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

Part I

The political purpose of Vitezović’s writings

The ultimate political purpose of P. R. Vitezović’s works, based on his ideological construction, was of a triple nature.

First of all, he tried to refute the Venetian claims on the territory of Dalmatia, the Istrian Peninsula, the Dalmatian Islands and Boka Kotorska (Cattaro Gulf in present-day Montenegro) that rose during the Great Vienna War 1683–1699 in which the Republic of St. Marco successfully fought the Ottoman Sultanate in a coalition with the Habsburg Empire [Banac 1984, 73]. The war clearly marked the beginning of the irreversible decline of the Ottoman power which consequently opened the so-called Eastern Question or the question of the destiny of the Ottoman Sultanate in Europe.

A state of the Ottoman dynasty reached its heyday in the mid-16th century when it occupied and annexed most of the Arab world, most of Hungary with Transylvania, Srem, and Slavonia, Azerbaijan, Georgia and many of the islands in the East Mediterranean Sea. The Sultanate also inflicted several heavy naval defeats on Spain, Genoa, and Venice. After the fall in 1521 of a strongest Hungarian military fortress of Belgrade, known as a Gate of Hungary, a way to Central Europe became fully open to the Ottoman army. Subsequently, the biggest part of historical Hungary became occupied up to 1544 including and the biggest portion of present-day Croatia. After the Mohács Battle in 1526, Hungarian, Bohemian and Croatian nobility elected the Habsburg Emperor as their new ruler and protector.

The Hungarian and Croatian feudal aristocracy hope to reconquer their self-proclaimed historical territories from the Ottomans backed by the Habsburg rulers. Therefore, any kind of revived Hungary or Croatia was possible only within the borders of the Habsburg Monarchy after the military defeat of the Ottoman Sultanate. The House of Habsburgs before 1526 had their family domains only in the region of Alpes: the Upper and Lower Austria, Styria, Carinthia, Carniola, Gorizia, and Tyrol. However, the invitation to the Habsburg ruler to become the Hungarian-Croatian king in 1526 change dramatically the territorial base of their rule as the Habsburgs started to claim all historical lands of the pre-1526 Kingdom of Hungary including and Croatia-Slavonia and the lands of the Kingdom of Bohemia together with Bohemia itself, Moravia, Silesia and Lusatia (Magocsi 2002: 62). Subsequently, after 1526 the geopolitical aims of the Habsburgs coincided with those of the Hungarian and the Croatian nobility.

An example of the Spanish Reconquista from 1492 gave a great impetus to the Christian Central European nobility in their struggle against Asiatic-Islamic “infidels” who occupied their feudal domains and destroyed their medieval independent states. The European possessions of the Sultanate reached its maximum extent as late as 1676 and in 1683 the Ottomans were enough strong to launch a decisive war for the heartland of Central Europe by putting Vienna under the siege for two months (Bideleux, Jeffries: 1999, 82). However, it was the last attempt by the Sultanate to penetrate deeper into Europe – an attempt which became not only a total military fiasco but much more seriously, the beginning of the final end of the Ottoman state. In 1699, the Sultanate lost all of its Central European possessions opening the doors to the Habsburg Monarchy and Venice to divide between themselves conquered territories from the Sultanate. At such circumstances, it was for the Croatian nobility of the fundamental importance which lands from the Ottoman Sultanate are going to be included into the Habsburg Monarchy as they could count only these territories to be unified with the rest of the Habsburg-ruled Croatia into a separate administrative-territorial province under the name of Croatia. In other words, all South Slavic lands which were left outside the Habsburg Monarchy were lost for a Greater Croatia.

