.

Magocsi R. P., 2002: Historical Atlas of Central Europe, Revised and Expended Edition. Seattle.

Mallory J. P., 1989: In Search of the Indo-Europeans. London.

Marković M., 1987: Prilog poznavanju djela objavljenih u zagrebačkoj tiskari Pavla Rittera Vitezovića, Starine, 60. 71–99. Zagreb.

Marković M., 1993: Descriptio Croatiae. Zagreb.

Marsigli L. F., 1699: Relazione di tutta la Croazia, considerata per il geografico, politico e economico e militare. Bologna.

Matić T., 1950: Bajraktarijev prijevod Orbinijeva “Il regno degli Slavi”, Historijski zbornik, 3, № 1–4. 193–197.

Mladićević Z., 1994: Simboli srpske državnosti. Kratak istorijski pregled heraldičkog razvoja u Srba. Крагујевац.

Moravcsic G. (ed.), Jenkins R. J. H. (translator), 1949: Constantinus Porphyrogenitus. De Administrando Imperio. Budapest.

Novak G., 1951: Dalmacija i Hvar u Pribojevićevo doba in Pribojević V., O podrijetlu i zgodama Slavena. Zagreb.

Orbin M., 1968: Kraljevstvo Slovena. Beograd.

Orbini M., 1601: Il Regno degli Slavi. Pesaro.

Palmer A., 1970: The Lands Between. A History of East-Central Europe since the Congress of Vienna. London.

Pandžić A., 1988: Pet stoljeća zemljopisnih karata Hrvatske. Zagreb.

Pantelić M., 1965: Glagoljski brevijar popa Mavra iz godine 1460, Slovo, XV−XVI. 94–149.

Pažanin A. (ed.), 1974: Život i djelo Jurja Križanića: Zbornik radova. Zagreb.

Perković Z., 1995: Croatia Rediviva Pavla Rittera Vitezovića, Senjski zbornik, 22. 225–236.  

Povest’ vremennyh let (translation, introduction and comments by L. Leger), 1884: Paris.

Pribojević V., 1951: De origine successibusque Slavorum. Zagreb.

Radojčić N., 1950: Srpska istorija Mavra Orbinija. Beograd.

Radojčić N., Šišić F., 1929–1930: Letopis Popa Dukljanina, Slavia, vol. VIII, № 5. 158–182.

Rešetar M., 1915: Toma Nadal Budislavić i njegov Collegium Ortodoxum u Dubrovniku, Rad JAZU, 206. 136–141.

Ritter P. E., 1689: Anagrammaton, sive Laurus auxiliatoribus Ungariae liber secundus. Vienna.

Ritter P. E., 1696: Kronika, Aliti szpomen vsega szvieta vikov. Zagreb.

Ritter P. E., 1699: Responsio ad postulata comiti Marsiglio, in Count Marsigli’s collection, manuscript volume 103, entitled Documenta rerum Croaticarum et Transylvanicarum in Commisione limitanea collecta, fol. 27r-34r, Biblioteca Universitaria di Bologna, Bologna.

Ritter P. E., 1706: Indigetes Illyricani sive Vitae Sanctorum Illyrici. Zagreb.  

Ritter P., 1689: Anagrammaton, Sive Lauras auxiliatoribus Ungariae liber secundus. Vienna.

Ritter P., 1700: Croatia rediviva: Regnante Leopoldo Magno Caesare. Zagreb.

Ritter P., 1701: Stemmatographia, sive Armorum Illyricorum delineatio, descriptio et restitutio. Vienna.

Samalavičius S., 1995: An Outline of Lithuanian History. Vilnius.

Samardžić R., 1983: Veliki vek Dubrovnika. Beograd.

Sančević Z., 1991: Povijesne granice Hrvatske i Bosne prema kartografima of 16. do 18. stoljeća, Hrvatska revija, vol. I–II. 17–46.

Šapoka A. (ed.), 1936 (reprint 1989): Lietuvos istorija. Kaunas.

Schmaus A., 1953: Vicentius Priboevius, ein Vorläufer des Panslavismus, Jahrbücher für Geschichte Osteuropas, 1. 243–254.

