i..n,.

,^H,gs*:SnSa
roEilHA
rrr

sPoJ

/ 4 / 2006

Qnnonou

Ko - yMerH nqKtA Qa

Kynrer Kpa ryjeBa u

cAIPx(AJ

PE3MMEYl

cTvEvuB Mrno Jlonmryr

ECEII,ICTrlqm

TarjanePo(fr rocfioEfrtrf/,I,1 IIPIICTYII HruconeEitd

CPNCKAKffiI
K}b},TX(EBTIO IIPEBO,W,[OU

HroPmcPr
)

IEUHO Bl,r$ru

Mrmemoff
TIPABOC"IIAT

eedomi[e

tlr

CONTRIBilJTU

KATECHOUIU

YladisbY t'f, THE CROATI (,rHE *IIfr--TN

oF [A]sG[&t

Ift,mfrmW
BPE},[ET[,CM

o TEflIoilil (

[nffiicm m
Bn,uoBl"tw ObJI[IflT KuN Itapro

A"u
Tf

OJHOCXAI
IT3 }T,L.T

N-CT'ABAild

PE3I4}ydEYI

cTyAr4lE
Mr,rro /Iounap

20

ECEIIICTIIqKO T4CKyCTBO
Tarjaxa Pocnh TOCilOTUUA I4BE AHEPIzITA: IIPOEIIEM OOKAnil3AUyrlE

2T

uilpr4cTyll

,,cyEJEKT-trO3I,{r\uIu"

39

Hrxona Bjennh CPIICKA KI5I4XEBHOCT UMNI4 CPIICKA TIPEBOTHA KIbYIXEBHOCT: CPICKTI nrICUI4 KAO IPEBOIr4OUr4 nOmTrJE

55

llrop llepnIluh
JEIHO Br4SErbE OAHOCA rrACTr4rrIA r4
Mr,rxauno Crvrrmanrrh
NPAB O

nApoII4IE
YTKA

63

CIABHO E OIO CIO BILE U HAYqHA OAHTACT

eedomila Marinkovid CONTRIBUTION TO THE RESEARCH CONCERNING KATECHOUMENA IN SERBIAN MEDIEVAL CHURCHES Vladislav B. Sotirovid THE CROATIAN NATIONAL REVIVAL MOVEMENT (THE "ILLYRIAN MOVEMENT') AND THE QUESTION OF LANGUAGE IN THE PHASE FROM 1830 TO 1841
WnwjaHa

9l

101

9yrypa
1t7 Y C O HATH OM
131

CEMAHTT,TqKOM TWny BPEMEHCKWXfIPI/.ilOTA fiaHnj e/ra 34p anrh-M wxaittrnoBrdh

B

o IEIHOM

MA O BYI AWH AM'{3A IIWIE PEII OBNWKY K/IAC',II{APA

T43E

Mapxo AneKcr{h OAHO C XAPMOHCKOT I/I ME]TOAWICKO| II/IAHA W3 YrIIA TEMATI43MA Y TIPBOI CILM@OHUIII TYCTABA MA/IEPA

Bg

sl

L{ACONilC 3A K}.b14XEBHOCT, )E3IAK, YMETHOCT

I/

KYflTYPY

METO[I4KA
Mnpjana )Knnrosrdh ]TO]T/IKA Y HACTAB''I XAPMOHVIIE
Maja MunyruHonnh

158

L59

[olyqABArbE y ycBAlAIby B OKAEy/IAPA

167

ofrlEaw
X.enr,rM rflp Byrarur,rH

176

ornh
t77
182

rlE

lE UIOEA/IHA KyTITyPA?

TIP'{K A3W Eyrua:nVlnaHnh

y3 ooToTyIIICKO I43[A]bE HOBUHA

CPUCKWIX

183

[yruanVlrlarHnh o OTOTI4ICKA t/t3E\ArbA HAP OIH,{X IJECAMA ... 3EH,{UA OKA MOIA TEE,{ JE rHE3[O ... AyTOPUTHACIIETA

189

193
197

l6

Hacnef
c EarrerrHor o4Hoca Sem ocBpra Ha roMeHyre orrrje rplrcyrHe y lpo6fuqurcnucmuMa Cserurroje HHrepreKcryarrHe
EHIr OATOBOp Ha

eO

rfegouuna MapNnxonrh
TI P

I4II

fIP OYTIA BA IbY KATI{XYME HA Y CP TI CKI{M cPElrs OBEKOBHT4M TIPKBAMA

ryrrarbe

mpoauje.

Igor Peri5id

ONSHIP BETWEEN CHTAND PARODY

Summary
t literature,
:

Pesnue Y pagy ce pa3Marpa repMr{Honorraja nesana sa r,rHcr}rryrl ujy xarwxyn,reHa-ra Kao ,r HaquHlr Ha rojr je oBa rHcrlrrwujityru4arru ua Qopurparre, o6nr,rr ,n SyHrIIujy rpocropa KarrxyMeHe y cpucroj cpeArboBeKorlroy apxure*rypr{. flapanennuu [peureAoM rtilcaHuxr,rsBopa r4 canyBaHr.rx crroMe,rrKa 3aKrbyrryje ce ga cy ce [pocropr,r Karr{xyMene, vllja HaMeHa v ilarbeocraje HeloBo.rbHo ge0uulrcana, cr{rypHo ."arrasvrt,Ha crrpary rr3Ha[ Hapr eKcauilvtersoHapreKca, rasgrojerud oA Haoca rIpKBe arrrr y Helocpe4noj nesn ca r6oM.

there is a di-

mode of its relation to

eedomila Marinkovid

Ipostmodernism aside, Hneen the phenomena of frbn of such debateQ, we ile applied in the novels Widovich; and, Svetislav hres where there are infproving the point from
:pqrody.

CONTRIBUTION TO THE RESEARCH CONCERNING KATECHOUMENA IN. SERBIAN MEDIEVAL CHURCHES

Sqmmary.

Mrxanno Crunranr,rh

TTAOAHTACTI4KA
Pesr,rue

institution of the catechumenate and the influence that that institution had on the form and function of the architectural space named katechoumena, in the serbian medieval architecture. Reviewing, in parallel, the literary sources and the architectural evidence, the author shows that, although its functions still remain unclear, the architectural space of katehoumena in Serbian medieval churches was located in the upper storey of the narthex or exonarthex of the church and had direct communication with the nave.
Bna4ncnar E. Corupowrh
XP BAT

The paper examines the terminology concerning the

rypaTr/r o4Hoc 6orocrol cIBOpeHr{ cBer orrurue, ty oBoM PaAy pa3Marpa

6nou

Krbr/DKeBHoM )KaH -

CKI{ HA II I4 O HA II H I,I TI O KPET (]l/,iII|/TP CKI4 tIO KPET ) r4 frr{TArbE JE3rdKA y oA3r{ o[ 1s30. Io 1841.
Peslrtue.

Mihailo Smiljanid }SCIENCE FICTION

Summary rible to consider the attilng a way to describe the qler, however, considers t one specific genre, one ture"

y qlrlby rrpyxarsa esr,IKaclre og6pane o4 rvrafapus a4uje. Bofctno floxpera ie npouonucailo utmoKaecrco uapeuje 3a Krblrxennr,r jesnx cnr,rx Xpnara rrrro je nsasrano HerarrrBHe pearquje rog cp6a xojn cy ce warbu^n o4 floxpera
Ba 131

1841. ocnosHn sBaHr4rrHr,r rporpaMcKu \vrrbeBfi florpera (xoju cy 3arlpraHn Ao 1841) 6wnw cy fiorrrroBarbe xpBarcKr{x nonujecuux }r HarlrroHanHrrx rpa-

rpr,rMeHe jesuvxe rgenruQnraquje rpynHe Epl'rrraAHocru'y cnytajy KaKo cy ra nprMeHr{ne nofe xpBarcKor llnupcrcoz no,cPema (i830-1S47) y rreronoj uproj Qasu go 1g41. fnasHr,r qun unanxa je Aa upr{K:Dr(e uraBHe roKoBe jesnvre fion]rrrrKe ,rleo/rorrrKnx rola florpera 4o

Oraj pag ncrpaxyje Qeuonren

qAconhc 3A Kl-bt4xEBHOCl-,

JE3t4K, vMETHOCT

t/ KvnTvPv

BI{AehI{yIbeMyu[eo[oIIIK,loKB,Ip3acflpoBobelbeBe/I,IKoxpBaTcKe[PxaBHe

ilAeorol,lie.
Vtadislav B. Sotirovid

adryryrhmM ,u@&sd"f mdilrp

THECRoATIANNATIoNALREVIVATMoVEMENT (.THE ILLYRIAN MOVEMENT;) AND THE QUESTION OF LANGUAGE IN THE PHASE FROM TS3O TO T84T
Summary
identified by a This paper explores the phenomenon of group identity being Illyrian Movement (1830language, as applied by the leadership of the croatian of this paper is to 1g4r) ; its first phase, up to the year 1g41. The main purpose pr*.", the main streami of the tinguistic policy of the ideological leaders of the aim of the Movement's Movement until 1841. The crucial officially promoted

ffiwfierumryffi
mmflrrrr,
fr,fig&ry

6S!n

wmTfimFm

q:

Wmufi

il@F"qflir,fiqin-M

mfuufl mfnrynlq!ryTmilffri (
tr(ffi& tErreffirl[ re

program'upto1841,was:toupholdtheCroathistoricalandnationalrights
agai"nst the

promoted thryat of Hungarizati,on. The leadership of the Movement language, butthis cauliterary the itokaviar dialect as the Croatian national the Serbs, who then distanced themselves from sed adverse reactions amongst the mat<ing of a Greater the Molement, seeing it as ideological framework for
Croatia.

