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 Periods | 
| Author: John V. A. Fine
Publisher: University of Michigan Press
Category: Book
Buy New: $85.00
New (9) Used (5) from $40.37
Avg. Customer Rating:  5 reviews
Sales Rank: 1721323
Media: Hardcover
Number Of Items: 1
Pages: 672
Shipping Weight (lbs): 2.3
Dimensions (in): 9.3 x 6.3 x 2
ISBN: 047211414X
Dewey Decimal Number: 305.80094972
EAN: 9780472114146
ASIN: 047211414X
Publication Date: March 2, 2006
Availability: Usually ships in 24 hours
|
| Editorial Reviews:
Product Description
"This is history as it should be written. In When Ethnicity Did Not Matter in the Balkans, a logical advancement on his earlier studies, Fine has successfully tackled a fascinating historical question, one having broad political implications for our own times. Fine's approach is to demonstrate how ideas of identity and self-identity were invented and evolved in medieval and early-modern times. At the same time, this book can be read as a critique of twentieth-century historiography-and this makes Fine's contribution even more valuable. This book is an original, much-needed contribution to the field of Balkan studies."
-Steve Rapp, Associate Professor of Caucasian, Byzantine, and Eurasian History, and Director, Program in World History and Cultures Department of History, Georgia State University Atlanta
When Ethnicity Did Not Matter in the Balkans is a study of the people who lived in what is now Croatia during the Middle Ages (roughly 600-1500) and the early-modern period (1500-1800), and how they identified themselves and were identified by others. John V. A. Fine, Jr., advances the discussion of identity by asking such questions as: Did most, some, or any of the population of that territory see itself as Croatian? If some did not, to what other communities did they consider themselves to belong? Were the labels attached to a given person or population fixed or could they change? And were some people members of several different communities at a given moment? And if there were competing identities, which identities held sway in which particular regions?
In When Ethnicity Did Not Matter in the Balkans, Fine investigates the identity labels (and their meaning) employed by and about the medieval and early-modern population of the lands that make up present-day Croatia. Religion, local residence, and narrow family or broader clan all played important parts in past and present identities. Fine, however, concentrates chiefly on broader secular names that reflect attachment to a city, region, tribe or clan, a labeled people, or state.
The result is a magisterial analysis showing us the complexity of pre-national identity in Croatia, Dalmatia, and Slavonia. There can be no question that the medieval and early-modern periods were pre-national times, but Fine has taken a further step by demonstrating that the medieval and early-modern eras in this region were also pre-ethnic so far as local identities are concerned. The back-projection of twentieth-century forms of identity into the pre-modern past by patriotic and nationalist historians has been brought to light. Though this back-projection is not always misleading, it can be; Fine is fully cognizant of the danger and has risen to the occasion to combat it while frequently remarking in the text that his findings for the Balkans have parallels elsewhere.
John V. A. Fine, Jr. is Professor of History at the University of Michigan.
|
| Customer Reviews:
 De-Mining the Field of Dreams December 21, 2006
4 out of 4 found this review helpful
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.
 Misleading Propaganda June 14, 2006
4 out of 8 found this review helpful
Having studied Eastern European history for a number of years now it pains me to have witnessed the slow decline of professor Fine's writings. He managaed to keep his biases under control somewhat earlier in his carreer but since the break up of Yugoslavia the level of vindictiveness in his writings have increased exponentially. This breathtaking piece of propaganda is a throwback to communist era chauvinism which will ring all too familiar to those who lived through those dark times.
Fine has shown a level of manipulativeness that I have not witnessed among modern historians in a long time. The book is full of wonderfull references to be sure but they are given little to no context. For example, he harps on the fact that of the inscriptions which mention Prince Branimir's name, only one calls him the duke of the Croats. What he doesn't mention is that the one which does, was commissioned by Branimir himself, while the others were written by Frankish monks imported by Branimir who continued to use the generic ethnic reference. As the primary carriers of culture and education, these foreign monks passed down their terminology.
Professor Fine also casually dismisses the countless references to Croats as refering to a small elite or military organization. I for one have never heard of a prince calling himself a duke of a few soldiers. Coupled with the other references to Prince Svetoslav of the Croats, Drzislav of the croats and King Zvonimir "the Croatian King" you have to wonder at Fine's motivations.
What angered me the most however was his deliberate misrepresentation of Wendy Bracewell's superb "The Uskoks of Senj" who Fine again pulls quotes from out of context. Bracewell was cautious about applying modern nationalist ideas to pre enlightenment europe, as all historians are, but does confirm that both the local population of Dalmatia and the foreign overlords considered them to be of the same Croatian nation. As a sly slap to the face of a more professional historian, Fine says he'll assume her translation of Venetian sources are accurate then says nothing more on the subject. We as readers are left wondering where this is all leading as he seems to be running in circles.
It's been a long time coming but personal biases have seemingly gotten the best of Professor Fine. Avoid the steep cost of this book and wait for it to appear in your local library. If you have already been swindled as I have, then you can use it for the references and get the whole and accurate story from the originals. For anyone who is really interested in Croatian history I suggest "The Latin Epigraphic Monuments of Early Medieval Croatia" by Vedrana Delonga and "The Uskoks of Senj" by Wendy Bracewell. Both are fantastic and available for free at your local library.
Such a Waste May 23, 2006
5 out of 11 found this review helpful
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 Gruenemberg 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.
 Disapointing May 12, 2006
6 out of 11 found this review helpful
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.
raising the bar March 17, 2006
5 out of 12 found this review helpful
One suspects that this book is intended to be the author's magnum opus. If so, it has succeeded. This work is no place to start for beginners in Balkan history (or linguistics, or literature). You need to know your onions in at least one of these fields, or much of the discussion will simply go past you. But it does lay down what is sure to be recognised as a definitive benchmark for the subject delineated by its combative title.
The scope and depth of the research is awe-inspiring; clearly, this book is the product of a lifetime's reading. The bibliography at the back is mind-numbing - even if most of it consists of newspaper and journal articles (which are largely, though not entirely, in Croatian and its cognates, of course).
I feel reticent about making any criticism at all in the face of such magisterial academic authority, though I would, somewhat tremulously, venture this: It is a shame that more attention has not been paid to the specifically religious aspect of identity - whether `ethnic' or, later, `national'. No one can dispute that this played, and continues to play, a major role in the formation of ethnic consciousness. Yet, as the Editorial Review on this site warns us, Fine has chosen to concentrate on the secular, linguistic and literary aspects of identity formation. It is not merely that, in consequence of this decision, his discussion can seem unduly technical, but that a vital - perhaps the most important - consideration for ordinary people, in the past under discussion as well as in the present, is overlooked. And this fact will provide fuel for Fine's enemies. That is a pity, because the case he is making is indubitably correct: modern nationalisms are a back-projection onto a past that never was - or, at least, never had the kinds of consciousness that nationalists insist upon. Fine is taking a tilt, not only at the HDZ and its fellow-travellers, but at the world of Braveheart and its associated nonsense in comfortable, western countries.
I ordered this book back in August, when its appearance was advertised as imminent, though it only arrived recently- seven months late. But it was nobody's fault. The `Acknowledgments' section makes it plain that the author has been seriously ill while the MS has been at the publisher's, and this has clearly been the cause of the delay. Those who care - about Fine, about the Balkans, or just about history - should pray that he recovers to produce more work of this calibre. But it is hard to think that either he or anyone else will get very much further ahead in the discussion than this truly excellent work.
|
|
|
