Bosna i Hercegovina
1
What ethnicity were the people of Medieval Bosnia?
What ethnicity and religion do you think the people Medieval Bosnia were?
I've wondered about this topic for a while and changed my opinion on the topic multiple times so I don't have any ideological bias here. There's been a lot of discussion regarding this issue on various off-topic threads here so felt it deserved its own thread here.
The Serbian side claims that the Medieval Bosnians were mainly Serbs, the Croatian side claims they were mainly Croats, and the Bosniak side claims they were mainly ethnic Bosniaks.
The Medieval Bosnians being neither Serbs nor Croats, but instead a third ethnicity in the Western Balkans known as "Bosniak" doesn't make sense for a number of reasons. In the list of historical Slavic tribes, there is zero mention of a Slavic tribe known as "Bosniak". The term "Bosniak" is named after the Bosna River according to scholarly consensus. This means that if such a tribe did exist, it would have originated in the Balkans after a mixture of different Slavic tribes and not have been one of the tribes coming in from upper Central Europe. In the past, there were numerous Slavic tribes in the Western Balkans such as the Guduscans, Narentines, and a few others; but not mention of any tribe in history by the name "Bosniak". Anyways, all these South Slavic tribes merged into either "Croats" or "Serbs" sometime during the Middle Ages with no reference made to other tribes living in that region. So if all these other tribes (Guduscans, Narentines, etc.) became extinct, then where do the Bosniaks come from? There is no mention of them in history as a people until they got their own state, so its safe to assume that it was a political/regional identity.
My personal thoughts after researching the topic in a lot of detail are that the medieval Bosnians were Catholic Croats. Below, I may include a lot of extra info as I don't know exactly what parts are disputed and I want to include all the relevant info in the OP so there is less to argue about in the comments. I'll admit the info I got regarding Serbia were from a biased Croatian site (hercegbosna) because most of the sources regarding that part of Bosnian history were blocked by Google Books so I couldn't read about it there and that was the only source present. The other info regarding the Bosnian Church and whatnot were from multiple different books online. Much of the info regarding the Bosnian Church may not be relevant, but its mostly included to discuss the Catholic roots of the church. There also isn't much info on the Bosnian Church on this forum so some people may find it interesting.
Ethnic Bosniak Bosnia
If a Bosniak people did exist historically as separate from both Serbs and Croats, then that would mean at some point, the Bosniaks lost consciousness of their ethnic identity and then had it brought back to them by the Austro-Hungarians. The person who spearheaded the idea of separating Muslim South Slavs from Christian South Slavs was Austro-Hungarian statesman Béni Kállay. While he was doing this, some Muslims raised objections stating that doing such a thing would imply that Islam is incompatible with nationhood and that they had given up their nation for their faith.
The Ottomans don't refer to Bosniaks as a separate ethnicity after ruling them for centuries, in fact the Turkish historian Mustafa Ali of Gallipoli refers to the people of Bosnia as Catholic Croats. Why would he do that if the people there were ethnic Bosniak? One could argue that he was completely unfamiliar with Bosnians and just used the term "Croat" as a term for Catholics in general. However, he was a historian that lived in Bosnia for seven years, so one would expect him to pay attention to such detail. Also, his father Ahmed bin Abdullah was said to have Bosnian origins (his name Abdullah was also a named associated with Muslims of recent Christian origin).
The poem Molitva suprotiva Turkom mentions Bosnians separately from Croats and Serbs. However, Bosnia was a separate entity from Croatia and Serbia so it was mentioned as more of a separate nationality than a separate ethnicity. If you search, you can even find Croats distinguished from Slavonians as well as Serbs distinguished from Rascians even though we know that Slavonians are Croats and Rascians are Serbs. When historic documents mention the term "Bosnian", they mention it as a regional identity similar to how they also mention "Humljani" to refer to someone from Hum (Hercegovina). The surname Bošnjak is also used mostly by Croats today because their Croatian ancestors used to self-identify as Bosnian (since it was just a regional identity).
Early Christianity in Bosnia
Christianity in Bosnia first arrived via the Romans. Once Roman rule ended and Christianity more or less dissipated, a second wave of Christianity arrived in Bosnia via the Croats of Dalmatia. Bosnia's church architecture, liturgical language, script, and church jurisdiction are evidence of Christianity coming from the Croats.
