Part I - "Heroes"
This is one of most common serbian national myths yet, the truth is a
lot different. After entyre Serbia came under turkish rule in late 15th
century, next two centuries 16th and 17th there is simply no reliable
hystoricall evidences of any serbian resistance against turkish rule
whatsoever. This shortage of hystoricall evidences Serbes tryed to
compensate in their traditional oral folk literature and legends which
have later serbian historiography adopted as hystorical facts which
really has no basis in serious scientific methodology but was (and still
is) very usefull for political purposes.
So they started to invent "heroes" and events and adjust the truth to
fit their politicall needs and romantic imagery of heroic and allways
rebellious and unbowed serbian national spirit.
One of best examples are folk songs about
kraljević (
prince)
Marko,
kind of medieval Superman. Invincible fighter for peoples freedom and
against ottoman terror which singlehanded killed hundreds upon hundreds
turkish soldiers allways fighting for liberty and christianity. But in
fact nothing of this was true. Kraljević Marko was in fact serbian
nobleman
Marko Mrnjavčević son of one of pretenders for serbian
throne, after defeat in the battle at Kosovo, "king" Vukašin Mrnjavčević
and nephew of serbian despot Jovan Uglješa. I have to notice here that
neither his father Vukašin was really a king neither Marko was a prince
because after battle at river Maritza Serbs havent had a real kings but
only ambitious pretenders for throne which have often fought between
themselves. Not even "tzar" Lazar who was leading serbian army at battle
of Kosovo was no king and especially not "tzar" but just one of this
pretenders nobleman Lazar Hrebeljanović. So lets go back to Marko.
Besides chronological mistakes which put him in very unspecified time
period (i
n fact he lived in second half of 14th century) it is
complete hystoricall forgery calling him christian hero and fighter
against Turks because he become, after the serbian defeat at battle on
Maritza river in 1371. turkish vassal and stayed that as long as he
lived. He died in 1395. in the battle fighting alongside with Turks
against wallachian christian duke Mircea.
But Marko Mrnjavčević was at least real hystorical figure. Other serbian "hero" placed in todays
Vojvodina after the horrible defeat of christian hungarian-croatian army at the
battle of Mohacs in august 1526.
"tzar" (
another of serbian false "tzars")
Jovan Nenad is even more interesting case. Jovan Nenad aka "crni čovek" (
black man) was according to (
quite unbeknown) serbian folk stories and some modern serbian "alternative historians" (
mildly said)
leader of about 600 serbian mercenaries which came to todays northern
parts of Vojvodina after the battle at Mohacs. Using total anarchy after
the defeat he, allegedly, overtook power over entyre Bačka and Banat,
two parts of todays Vojvodina (
together with Srijem) and raised
an army of 15.000 men. According on serbian undefined "sources" he
become so powerfull that both pretenders for hungarian throne
Ivan (John) Zapolya and
Ferdinand of Habsburg
fought for his sympathies and both have desperately tried to attach him
to their side. He also, as serbian story goes on managed to drive Turks
out from Vojvodina and forced them to retreat southern of Danube river
into todays Serbia. Same Turks which have few months ago, with army of
50.000 troops, defeated entyre hungarian-croatian army and occupied
large parts of Hungary and Croatia.
After that this incredible charcter proclaimed himself a "tzar" and placed his throne in
Subotica (
Szabatka) second largest and most northern city in todays Vojvodina. All this wonders he managed to acchieve in
less then a year because he was, according to legend
killed in july 1527. Remarkable. But the best is yet to come. There is absolutely
not a single one written document neither in hungarian, neither austrian, serbian, croatian or turkish archives
which even mentiones this so called "tzar".
It is really most interesting that such a mighty warlord for whose
friendship and alliance fought pretenders for hungarian-croatian throne,
even powerful Ferdinand of Habsburg, who defeated Ottomans at the peak
of their power, who raised quite an numerous serb army in areas where
Serbs haven't even lived at that time, and who proclaimed himself a
"tzar" wasn't mentioned even with one word in chronicles of his nation,
his supposed enemies, and his "allies". From that it is quite easy to
get to the conclusion that this character was either completely invented
by 19th and 20th century serbian regime "historians" to prove
hystorical lie of serbian presence in Vojvodina in 16th century , either
is distored version of who knows which epic song from serbian oral
literature. But this doesnt't bother Serbs to call this Mickey
Mouse-like character "last serbian tzar", raise him monuments (
in Subotica)
Since turning turkish vassals into freedom fighters or even inventing
nonexisting "heroes" wasn't enough serbian "jester-historians", same as
some serbians "teach" us that serbian history say that
Janos Hunyadi, most famous hungarian 15th century fighter aginst Turks,
was Serb called Sibinjanin Janko.