Wcrymsuq
E.[ 6F-

r,il&lryil:

5ml

y'r@q1a
ffirffiffiFffi@

}.

vF&rffiGF

mr,.Wffim c.irymsd, l

'@mryryq
mrwr,WrqfrniWu
ffirF

llruriagarIYrYPa

o IEIHOM CEMAHTI{TIKOM TI{fIy BPEMEHCKI'IX fIPI4IIOIA

Pesuue

r(Wryry
r@w-rrprer

ffipmrlonfilymry

&e:rfputlw

flPulom jecy npunosw rojn ucJe[an og ceMaHrI{aIKI4x rl'IrroBa BPeMeHcK}rx HellocpeAuo ocnamajy na BpeMeHcKy pei[epenquja/rHocr raKo Iuro ce "*r, roBopHe curyaqv\e. Orai uau nPurora o6yxoata rppy 3aMeHIlqKI'rx BpeMe osnauarajy rperpunora opraHrBoBaHr4x oKo rrpil[ora cag(a), rPl4[ore roju (ca o6enexjrMa aHrepl'{oPHocr}I il noMeHcKy nl,rcraH4y on MoMeHra roBopa a rojn creprlopHocrn), te ilP,tnore xoje raparteP]Iue rIeKcI4Ka/I]I3oBaHocr'
roAI{He' u ,oana.ranajy [aH I4 flePilone naHa, ro[IdHy Ao6a

m ,'
'ths rtqm*rfumn

Ilijana eutura

&mM

stril ThEd

mmMm[m"I"lnu&&ryil{

ABoUToNESEMANTICTYPEoFTEMPoRALADVERBS
Summary
to the-time of speaking Adverbs expressing time reference by referring directly type of adverbs includes represent one semantic type of temporal adverbs. This adverb now;also adverbs around the a group of pronominal Jverbs organized the nioment of speaking (anterior/posterior); and' denoting time distance from

wthsds,.urynedgb dssm [lrryoffiEwl:f

wfudmhs,imrofrq
*"fmrntlluimrr.m

mhenmnmMnq
tflffi{}

t"-fi,pEq,fl

l14

tiDK

8 1 l. 163.

42

1830 I 184L"

[s of clerical 'had derived whith Con-

Vladislav B' Sotirovid

[JniversitY of Vilnius' Lithuania

rbian meditvaries from

Pee, ftn,

through

MOVEMENT THE CROATIAN NATIONAL REVIVAL (THE "ILLYRIAN MOVEMENT") AND THE QUESTION

f the church
,jlnvestigated.

it is clear

oFLANGUAGEINTHEPHASEFRoM1830ToIS4l

for the usage

in Paphos in
F location
f,ng

in

INTRODUCTION

for direct

influenced ethnonational group The article investigates how language t"ai..rhip during the first period (1830identity of Croatian ""ri""rf movement ihut *ut formally named 1g41) of croatian ,ru-tiorul revival the This work is an attempt to reconstruct as the Illyrian (in the leaders of ihe movement main stream of linguistic policy by the i"tti".r irow to solve the South Slavic question "#A;ii part of Central and South East Europe'

u""ii"ii.

ffi;#;;iig
;hil;

of the Illyrian Movernent as role of language in tt. iJ.aogfoal structure respectively.s.tltT' nationality a model of the definition of Lroatian, ofl ethnolinguistically-defined and as weII as a model of the creation

Previousresearchintotheproblembasicar]yrai]gdtoinvestigale}e

nationalstates"rc,"".'andSerbs.Thefindingsofthepreviousresearch of th-e PolitiAl ideology of the lagerly misinterpretfi afr.ltt g"itticside poiititul leadership fought Movement, rndr,5,.ii"*iinE that Croatiutt However, i., p""_i"",r, Suui. !itt".i ard even political unification. goal of an ultimate indicating that most probably my research_r.rott, "r. establish i Greater Cioatia and as such to politithe Movement was to
cally reshape a map

lf itt. Balkan Peninsula and the South East Europe'

Inotherwords,themainattentionintheformerinvestigations.has beentoanalyzethepoliticalstructureoftheideological{rameworkof of the linguistic

'1.

9'.

b,

Sncrco1 opxumeK-

the importance the Movement, whili the structure and the criation of a united national model of the national determination and The subject need tobe further invesstate has u..r, turg.f airi.g*a.d. was 1) the previous research in the field tigated for at l.uri#o ""'lo"'t or not language played an incomplete; it stilllemains unclear wiether of the Movement, and important.ot. *itrri.^-rh. id*l"gical framework r.rZ*"f, are controversial (a) within one 2) the results "f of the Movement was to establish approach, the ultimale political aim

d;;;""r

an
1011

r'l'r "'ilil

qACOnilC 34 KFbI4XEBHOCT, JE3t/,tK, yMETHOCT t/ Kynrypy

Yugoslavia(s).

united South Slavi:: b"rt:dll Croato-Serbian, national state, whereas (b) within the other approach, tiie readers of the Movement struggled for an independent tiune Kingdom of Dalmatiu, croutiu und Slavonia. Method of comparison and method of text oiotyr* *. ,rr.J in the investigation of croatian and Serbian ringuistic a"ri"g ii" first period of the lilyrian Movement.Both-methods "uiiorutir* for are used the pur_ pose of sociolinguistic examination of the role and function;il;;d; in the process of national determination and national_ideology.d;;, internal nationar cohesion and distinction from tt otrr.r, uy ir* Cr""t, and Serbs at the time of the Movement. " The majority of pubrished works_on-the topic in yugosrav historiog_ raphy after both the wwl and wwwll deal with trre manifestation of extreme pan-South Slavic unitv in cultural-linguistic point of view. The ideology of the Movement became (mis)useifor the practical-politi_ cal purpose of Serbo-croat and yugoslav t.oth"rhooa ana unity i;iirri"

of the Czg.
as

accepted by

gajicfr.l In the si ]osip Ku5er political wo was dealing dom of Dal to refute Ft of Dalmatir personal un Book-Lover torical prov the ordinar special polil

Kratka o snov a horv atsko - slav eiskoga prav opis anj ai Die Kleine Kro atiiche slavischen orthographie (short Foi"aotni oy iro,oti'on_ slavonic orthog_ mphy)-. This publication marked the begin"i"g;irh; croatian national revival movement, which is considerea in croi'ti* rrirtoriography as the period of croatian national renaissance. From this period starts a mod_ ern Croatian history, but also and modern Croatian'nationalism and history of political thoughts. The brochure Kratka otioro horvatsko-slavenskogpravopisaniabecame the foundation for tt. fu.tfr", development of the policy of standardization of literal-pubri. r""g"rg. of the croats and as well a reform of orthography among the croat"s. Iicontestably, Lj. Gaj in 1830 reformed the Cioatian ortho[rapty u"J ,tr"rr"d u rit.;;i';;ty of the Croats with the other south sra;, i*ai*i"riy*i rr,n. Serbs who were speaking (onry) itokavian dialect. ^ca;t ortographic modification of croatian writings was done fundament;1iy;;;;;ing to the pattern

THE ORIGINS OF THE MOVEMENT The croatian nationar revivar movement (officially as the lilyrian Movement) emerged with the name of Croatian national worker and politician of Gcrman originl, Ljudevit Gaj in iilb.;;"" he published in Budim a brochure in two languages (croati^i-iojtirian atd,German)

Politicians,r matia lost al more, that

becamepffi ficial rnediu and the Trir with H*9, ("united kin

Ku5evic arg

became the in the 19e r Croatian po Party of Rid The nexl Derkos lr'h grilb Genius erland abou the love to*r mote an id composed b (spoken by

ry**rl"# ' Krapina) in 1786'$1*., a German physician who came to rive in northern croatia (in Gaj's ancestors f.om the father side
Gajt mother was Iuliana schmidt. Gajt mother tongue was

lt02

- Zagreb,

t997, t5t).

*.r" i.oGerr*

srrrgundy and slovakia.

ir. n*te. povijest Hrvata.

2 3

D. Par"lieffia

A. Starier.ie
izmijeniru,

Zagreb,lg

HacneheO
rhereas (b) tsled for an
Elia.

of the Czech orthography. This new Croatian orthography, which was accepted by the neighbouring kajkavian Slovenes as well, became known
as gajica.2

sed in the during the br the pur-

f language
gy

creation, the Croats

historioghstation of fview. The

,

i"l-politinity within

he lllyrian rorker and

in I German) kpatiicheublished

tk Orthogm national
qphy as the

rts a modm and hisilca-slayen-

hpment of Croats and bh Lj. Gaj leral unity $erbs who

udi:frcation

he pattern
nn

In the same year (1830) aprotonotar (secretary) of Triune Kingdom, ]osip Ku5evi6, published in Latin language one of the most important political works in Croatian modern history: Iura municipalia...lhebook was dealing with the special political rights and constitution of the Kirgdom of Dalmatia, Croatia and Slavonia. The author in point of fact tried to refute Hungarian claims that after the year of 1102 (when Kingdom of Dalmatia, Croatia and Slavonia joined the Kingdom of Hung*y by personal union in the personality of the Hungarian King Coloman ("the Book-Lover") 1095-1116), Croatia, Dalmatia and Slavonia (three historical provinces of Croats claimed by Croatian historiography) became the ordinary province within a greater historical Hungary without any special political status, rights br autonomy. In other words, Hungarian politicians claimed that after the year of 1102 Croatia, Slavonia and Dalmatia lost anll state or municipal rights and that historical lands of Croats becarne partes subjectae ("subdued parts") to Hungary. It means, furthermore, that Hungarian language has to be the only mandatory public-official medium of communication within the whole Hungary including and the Triune Kingdom. However, contrary to such Hungarian claims, Ku5evid argued that historical Croatian lands made a political union with Hungary and that after 1102 Hungary and Croatia were regna socia ("united kingdoms") with equal political rights. This Ku5evid's program became the first formulation of Croatian historical rights, which later in the 19m century became the foundation of the programs of several Croatian political parties. Among them the most important has Croatian Party of Righx been, established in 1861.3 The next step in development of Croatian national revival made Ivan Derkos when he published in 1832 in the Latin language in ZagreblZigritb Genius patriae suPer dormientibus siusfiliis (The genius of the motherland above its sleeping sons). Derkos with this book tried to wake up the love toward motherland among the Croats, but in addition to promote an idea of the one single Croatian literal language that has to be composed by a combination of the three South Slavic dialects: kaikavian (spoken by the Croats in north-western Croatia and Slovenes in Slove-

Croatia (in end Slovakia.