As a result of the Venetian military victory over the Ottoman Sultanate at the end of the Great Vienna War, the officials of the Republic of St. Marco required considerable territorial enlargement of their possessions on the East Adriatic littoral at the expense of both the Ottoman Sultanate and the South Slavs. These territorial demands had been based on the Venetian state-historical and ethnolinguistic rights on the lands and people of the East Adriatic seacoast. It was pointed out in the Venetian territorial claims that Signorina ruled Istria, Dalmatia, and the Adriatic Islands since the year of 1000, strengthening her realm by the further territorial annexations in 1409, 1420, 1433, and 1669.[1] Further, according to the opinion of the Venetian authorities, the majority of the population of the East Adriatic littoral were the Italian-speaking inhabitants, whose wish, natural rights and interest were to be liberated from the Ottoman sway and governed by the Italian-speaking Venice. Due to their military victories over the Ottomans and well-organized propaganda network, the Venetians extended their Dalmatian possessions according to the Peace Treaty of Sremski Karlovci that was signed with the Ottoman Sultanate on January 26th, 1699. However, the treaty was revised on April 15th, 1701 in the Venetian favor by acquisition of whole Peloponnesus/Morea, some islands, the city of Herceg Novi, part of Boka Kotorska, the mouth of the Neretva River and continental Dalmatia up to the Dinaric Range (Istorija naroda Jugoslavije 1960: 777–778; Dimić 1999: 266).

P. R. Vitezović tried to negate the Venetian territorial claims on the South Slavic Adriatic littoral, which was considered by him as a Croatian state-historical and ethnolinguistic territory, which was at the same time a part of the lands of the Hungarian Royal Crown inherited in 1526 by the Habsburg Monarchy. He was actually protesting against the articles of the 1699 Habsburg-Ottoman peace treaty requiring its revision for the sake to include into the Habsburg Monarchy all “Croatian” lands. For that purpose, Vitezović based Croatian territorial claims primarily on state-historical rights – iura municipalia[2] – but combining them to the certain degree as well as with the Croatian ethnolinguistic rights. Subsequently, for instance, the whole territory of Adriatic Dalmatia was appropriated to Croats by Vitezović for the reason that the Croatian King Peter Krešimir IV (1058–1075) included this region into the Croatian medieval state (Fine 1994: 278–279; Klaić 1971: 105–111; Macan 1992: 36–41): “Cresimirus Croatoru Rex Adriaticum Mare suae appropriabat jurisdictioni” (Ritter 1700, 13).

P. R. Vitezović’s writings were especially directed against pro-Venetian texts of the famous historian and doctor of law from Dalmatian city of Trogir – Ivan Lučić (Lucius Joannes 1604–1679) – who is traditionally considered as a founder of the Croatian scientific historiography. I. Lučić’s most important work – De Regno Dalmatiae et Croatiae libri six (“The Kingdom of Dalmatia and Croatia in Six Volumes”), Amsterdam, 1668 – that includes many narrative sources, genealogical tables and historical-geographical maps, tells the historical truth that Dalmatia in former time was a separate territory from the state of Croatia and, in fact, the Venetian possession. However, Vitezović, due to his Croatocentric point of view, used every opportunity to accuse I. Lučić (Lucius) of Dalmatocentric and pro-Venetian, attitude, a subject to which he devoted a whole work under the title Officiae Ioannis Lucii de Regno Dalmatiae et Croatiae Refutatae (“Refutation of Lučić’s Kingdom of Dalmatia and Croatia”) written in 1706. For this purpose, Vitezović referred to the Priest from Doclea who wrote in his chronicle that a synonym for Croatia Alba (White Croatia) is Dalmatia Inferior (the Lower Dalmatia), while a synonym for Croatia Rubea (Red Croatia) is Dalmatia Superior (the Upper Dalmatia) (Ljetopis Popa Dukljanina 1967: 194–196). Clearly, for both the Priest from Doclea and Pavao Ritter Vitezović, Croatia and Dalmatia were the same territories, just with two names.

Second of all, P. R. Vitezović’s political aim was to put all “Croatian” Balkan territories under the sceptre of the Habsburg Emperor Leopold I. The regions in question, which remained outside the borders of Croatia and the Habsburg Monarchy after the Peace Treaty of Sremski Karlovci in 1699, became the object not only of Vitezović’s Croatocentric, but as well as of the Habsburg imperial desires. For instance, during the first peace treaty negotiations between the Habsburg Monarchy and the Ottoman Sultanate in 1689, the Habsburg diplomatic representatives steadily demanded that the eastern frontier of the Habsburg Monarchy had to follow the Morava River (in Serbia). It means that Bosnia-Herzegovina, Srem, Croatia, Slavonia, and West Serbia had unconditionally to be part of the Habsburg Monarchy (Stoye 1994: 71–72).