Janos Hunyadi "Hammer of Turks"
was in fact an hungarian noblemen from Transylvania, but of wallachian
origins, which become famous all over Balkans and every nation gave him
name in the spirit of their language. So Romanians call him Ian de
Huneadora and Croats and Serbs gave him name Sibinjanin Janko coming
from his home transylvanian town Sibiu (
Sibinj). His only connection with Serbia was the fact that he was leading christian army which broke turkish siege of Belgrade (
which wasn't even part of Serbia at that time or before that).
Obvious ignorance of many, even hungarian authors resulted with
allegations that Hunyadi's family was of serbian origins because
they were in fact Wallachian (Vlasi) orthodox. His father's, who alledgly converted from orthodoxy to catholicism, name was
Vajk which isn't slavic or serbian name at all. But knowing that Serbs have later completely serbised Wallachians (
Vlasi) in Serbia and Bosnia (
many of today's bosnian Serbs have wallachian - "vlaški" origins), and knowing also serbian praxis to proclaim allmost all Balkans orthodox belivers (
except Greeks) a Serbs (
examples, beside Wallachians also Macedonians, Montenegrins, Aromanians or Cincars and even gypsies when that suites them).
Other example is
albanian christian catholic (
yes, before
turkish occupation in late 15th century Albanians were christians,
mostly roman catholic with significant number of orthodox belivers)
warlord and national hero Gjergj Kastrioti Skenderbeg.
This legendary fighter against Turks had his fortress in Kruje, Durres
region in northern Albania. In his case Serbs are not completely
claiming him for themselves but are willing to share him with Greeks.
They both claim that Skenderbeg in not an albanian but half Greek
(father) half Serbian (on mothers side). Skenderbeg mother is mentioned
by the slavic name Voisava,. Of course if name is slavic then it
certainly has to be Serbian. Like Serbs are only Slavs on Balkans. Yet
this informations about his parents can be found only in serbian and
greek sources and ones who quotes them. And there is no explanation how
come that
son of orthodox (
greek)
father and
orthodox (
serbian)
mother turned out to be
roman catholic.
This few examples of twisting history or simply inventing it same as
stealing other nations heroes and history is just a top of an iceberg of
lies and delusions which their propaganda is spreading all over the
world
Part II – Expansion of Serbian orthodox church under the Ottoman rule
One of the most important consequence of Ottoman rule on Balkans is
drasticall change of national and religious structure of Balkans
countries, especially Bosnia, Vojvodina and Croatia.
Bosnia was before turkish conquest predominantly catholic land with
significant number of heretical patarens – followers of heretical
"bosnian church" and very small number of orthodox Serbs concentrated
mostly in eastern and southeastern parts of todays B&H. Bosnian
catholics, same as heretic patarens of "bogumils" were predominantly
Croats by their origins with some elements of unknown slavic tribes
(Slavs that came to Balkans in 6th century, before Croats and Serbs
did). It is possible that there were some traces of Illirian,
Roman,Goth and Avar population, same as Magyars but in very small and
insignificant numbers. It is without any doubts that vast majority of
pre-turk Bosnian population were catholic of croatian ethnic origins
with minorities like Serbs and also orthodox non-slavic nomadic
Wallachians (Vlasi).
Todays Vojvodina was part of Hungarian kingdom and populated allmost
completely with roman-catholic Hungarians, except eastern parts of
todays Banat which was ethnically mixed and populated with larger number
of orthodox Wallachians (today Romanians).
Todays Croatia, which was split between hungarian-croatian kingdom and
Venetia (coastal cities, islands and part of croatian mainland along
the adriatic shore). Part that belonged to croatian-hungarian kingdom
was populated allmost entirely by ethnic Croats, except northeastern
part which had mixed croat-hungarian population. Coastal part possesed
by Venetians had predominatly Venetian-roman urban population (yet with
significant number of Croats either) and rural croatian population in
the hinterland.
For all of them is typical that population was partialy ethnic mixture
but religiously it was very homogenous, namely vast majority were
roman-catholics.