2 3

wiirtt Hrvata.

D. PavlideviL Povijest Hrvatske. Drugo, izmijenjeno i proiiretlo izdanje. - Zagreb,2O0O,2M. A. Stardevii. Izabrani politiiki spisi. - Zagreb,1999; D. Pavlideyid. Povijest Hrvatske. Drugo, izmijenjeno i proiireno izdanje. - Zagreb,2000,245; M. Gross. Povijest pravaike ideologije.

- Zagreb,1973.
103 I

qACOnilC 34 KFbt,IXEBHOCT, JE3tlK, yMETHOCT

k1

KyflTypy

nia), iakavian (spoken by the croats in northern Dalmatia, Istria and Dalmatian islands) and itokavfan (spoken by all se.bs and very small number of those who accepted the ethnic name of croats at that time).a However, Derkos was in opinion that all of these three South Slavic dialects were spokensol.ly bi the croats, i.e. that croatian larrguage corsists kajkavian, iakavian and itokavian dialects. This Derkos, claim be_ came from the mid-l9th century the key backbone within a framework of croatian linguistic nationaliim. It piovoked in due course a Serbian reaction and finally alienated serbs frbm the croatian lllyrianid."i;;t of Yugoslavism. In the same year, croatian count |anko Draskovii published in Karlovac Disertatia iliti razgovor...(Disertation or Tatk...)*t i.t was the first political book written in croatian language. This *o.k *u, actually the political program of both the croatian national revival movement and the croatian nation in which the author required poiiti.a, economic, Iinguistic and cultural union of all "croati*; turrar'i*rto or. single na_ tional state of ethnolinguistic croats. At such a way united Croatia was named by Draskovii as a Greater lllyria. The lands'which should be in_ corporated into united croatia weie: croatia, slavonia, Rijeka/Fiume, the Military Border, Bosnia, Herzegovina, Montenegrb, Dalmatia and slovenien provinces. According to him, an united Greater croatia would s]ay in political union with Hungary, but both Hungary and united croatia would r:T3" as the parts of ihe Habsurg tvtoria.ity. In united croatia the official lqgyug. *ourd be lllyrian,i.!. "croatian,larrguage of itokavian dialect, wliile ihe supreme authority would be in the hands of the Ban (the Governor or prorex).Also, he r.qoir"Ju modification of the croatian feudal system and development ofih. ciouti* trade and
economy.

the

tW

Illyrimn

TTIEIf,I

POIJM
Cffi
skoga

the common name for all South Slavs) *u, ,.plu."d with the national n:lme of the croats.-Basically, the time o,t tttyrioh Moir*rntis the most imp_ortant period of the croatian renaissanie. In the larger sense of pe_ riodization, the whole croatian national revival movement can be sub_ dMded into: r) the period of the preparatory time from the end of the 18e century to rB29;2) the first (early) period fr"- h;0 to 1834; 3) the developed period from 1835 to na2i+i ttre period of th. prohibition of

of Croats achieved a final victory over Germanization "t:ld andJVlagyarizationin croatia and Slavonia and *ir; the illyrianname (as

urrdeniably, the mentioned writers have to be considered as the found_ ers of the so-called lllyrian Movement,which lasted until 1g47 when the
language

1830

r,ril

theffi

andmd

Croats.fr to Ga!m tional ptm

awapft
base

tht

the fut$rt

4
I 104

II. MnnocaB/beel,Ih. Cp6u u tuuxoa

jesurc.

- flprru ryr1a,

L9gZ,13-50.

J.

$d*r

Hacnebeffi
and thelllvrianname (1843-1345); lllyriinname O,

sltl'"

period of

replacement of the

Eia and ry small t time).4 mric diarye conlaim bermework

r

tnt'ffiffi

Serbian

ideology

in Kars the first

d

mally the nent and ,. conomlc, iingle naoatia was dd be inka/Fiurr, natia and

fiiawould nd united In united

'language the hands ification ot , trade and

Territorial distribution of

serbs and cro.ats

.- afier their migration to tthe Balkans' -t

ac'o'd'ing to Constantinus

Vll

Porfirogenetus

iotiiitl

UNTILTHE CREATION OF THEILLYRIAN MOVEMENT

PARTIES Certainly, the publishing

(1s41)

thefoundthe manization yrian name he national is the most iense of peEan be subr end of the [834; 3) the
7 when

*#*fi '*s,l;##tg#;#*.ui***lrffi
"uiitio"i'y
ti*t'*ftitl'
tional purpose," away, the croats base that was a the future.

of iais..Kratka

osnova horvat, rs ko-staven-

all of o"t titttal language for was that Gai proposta u 11,"1fi the book was done' according utt at that Croats. It was u oolitical-naihe -orn.*.rr,, io, th. ultimate to Gaj and other leJers of ilatian lands' At such

"lrrt'"'i* r"ngiil;;; "" the language-literal in ",i'i'itIoffi;"'"ldil"ir.a .r#j;;;;;i i";i;, cr*tiun poritical unification
orc.Hrvatskinarodnipreporod,t.|.-Zagreb,l965,7.
10s I

phibition of

qACOnilC 34 KFbI/'IXEBHOCT, JE3t/K, yMETHOCT t/ Kynrypy

the official language in c^roatia and Slavonia (under Hrrngarian administration) was Lati-n. Howeveq at the same time y""gjr*l magnates requirei that Hungarian langlage should be only official language in cioatia and Slavoriia, but not Croatian one-6Ivan Kukuljevii Sakcinski was the first Croatian politician who openly required (on May 2'd, 1g43) croatian language to b^ecome an official in croatian feudal aCsembly (the sabor). N.i..t[a.r;, i;;;;._ ian authoritiesrejected this requir-ement and at the same time prohibited the practice of r,atin language of croatian representatives in Hungarian feudal parliament (tie oleta), requiring tlie usage of only Hungarian. Hungarian Dieta issued in the run. yJu. u p*lLr.r.rt*y a..ir"io" ft.u} t9n years only Hungarian language woddle the officij hg"ug; i" within the whole territory-of the "tirdJof the crown orst. rrtu,lri" (iL. historical Hung-aryfrom the_carpathian Mountains to the Adriatic SeJ including and croatia and Slavonia (these two provinces were parts oi Hungary, while Dalmatia has been apartof Ausiria). This ,troggte orr., the language issue in Croatia and Shvbnia became the initial biiof fire in croatia's society which very soon becarne politically bipolarized i"t" t*; opposite politiial parties: i aro dnj aci(supporte.s o7 C[utiu1 national revival movement and croatia's independence in relation to Hungary) and madaroni (pro-Hungarians who riquired closer links betweei iioatia and Hungary, j...Croatiat total incoiporation into Hunga.yl Theyear of r132was one ofthe most important in hisioryof croatian national revival movement. Among othei things, in this year r;"aevit Gaj asked the Habsburg autoritiis for permiision to print croatian national_ newspaper (hrvatske novine) ani wrote in the ,u-" y.* u song"Horvatov sloga_zjedinjenje", which in the following years blcame croatian anthem. This anthem became popular under tf,e name which was derived frg,1 th.e very beginning of it "Joi Horvafska ni propara, dok mi zivimol' In th9 j*g year, as well, the croatian riri" sabor) elected Franjo Masii for croatian Governor (the"rr",,rfry Bafl fir'the period from 1832 to 1840. He chose General ]uraj Rukavina for the vicecaptain of the Croatian-Slavonian kingdom. on'this occasion Rukavina g_ave a speech in the Sabor, but unusually not in the Latin but rather in Croatian-kajkavianlanguage. It was the first speech in national language in Croatian Sabor. As it is mentioned above, in 1g32 Ivan Derkos printed one of the most influential books of the movement Genij doinovine nad svojim -

and his - Lj- Gajaccepted followers required that croatian national language has to be as an official'-bureaucratic -.di r* of .orr.rforrSence in the Triune.K"g4o-. At that time

$e?gdrt"0:iliw rna:Eillomial

k pr a sungfle lir(
nmain\
$msuBr

mr'&s

[foud

m 1833 urh Er-er., matul Lw the sr'or

he pubfriqh(
sfu'pp's

ilM&
in

q,rurflttem

*-rfitO'u-Umm t

ed [m the c For the he safld th

'uil,e cortnrn(

srckglr "in;tt B

\ugoslavinr the ilntenq = ca), and,

.tful',rigr"g dfo

(aroundZ;the islamds
Ca.r, fu,fieka

Border,tlbj Sara Nfoul

south-east mia, Herzq 'uhree sub< siation of I

I"Dma,$l

gram of th Croatian p a Greater (

Herzegomit

matia, Slary rights (iun

D. Fan-trirb

I \. Dedtic
I. StCats en

6
I 106

B. Sulek. Hrvatski ustav.

Zagreb, 1gg3, g0.