Šidak J., 1972: Počeci političke misli u Hrvata-J. Križanić i P. Ritter Vitezović, Naše teme, XVI/7–8.

Simpson C. A., 1991: Pavao Ritter Vitezović; defining national identity in the baroque age. Manuscript. The School of Slavonic and East European Studies. University of London. London.

Šišić F., 1928: Letopis Popa Dukljanina, Beograd–Zagreb.

Šišić F., 1934: Hrvatska historiografija od XVI do XX stoljeća, Jugoslovenska istoriski časopis, I/1–4.

Slukan M., 1999: Kartografski izvori za povijest Triplex Confiniuma. Zagreb.

Šmurlo E. J., 1926: Juraj Križanić: Panslavista o missionario, Rivista di letteratura, arte, storia, 1. 3–4.

Šmurlo E. J., 1927: From Križanić to the Slavophils, Slavonic Review, 6, № 17. 321–325.

Sotirović V., 2000: Nineteenth-century ideas of Serbia “linguistic” nationhood and statehood, Slavistica Vilnensis, Kalbotyra, 49 (2). 7–24.

Sotirović V., 2014: The Idea of Pan-Slavic Ethnolinguistic Kinship and Reciprocity in Dalmatia and Croatia, 1477−1683, Politikos mokslų almanachas (Political Science Almanack), 15. 175−187.

Spasić D., Palavestra A., Mrđenović D., 1991: Rodoslovne tablice i grbovi srpskih dinastija i vlastele. Београд.

Stanojević S., 2015: Svi srpski vladari. Biografije srpskih (sa crnogorskim i bosanskim) i pregled hrvatskih vladara. Beograd.

Šrepel M., 1890: Latinski izvor i ocjena Kašićeve gramatike, Rad JAZU, 102. 172–201.

Stančić N., 1985: Hrvatski narodni preporod, 1790–1848: Hrvatska u vrijeme Ilirskog pokreta. Zagreb.

Starčević A., 1971: Politički spisi. Zagreb.

Štefanić V., 1938: Bellarmino-Komulovićev Kršćanski nauk, Vrela i prinosi, 8. 1–50.

Štefanić V., 1963: Tisuću i sto godina od moravske misije, Slovo, XIII. 5–42.

Stojković M., 1913/1914: Karakteristika života i djelovanja Bartula Kašića iz Paga, Nastavni vjesnik, 22, № 1. 1–9.

Stojković M., 1919: Bartuo Kašić Pažanin, Rad JAZU, 220. 170–263.

Stoye J., 1994: Marsigli’s Europe 1680–1730. The Life and Times of Luigi Ferdinando Marsigli, Soldier and Virtuoso. New Haven and London.

Sulimirski T., 1945: Schythian Antiquities in Central Europe, The Antiquaries Journal, XXV. 1–26.

Tadin C., 1903: Elio Lampridio Cerva, Rivista Dalmatica, 3, № 6. 265–278.

Težak S., 1996: Naglasci Jurja Križanića i današnji naglasni odnosi na području Ribnika, Ozalja Dubovca, Filologija, 26. Zagreb.

The Sorbs in Germany (group of authors), 1998. Görlitz.

Vanino M., 1934: Bartul Kašić i književni mu rad, Napredak, kalendar, 23. 123–127.

Vanino M., 1936: O Aleksandru Komuloviću, Napredak, kalendar, 26. 40–54.

Vanino M., 1940: Autobiografija Bartula Kašića, Gradja, 15. 1–144.

Velčić M., 1991: Otisak priče. Zagreb.

Verantius F., 1595: Dictionarium quinque nobilissimarum Europae linguarum, Latinae, Italicae, Germanicae, Dalmatiae & Ungaricae. Venice.

Vitezović P. R., 1699: Mappa Generalis Regni Croatiae Totius. Limitibus suis Antiquis, videlicet, a Ludovici, Regis Hungariae, Diplomatibus, comprobatis, determinati. 1:550 000 (drawing in color). 69,4 x 46,4 cm. Hrvatski državni arhiv, Kartografska zbirka (Croatian State Archives, Cartographic Collection), D I. Zagreb.