Even in first 50 or 60 years after turkish conquest of Bosnian
kingdom, Bosnia stayed mostly catholic country witho between 55-60% of
roman catholic population.
But that is going to change. Key years were 1526. and especially 1527.
Status of catholics in Ottoman empire become worse even in last years
of reign of sultan Selim I (died in 1520.), yet when his successor
sultan Suleiman I the Magnificent and his military campaigns against
Hungarian-croatian kingdom it became unbearable.
Turks have 1526. heavily defeated hungarian-croatian army at the
battle of Mohacs and opened the way to conquer large parts of todays
Hungary, Romania and Croatia same as northern and northwestern parts of
Bosnia which still were not in thier hands. In next 15 years there were
numerous battles between Turks and christians while Turks were
advancing towards west and northwest.
Same year Ferdinand of Habsburg joined hungarian-croatian kingdom with
his own forming large and powertfull catholic Habsburg Empire which
becames greatest enemy of the Ottomans.
In this situation catholic population in Ottoman empire was
considered as extremly unrealiable and potentialy dangerous element
which has to be neutralised or even eliminated by any mean. And terror
had began. Catholic population was persecuted and terrorised in many
ways. Many catholics were killed, entyre villages, towns, churches and
monasteries were burned and destroyed. Ottomans have imposed
discriminatiory laws agains catholics. They payed much larger taxes and
muslims and orthodox, had much harder labor obligations, in many parts
catholic worship and masses vere forbidden, and many priests and monks
were killed. Catholics were forced to either convert to islam either
leave their homes or even loose their lives. And many did that. Many
left occupied parts of Bosnia and Croatia and went to Habsburg empire.
Others have been islamised or simply killed. In this decade or two
number of catholics drastically felt and number of muslims significantly
grew. Number of total population in this area felt and many parts
became unpopulated and empty.
On the other hand, there were no significant orthodox state left which
Turks considered as a danger. Byzantyne empire was completely in
turkish hands, same as Serbia, Bulgaria, Wallachia and Transylvania.
Russians had just began to form their empire and their influence on
european and balkans historycal scene was allmost unexisting.
Under this circumstances it is clear that Ottomans have favourised
orthodox christians over catholics and stimulated colonisation of former
catholic lands by orthodox belivers. They even stimulated conversion of
catholics into orthodox where they refused to adopt islam regarding
that as easyer way to neutralise catholic element and ensure their
loyality. Into emptied former catholic parts of the cities and towns
Ottomans have settled islamised former christians, anatolian Turks and
Albanians and into rural areas orthodox Wallahians (Vlasi). Many parts
of Bosnia, Herzegovina, Dalmatia and Slavonia were devasated and empty
after catholics left or were killed and on this areas Ottoman goverment
settled Wallachians and in smaller number Serbs. This mercenaries, and
not real Turks or islamised slavs have guarded turkish western borders
against christians. Same parts in western Bosnia and dalmatian
hinterland which was occupied during the war 1991.-95 by Serbs and which
formed so called "srpska krajina" and western part of "republika
srpska". This large parts of land are still poorly populated rural areas
without any larger cities except Banjaluka. Many of inhabitants are
still engaged in sheep breeding and sight of sheppherds driving their
herds of sheeps around wilderness is still quite regular in this areas.
Part II – Expansion of Serbian orthodox church under the Ottoman rule
One particular event gave additional wind in sails of Serbian orthodox
church. After the turkish conquest of Serbia serbian national Peć
patriarchy (established by sv.Sava – serbian national saint and brother
of first serbian king Stefan Nemanja) was abolished and merged with
older Ohrid archiepiscopy in 1459. That way Serbs lost their national
church for next allmost 100 years. But during the reign of sultan
Suleiman one man, islamized Serb from todays eastern Herzegovina
Mehmet-pasha Sokolović became at first rumelian begler-bey (turkish
military commander for european part of Empire) and later Grand Vissier
of Ottoman empire.
In 1557. he used his enormous influence on turkish court, procured
restoration of Peć patriarchy and helped his cousin Makarije Sokolović –
Hilandar monistery monk to become patriarch. Peć patriarchy soon
started to extent its influence on all orthodox belivers in Serbia, part
of Macedonia, Bosnia, Croatia, Vojvodina and Hungary. With such a
powerfull background on turkish court Peć patriarchy gained
jurisdiction over all orthodox belivers in this lands.