EiEktffiffi

Hac4eheO

nl language
correspond;e in Croatia n. However, ngarian lanmia, but not

*T th: first cultural and sinoiimakoji sp;avair (Genius pat!?'"')'which nationalProgramofthe,Illyrian^Movementwij!thefinalideatocigate whose literature up to thatlime a single literal language of th" Croats, dialects (or ranguages). was mainry written friak iiii ia ka.ikavian t;t i.a3a iiihis work Rec jezika rinrodnoga |osip Kund.k p.orrrot.ilh;
in1832wheret'..*pr'"'i'ed'theoldnationalgloryoftheCroats.THowof t[e movement was framed ever, matur.'d.rn lofJ pottical qrogrlm praSkoiie in the same year of 1832 when by the work of .ooiiiJ"rc gospodi poklisaron! y.kon' he publishe d o*ertia-iii *"soror, darouan 'iai" manuscript was i iia"rr* rrioiotvorceikralievinah nasi\ "\is fact that Dra5kovi6 was written in itokaviai iia"rr,r"g".d1.tt-on the work was print-

rn politician
p become an
E$s,

Hungar-

rc prohibited

i in Hungarnrly Hungar-

;rt*;;

rp.ut t tiir.;*itt riu?*it

hry decision
ciat language L Istv6n" (i.e.

ed in the ciry of itokavian one.

fi*r"";-*n1re

the Gaj to9) 3nd kaikavian dialect was spoken, but not

Adriatic Sea) rere parts of struggle over rlbit of fire in fzed into two n national re{ungary) and lneen Croatia T). rF of Croatian $ year Ljuderint Croatian 'same yealr a
Irears became : name which

ni propala, rssembly (the : Ban) for the n for the vicexion Rukavina r but rather in bnal language
Vn

(an official name for be said that the so-called serbo-croatianTang.uage i" ttt. time of both former the common t"rrgolg. ori.1u, and croats form of yugoslaviaO i, airriala into three basic dialects according to the (what atzkajkaviaz (wha! =-kaj)' iakavian the interrogative et tfre fime of Illyrian Movement, ka= da), and, itokavir"-(*i" = Sto). partS of Croatia proPer dialect *u, tpotttt' **th.western it coast area and (around Zagreb;; ii"rlr* s), iakav.ianin theiorthern (Istrian Peninsula, area aroundZathe islands of .urt"i" eJ.iuii. tt ote area from Austrian Military dar, Rijeka, Split) uri itotouianwitlinthe in t{e- lorth-w:sl 10 1le BorderI Vojna Krajina (present-day in Croatia) Kosovo and Macedonia) in the Sara Mount"i, folr'ii.'Uia.t between dialect(spoken in Serbia' M9*ryq19"1o:south-east. m" iiot croatia) is divided into nia,Herzegovina fficig;;purt orpr".ent-day according to the pronunthree sub-d iatectslitcivlin,ilikaviai, ikavian) ii""i'vowel represented by th9 le$et iat'8 ciation of the -"rigi*rf praSkovi6'uLu,'o"'ipt, anyway' became not only an extensive prol. a politill program of the gram of the tllyriiii'uoii*nnt, but'also and oi t1'e Greater Illyria (i'e' croatian people.' His proposal upon creatio. ..croatid, composed bycroatia p.roper, Bosnia and a Greater or united palmatian crrygf Rijeka, DalHerzegovinu, eoriiui rr,ririi*y n-grder, bases of Crotaian state ,""rlr,"Sf"*nia, tutoni.negro and Slovenia) on the program of the lllyrian Moverights (iura munircipalid*ecarrre an offical

P;;;;; ''

riiri

iian

nd one of the we nad svojim

TS]friauie:o

8 -

pr:tlyiizdanie' - .zagreb'2000'247 ' vijest Hryatske. Drugo, izmijenjeno i storv of the Balkans: New Yory rezs' n.. 19lll'.ftlTth' H' V. Dedijer. Hktory of Yugoslavia' Cambridge' 1983'-304-308' Eighteenth andliinit'eitl' Centuria' Ilirski pokret. '-Zagreb, atski narodni pr"poia Siaak ana
J.

*-""ii.rr.

i-

1990,210'
rc7 I

qACONilC 34 KFbI/XEBHOCT, JE37IK, YMETHOCT

14

KYNTYPY

ment.Simultaneously, DraSkovid supported I. Derkos'idea of creation of the common literal language of the croats, but differently from Derkos count Draskovii proposed only itokavian dialect (spoken at that time by all Serbs and only minority of croats)t, as the standardazed language of croatian literature. This language he called as lllyiian and acciptJd at the same time the so-called "Illyrian theory''upon croatian etinolinguistic origin according to the old Croatian tradition especially from Dalmatian shore. This theory traced back among the croats to the humanist from Dalmatian crty of Sibenik, ]uraj Siigori6, who wrote a short history of his native city around 1477 (De situ lllyriae et civitate Sibenici).,In this work the author undoubtedly stressed that ancient Balkan lllyrians (aborigines of western and central regions of the peninsula) have been a real ancestors of the modern croats. According to his (wrong) opinion, St. Jerome, a native from Dalmatia, was a Croat who invented the first SbY. alphabet-Glagolitic one. A half a century later this SiZgori6t idea of Illyrian origin of Croats and all Slavs (Southern, Eastern u.ri Western) was further developed by Dominician friar from Dalmatian island of Hvar - Vinko Pribojevii in his public lecture De origine successibusque slavorum given in the city of Hvar in 1525 and published in venice^in I 532. For him, Greek philosopher Aristotel, Macedonian King Alexander the Great, Roman EmperorJDiocletian and Constantine ttie Great, St. |erome, sS. constantine (cyril) and Methodius were Illyrians, i.e. slavs. AIso Pribojevii was the first to claim that three brothers, czech, Lech, and Rus, were expelled from the Balkans and consequently became the founders of Bohemia and Czechs, poland and polis and Russia and Russians (in factRas). Likewise Pribojevid, Mauro orbini, a Benedictine abbot from Dubrovnik who wrote an extensive history of Serbia (and in the lesser extend of croatia and Bulgaria) under the title Il regno degli slavi (pnblished in Pesaro in 1601), saw the Slavs everywhere,i and tf,e Illyrians as "the noble Slavic racd'. For him, the soldiers of Alexander the Great were Slavs who spoke "the same language which is today spoken b;, the inhabitants of Macedonia" (the Miscoiite Annals expresf state that the Rus' are of the same race as were the ancient Maiedonians). Filally, orbini advocated the idea that the first Slavic alphabet, popularly called Bukvica, i.e. Glagolitic script (for him secord Slavic siript cyrillic was invented by the saintly brothers from Salonika - cyriiand Methodius), was invented by st. |erome, who was a Slav, "since he was
10 E.
11

born in

the thr-sc

movedm (firstryry by Rud).

South Croat Pry he claimn ancient l[ main prq becamet, atian It is im was as ffi Conseqm and "-qdl Catholicr unjustifiC

fu

ry

the CJh font b@ charactss Thur,

AM

Cllrryrl

Methodtu by Cronry indige,rm in the hffi used thb In thele |erome h

who
12 13

trffi

M-Orh Eq. Pilh

_7-ryt&,,

writenrn teme"ffil L4 Li.

I 108

Ep6opuh. o jesutxon pacxony. co4uonuHzBucmuqKu oznedu L - 6eorpa[, 2000,324; B. Ep6opuh. C jesura na jesurc. Co4uonuuzeucmuqru oznedull - Beorpag, iOOt, lzt-lZe. A. schmaus. 'vincentius Priboevius'l /ahrbilcher fiir Geschichte osteuropas. - 1953,2s4.

fi,uw*. G+,

fanuaqTl

15 J. Fine.

CetMf..

HacnebeU
:reation of m Derkos that time I language I accepted an ethno-

i*lly from
rnist from history of rf). In this rrians (abnre been a $ opinion, d the first pri6's idea lWestern) I island of
rssibusque ,'Yenice in

born in Dalmatidll2 M. Orbini repeated the old Dalmatian theory that the three Balkan Slavic tribes, ledby the brothers Czech, Lech and Rus', moved northward and established the three new Slavic states - Bohemia (first ruled by Czech), Poland (first ruled by Lech) and Russia (first ruled by Rus). ror orbini, modern Czechs, Poles and Russians likewise all Sfuth Slavs originated in the Balkan Illyrians. However, a century later, croat Pavao Ritt.r vitezovid (of German origin) went one step further: he claimed in 1700 and 1701 that all Slavs had a common progenitors in ancient Itlyrians who were in fact the ethnolinguistic Croats'l3 Vitezovii's main programatic idea upon unification of "all Croatia" (totius Croatia) became a-century later an official political program of the leaders of Croatian Illy ri an Mov ement.ra It is important to notice that St. |erome (Hieronimus) from Dalmatia was as weli appropriated as a Slav and later on exclusively as a Croat' Consequently, ih. futin-language Bible, which was written by St. ferome

arrd used by all Catholic Slavs

in Europe was recognized by Dalmatian

Alexander : Great, St.

L i.e. Slavs.

Itrh, Lech,
Ecame the

lussia and enedictine bia (and in

regno degli
err and the

rander the

hy spoken
rresly state ndonians).

Catholics as achievement of the Slavic Croat. Moreover, St. |erome was unjustifiably proclaimed as an inventor of the oldest Slavic alphabet - it" Ctogoliii, on", named as ")erome's script" and subsequently thig font becaire appropriated by Croats as their own original and national characters thaibecame used and by other Slavonic peoples' Thus, this first written Slavic language (named by the scholars as Old Church Slavonic), and devised in fact by Constantine (Cyril) and Methodius in the middle of the 9m centuryls, became appropriated by Croats in the Middte Ages and later on as a Croatian national and irrdig.rroo, literal language. This belief founded an ideological doctrine in the later centuries foithe claiming that all people (i.e. Slavs,) who used this language virtually belonged to Croatian ethnic community. In the tate medieval period following a popular tradition about him, St. people |erome has been assumed as a spiritual progenitor of Croatian (sacre scripture) to who translated Hebrew and Greek holy writings
12 M. Orbini. Kraliewtvo Slovena. - Beograd, 1968, CXLII-CXIIX' 13 Eq. Pavlus Ritter [Pavao Riter Vitezwii]. croatia rediviva; regnante Leopoldo Magno caaare' the Croatian Baroque -iugr"b,1700. About historical development of Slavic idea among Siaat ,,Podeci politidke misli u Hrvata - I. Kriiani6 i P' Riter Vitezovii", Naie *ria!.. *"' I. Russophile and teme,Np t6. - 1972;T. Eekman, A. Kadi6 (eds.).luraj lOi1anii (1618-168j):

;popularly h script

'Cyril and

re he was
5

V
!000, 324; B.
v,32t-326.
ru)53, 254.