Being disappointed with the newly established borders accorded by the Peace Treaty of Sremski Karlovci in January 1699 (Weigl 1699), the Croatian representative in the Habsburg Monarchy’s commission for the demarcation, a cartographer and historian Pavao Ritter Vitezović, presented his memorandum, printed under the headline Croatia rediviva…i.e., his view of the “real historical borders and territory of Croatia” (Marković 1987: 71–99; Fürst-Bjeliš 2000: 211–214; Kovačević 1973) to the Habsburg Emperor Leopold I, urging him to liberate and to annex to the Habsburg Monarchy all Cisdanubian “Croatian” territories, what was actually the whole Balkans without Central and South Greece. Surely, Vitezović’s political plan presented to Leopold I fitted to the Habsburg’s plans of the future Habsburg foreign policy. Thus, already in late 1700, after submission of manifesto Croatia rediviva… to the Habsburg authorities, the Habsburg Emperor officially invited Vitezović to visit him in Vienna “since certain and important reasons make your presence in order to provide some information urgently required, also bring all letters and documents delineating and defining borderlines and demarcations of our said Kingdom of Croatia you have on your person…” (Klaić 1914: 105).

The fact is that Leopold I Habsburg, as the Emperor of the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation, the King of Hungary and the King of Croatia, started to frequently express the Habsburg hereditary claims on Dalmatia, at the expense of Venice, exactly after the conversation with Vitezović in Vienna. Vitezović himself confirmed that his manifesto was accepted at Viennese imperial court with full attention: “the Viennese are applauding my Prodromus in Croatiam Redivivam I have sent them…” (Lettere del Cavaliere Ritter 1700).

P. R. Vitezović based his claims on these “Croatian” territories on two principles of legitimization: 1. State-historic rights of Croatia; and 2. The Croatian/Illyrian form of the local place-names as the most reliable marker of the national character (Simpson 1991: 94; Blažević 2000: 228–229). A Croatia Meridionalis (South Croatia) was designed by Vitezović to join the Habsburg Empire, and as a consequence, the whole Balkan Croatia (Illyria) would be politically unified under the Habsburg administration. P. R. Vitezović attempted to institute the piece of evidence that historical borders of the Kingdom of Croatia were considerably larger than those Croatia’s borders established in his time. Beside the far-reaching consequences of the future annexation of Dalmatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina to Croatia, which were according to Vitezović the integral parts of a united historical (but as well as and ethnolinguistic) Croatia, Pavao Ritter Vitezović in fact formulated with his works a political program that would have a significant impact on the 19th-century Croatian national revival, officially named as the Illyrian Movement (Fürst-Bjeliš 2000: 211–214; Perković 1995: 225–236). Shortly, Vitezović protested against the geographical, historical-administrative and ecclesiastical division of “historic” Croatia according to the 1699 peace treaty between the Habsburg Monarchy, the Republic of St. Marco and the Ottoman Sultanate.

Third of all, it can be understood that according to Pavao Ritter Vitezović, the second and final phase of a total “Croatian” historical-ethnolinguistic unification under the Habsburg government should be realized by the Habsburg occupation and annexation of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and the Russian Empire (according to Vitezović, Croatian Sarmatia). It should be pointed out that Bohemia, Moravia, and Lusatia, which were considered by Vitezović as Croatian Venedia, already were parts of the Habsburg Monarchy. A historic Bohemia became integral part of the Habsburg Monarchy in 1526, while Lusatia, which was a part of the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation, was ruled by the members of the Habsburg dynasty as the German Emperors already from 1438 onward (Bérenger 1994: 80–98; Kann 1990: 7; Johnson 1996: 60). Therefore, the final step of a Pan-Croatian political unification should be the annexation of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and Russia into the Habsburg Monarchy.