Wallachian nomadic shepherds which were present in Bosnia even during
early bosnian state became more and more numerous coming along with
turkish troops as mercenaries or following them as marauders. They
settled in abadnoned catholic areas on western borders of turkish
empire. They have ofen attempted marauding campaigns on the other side
of austrian-turkish borders. To stop this forays austrian military
commanders even engaged many of them and settled them on austrian (in
fact croatian) territories since this territories were also abandoned
during the war actions. Very soon this Wallachians from both sides of
the border, together with newcoming Serbs felt under jurisdiction of Peć
patriarchy. Since Ottomans have given orthodox priests many abandoned
and ruined catholic churches and monisteries to use them they have
managed to establish their church infrastrucutre. Using their
privileged position over catholics they have soon began with numerous
pressures on catholics. Turkish laws favorized them so they even managed
to convert some catholics into orthodoxy. Ottoman laws even let them to
collect church rates not just from orthodox belivers but from catholics
too. And with mixing of Wallachians (Vlasi) and Serbs which also came
folloving turkish troops, and actvities of serbian priests process of
serbisation of Wallachins has began and finished in 19th century when
all of them adopted serbian national determination as their own. But
even today in many parts of Croatia and Bosnia this "Serbs" are called
Vlasi which points on their origins.
This conditions lasted for next 160 years and culminated with turkish
defeat under the walls of Vienna 1683. and austro-turkish war
1683.-1699. when Hungary and Croatia were liberated from the Turks.
Esspecialy after the military campaign of austrian commander Eugen of
Savoy 1687. when he reached and burned Sarajevo but had to retreat
persecution of catholics reached its peak. Folloving Eugen of Savoy and
his army over 100.000 Croat catholics left Bosnia and settled mainly in
Slavonia. Number of catholics in Turkish occupied lands came to its
lowest point and they were allmost extinct. On their homes Turks have
again settled muslims and orthodox population.
During this same war, austrian troops attacked Turks in Serbia and
reached Prizren in todays Kosovo but were forced to retreat. Together
with austrian army there were about 70.000 Serbs from Kosovo and Rashka
running from Turks to the north. This Serbs under the leadership of
serbian patriarch Arsenije III Čarnojević settled to Vojvodina and parts
of Hungary (they came allways to city Szentendre northern from
Budapest). That has drastically changed ethnic strucuture of Bačka and
Srijem and most of todays Vojvodina Serbs are descendents of this
settlers.
From all this it is quite obvious that Serbian orthodox church was not
taken any active part in fighting Turks between 15th and late 18th
century but, quite oposite. Because of its policy of collaboration with
Oottomans Serbian orthodox church managed to enable serbian expansion
towards west and north. This expansion, together with serbisation of all
non-serbian orthodox belivers under their jurisdiction was a base of
later concept and project of «greater Serbia» which lead to many bloody
wars on Balkans lasting with wars in the 1990-es.
Today we have a situation that Serbs, althought they have lost Kosovo,
and could possible lose Sanjak, were only real historicall winners
during that period of turkish conquests and wars because they have
widely expanded their ethnical and administrational borders on the areas
much more valuable than backward hellholes like Kosovo and Sanjak.
Areas which, before the Ottomans arrive, belonged to other nations and
religions and in whose extintion and elimination from this areas Serbs
and their church had very active role. Following the steps of Ottoman
conquests or fleeding before them they have gained rich and fertile
Vojvodina and half of Bosnia . And if Croatian army haven't managed to
crush their so called «serbian krajina» they would have large parts of
Croatia too. This areas were also properly ethnically cleansed from
non-serb population during last few decades which ensured absolute
serbian majority. All of that on blood of Croats, Slovenes, Hungarians,
Romanians, Germans and other nationalities which were present in this
before Turks showed up.
This collaboration with ottomans can be seen on this maps where is
obvious that the western borders of turkish conquests, western borders
of serbian ethnic presence and borders of so called «greater Serbia show
remarkable similarity. They match allmost completely.
Ottoman conquests on Balkans
Ethnic map of former Yugoslavia - Serbs - blue
So called "greater Serbia" plans
Conclusion is that serbian chauvinists in their "imperialistic" plans of
grabbing other nations territories rely on turkish imperial heritage
and anti-catholic and anti-european role of Serbian orthodox church
which was allways rewarded by Ottomans for their policy of collaborating
with them or at least not obstructing turkish interests.