EcumenicVisionary. - The Hague' 1976. JanuaryT6,1835.

The Early Medieyal Balkans.

Lj. Gaj.,Horvatov Szloga y iledinieny, Danicza Horyatska, Slwonska y Dalmatinzka.

rs i. rirr..

A Critical

Survey

Century.

- Ann Arbor,

1994,302.

from the Sixth to the Late

Twelfth 109 I

qAcont/lc 3A Kt-bt4xEBHOCT,

JE3t4K, yMETHOCT

il Kyflrypy

both Latin and Slavonic languales.r6 Even and Roman catholic church accepted this popular opinion that St. ]erome was a founder of Slavonic
litdracy.tT

lic l{ahr
the II* Dubrou the lqd

Illi?'tffi

I. Derkos and I. Dra5kovii promoted itokayian dialect of Renaissance and Baroque literature of Republic of Dubrovnik (Ragusium/
Ragusa) as Croatian one-an act which created among the Croats a national conscience upon Ragusan cultur.al heritage as solely a croatian one. However Serbian philologist Branislav Brborii (and many others) is in opinion that itokavian literature of Dubrovnik belongs to Serbian cultural heritage as this dialect is national Serbian language, but not Croatian one. According to his research, there are many Latin-language documents in the Archives of Dubrovnlk in which the languag. Jr ti" people of Dubrovnik (itokavian dialect of ijekavian speech) is named as lingua seryiana, but there is nb one document in which this language is named as lingua croata.L8 B. Brborii claims further that for centuries citizens of Dubrovnik had 'some" Serbian national consciousness and perception that their spoken language is Serbian. Among Ragusan inhabitants there was no Croatian ethnolinguistic consciousness before the Illyrian Movement and before Dubrovnik became included into catho16 V Stefanii. ,,Tisuiu i sto godina od moravske misije", Slovo, No XIII. - 1963,34-36. 17 However, many of ancient and early mediaeval histirrical soruces are using the term lllyrians
syninim for modern ethnic-name of the Serbs and claiming at the same time St. ]erome from Dalmatia was in fpct of a Serb origin. There is a visible tendenry, based on the sourses and tradition, among contemporary Serbian historians and ethnologists to claim that serbs are the oldest Balkan, i.e. indigenous, people, and evenmore that the original name for all Slavs has been - the Serbli. See for instance: O. .Ilyr<osuh-fljauonrah. Cp6u...nipod
as a

dialdt
workem

andR{
ogr ofl rrritenil
om'firtril

atiand
thefiaC wa,saI[
B&
_itoti

forthl

terr frrwr*,
of the [r Croatrn

phildol Orthoil

.M. I
thepl

Du&rryrl
a)

ken amd

uajcmapuju.I-ilL - Eeorpaq,1994; E. Bnajrh-3eurbaur{rrKrr. Cp6u cmapocedeoqu Eanrana u Ilanouuje y eojxum u qulunHuM dozallajuma ca Punnanuna.u Xenenuma od I do X aera. - Eeorpag, 1999; I. fenlearh. Od l4ubuje do Cp6uje. Ilpacmapu noqetlu cpncKe'ucmopuje.
Xumade zoduna ceo6e cpncKo? napoda rpos Asujy u Eapony npewa cnuculvra u-\umamuMa najaehux coemcKux uctnopumpo. - EeorpaA, ZOOO lreprint from 1961, Rome); M. |onrah. Cp6u npe Cp6a. Kpaneno, 2002; l. Bajuh. Erutcexu leponuw Conuncra qpxea u Cp6ofl,anruamu. - IIIa6a4, 2003. Yugoslav linguist Ranko Bugarski is in oppinion that in sociolinguistic sense the dialects are not a separate languages, lut in linguistic sense they.are. According to him, a "dialect" is a "language" which lost political battle, while "language" is a "dialect" which won political battle. In the othei words, it is only political decesion if one tialect'' will be proclaimed as a "languagei For him, in fact the most important criteria which makes a difference between the "language ' and the tialect" is a comprehensibility (R. Bugarski. Uvod u opltu lingvistiku- Beograd, 1996,238-239). Serbian philologist and academic Ljubomir Stojanovic (18601929) was in opinion that around 20% of South Slavic population can not be exactly classified to one linguistic-national group according to their spoken language because they are speaking "mixture dialects" oftwo languages. Thus, there are "transitional zones" between South S1avic languages (/b. Crojanorrh.Ilpucmynuaarcadeucra6eceda.- Eeorpa4, ll-I-1896).

lf writil
nor fibdl

wasrdl
vl.Ia$

ind
ryff

te

E-

18

20 It ilL 2I mcd

lffi

Thcilr
"

&cr

dDr tuhi

didqn

rh

tur

I 110

HacnebeO lic Church rf Slavonic

of

RenaisRagusium/ mats a nan Croatian

my others) r to Serbi-

ga but not n-language Ege of the ) is named b language r centuries osness and agusan inlbefore the ffio Catho],
1

:'

l-36.
*term lllyrians

he St. |erome m the sourses

i*n claim that

tng"A
fuqu

name , Cp6u...nipod
Eanrcarua

0r do X aerca.

ucmopuje.

i"A-qumamuMa

rc); M. |owrh. u cp6o-

lic Habsburg Monarchy (from 1815).1e In other words, from the time of Illyrian Movement the process of Croatization of Dubrovnih backed by Catholic Serbs from the Habsburg authoriry, shrted. Consequently, "11 whose language was proclaimed by Dubrovnik became national Croats the leaders of the Illyrian Movement as Croatian language of itokavian dialect and ijekavian speech.2o Therefore, after 1830 Croatian national workers consideied the people from Dubrorrnik exclusivelly as Croats and,Ragusan history and culture as Croat ones. Coirsequently, an anthology of Stari pisci hrvatski (Old Croatian Writers) where many Ragusan writers were published among others was priirted inZagreb from 1869 onwards. The edition of this collection was criticizedbythe Serbs as Croatiau attempt to appropriate Serbian cultural heritage of Dubrovnikwith the final political aim to include the territory of Dubrovnih which never was a part of Croatia, into united greater Croatia. Before Dubrovnikwith Southern Dalmatia was included into Croatia for the first time in history due to Communist rearagment of the innerterritorial structure of Yugoslavia by her federalisation two of the most fervent defenders of Serbian character of Dubrovnik against the claims of the leaders of the lllyrian Movement that this city-state belongs to the Croatian history and cultural heritage were Catholic Serb and famouS philologist from Dubrovnik-Milan Re5etar (1560-1942) and Serbian Orthodox priest-Dimitrije Ruvar ac (L842-193L). M. Re5etar concluded, after the extensive research in the Archives of Dubrovnik and as a person who very well knew Ragusan literature, that: a) the people from Dubrovnikwere and are the ethnic Serbs; b) their spoken and literal language is Serbian because theywere speaking and mainly writing in itokavian dialect;zt c) the Dubrovnik citizens, however, did not feel themselves as the Serbs since for them the ethnic name Serbian was relating only to those who lived in Serbian state: as Dubrovnik never was includid into Serbia for that reason Ragusan people did not call
19 E, 6p6oprh.
68.
C

y,

jesura ta jesurc. Coquonuuzeucmuwrcu oznedu'Il

Eeorpa4,2OOI,43-M,

ce the dialects fu, a tialect"

hmn political
[pmctaimed
as

20 fI. Mrnocasresflh. Cp6u u ruuxoe jesux. -flpraurtuna, lgg7, 13-41,412-426, nUU-n ). 21 The spoken language of the people from Dubrovnik was always itoka:vian dialect, but their
literature was written infour langaages:Latin,Italian, iakavian dralecl,anditokavian dralect' The last two were "domestic languages". Cakayian dialect was used till mid-156 century as the most fashionable literal language in the whole Dalmatia besides the Italian and Latin. Howeve6 from the mid-l5d centuty the writers from Dubrovnik mainly wrote in itokavian dialect that became the language in which the most glorious Ragusan literature (the period of Baroque) was written. According to the most critics of the Slavic literature, probably, the ilokayian Baroque literature of Dubrovnik gave the best examples of the Slavic Baroque literature.
111 I

pnce between

fukngvistiku.
hnovid (1860-

F.tty classified
rse6).

