When Ethnicity Did Not Matter in the Balkans: A Study of Identity in Pre-Nationalist Croatia, Dalmatia, and Slavonia in the Medieval and Early-Modern: ... and Savonia in the Early Modern Periods [Englisch] [Gebundene Ausgabe]

The negative reviews posted for this book indicate the challenge that Professor John Fine has taken on, and his courage in doing so. Nationalist mythology continues to envenom politics (and scholarship)in the Balkans, as in so much of the world. Potential readers should know the following: first, that John Fine is perhaps the world's leading authority on medieval and early modern Balkan history; second, that he knows and respects all the cultures that make up the Balkan tapestry; and third, that his work has been attacked by ethnic chauvinists and mythomanes from all three of the major ethnic communities of the former Yugoslavia, while earning the respect of open-minded Bosnian, Croatian, and Serbian colleagues. That is itself is a tribute to his independence and integrity.

A book of this scope and ambition will naturally be challenged- and should be challenged- in detail. But its essential thesis seems to me incontrovertible: "political" ethnicity, in the Balkans as elsewhere, is a modern construct, which it is both meaningless, and potentially murderous, to retroject into the distant past, in the service of contemporary political agendas. The political manipulation of ethnicity is wreaking enormous devastation throughout the contemporary world. Anyone interested in understanding this crazy process will find much to ponder in John Fine's demanding, but magisterial book.

Some of the more specific problems I have with this particular book is the constant distinction the author makes between Croats and Slavs. Are not the Croats themselvs slavic, or atleast culturally slavic? If so then why such wonderment that historical sources used the terms interchangeably? Many still refer to all Eastern Europeans as slavs and Croats today often use the english form of their name when talking to foreigners rather than the native form "Hrvati". That they did the same in the middle ages is hardly surprising.

Secondly, the author's conclusions are convoluted and stretch incredulity to the limit. The author seems more intent on countering rising Croatian nationalism rather than portraying a credible history of the region. For example, any document refering to the Croats is dismissed as either being historically useless or an attempt by a few "Croatian nobles" to maintain control over their "slav subjects". But yet again the author doesn't really tell us just who he thinks these minority Croats are. The constant mental acrobatics in the book will quickly grate on most students of history.

The biggest problem I have with this book however is that evidence of Croatian rule and settlement in the region which is not easily dismissed such as the Baska Tablet naming Zvonimir as the King of the Croatians is strangely absent. Professor Fine has once again made the same mistake he made in his book "The Bosnian Church: A new interpretation", i.e. he formed his theory first then shoehorns the evidence to fit. Moreover, his animus towards the Croatians is so palpable in both works that one wonders if his marriage to a Serbian woman has clouded his judgement as a historian. A better title to this book would be "When the Croats did not matter in the Balkans".

If you are looking for a more balanced and frankly plausible history of Croatia, I suggest you look elsewhere.

I was tempted to give this book 2 stars due to the wealth of sources used but unfortunately the author had a tendency to use only snippets of information which seem to support his thesis. However, most of his sources when read in its entirety directly contradict his conclusions, i.e. that a Croatian "nation" did not really exist until the national awakenings of the 19th century.

For example the author mentions a German traveller named Arnold von Harff who called everyone living in the vicinity of Dubrovnik "slavic" and not "croatian". What he does not mention however is that von Harff also wrote that "this city is situated in the Kingdom of Croatia". Slavs living in Croatia? Who would of thunk it?! But the author would have us believe that these people only thought of themselves as Slavs and not "Croats". A curious assertion to make given the enormous amount of evidence to the contrary.

However, the author only lists sources which he can manipulate to fit his thesis but others which are literally cut in stone he ignores such as the Baska Tablet the previous reviewer mentioned. Others so completely undermine his thesis that it is no wonder they were left out. One of the points the author repeatedly makes is that the population often identified more with the region they were living in such as "sclavonia" or "Dalmatia" ect. Is this not still true today? Can not a New Yorker also consider himself to be an American? In the case of Medieval Croatia the author argues no, but his reasoning is so twisted that anyone with common sense would be left shaking their head.

For example the author mentions Dominko Zlataric's translation of the greek Electra into "croatian" as a gift to Juraj Zrinski who the author says did not consider to be in the "croatian" language but "Dalmatian". For the author this is evidence that those slavs living in Dalmatia were not considered to be Croats. However, that Zrinksi called it "Dalmatian" and Zlataric "Croatian" only proves that although they were isolated politically, they still saw themselves as deriving from the same people. The author himself states that the dialects in the region were as varied as the numerous Italian dialects. But this is not evidence they were a diffent people.

If the author had bothered to include such foreign sources as Bernard von Breydenbach, Konrad von Grünemberg or Sir Richard Guylforde his readers would have had a clearer understanding of the political situation in Croatia at the time. All three say pretty much the same thing "...civitate que Ragusiu vocatur in Schlavonia provincia regni Croacie" or "Dubrovnik is in Sclavonia or Dalmatia, which is a province in Kingdom of Croatia."

In other words, the three terms are synonyms. It is such as simple and obvious explaination which even the lay reader would have picked up on had it been included. But then the author would not have had much of a book. Instead he jumps through so many unecessary hoops and twists of logic in order to prove his thesis.

As it is I would have to agree with the previous reviewer. The author blatantly admits to being a yugo nostalgic and it appears is not above twisting history to suit his agenda. Had he used this tactic for some ethnic minority it probably would have been decried as hate speech.