Vitezović P. R., 1706: Offuciae Ioannis Lucii de Regno Dalmatiae et Croatiae Refutate. Zagreb.

Vitezović P. R., 1997: Oživjela Hrvatska. Zagreb.

Vitezovich P., 1696: Kronika, aliti szpomen vszega szvieta vikov. Zagreb.

Vrančić F., 1971: Rječnik pet najuglednijih evropskih jezika. Zagreb.

Wandycz P., 1974: The Lands of Partitioned Poland, 1795–1918. Seattle.

Wandycz P., 1992: The Price of Freedom: a History of East-Central Europe from the Middle Ages to the Present. London.

Wandycz P., 1997: Laisves kaina. Vidurio Rytų Europos istorija nou viduramžių iki dabartines. Vilnius.

Weigl J. Ch. 1699: Mappa der zu Carlovitz geschlossen und hernach durch zwei gevollmächtige. Comissarios vollzogenen Kaiserlich-Türkischen Grantz-Scheidung, in dem früh jahr 1699. angefangen und nach verfliesung 26. Monaten volendet worden. 1:11 300 000. – 1702. – Copperlate in colour; 290 x 365 cm. Hrvatski državni arhiv, Kartografska zbirka (Croatian State Archives, Cartographic Collection) A I 12; Muzej hrvatske povijesti, Kartografska zbirka (Museum of Croatian History, Cartographic Collection) 3844, Biblioteka nacionalnog univerziteta, Kartografska zbirka (National University Library, Cartographic Collection) S-JZ-XVIII-14.

Westermann, 1985: Großer Atlas zur Weltgeschichte. Braunschweig.

Zamoyski A., 1987: The Polish Way: a One Thousand Year History of the Poles and their Culture. London.

Žefarović H., 1741: Σтемматографϊа. Vienna.

Žic N., 1935: Hrvatske knjižice Aleksandra Komulovića, Vrela i prinosi, 5. 162–181.

Zinkevičius Z, 2013: Lietuviai: Praeities dydybė ir sunykimas. Vilnius.

 

Dr Vladislav B. Sotirović

www.global-politics.eu/sotirovic

sotirovic@global-politics.eu

© Vladislav B. Sotirović 2018

 


Origins of images: Facebook, Twitter, Wikimedia, Wikipedia, Flickr, Google, Imageinjection & Pinterest.

Read our Disclaimer/Legal Statement!

Donate to Support Us

We would like to ask you to consider a small donation to help our team keep working. We accept no advertising and rely only on you, our readers, to keep us digging the truth on history, global politics and international relations.