Hfere speaking Lnsouth Slavic

qACONilC 34 KI-bI/XEBHOCT, )E3IAK, YMETHOCT I/ KYflTYPY

themselves

as Serbians;

d) they, however, did not call themselves

as

Croats

cal $tnt

too; e) usually Ragusan people understood themselves as Dubroviani, i.e. as the citizens of the Republic of Dubrovnik (citizenship-identity); f) the Serbs and Croats do not speak the same (Serbo-eroatian/Croatian or Serbian) language; g) Serbs and Croats are two different peoples.22 D. Ruvarac claimed that after Slavic migrations to the Balkans at the end of the 6m century the Latin municipality (city) of Ragusiumbecame Serbianized and as a consequence of this process the city changed its name into Slavic-Serbian-Dubrovnik (Slavic dubrava=oak-forest). He refuted as well Croatian claims advocated by the leaders of the lllyrian Movement that all inhabitants of Croatia, Dalmatia, Dubrovnik and Slavonia can be only ethnolinguistic Croats regardless on their religion. However, Ruvarac was in opinion that itokavian dialect is only Serbian national language which was spoken in Serbia, Dubrovnih Slavonia, Dalmatia, Montenegro and part of Croatia (the Military Border) by Orthodox, Catholic and Muslim believers. Especially he disproved Croatian idea that Slavonia (the region between the rivers of Sava and Drava, today included into Republic of Croatia) is a part of Croatia because historically it was all the time a separate province with_ separate provincial name whose inhabitants were speakingSlavonian language, as it is recorded in many historical documents. However, according to Ruvarac, the leaders of lllyrian Movement proclaimed that Croatian people and language (i.e. kajkavian dialect, which was spoken in north-western Croatia only by the Catholics) and Slavonian people and language (i.e. itokavian dialect, which was spoken in Slavonia by both the Orthodox and Catholics) as one Croato-Slavonian people and language, which was very soon started to be called by Croatian philologists as only Croatian people and language. Thus, Slavonians became Croats and Slavonian language became Croatian language. For Ruvarac, the same philologi22 M. Penerap. Anmonozuja

theirh

rypq

ffiyim

tia ffiru poinry

diffi rw rq
burd
,t{r

ftue

oeMI

PrdI
fi

enc ilG[

gEmrurry

wes

qryeh
fudtuq;

eGW
offtBJ

*M
ffiil @-ffi

oer{illry]

Th fremd

fi,fuH

hfu"
rn4[,!

{1658-

- Beorpag, 1894; M. Peruerap. ,,Hajcrapuju Ay6ponavxra ronop", foduunoax Cpncxe KparbeacKe arcademuje, Ne 50. - Eeorpa4, t940; M. Re5etar. "Die Ragusanischen Urkunden des XIII-XV |ahrhunderts", Archiv filr slawische Philologie, XVI fahrgang. - Wien, 1891; M. Re5etar. "Die eakav$tina un deren einstige und
dy6poaaurce nupuxe.

!!l

r.I m;fl
&il,mo

jetzigeGrenzeri',Archivfilr slawischePhilologie,XVl |ahrgang. - Wien, 1891. However, during the time ofKingdom ofYugoslavia (1918-1941) ReSetar corrected his stand upon Serbs and Croats and their languages. Namely, under the strong influence of the oftcial policy of "the integral Yugoslavisnf Re$etar became an advocate of the idea that Serbs and Croats were and are speaking the same language, and therefore they belong to the same people who just has two names (see: B. Hosax. Anmonozuja jyzocnoeeucrce Mucnu u napodnoe jeduncmea. - Eeorpag, 1930). Nevertheless, Re5etar two years before died returned to his original idea that Serbs and Croats are two different peoples who spoke two different languages and that Ragusan literal heritage is definitelly Serbian, but not Croatian.

sfl f [.,l ilu

hl

,+
L5

r#
ru
lt! rII

rr2

Hacnet)eO
as Croats

Woviani,
Bntity);
s.22

f)

watian or
rns at the n became

anged its rest). He

e

lllyrian

mik

and "religion.
p Serbian

Slavonia,

rder) by
trisproved

$ava and

patia beseparate

suage, &s qg to RuItr people p.western

page (i.e.

)rthodox
fuich was 'Croatian
Ylnvonian

rhilologiHajcrapwju Ur t940; M.
W dowische einstige und rcver, during
m Serbs and

cal strategy was implied by the Croatian lllyrians in the case of Ragusan people and their our or Slavic language (how did they usually call their language). The final consequenses of such politics by the leaders of Illyrian Movement was Croatization of Slavonia and Southern Dalmatia with Dubrovnik. D. Ruvarac's stands can be summarized into three points: a) Serbs are all South Slavs whose mother tongue is itokavian dialegt regardless on their religion; b) Serbian and Croatian languages, regaqdless on the fact that they are similar, are two separate languages; 3) Croats are speakingkajkavian and iqkavian "lartgaages" (i.e. dialects), but not itokavian one.23 According to the leading Slavic philologists from the end of the 18s century and the 19m century (Serb Dositej Obradovii tZa8-t8t l;Czech Pavel fosef Safafit 1795-1861 Czechlosef Dobrovsky 1753-L829; Slovene |ernej Kopitar 1780-1844; and Slovene Franc Miklo5id 1813-1891), genuine Croatian national language was only iakavian, while kajkavian was originally only Slovenian national language, but in the course of time kajkavian speakers who lived in Croatia accepted Croatian national feeling.2a All opponents of political ideology and national program of the lllyrian Movement (Serbs and Slovenes), concluded that the thesis of the lllyrian Movement that Croats are speaking three "languages" (i.e. kajkavian, iakavian and itokaviar) should be refuted as wrong one because the leading principle in the whole Europe from the end of tlie 186 century onwards was that one nation can speak only one language, but not several of them.2s Undoubtedly, I. Derkos' and |. Dra5kovid's works and patriotism framed the basic idea ofpolitical requirementbythe leaders of thelllyrian Movement-political, linguistic and cultural unification of all "Croatiart'' lands. However, this idea was inspired by the work of Croatian nobleman and professional writer of German origin, Pavao Ritter Vitezovid (L652-L7L3) who was the first among the Croats who advocated the con23 [.Pyeaparl .Eeo,wmacmeuanrpueu! -3errryr, l8g5.Thisbookisimportantbecausethe
author is dealing with ethnolinguistic division between the Serbs and Croats.

24 [,. O6pagonrh. ,fkcuo Xapanannujy", Xtueom u npuxmyuetuja. - Hosr Cag,

J.

1783;

P. J.

Sazuit<. Slowansky narodopis. - Praha, 1842;P. J. Safaiik. SerbischeLesekdrn|er. - Pest, 1833; p. Safafitc Geschichte der slawischen Sprache und Literatur nach allen Mundarten. - Buda,

nlicy of "the Croats were trwho just

:

jeluucmla.

riginal

idea

25

ges and that

1826;1. Dobrovskf. Gachichte d.er bijhmische Sprache und l-iteratur. - Wien, l792ll8L8;1. Kopitar. Serbica. - Beograd, 1984 (repginted sellected works); f. Kopitar. .Patriotske fantazije jednog Sloveni', Vaterhiindische Bkiter. 1810; F. Miklo5id. "serbisch und chorvatisctf, Vergleichende Gramatik der slawischen Sprachen. - Wien, 1852t1879. For instance:.A. flelporrh. .IIIta cuo Mu, rrrra hervro 6rua, raro heuo ce ssarrr?", Cpncru 1839; Huxonajeruh. Cpncru cnoweHulu. Eeorpag, uapodxu nucmi., 24, 25,26.

l*

!.

1840.

113 I

L{ACONilC 34 KFbI4XEBHOCT, JE3IAK, YMETHOCT

t/

KYIITYPY

cept of political unification of historical and ethnolinguistic Croatia and promoted the idea that ancient Balkan people-Illyrians,who lived in the Central and Western parts of the Peninsula at the time of ancient Greeks and Romans, were the real ancestors of modern Croats and all Slavs. In the other words, he championed the idea that Croats are descendents of

o{ accu parts Il

Mcri&

ancient Balkan lllyrians and that all Slavs originated in Croats. His formula was: Illyrian = Croat = Slav. P. R. Vitezovii divided the whole world into six ethnolinguistic, historical, cultural and geographical areas, civilizations and cultures: I) Germania, which. embraced the whole German-speaking world: 1. Holy Roman Empire of German Nation, headed by Austria, 2. Kingdom of Sweden (Sweden, Norway, Finland),3. Denmark,4. East Prussia,5. Curonian Isthmus (Kurdii neria) with Curonian Bay or Courish Lagoon (Kurdii Marios), 6. Memel (Klaipda), and7. Angliae regnum (Scotland, Eng1and, Wales, and Ireland). II) Italia cum parte Greciae (Italy with the part of Greece) referred to the 1. Apenninian Peninsula, 2. Corsica, 3. Sardinia,4. Sicily, 5. Attica, 6. Peloponnesus (Morea), 7. the main number of Aegean and Ionian islands, 8. Malta, and 9. Crete. III) Illyricum, that was 1. almost the whole Balkans (except Attica and Peloponnesus with the adjoining islands),2. Wallachia (Dacia and Cumania), 3. Transylvania, and 4. Hungary. IV) Hispania, which was composed by 1. Spain and Portugal, 2. their European possessions, and 3. their overseas colonies in Africa, Asia, Latin America with Florida and California. V) Sarmatia, that was 1. the territory of Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (the Republic of Two Nations), 2. Moldavia, and 3. Muscovy (i.e. the Russian Empire). Finally, VI) Gallia, that was France.26 The real ideological source for such a division of the whole world was the popular Slavic idea that decisively influenced Vitezovii, who recognized that all Slavs belonged to a single ethnolinguistic communlty (having the same ethnolinguistic origin). Nevertheless, traditional idea of Pan-Slavism was methamorphosed by him eleven years later into the idea of Pan-Croatianism and a Greater Croatia. In fact, Vitezovid claimed that all Slavs are Illyrians who were autochtonous inhabitats of Illyricum. For him it was clear that ancient Illyrians have been modern Croats and ancestors of all Slavs. This ideology of Croatian-Slavic ethnogenesis Yitezovii developed in his work Croatia rediviva. .. (in 1700) that was an outline of more ambitious general history of the Croats and Croatia, i.e. entire Slavic population. In this work Vitezovii divided a total territory
26
I Lt4
P. E.

Danuhc l. Bohtr and $q

7.