The Bosnian diocese was under jurisdiction together with regions part of modern day Croatia. The Bosnian diocese was first under the domain of the Metropolitan of Split, then of Bar (1089), then of Split again (1137), and then a few decades later under the archdiocese of Dubrovnik (before 1185).
Besides the Bosnian diocese, eight other church districts existed in Medieval Bosnia. Northwestern Bosnia (west of the Vrbas River) was under the jurisdiction of the Archdiocese of Zagreb. The Diocese of Knin and Krbava and the Archdiocese of Split had jurisdiction over parts of southwestern Bosnia. The Diocese of Duvno, Makarska, Ston, and Trebinje controlled the central and southern parts of the country.
Bosnians wrote in the Glagolitic script similar to Catholic Croatia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hval%27s_Codex
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hrvoje%27s_Missal
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humac_tablet
https://hr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mihano...lomak_Apostola
https://hr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gr%C5%...lomak_apostola
The remnants of the diocesan priests were known as glagoljaši who got their name from their usage of the Glagolitic script and Old Slavonic (as a liturgical language) in Bosnia. Once the Franciscans came to Bosnia, the glagoljaši continued to serve the faithful. Since the glagoljaši were less educated than the Franciscans, they served as their assistants.
The Franciscans were given permission by Mehmet II to stay among other Catholics in Bosnia, but Catholics in Bosnia generally weren't treated well (compared to the Orthodox and especially Muslim populations) since the Ottoman Empire was more often at war with Catholic states such as the Habsburgs. Persecutions of them lead to some conversions to Islam with others emigrating. One major exodus of Catholics from Bosnia to northern Croatia took place during the Habsburg-Ottoman Wars from 1683-1699.
Church of Bosnia and Bosnian Catholicism
Prior to the rise of the Church of Bosnia in the 13th century, Bosnia was a fully Catholic country no different from Croatia or Hungary. Because of its remoteness though, it wasn't in as much contact with the Ragusan hierarchy. Hungary wanted greater control over Bosnia so campaigned at Rome to have its jurisdiction at the more pro-Hungarian Archbishop of Split. The ruler of Zeta then sent letters to the pope accusing Bosnia and Ragusa (Dubrovnik) of heresy by virtue of warmly accepting heretic refugees from Dalmatia. Kulin told the pope that he thought these refugees were good Christians and sent some to Rome for them to confirm. Hungary tried to use the heretic accusations towards Bosnia as justifications for an invasion, but Ban Kulin defused the crisis by holding a council of the Bosnian Catholic Church (called the council of Bolino Polje) in 1203 where a series of errors were officially renounced. These were said to be more related to lax religious practices rather than actual heresies. Ban Kulin denied these heresies strongly and always maintained that he was a faithful Catholic. He maintained ties with the Archbishop of Dubrovnik, sent gifts to the pope, and built Catholic churches. His clear loyalty to the pope led to no jurisdictional change here (which was requested by the Hungarians). At this council, the errors that were renounced were likely just based on ignorance
The Church of Bosnia had also managed to preserve the continuity of the Bosnian Roman Catholic bishopric, whose seat was officially moved to Slavonia by the Hungarians in the 1252. This was done after Hungary persuaded the pope in 1252 to place the bishopric of Bosnia under the authority of the bishopric inside Hungary. After this failed, the seat was moved to Slavonia thus resulting in no control over the Catholic Church in Bosnia. Hungary thus tried to invade Bosnia again a year later in 1253. Hungary ended up never conquering Bosnia, although the Banate of Bosnia did play a subservient role to Hungary, even helping Hungary to quell Croatian rebels at times (under Stefan Kotromanić II).
The Church of Bosnia was most likely a schismatic or autonomous church of Roman Catholicism. Most followers of this sect called themselves krstjani ("Christians"), dobri mužje ("good men"), dobri ljudi ("good people"), dobri Bošnjani ("good Bosnians"), or just Bošnjani ("Bosnians"). The term krstjanin was said to have been used for only the clergy and monks of the Bosnian Church whereas the nobles of the Bosnian Church were called dobri Bošnjani. They viewed themselves as Christians "of the apostolic faith" (koi svu svete vere apostolske), which is how they are described in Gost Radin's renowned will. Catholic sources referred to them as patareni or patarini in Latin and kudugeri or kutugeri in Greek. The Serbs called them babuni (after the Babuna Mountain), which was the Serbian word for Bogomils. The reason the Bosnian Christians were called Bogomils was because of the dualistic and heretical nature of both sects, so this is probably why the Serbs referred to them both by one name. There may have also been some influence from Patarins or Bogomils fleeing persecution from the Adriatic Coast and central/eastern Balkans. Bosnian Christians also called themselves boni homines following the example of a dualistic group in Italy. The Ottomans referred to the Bosnian Christians as kristianlar (singular: kristian) while the Orthodoxes and Catholics were referred to as kafir or gebr meaning "unbeliever".