READ MORE!
U.S. Infowar: Kosovars, Kosovo, Kosovans, Serbian Albanians, Croatian Serbs, Bosnians…
The U.S. government and U.S. media explained the mass murders of Kosovo Serbs, Roma, and other Kosovo minorities as “revenge murders”. They were “revenge attacks”. The expulsion of over 250,000 Kosovo Serbs, Roma, Gorani, and Jews was simply censored and deleted using the infowar technique of Emphasis. These infowar techniques have no basis in criminal law and violate fundamental values and tenets of morality and ethics. The U.S. rationale was spurious: Because Yugoslav police were defending themselves and Kosovo civilians against what the U.S. State Department itself declared were “terrorists”, the Albanian Muslim population of Kosovo had some sort of right ...
READ MORE
NATO – A Dangerous Alliance
When the Warsaw Pact ended, after the collapse of communism, some optimists might have expected Nato to be broken up too. After all, the Labour Party in Britain had been opposed to Nato in the mid-1980s. But that was not to be. The US, which had always dominated Nato, quickly began to reinvent Nato and furthermore to expand it. Following the end of the Warsaw Pact many central and east European governments wanted to join Nato. This of course was music to the ears of the US military manufacturers. Indeed, the chair of the expand Nato committee, Bruce Jackson, was technical director of ...
READ MORE
NATO 70 Years Old… Still Vigorous in Aggression
When the North Atlantic Treaty Organization was created 70 years ago in 1949 it was formed as a blatant military instrument for waging the Cold War, a war that the US, Britain and other European allies had newly embarked on. NATO’s public relations cant about “peace and security” is but Orwellian rhetoric.The supposed allies of the Soviet Union hastily went from an ostensible joint purpose of defeating Nazi Germany during the Second World War to initiating hostility towards Moscow. Already in 1946, British war-time leader Winston Churchill was fulminating about “an Iron Curtain” descending across Europe, in language adapted from ...
READ MORE
The Authoritarian Militarization of the Croats in the 1990s
The internal and much more external destruction of the former Yugoslavia in the 1990s was celebrating in 2015 its 20th years of anniversary. However, this historical and much more geopolitical event still needs a satisfactory research approach in regard to the true geopolitical reasons and political-military course of the destruction of this South Slavic and Balkan state. During the last quarter of century, the (western) global mainstream media unanimously accused Serbia and the Serbs for the national chauvinism as the main cause of the bloody wars on the territory of ex-Yugoslavia in the 1990s. However, the role and direct impact ...
READ MORE
The Fallacy of Calling McCain or Anyone Else a War Hero
Obit scribblers are calling John McCain a war “hero.” Well, I have to concede that unlike so many warmongering chickenhawks such as Karl Rove, Paul Wolfowitz, Robert Kagan and most other neocons, McCain did actually serve in the military.  But the same could be said for nearly all top Nazis including Hitler and Goering; they fought in a war and they loved war. They were destructive persons who learned nothing positive from their military experience. Of course, few of the pundits and politicians who are eulogizing McCain would wish to include Nazis in their hall of fame, nor would most of ...
READ MORE
World Conquest: The United States’ Global Military Crusade since 1945
GR Editor’s Note The following article by professor Eric Waddell was first published twelve years ago by Global Research in December 2003 in the immediate wake of the invasion and occupation of  Iraq by US and British forces, with a postscript added in 2007.  The article provides an incisive historical perspective on America’s “long war” against humanity, which is being carried out under a fake humanitarian mandate. Let us be under no illusions as to the intent of the US and its allies. We are dealing with World Conquest under the disguise of a “Global War on Terrorism”.  Michel Chossudovsky, December 24, ...
READ MORE
The Yugoslavia Counter-Narrative in 1993: Sean Gervasi, a Neglected Expert, Spoke Out in the Early Years of the Catastrophe
TRANSCRIPT:Harold Channer (HC): Good evening and welcome very, very much to the conversation. We’re pleased to welcome to the program, Sean Gervasi. He is a professor and academic who is concerned with economics and particularly with what is relevant to what we want to talk about tonight. He has just returned from a long stay in Belgrade, Yugoslavia, and knows something of that situation. Sean Gervasi, welcome very, very much to the conversation, and back to New York. Before we go into some detail about what in the world is going on in terms of the Balkans, from your experience ...
READ MORE
The Vatican has Never REALLY Apologised For Any of its Crimes
When it comes to ‘apologising’ for genocides, which it either directly instigated or facilitated through tactical support, the Vatican is a conjurer adept in sleight of words and institutions. You are made to believe that the Vatican has changed; that the Vatican has apologised but then you go through what has been actually said officially and by whom, and you realise that nothing has changed. Take for example the absolutely safe sounding name for one of the oldest congregations in the Vatican — ‘Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith’. That is the modern name. The original name? ‘Supreme Sacred Congregation ...