Mury

in Ntrt

Croaffi,r as sarm and Sn fir ing it

andHd

\*k

and,fu
By-railfr the ry;l

tle Soh

GrM

of Crm
Tlmotsk ryidnd

W
t
ffi

(Red Cr

tral

friffu
rrir ($h

Frrdx
hfio@
toffurs

emd&{

ycq,v
knormlE

mati@f

WPq !s am
3$ Pf,l

waH
odlrl lflt

I4fr

Rlttet Anagranrnaton, sive Laurus auxiliatoribus Ungariae liber secundus.

Vienna,

1689,69-117.

HacnebeO
fria and d in the :Greeks ilavs. In ilents of His forrguistic, hrres: I)
r

into two of, according to his opinion, ethnic-historical-linguistic Croatia parts: I) Criatia Septemtrionalis (North ern Croatia), at d II) Croatia

'Iueridionalis (southern Croatia). The boundary between them was of Danube River. Northern Croatia encompassed the entire territories Eastern saxony 1. Bohemia, 2. Moravia, 3. Lusatia (l;tLica or l-tbyca in

l. Holy

ldom of
h 5. Cu,,[,agoon

Wallachia, and Southern Brandenburg), 4. Hungary, 5. Transylvania, 6. i. t tor.orry, and 8. potandi,rith Lithuania.2T The people wh9 were living in Northein Croatia were divided into two groups: 1. Northwestern croats, called as venedico s (wends), and2.Northeastern croats, named Moravians, as Sarmatic os (Sarmatians).1he Wends consisted of Czechs, were and Sorbs (Sorabi who lived in Lusatia), whereas the sarmatians living in Muscovy, Lithuania and Poland," i.e., were Rus" Lithuanians and Poles.

cotland, aty with [. Corsihe main

il lllyri)eloponnnia) ,3.
ned by 1.

.verseas nnia. V) )il^realth (i.e. the

[e world Fii, who rununity mal idea I into the lclaimed ftyricum. mats and
ngenesis t[ was an

oatia, i.e. Iterritory

j,

Vitezovi6 found that ancestors of all Northern Croats - Wends from the and sarmatians - have been the white croats (Belohrobatoi around Byzantine historical sources) who lived in the early Middle.Ages River, i.e., Galicia and Litthe upper Dnester River and upper vistula Croatia was a t1e Poland. Traditional name from the sources for White writing Greater Croatia or an Ancient Croatia.In the time of Vitezovid's the Republic of of croatia rediviva...this territory was integral part of Two Nations (Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth)' subdivitezovid',s Southern croatia, or Illyricum (the Balkans), was Rubea vided into two parts: Croatia Alba (tttihite Croatia)' and Croatia (cen(Red Croatia). iroatia Alba was composed by Croatia Maritima Croatia tral and maritime Montenegro, Dalmatia and Eastern Istria), Mediterranea (Croatia propJt and Bosnia-Herzegovi na), .Crotia Alpes(Slavonia with tris (Slovenia and Western istria) and Croatia Interamnia pariof rannonia). croatia Rubea consisted of 1. Serbia, 2. north-eastern Thessaly, ivlontenegro, 3. Bulgaria, 4. Macedonia, 5. Epirus, 6. Albania, 7. of"limites and 8. Oirysia(Thrice)." There have been Vitezovii's frontiers ethnolinguistic Croats'30 Howtotius Croitiae'; ("allCroatid') settled by Pan-croatian ever, vitezovid recognized that his Greater croatia and acnational identity wai not unified in whole. In the other words, he customsi"ct)m differences in borders, names, emblems, and t "o*t.agad zagreb, 1700, 10. 27 p. Ritter. croatia rediviva: Regnante Leopoldo Magno caesare. Zagteb, 1700, 10' 28 p. Ritter. Croatia rediviva: Rignante Leopoldo Magno Caesare. Magno caesare. - zagreb, 1700,32. 29 p. Ritter. croatia rediyiya: Rignante Leopoldo
30 p. R. Vitezovi6 . Mappa

Vienna,

Geniratk Regni Croatiai Totius. Limitibus suis Antiquis, videlicet' 1:550 000 (drawing in Regis Hungariae, Diplornitibus, comprobatis, iletenninati, Luilovici, Collection' D l' - Zagteb' og,+ i +o,a .i". Croatian State Archives, Cartographic

lofor),
1699.

11s I

qACONilC 34 KFbI4XEBHOCT, JE3[/K, YMETHOCT

t/4

KYflryPY

propriis tyTnen singularum limitibus etymo, Insignibus, rebusque ac magis memorabilibus populi moribus".3L Aftei a[, he bilieved that t]iese distirictions were ofless importance than the common Croatian nationhood of all of these peoples and lands. His apotheosis of the common Croat name especially for all South Shns (Illyrians) with regional and historic differences lvas expressed in vitezovii's heraldic manual Stemmatographia... r,-vhere hs'presented all Croatian historical and ethnolinguistil tands in the South East Europe,like Serbia, Bulgaria, Romania, eti.32

Os
f,rt

mI

ryt

mo

rur

icw
rym

qWT

str

trEpr

rru

pry

mu
n{m
TIEI

reI
iI

( orq

Lmtr

rry
31

Ritter. croatia rediviva: Regnante Leopoldo Magno caesare. - zagreb, 1700,32; p. Ritter. Stemmatographiq sirte Armorum lllyricorum delineatio, descriptio et restitutio. * Vienna,
P.

g.m
,trL

iln" t

170t.
32 P. Ritter.

croatia rediviva: Regnante Leopoldo Magno caesare. - zagreb, 1700,32; p. Rifter. stemmatographia, sive Armorum Illyricorum delineatio, dacriptio et restitutio. - vienna, l70l; I. Banac. "The Insignia of Identity: Heraldry and the Growth of National Ideologies

Among the South Slavs", Ethnic Studies;vol. 10.

4m
5L.

m
f,L

L993,223-227.

I 116

L{ACONilC 3A KI-bI/XEBHOCT, )E3IAK, YMETHOCT

II

KYIITYPY

,I SaIIITrIre XUBOTIOBe. Kao cTlrleHA,lCra-AoKTOpaHr MuHr'rcraPcrBa HayKe yMerHocr y Eeorpagy' He cpe[rHe capaAHrIK ieVlncturyra 3a KIbrlxeBHocUI
Muxarano Curaranr'rh pofen je 1974. ro,urrHe y Eeorpa4y. Crylupao je ua Kategp'I 3a erHorloruiy tr -urrporrororujy Ounoao$cror Qarynreta y Beorpagy' fiwtrnov;lrrpao je na Eo,o.io".*o, $"*yo".ty Cpucre rpaBocrlaBHe rIPKBe, 2003' ro*une' Og 2005' roArrHe vnan je IyrocnorencKor y[pyxelba 3a HayqHo llcrpa>ru/rBatrepeililwrje. flocrgr,runonaq je na Oaxynrery rorrl'Irrqrl'Ix HayKa y Eeorpagy, ogcer Te'opvjaKyrrrype. IIIKoJII/I ,,3eMyH" Pagu rao Bepoyqr,rre/b y Enerrporexnuuroj y 3errayny.

relplr 3a ltcil y Bwnrbycf fi

qllorrldHrBEc',l

rIeHrParrEqll Kyrrrery ]ffi

ge$nnHcarit
IapamaHrnnr

SarynrerYP Hr4X qrlaHitill

rlvtolry'.rrrBtc rrI{HrBHCrrnt

MebyHaPqm

tle4ounna MaPrarr orrrh polena je 1969. ro[r4He y Eeorpagy. flunnorvrrpa rravl vraruIcTPlrrPar:n na Katesancropujy yrlerHocrll OunosoQcror Sarynreta y Eeorpa4y' Pagvnaaa
Apv

pofeHa ie
craPcKe

lI

ronsepnaquju Qpecara y MaHacrrrpy flo6punonrlHrl, Kao ac]IcreHr Kycroca y EaseHapogHoM *yu.jy y Beorpagy u Yrvrernu.ffiorra rvryaejy (Kunstmuseum) y nojuony (UlnajUapcra) n rao ucrpa>rl4Barl-rpl4rrpaBHl,lr< y O46opy sa Pevnur arageuuje HayKa I{ yMerHocr}I y sa us o6nacrl{ rII4KoBHe yMerHocr}I Cprcre
je Eeorpagy. O6jautna uonorpa<fnjy o crrKaPy fletpy Olvrvurycy' Acucreur Ha Ogcexy 3a rrPrIMeIbeHe yMerHoctu OTIIIYM-a'

reryy Eryl

qt

acvrcrerry-q

polena ie t 3a orrffry r

Bnagucnar E. CoruPorrah

pofen je 1967. ro[]IHe y Kparyjenqy r4e je ny (KparyjeBarlKy ruttrasrjy). firnnouupao je na @ulosoQcrornr Qarynrery )irr".p.rr.ra y BeorpaAy Ha rpyru zaucropujy ca reMoM: ,,<Dopru0rraquje , yp6aua ronorpasnja Beorpaga rpajervr cpe46er BeKa (1404-1521)".oy1992. go 1995. palll Kao upo$ecop vcropviey Eeorpagy' Ou 1995' go 1997 ' uoxafa
rrocrAlrfirroMcre ctyAuje na I-[enrpannoeBporcKoM yH]IBeP3I4reryy By4uIunerurrl r[e 6patug"u ru"r.rup.*u p"gu (,,CrsapaEe Iyroclaruje 1914-1918]'

saBPIIruo ocHoBHy I'I cpeAlby IIrKo-

qr roA ru
y
rpnqPasm

Pana Ha

o.