As the matter of fact, this phase of a Pan-Croatian unification started to be realized by the First (1772) and the Third (1795) partition of Poland and Lithuania when Galicia was incorporated into the Habsburg Monarchy in addition to Bukovina (Bukowina) that became included into the Habsburg domains in 1775 (Hammond MCMLXXXIV: 24; Westermann 1985: 115; Kiaupa et al. 2000: 340–358). With partitions of Poland and Lithuania and annexation of Bukovina[3], the parts of the territory of a Transdanubian Croatia Septemtrionalis – “White/Greater Croatia”,[4] became politically unified by the personal union (i.e., by the Habsburg ruler) with the parts of a Cisdanubian Croatia Meridionalis – “Croatia Alba” or West Balkans.

Finally, P. R. Vitezović’s writings had clear (geo)political purpose, being in direct coordination with the Habsburg foreign policy direction at the time. It is a known fact that the Habsburgs laid their territorial claims in Central and South-East Europe on the historical rights of the Hungarian Royal Crown. As the Habsburgs were elected in 1526 by the Hungarian nobility as the kings of Hungary, accordingly, all pre-1526 Hungarian lands are inherited by the Habsburgs. Nevertheless, it was wrongly understood by Vienna that Walachia, Moldavia, Bulgaria, and Serb-populated lands at the Balkans were part of historical Hungary too and therefore had to be liberated from the Ottoman Sultanate and included into the Habsburg Monarchy.

Basically, Vitezović’s idea was to ideologically pave the road to the creation of a unified Croatia with the help of the Habsburg foreign policy as all South Slavs and their lands were already before the Great Vienna War considered by Vienna to be within the Habsburg sphere of interest. As the Hungarian Royal Crown enjoyed even from 1102 hereditary rights on Croatia, the Habsburgs claimed from 1526 all “Croatian” territories as hereditary lands of the Habsburg Monarchy. Subsequently, Vitezović had the only duty to “prove” that all South Slavs are, in fact, ethnolinguistic Croats. He started in 1682 to urge the Habsburg authorities to actively work on the realization of their foreign policy based on arbitrary understood “hereditary rights” of the Hungarian Royal Crown by sending the poetical letter to the Habsburg Emperor Leopold I in which he reminded the Emperor that Dalmatia, Croatia, and Slavonia have to be annexed by the Habsburg Monarchy from the Ottoman Sultanate and the Republic of Venice as these provinces were parts of the pre-1526 Kingdom of Hungary (Dimić 1999: 75). After the Great Vienna War, he continued to urge the Emperor with the new writings on his duty to liberate all “hereditary lands” of the Kingdom of Hungary, but now under the name of revived Croatia (Croatia rediviva).

To be continued

Note:  The text is written according to the orthography of the American (US) English spelling.

 

Dr Vladislav B. Sotirović

www.global-politics.eu/sotirovic

sotirovic@global-politics.eu

© Vladislav B. Sotirović 2018

 

Endnotes:

[1] About the Venetian territorial expansion in the Balkans, see in (Difnik 1986: 330–338; Westermann 1985: 63, 94).

[2] At the time of the feudal order, society and values, the only justifiable rights in international relations were those rights based on the principle of iura municipalia.

[3] Bukovina was in the second half of the 15th century a vassal territory of the Polish-Lithuanian unified state.

[4] According to P. R. Vitezović’s ideological construction, this territory was a motherland of the Czechs, Moravians, Sorbs, Poles, Lithuanians, and Rus’.

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.