READ MORE
CIA Discovered Who Helped Hitler to Win Elections in Germany and to Become a Chancellor in 1933
Read our Disclaimer/Legal Statement! Donate to Support Us We would like to ask you to consider a small donation to help our team keep working. We accept no advertising and rely only on you, our readers, to keep us digging the truth on history, global politics and international relations.
READ MORE
Why Kosovo is Ineligible for the Membership in UNESCO?
Because the request for its membership is a serious breach of the international law, the Constitution of UNESCO, the legally binding UN Security Council resolution 1244 (1999) and the Charter of the UN whose Article 25 says that „The Members of the UN agree to accept and carry out the decisions of the Security Council in accordance with the present Charter”. Because according to the UN Security Council resolution 1244, which reaffirms the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (now Serbia), Kosovo and Metohija is an integral part of the Republic of Serbia, under the administration of ...
READ MORE
NATO’s War against Yugoslavia was Based on Lies
Germany joined the war against Yugoslavia under the pretense of fabricated facts. Sensational confession of German policeman Henning Hentz who served in the OSCE in Kosovo in the 90s confirmed that.The reason here is that photographs taken by Hentz in late January 1999 were used by then German Defence Minister Rudolf Scharping to justify the immediate interference of NATO in the Kosovo conflict. He presented the photographs of the militants killed in Rugovo as photos of innocent Albanian victims.What did really happen in Kosovo in late January of 1999, several months before NATO launched its operation against Yugoslavia?According to Serbian ...
READ MORE
Balfour at 100: A legacy of Racism and Propaganda
The coming months mark the centennial of Palestine’s forcible incorporation into the British Empire. In November 1917, British foreign secretary Lord Arthur Balfour declared his government’s support for “the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people”; in December, Jerusalem fell to British troops. One hundred years later, the effects of these events continue to reverberate. This should be a time of sombre reflection about international responsibility for the unfolding tragedy in Palestine.This responsibility should weigh heavily on the West. Walid Khalidi put it well: “The Zionists were the initiators. But they were also, as they still ...
READ MORE
Obama’s Ukrainian Coup Caused 2.5 Million Ukrainian Refugees into Russia
On Tuesday, March 7th, Russia’s top parliamentarian dealing with the Ukrainian refugee influx into Russia — dealing, that is, with the people who have fled Ukraine as a result of U.S. President Barack Obama’s 2014 coup overthrowing Ukraine’s democratically elected President Viktor Yanukovych — presented the first-ever comprehensive number of asylum-applicants from Ukraine who have received asylum there after that February 2014 coup. The Russian government had never before publicly provided a number, but does have an established system of processing refugees, including assignment of official refugee status, which «allows the recipient various social benefits, including unemployment compensation» and so each Ukrainian refugee has ...
READ MORE
Russophobia Vulgaris: A la Lietuva
The historical Western policy of „Russophobia Vulgaris“, which is currently promulgated by the British Cabinet of Theresa May, is nothing new. It was originally started by the British Empire in the XIX century, followed up by the US after the WWII and now, as Russia it getting notably reinforced, is escalated in the form of the “New Cold War”. The Russian exodus from the West (diplomatic only yet), presented as a punishment for Russia’s alleged nerve gas poisoning of a former Russian/MI6 double-agent reminds us of the baiting of Jews in the Middle Age for alleged ‘poisoning of wells‘. We have ...
READ MORE
Seal in lobby at CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia, USA
Introduction: The Missing LinkWhy did the US support the separatist and terrorist so-called Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA, or UCK in Shqip), which sought to create an ethnically pure Albanian Kosovo based on ethnicity? Why did the US sponsor a criminal and illegal separatist movement that sought to ethnically cleanse non-Albanians and create an independent state of Kosova? Why was the US supporting and sponsoring the re-establishment of a fascist-Nazi Greater Albania that Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini had initially created?When did the US begin to play a role in Kosovo? Did the US role in Kosovo begin with the arming ...
READ MORE
Jonas Noreika: Nazi Collaborator or National Hero? A Test for Lithuania
For the tiny village of Sukioniai in western Lithuania, the exploits of General Storm, a local anti-Communist hero executed by the Soviet secret police in 1947, have long been a source of pride. The village school is named after him, and his struggles against the Soviet Union are also honored with a memorial carved from stone next to the farm where he was born. All along, though, there have been persistent whispers that General Storm, whose real name was Jonas Noreika, also helped the Nazis kill Jews. But these were largely discounted as the work of ill-willed outsiders serving a well-orchestrated ...