Regarding the contents of the Church of Bosnia, its most closely linked to Roman Catholicism. According to the New Testament codex known as Zbornik krstjanina Hvala from 1404, the Bosnian Christians retained Catholic theology. The Bosnian Church had a similar hierarchy to the Roman Catholic one. At the top of the church hierarchy was a bishop (djed. Below him were the gost, starac, and strojnik in that order. The structure of the Bosnian Church was pretty fragile (and that's being polite) with spiritual life taking place solely within the walls of abbeys or monastic houses (hiža). It also wasn't known as a large feudal landowner. It actually had no parishes and its monks had no influence over the general population so it probably wasn't very common outside the Bosnian elite. Because of its lack of parishes to serve the religious needs of the population, its sometimes said it can't be referred to as a true church. The Bosnian Church didn't have official ties to Catholicism for seventy years during the struggle against the Hungarian crusaders thus isolating it and leading to its separation from mainstream Catholicism. The Bosnians would have also been more ready to adopt Bosnian Christianity in response to Catholic Hungarian aggression, although the amount of time this sect existed was relatively short.
During the 13th century, the main power in that region was Hungary and they were the main aggressors towards Bosnia. Serbia also started growing during this time period, but they never made any large scale serious attempt to conquer Bosnia. The Hungarians themselves had difficulty in conquering Bosnia because of its difficult terrain. Bosnia's remoteness is the reason why it stayed independent for a while and got distanced from Catholicism. It stayed separate from mainstream Roman Catholicism from the 13th century up until the 1340's, which is when the Franciscans came to reassert the authority of the Vatican in Bosnia (although there were a small number of Dominicans there before them). They quickly formed an administrative unit called the 'Vicariate of Bosnia' which expanded to include a much larger region of Europe extending all the way to Romania eventually. These Franciscan missions ended up being successful for the most part since Bosnia's leaders from Stjepan Kotromanić II onward being Catholics. The Church of Bosnia was finally extirpated by Bosnia's King Stjepan Tomašević as demanded by the pope in return for his request for aid against the Turks. The Bosnian Christian leader then sought refuge in Hercegovina where around 40% of his followers followed him there, with the remainder converting to Catholicism, Orthodoxy, or Islam.
Serbian Bosnia
Here are the arguments in favor of medieval Bosnia being Serb land.
Over here, it is not considered part of Serbia proper. Also, this was the only time that Bosnia was under Serbian control. Bosnia started out as a small region in central Bosnia around modern day Visoko and Sarajevo, and this would have been the Bosnia that was under Chaslav's domain. It then later expanded into Croat and Serb lands (mostly Croat lands). Its sometimes called Vrhbosna. Bosnia was more eager to annex Croat lands than it was to annex Serb lands. For example, it took Završje and Donji Kraji from the Kingdom of Croatia, both very large regions. Through further contact with Croatia, it developed closer geopolitical and economic ties with Croatia. This can be seen in the friendship contract between Ban Kulin and Dubrovnik in 1189. Not to mention the religious and cultural influences from Croatia that was discussed above. There is also no evidence of Orthodoxy in Bosnia prior to the arrival of the Ottomans while there is a lot of evidence of Bosnia being Catholic prior to the Ottomans. Exclusively Croatian names such as "Hrvatinić" and "Tvrtko" were also used by the Bosnian nobility.Bosnia is first mentioned as a region as part of Duke Chaslav's Serbia in the mid-10th century by Constantine Porfirogenet in the DAI.
The Serb vs. Vlach distinction is not originally from Bosnia, but rather from Serbia. The first instance of these names being used is in the document of the Grand Principality of Serbia (known as "Rascia" back then by Westerners) from Stefan to Dubrovnik around he year 1215. So basically the distinction between "Srblin" and "Vlah" came to Bosnia from Serbia under the complicity of the Dubrovnik public office. The document can be recognized to have been written by Paskal. He had written two of Matej Ninoslav's documents in 1240 and 1249. Matej Ninoslav's first document was written before 1235 by notary Desoje. Also, a document sent by Ban Kulin in 1189 (which is older than Ninoslav's document) doesn't recognize the name "Srblin" or even "Vlah". The reason for why the Dubrovnik notaries identified Bosnia with Serbs may have been Serbia's leading position in the Slavic continental hinterland. This was around the time that Serbia had conquered Hum, Travunja, and Duklja while Bosnia was a small state.Multiple letters from Ban Kulin clearly reference his subjects as Serbs when distinguishing them from Vlachs. Their language is also referenced to be Serbian by Stefan Kotromanić in another letter.