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!
Kosovo: America’s Mafia State
The unilateral independence of Kosovo was declared in February 2008. Kosovo is a member of  The Bretton Woods institutions. Kosovo seeks membership of NATO, the EU and now Interpol. The Interpol Executive Committee has decided that the application of Kosovo for membership in Interpol would be put on the agenda of the General Assembly to be held in Beijing, China, from 26 to 29 September 2017, Government of Kosovo stated Monday. In a bitter irony, Kosovo president Hashim Thaci is still on the list of Interpol in relation to his links to organized crimes and the drug trade. Last February president Thaci requested the secretary-general ...
READ MORE
Europe’s Forgotten ‘Hitler’ Killed over 10 Million Africans
Most people have no idea of who is pictured above, but you should. The sight of this man should cause a similar revulsion to that of seeing Mussolini, Mao, Stalin or Hitler, as he committed an African genocide that resulted in the killing of over 10 million people in the Congo. His name is King Leopold II of Belgium. Most of the people never learned about him in school, and have also most likely never heard about him in the media either. This is because he’s not included in the popular narrative of oppression (which includes things like U.S. slavery and the ...
READ MORE
The Collapse of the European Union: Return to National Sovereignty and to Happy Europeans?
Imagine – the European Union were to collapse tomorrow – or any day soon for that matter. Europeans would dance in the streets. The EU has become a sheer pothole of fear and terror: Economic sanctions – punishment, mounting militarization, the abolition of civil rights for most Europeans. A group of unelected technocrats, representing 28 countries, many of them unfit to serve in their own countries’ political system, but connected well enough to get a plum job in Brussels – are deciding the future of Europe. In small groups and often in secret chambers they decide the future of Europe. Take ...
READ MORE
A Nazi past of Bosnia-Herzegovina: Censored Truth in the West
Bosnia’s Nazi past and role in the genocide of Bosnian and Krajina Serbs, Jews, and Roma during World War II has long been censored and covered-up in the U.S. and the so-called West. Film footage exists, however, of the Bosnian Muslim Nazi SS troops and Imams in the Handschar and Kama Nazi SS Divisions. Bosnian Muslim Division Imam Abdulah Muhasilovic shown in 1943 during training and formation of the Bosnian Muslim Nazi SS Division Handzar Moreover, German film footage also exists of the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin el Husseini, a self-proclaimed leader of the Muslim world, reviewing the Bosnian Muslim ...
READ MORE
US Human Rights Violations: Geneva Centre for Justice
Universal Periodic Review reveals longstanding unwillingness to fully commit to obligations of pertinent human rights treaties. On 11 May 2015, the United States of America participated in its second Universal Periodic Review (UPR). The Universal Periodic Review is meant to be a mechanism by which all UN Member States are periodically assessed on their human rights record. The process allows countries to present a report of their efforts to promote and improve human rights within their country. It also affords the Working Group of the UPR, comprised of member countries of the Human Rights Council, the opportunity to assess the human ...
READ MORE
“Humanitarian Imperialism”: US, NATO Lie to Justify Genocide and Destruction in Yugoslavia
Seventeen years ago today, on March 24, 1999, NATO began a 78-day deadly and devastating U.S.-backed intervention of Yugoslavia. It was the first time in history that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization decided they would attack a country without the approval of the U.N. Security Council. Nineteen countries took part in the aggression led by the United States that was supposed to stop the repressive activities of the Slobodan Milosevic government and to establish a framework for its Southern province, Kosovo, under international law. Milosevic was president of Serbia from 1989 to 1997, and of Yugoslavia from 1997 to 2000. The attack was ...
READ MORE
Bismarck, the United States and the Pomeranian Grenadier
All of the Balkans, legendary German Reichskanzler (Imperial Chancellor) Otto von Bismarck famously said, were not worth the bones of a single Pomeranian grenadier. And Bismarck, a Prussian landowner or junker had nothing but amused contempt for Pomeranian grenadiers who were regarded as a standing joke in the German Army. In 1890, brash, young new German Emperor Wilhelm II fired Bismarck after 28 years as minister-president of Prussia and then first Imperial Chancellor of Germany. He abandoned the priority policy of maintaining warm ties and close communications with Russia that Bismarck had always followed and scrapped the Dreikaiserbund, the League of ...
READ MORE
The Destruction of Yugoslavia: International Justice or NATO “Battering Ram”