READ MORE
Tito Disappeared in 1937: Yugoslavia was Led by a Russian Agent – FBI Documents
On April 20 1955, Marijan John Markul entered the FBI’s Los Angeles office and told a shocking story. The man who then introduced himself as Marshal Josip Broz Tito was not actually him, but a Russian agent who assumed the identity of Tito after Josip Broz disappeared in Russia in 1937. This is stated in the FBI’s report from the beginning of May 1955, writes daily newspaper “Kurir”. Secret FBI reports from the fifties were recently opened and released to the public. Marijan Markul was born in Livno in 1909. He moved to the United States in 1936, and received citizenship in ...
READ MORE
Ukraine could Learn from Kosovo’s Troubles
There was an interesting announcement recently that went almost entirely unnoticed in the Canadian media. On June 17, Peter Szijjarto, foreign minister of Hungary’s centre-right government, made the startling declaration that his national security forces will erect a four-metre wall along the entire 175 kilometres of shared border with Serbia. Szijjarto’s rationale for resorting to such a drastic measure results from a months-long flood of asylum seekers pouring into southern Hungary. While tens of thousands of these desperate illegal immigrants have been caught, detained and returned into Serbia, the vast majority have used the processing time for their asylum applications to simply ...
READ MORE
Albanian Ethnogenesis and Kosovo-Metochia
The topic to be addressed in this text is the basic misconception on the question of the Balkan Albanian ethnogenesis and national identity that was framed by extremely geo-politically coloured German-based “Illyrian” theory of the Albanian ethnic and cultural origin. This (quasi)theory, unfortunately, has very deep and negative regional political-security consequences. The implementation of the “Illyrian” theory of the Albanian ethnogenesis was accepted firstly by the Rilindja, (the Renaissance) – the Albanian nationalistic and chauvinistic political movement in 1878–1913 for the sake to create the ethnically pure Greater Albania as a national state of all Balkan Albanians composed by self-interpreted ...
READ MORE
Belgium’s Multicultural Society of “Federalism Laboratory”
The Kingdom of Belgium as a multilingual and multucultural society is today a federal type of the experimental laboratory of the European integration within the framework of the European Union (the EU). This is also a country in which the capital of the European Union is located and a country as one of the original six establishing countries of the present day the EU. The question of destiny of the Belgian multicultural federalism is of the crucial importance for the future process of European integration or disintegration. The Belgian multicultural society: Long united and long divided The population of the Kingdom of ...
READ MORE
U.S. Infowar: Kosovars, Kosovo, Kosovans, Serbian Albanians, Croatian Serbs, Bosnians…
NATO – A Dangerous Alliance
NATO 70 Years Old… Still Vigorous in Aggression
The Authoritarian Militarization of the Croats in the 1990s
The Fallacy of Calling McCain or Anyone Else a War Hero
World Conquest: The United States’ Global Military Crusade since 1945
The Yugoslavia Counter-Narrative in 1993: Sean Gervasi, a Neglected Expert, Spoke Out in the Early Years of the Catastrophe
The Vatican has Never REALLY Apologised For Any of its Crimes
CIA Discovered Who Helped Hitler to Win Elections in Germany and to Become a Chancellor in 1933
Why Kosovo is Ineligible for the Membership in UNESCO?
NATO’s War against Yugoslavia was Based on Lies
Balfour at 100: A legacy of Racism and Propaganda
Obama’s Ukrainian Coup Caused 2.5 Million Ukrainian Refugees into Russia
Russophobia Vulgaris: A la Lietuva
The CIA and a Greater Albania: The Origins of the US Role in the Balkans
Jonas Noreika: Nazi Collaborator or National Hero? A Test for Lithuania
Tito Disappeared in 1937: Yugoslavia was Led by a Russian Agent – FBI Documents
Ukraine could Learn from Kosovo’s Troubles
Albanian Ethnogenesis and Kosovo-Metochia
Belgium’s Multicultural Society of “Federalism Laboratory”
Policraticus

Written by Policraticus

SHORT LEGAL DISCLAIMER: The website’s owner & editor-in-chief has no official position on any issue published at this website. The views of the authors presented at this website do not necessarily coincide with the opinion of the owner & editor-in-chief of the website. The contents of all material (articles, books, photos, videos…) are of sole responsibility of the authors. The owner & editor-in-chief of this website is not morally, scientifically or legally responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect statement in the contents of all material found on this website. The owner & editor-in-chief of this website is not responsible for the content of external internet sites. No advertising, government or corporate funding for the functioning of this website. The owner & editor-in-chief and authors are not morally, scientifically or legally responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect statement in the text and material found on the website www.global-politics.eu

Website: http://www.global-politics.eu