According to M. Kuljbakin, "the ortography of Miroslav's Gospel differs significantly from Serbian Church monuments, such as Vukan's Gospel (Vukanovo evandelje), and approaches those old Croatian Cyrillic charters of Ban Kulin, Matej Ninoslav, and others.
During the time that the papal decrees were written where Bosnia was referenced as part of Serbia, Bosnia was in fact an independent entity and not part of Serbia. These were written during the reigns of Ban Kulin and Ban Matej Ninoslav. The reason for this confusion is likely because of not only the Dubrovnik public office using the "Srbin" and "Vlah" distinction, but also because of Bosnia's previous position where it was adjacent to Serbia and influenced by Serbia before it eventually started its own kingdom. Since Serbia was a powerful state in that area and Bosnia was still developing as one, Bosnia being mentioned as a Serbian state is indicative of Serbia's influence in that region. It should be noted once again that besides these three documents made in Dubrovnik, the inhabitants of Bosnia are never implied to be Serbs.The Pope sent a letter in 1188 to the bishop of Dubrovnik where he acknowledges all old rights of the Dubrovnik church. In the letter, he mentions Serbian Bosnia: "regnum Servilie, quod est Bosna" (Serbian kingdom of Bosnia). That was in the time of Ban Kulin.
The original Latin text says this:The Royal Frankish Annals describe the rebellion of Croatian war-lord Ljudevit Posavski and mention that an army was sent against him in 822. "Ljudevit leaves Sisak and flees to the Serbs, people inhabiting a large part of Dalmatia."
"Siscia civitate relicta, ad Sorabos, quae natio magnam Dalmatiae partem obtinere dicitur, fugiendo se contulit."
The part that says "ad Sorabos" is often translated to mean "the Serbs". However, there is no consensus this is an accurate translation. It's more likely that it means "to Srb".
The region that Ljudevit is described to have fled to is equated to the modern day town in Croatia called Srb. There isn't any evidence of Serbs living there in that era, so the name is likely not related to Serbs but sounds similar by coincidence. The name Srb is said to have come from the old Croatian verb "serbati" and denoting the spring of the Una River. There is a Srbinjak in Istria as well as a Srbani in Istria, yet Serbs haven't been known to ever lived in those regions. The 13th century Istrian manuscript (Istarski Razvod) says the name means "water spring".
He only did that so he could claim continuity with the Nemanjić Dynasty. Even though he actually did have partial Serb ancestry (through his Serbian grandmother Jelisaveta), he only emphasized on it so he could claim heir to the throne, not because he saw himself as a Serb.Tvrtko sees himself as a Serb when he says "by the Grace of God King of the Serbs, Bosnia, Pomorje and the Western Areas"
So my final thoughts are that medieval Bosnia was inhabited pretty much exclusively by Catholic Croats. There are a small amount of documents that lead to the confusion it may have been inhabited by Serbs, but they're very limited, and if they were true then they contradict a lot of what we know. Bosniaks being a separate ethnicity back then doesn't make sense because the Ottomans and Austrians would have described them as separate and their name wouldn't come from a region in the Balkans if that was the case. And the Austro-Hungarians wouldn't have devised a plan to separate Muslims from Serbs/Croats into a new ethnicity along religious lines if they were a separate ethnicity to begin with. Having a separate state is different from having a separate ethnicity. There is zero doubt that Bosnia was a fully Catholic land for most of the medieval period (the Bosnian Church itself being a stray Catholic branch) and that Bosnia was culturally much closer to Croatia than to any other country.
One more thing. Saying that Medieval Bosnia was Croatian doesn't mean that modern day Bosnians are Croats in denial or that most Bosniaks today are descended from Islamized Croats. Ethnic identity is much more complicated than that. I'm solely talking about the medieval period over here. A lot of stuff have happened since the Ottomans conquered Bosnia such as migrations and this post isn't about the ethnicity of modern day Bosniaks.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by Pribislav
Bookmarks