With the March 24 ICTY decision condemning Former Bosnian Serb leader Radovan Karadzic for war crimes, exactly 17 years after NATO began its bombing spree on Serbia,  international criminal justice revealed itself once again as an instrument of US and NATO foreign policy. [They chose that the 24th of March to render judgment regarding Karadzic iquite deliberately with a view to erasing the history of NATO crimes.] If any doubts persist, it is worth remembering how the Former US Ambassador-at-Large for War Crimes Issues, David Scheffer, perceived that tribunal. Writing about it in his memoirs, Scheffer wrote unabashedly: the tribunal was an important judicial tool, and I had enough ...
READ MORE
Serbian Patriarchate of Peć in the Ottoman Empire: The First Phase (1557−1594)
Introduction The goals of this article are: 1) to investigate the role of the revived Patriarchate of Peć in Serbian and Balkan history?; and 2) to explore and present the results of investigation of the problems with respect to: a) the role of the Serbian Church during the first decades of the Ottoman occupation of Serbian lands in the process of the creation of a Serbian national identity; b) Serbian-Turkish relations in the second half of the 16th century; and c) the reasons for Serbian disloyalty towards the Ottoman government at the turn of the 17th century. The article addresses the reasons ...
READ MORE
Newly Declassified Documents: Gorbachev Told NATO wouldn’t Move Past East German Border
Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev was given a host of assurances that the NATO alliance would not expand past what was then the East German border in 1990 according to new declassified documents. Russian leaders often complain that the NATO extended an invitation to Hungary, Poland and what was then Czechoslovakia to joint the alliance in 1997 at the Madrid Summit in contravention of assurances offered to the Soviet Union before its 1991 collapse. The alliance has dismissed the notion that such assurances were offered, however, scholars have continued to debate the issue for years. Now, however, newly declassified documents show that ...
READ MORE
Chomsky: NATO is a U.S.-Run Intervention Force
How did Russia and the West slip back into what seems like the Cold War all over again? How dangerous is the current confrontation? Should the world be ready to face a nuclear war? We ask somebody who’s renowned for his insights. World-famous academic, linguist, philosopher and political commentator Noam Chomsky is on Sophie&Co today. Follow @SophieCo_RT Sophie Shevardnadze: World-renowned academic Noam Chomsky, Professor Noam Chomsky, welcome to the show, it’s a great pleasure to have you with us today. Now, today U.S.-Russia relations are at a Cold War low. Rhetoric resembles what we heard in the 80-s. What is the worst-case ...
READ MORE
Documentary Movies about Kosovo
What you can see here, as the example: Serbian shrine Bogorodica Ljeviška (Virgin Mary of Ljevishka) is a cathedral church in the city of Prizren in the western part of Kosovo & Metohija region. The city was a capital of medieval Serbia. This church is built by Serbian king Milutin between 1307-1309. This church belongs to one of four masterpieces of Serbian sacral architecture in the Middle Ages in Kosovo & Metohija that was a central part of Serbian medieval state. The video is in the Serbian language. Rachak Village in Kosovo 1999- Lies and the truth from Vladislav B. Sotirovic ...
READ MORE
How US Criminal Politicians are Turned into Saints
The week-long deification of the late John McCain was quite the deep-state performance:  Three “state funerals”(in Phoenix, D.C., and Annapolis) accompanied by the constant clucking of the “mainstream” media about how the epitome of a deep-state insider — son and grandson of U.S. Navy admirals, mass murderer of Vietnamese peasants, “Keating Five” criminal conspirator, friend of “the right kind” of Middle East terrorists, lifelong government employee whose senate office was ground zero for defense industry lobbyists for the past several decades — is somehow an anti-establishment “maverick.” The televised sobbing of the very appropriately named Senator Jeff Flake was rich, ...
READ MORE
US Foreign Policy: Hegemony or Stability, not Both
US foreign policy has for decades been predicated on achieving and maintaining global peace, security and stability. In reality, it has for over a century constituted an overreaching desire to achieve and maintain global hegemony. And where US efforts focus on achieving hegemony, division and destruction follow. From the Middle East to Eastern Europe, and from Southeast Asia to the Korean Peninsula, US intervention politically or militarily all but guarantee escalating tensions, uncertain futures, socioeconomic instability and even armed conflict. The Middle East and North Africa   US efforts in the Middle East since the conclusion of the first World War have focused ...
READ MORE
Interview With Historian Stephen Cohen on Ukraine