Bl/tme OCI

2002. nom

IyHa 2005rPatry Ha tr Ca6o (ftx!

u ,,O4nocr nsuefy IyrocxonencKor KoMllreta y Ilongony, Haquona/IHor o[6opa y 3arpe6y , kpu^.t.r,. Bna,e Cp6vje 3a BPeMe rrPoqeca crnaparra |yrocnarule'j Ha rpyrr sawcropuiy vtrpyrtvt sa cry4rje Iyroucrovne Enpoue' na rnrefynapoAHoM fine rogune (1996-1997) paUu Kao Haf{Hil rcrPtDKI{BarI npojerry Ynnrepsr,rrera y Mel6ypuy uuiu cy Pesy/Irarll IIITaMIIaHU y Bt Ay nlr"", IlocmrcomyuucmutKa demorcpamusa,uja y rI3AaIby Ynueepsutera y sa Ker"r6pnrJy. 1998. pagr Kao rrpeAaBarilI HafIHlI I{crPDKilBaq na Karegpr'r (Dunonoruror Qarynrera Ynrrepeu"]" y Bunwycy .oot.r.*y Qrnonorujy (Ilwrrlariuja) rge npe4aje ucropuiy jyrocnosencK'Ix Hapona' Torou 1999' u
2000.pa4uyApxrny3aoTBopeHo[pyIIITBoI-{errtpanrroeBPollcKoryHI,IBepHayqH'I vtcrPa3rlrrera y Bygnuneurrrl, a oA cenrerr6pa 2000. rao [PeAaBarI I'I (Drnonoruror Qaryltera u KaxrrBarr Ha Kategpu sa cIIoBeHcKy tfnronornjy

u Bon$m MebFraPq ,r@orcmql

pofen ,e I yMerr{oq
MoHHi

ct

xaPM(E

y Eeorpqil

rpaBIrrEI

My3r{qil

I 198

HacrefeU
SAIIITI4TC XI4BOT-

reAprr sa

ucroprjy reoprja w rynrypavlcropnjcror $arynrera YrulBePsI{rera

mlcr y Eeorpa4y.

lrro
[

CrvrrarraHrah

$a erHorrorwjy m mmpao je Ha Eorom{He.O[ 2005. rc|Barbe pefivrrw-

qpatry, o4ceK Teiumontrr ,,3eMyH"

y Brnmycy (uo 2006), r4e npegaje flpegMere fis o6nacrmjyxnocnoreucKe coqilolrHrBrrcrrrKe, cprrcKe Sunororuje u jesura r jyrocnonencre, 6axrancre r,r rleHrpanHoeBporcKe ,Icropnje. lyua2002.ie4oKroPl,Ipao na Oranonorurortr $aKynrery Ynr,rsepsnrerayBunrcycy ca AficepTaqujorvr: ,,llulf.tB.uctualKl/I MOAeII gesnnrcaba cprcKe naquje Byra cresanosuha Kapaquha u npojerar lrlnuie faparuanrna o crBaPalby nr{HrBrlcrrvru ogpefeHe ApxaBe Cp6a"' Ha racrolvr ifaxynrerypaArl Kao EoIIeHr og 2005.,[o caga je o6januo B,IIre oA Aecer HayqHrrx qIaHaK a;y1s o6ilacru cpnCre, jyrocIIOBeHCKe vt 6anxaltcxe $unonoruje, coq[O]rrrHfB]ICTI{Ke, eTHOIIOruje, naqraOHaIIrISMa u wCrOpnie. Y'IeCHI,Ir je nuure rnrefynapo4nux ronsepenquja uocnehenux jyrocnoneucroj ncropuju, coquo/rrrHrBr{crr{qvryLHa\ytoftanr43My, a HapoqrrTo pacrraAy 6,{sule lytocnaswie.

neMapranrorrnh tlrrpara Ha KareIpatry. Pagwna Ha rcfeHT KyCrOCa y museum) y EaseffrPe.rHrlrK uojnao-

y Acucrenr je !TEY.
&t

Vlnaiaro-YYrnra polena je 1972. rogrrHe y |arogrnu, AlIrIIoMlIPa/Ia Ha Ounonouxou Saryxrery y Eeorpa4y, cuep Cpncru jetux n KrbI'DI(eBHocr, rAe je ynvrcana il l/IatucrapcKe cryguje. Og 2003. panl,I Ha Y'rrrencrou $axyltery y IaroAuuu rao acrcreHr-rrpllflpaBul,IK 3a rpeAMer Cpncru jesux. pofena je 1974. ro[r,rHe y Epycy. Cpegby n Buruy MysuqKy rIIKony (ogcer 3a orrrrry My3rIrIKy [egarornjy) 3aBprur{na y Hnuy, a 1998' ro4rHe nI4IInoMI'Iparru Ha (Daxytrery yMerHocrr,r y flpuurruurr Ha IIpeAMery Mysnvru o6nuqlr rroA MeHropcrBoM AorI. He6ojure Togoponuha. flo 2002.IoA]IHe Pap.vila y Blrue ocHoBHrrx rrrKorra, Huxoj r cpeAmoj rvrysNvroj IIIKOTI,( y Hnuy. og 2002. togurte 3afloc/reHa na oarynrery yruerHocru y Huury Kao ac]IcreHTlpilrrpaBHllK Ha IIPenMerHMa Myanvru o6nvgu lt Anannga My3I'IrIKor Aefia. Beo|yna 2005. ronllHe Marilcrpupana na <Daryxrery My3rqKe yMerHocru y rlon MeHropcrBoM ran'npoQ' Annqe rpa[y Ha rrpegMery Mysnvxu o6nuqu Ca6o (Tuno,u penprce y coHamHoM o6nurcy Kflacuqapa - iDpanu,losefi Xajdu u Bonseanz Amadeyc Moqapm). Ceureu6pa 2005. ro4une yqecrBoBana ie ta rraefynapoguoivr cuunosujyuy,,Moparv\a" y Coro-6amn, rge je vsrl;tarla paq,
,,@arcmipu dufiepent4uja4uje crcpahetba u cailcuMatua My3u1uKoz rnona"'

FrrerH ocrw

\atuiena 3gParnh - MuxaNnoruh

LE. Cornponnh qrr ?erury rrrKofcxou Saxynrery

Soprrr$ma\wje
=1521)'1 On L992.
* mo 1997.

uoxafa

ry*yy$WwMrreUnje L9L4-1918:'
fuq$oHarrHor o[Fca crBaparra |yFcrorrHe Enporre.

[ rcbynapo[HoM Immnalduy Buw :ykr,rBep3nrera y [u xa Karegpu sa meta y Bwnrbycy r. Tioxorr L9gg. yt

nilmcKor yHlrBep&t xalrq6w wcTpa-

Mapro AxercNh pofen je 1977. roArIHe y Alercunqy. flunnouupao Ha Oaxyntery My3ilalKe yMerHocr,l y Eeorpagy, o4cer 3a orrrrry MysuqKy renarorrjy rs o6nactr xaprvronnje ca xapMoHCKoM aHa/IlI3oM, ca TeMOM,,fygrar Manep: Ilpaa curuSouuja
xapMoHcKo-aHaruTlrqra ctygvia". Pagr na Oaxynrety MySI,IrIKe yluerHocrll y Beorpagy, npu Karegpu sa reopnjcKe rrpenMere, y cnojctsy acl4creHra-flpl{rrpaBHr,rKa Ha npeAMeTuua xapuottwja ca xapMoHcKoM aHaIIrIsOM, Ananuga MygrarrKrax crrr]roBa u A*tanusa Mygr{rrKor [ena. Toror"r ABe IIrKo/IcKe ro[rlHe,

t!*)"rrera

u Ka-

199

trcy: r4Me u rpe3r{Me n), r{Me rpeBoArroqa nca, MecTo, roArrma u

Man.ruh-Mnnuh, pev,

Ype[Hr,rruTBo

[paran Bourxosnh
znanHu u odzosopuu ypedruurc I enerua E e o.raH rH - Mnj aHor uh tle4onnilna MapnHxosuh BnaguMrrp PaHrosxh EpaHraMwneHroerh Huxona Ejennh

llrlMe ayTopa, HacnoB E, rrMe [peBoAktorla mAHHa krs4aw?,6poj @

epru e KpumuKe,

rpeBenrr

Cerperap ypelHr{rurBa Maja AHfenxosr{h

S 197

5, 236-285.

mM

rpunory (Jlume-

Fmrunn peAocJreAoM,

]eneHa

Ilerrop flerxosrh

TarrK[ HaBeAeHkrM F jeazHrrue. Je4una FsHMe fra ilMe ayro-

IlnronHo-rp arfr nvra orp eMa Cno6olaH lllrernh

TexHr,rrrKrd yp enH r,rK

t,
;

H To cnarseM Ha
6.6.

HeHa4 3axap

hnourKo-yttaerHurrKkt

F
ii

I 34000 Kpa-

7ls4ana.r
Q runonorrr Ko - yMe rH w.q.iKvr Q arynre

;tr.5ru).

r, Kp a.R

eB

arl

YpeAHkrrrrrBo

3a ns4aBaqa

Hacneha

Cno6o[aH

Illreruh

IeKaH

Agpeca llnujwha 6.6, 34000 KparyjeBarl |onaHa

rerr. 0341304-277 e-mail: nasledj e@kg. ac.yu

IIIrauua
WMrpec, KparyJeBarl Tnpax<
300 rprrMepaKa Hacnefie wsnasv [Ba

ryra

rolr4rrrrbe

CIP - Karanowrzaqujay ny6nvxa4vju Hapogna 6u6nvorexa Cp6wje, Eeorpag

82

HACIIEDE : qacoruc sa KlbrxeBuocr, jesrr, yMerHocr urynrypy I rrraBHlr r o[roBopHr{ ype[Hr{K fiparan Eomrosilh. - Iog. 1,6p. 1 (2004)- Kparyj eraq (Joaana Ilnujuha 6;6) : QwnonorrrKo-)rMerxr{qKr,r Sarynrer, 2004- (Kparyjenaq : Izlrranpec). - 24 cm floxyroguuure
ISSN 1820-1768 = Hacnefe (Kparyienaq)

COBISS.SR-ID 1 15085068