Interview with historian Stephen Cohen, by Patrick L. Smith, published in Salon.com, April 17, 2015 Introduction by Patrick L. Smith: It is one thing to comment in a column as the Ukrainian crisis grinds on and Washington—senselessly, with no idea of what will come next—destroys relations with Moscow. It is quite another, as a long exchange with Stephen F. Cohen makes clear, to watch as an honorable career’s worth of scholarly truths are set aside in favor of unlawful subterfuge, a war fever not much short of Hearst’s and what Cohen ranks among the most extravagant expansion of a sphere of ...
READ MORE
German Interests in the War Against Yugoslavia
Churchill once said that in war the truth is so precious it has to be surrounded with a bodyguard of lies. In Germany over the last two months one clearly saw the fabrication of such a bodyguard. Even as air attacks proceeded against civilian targets—destroying factories, electricity works, refineries, bridges, streets, railway lines and apartment blocks— German government representatives spoke of a ” humanitarian action ” . Despite the fact that the NATO attacks unleashed the massive wave of refugees and reduced towns and villages in Kosovo to ruins , it has been maintained to the very end that the aim ...
READ MORE
Proxy Wars: Kosovo and South Ossetia
Yada…yada…yada. The discussion on the unprovoked and planned aggression by Georgia on South Ossetia is futile and moot because Russian President Dmitry Medvedev announced last week that the Russian Government would recognize the independence and freedom of South Ossetia and Abkhazia. On August 25, 2008, both houses of the Russian Parliament or Duma voted unanimously to recognize the independence of both South Ossetia and Abkhazia. On August 26, 2008, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev announced that the government of the Russian Federation officially recognized the independence of South Ossetia and Abkhazia. Save your rhetoric. Georgia has lost those areas permanently. Ossetians and ...
READ MORE
Kosovo History – Third Part
For the Serbs as Christians, their loss of state independence and fall to the Ottoman Empire’s kind of theocratic state, was a terrible misfortune. With the advent of the Turks and establishment of their rule, the lands of Serbs were forcibly excluded from the circle of progressive European states wherein they occupied a prominent place precisely owing to the Byzantine civilization, which was enhanced by local qualities and strong influences of the neighboring Mediterranean states. Being Christians, the Serbs became second-class citizens in Islamic state. Apart from religious discrimination, which was evident in all spheres of everyday life, this status ...
READ MORE
Disappeared People in Kosovostan
During and after the the Kosovo conflict in 1998-1999, the KLA abducted and kidnapped over 2,000 Kosovo civilians, Serbs, Roma, and Albanians that opposed the KLA, who were tortured and murdered. Ten years after the conflict, these 2,000 remain missing. Approximately 1,000 to 1,3000 Kosovo Serbs are missing and presumed dead. How did they die? UNMIK occupation forces have been reluctant to investigate these mass murders of Kosovo civilians. What happened to them? Evidence has emerged that the KLA ran a series of prison camps, in Kosovo and in Albania itself, where they tortured and murdered Kosovo Serbs, Roma, and ...
READ MORE
The Russians are Coming!
As 2016 closes, we find ourselves a deeply unsettled nation. We’re unable to draw the lines of our national interest. Is it jobs and economy, is it national security, or is it now in our interest to ensure global security — in other words, act as the world’s policemen? As the “failing” (to quote Trump) New York Times degenerates into a Washington Post organization with its stagnant Cold War vision of a 1950s world where the Russians are to blame for most everything — Hillary’s loss, most of the aggression and disorder in the world, the desire to destabilize Europe, etc. — the Times has added the ...
READ MORE
Kosovo: America’s Mafia State
Europe’s Forgotten ‘Hitler’ Killed over 10 Million Africans
The Collapse of the European Union: Return to National Sovereignty and to Happy Europeans?
A Nazi past of Bosnia-Herzegovina: Censored Truth in the West
US Human Rights Violations: Geneva Centre for Justice
“Humanitarian Imperialism”: US, NATO Lie to Justify Genocide and Destruction in Yugoslavia
Bismarck, the United States and the Pomeranian Grenadier
The Destruction of Yugoslavia: International Justice or NATO “Battering Ram”
Serbian Patriarchate of Peć in the Ottoman Empire: The First Phase (1557−1594)
Newly Declassified Documents: Gorbachev Told NATO wouldn’t Move Past East German Border
Chomsky: NATO is a U.S.-Run Intervention Force
Documentary Movies about Kosovo
How US Criminal Politicians are Turned into Saints
US Foreign Policy: Hegemony or Stability, not Both
Interview With Historian Stephen Cohen on Ukraine
German Interests in the War Against Yugoslavia
Proxy Wars: Kosovo and South Ossetia
Kosovo History – Third Part
Disappeared People in Kosovostan
The Russians are Coming!
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