Brief Bosnian History Overview

In order to do some exploring for the ASK question, I investigated the different cultures that shaped Bosnian history. The main influential cultures, according to the quick google searches, are Roman, Byzantium, Ottoman Turks, and Austro-Hungarian. 

The Roman culture introduced Roman religion and Christianity to the region. The region's natural thermal waters and mineral wealth led to Roman movement and exploitation of the region. After the collapse of the Roman empire, the Byzantine empire took over. The Byzantine Empire was the continuation of the Eastern Roman Empire, so logically, they did not effect the culture as heavily. Livno will be a great city to explore the deeper history of Bosnia as it is an old city and has a museum detailing the rich history of the area. 

The Ottoman Turk rule introduced several major changes to Bosnian politics and cultures. The largest of these is the emergence of a Muslim community among the Slavic people. It was during the peaceful years of Ottoman occupation that Sarajevo grew into a cultural city. Because of this, the Ottoman Turk influence will likely be most apparent in Sarajevo. 

The Austro-Hungarian rule was short lived. However, Bosnia, and Sarajevo, were industrialized during that time period. 

Given these findings and previous research on Livno and Sarajevo, our journey through Bosnia will be somewhat chronological. In Livno, there is a great potential to explore the deep history of the Livno region. However, Livno is seemingly less affected by Ottoman Turks and the recent conflicts. As we move to Sarajevo, our historical timeline will progress to more recent eras. I think this will provide an interesting experience, almost as if we are "walking" through time in Bosnia. 

As for interactions, an interesting bit of information deals with how Bosnia was treated by the Ottoman Turks. Supposedly, the Bosnian identity was not subjugated as the Croatian and Serbian states were. This could potentially have lead to the current Bosnian identity, as several Bosnians become prominent members and characters in the history of the Ottoman empire. It offers an enticing explanation to why Bosnian culture and Islam are intertwined, and how Bosnians distinguish themselves from Croatia and Serbia. I suppose we will have to wait until we are on the ground to make any conclusions.

A Taste of the Balkans

A disproportionate amount of my childhood TV time was spent on Food Network. Alton Brown's Good Eats greeted me after school, Rachel Ray was the pre-dinner background noise, and if I was really good that day, I got to stay up a bit later and watch Iron Chef until a then scandalous 10pm. As I've grown, I watch very little TV now but those Food Network days have stuck with me. Perhaps this is why I thoroughly enjoy learning about a country's traditional cuisine. Not only is it a chance to try something new, but I believe it can reveal quite a bit about a country's character and culture without saying a word.

For example, if many dishes feature plants and grains instead of meat, the culture is probably more stationary and involved in significant agriculture. Conversely, meals that often incorporate meat suggests a more nomadic lifestyle or an area not particularly arable. The Balkans fall into this second category with a cuisine filled with meats and dairy products such as milk and cream. 

Meat Dishes

Meat features prominently in Balkans cuisine with lamb and beef featuring in more continental areas and seafood showing up in parts of costal Croatia. One prevalent dish is meat on a spit (or pečenje na ražnju in Serbian) which is typically lamb and is sold by the kilo. Bosanski lonac, a Bosnian meat and vegetable stew, arambašić (cabbage rolls filled with mutton) from Croatia, and trout stew from Herzegovina round out a severely truncated list of meat dishes that the Balkans have to offer. Many of these dishes take a long time to cook and were left in pots secured within the fireplace while the family worked during the day. The fact that lamb and fish feature in many dishes indicates that cattle populations were either not present or more valuable for their milk than meat. 

Seasonings and Vegetables

With such a starch and protein heavy diet, spices would be well received as a way to liven up rather bland dishes. Interestingly enough, spices are used sparingly despite the area being located in the middle of the Silk Road and its spice trade. The figure below shows the overland routes in red and the shipping routes in blue. During the rule of the Ottoman Empire, these overland routes to Europe were blocked, forcing traders to move to overseas routes. This caused much trade to bypass the Balkans, limiting their access to the East. 

Most flavor is incorporated through vegetables such as garlic and onions but some spices did make it to the Balkans with paprika, pepper,parsley, bay leaf and celery as the most popular spices. Other vegetables feature in Balkans dishes such as tomatoes, potatoes, squash, and carrots. Bread is also a standard part of the meal. This appears to be more true for Serbia than Croatia due to the geographic differences of the two nations, but pita, polenta, and other starches definitely make an appearance across the map. 

Some of the similarities across Croatian, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Serbia come from the shared influence of many countries. Hungarian and Turkish influences are strongest but Italy has influenced Slovenia and Croatia's food due to its close proximity while Greece has impacted Serbia in a similar manner. It is worth nothing the similarities in cuisine since it indicates cultural exchange. This can be seen in the strong Turkish culinary influences, which would be expected from the prolonged presence of the Ottoman Empire in the Balkans region. 

Beverages

As perhaps expected given the heavy Turkish influence, coffee is a popular choice of drink. In fact, when visiting neighbors or friends this is almost a ritual requirement. Coffee is typically served black with either rahat lokum (Turkish Delight) or a cube of sugar. For those of age, brandies (rakija) is a popular spirit that comes in many flavors as well as wine (vino). Be warned - European alcohols typically have a higher %ABV than those in America; brandies can be 40% ABV for example. It should also be mentioned that the water is of high quality and will likely not pose a gastrointestinal problem for travelers. 

The variety of Balkans cuisine is at once inspiring yet unsurprising. Every ruling power has influenced the country and while some of the physical impacts may have faded or never even been displayed, they remain represented in the food of the region. The meat emphasis suggests large scale agriculture is difficult and that most meat was hunted or culled from large herds. The presence of basic spices suggests limited contact with the Silk road which would have connected the area economically to Europe and Asia while heavy Turkish and Hungarian culinary influences indicates strong political and/or cultural influences from these areas over a long period of time. Similarly, Croatia's definite Italian culinary influences shows a tighter bond with Italy whereas Serbia's Greek influences (manifested in the prevalence of baklava for example) suggests a different set of exposures. It will be fascinating to try some of these dishes and to continue learning how the Balkans' cuisine developed and how cultural and political events influenced this development. 

Resources

http://croatia.hr/en-GB/Discover-Croatia/Gastronomy-and-enology/Cluster/Dalmatia-Split?ZHNcNCxwXDE3Mg%3d%3d

http://www.serbia.travel/about-serbia/typically-serbian/food/

http://www.visiteurope.com/Discover/Where-To-Go/Balkans/Cuisine-Balkan-Peninsula

http://www.visitmycountry.net/bosnia_herzegovina/en/index.php/eating-drinking

Illyria: A Curious Thread in Balkan History

"How do the physical environment and ancient human history relate to cultural interactions in the former Yugoslavia?” -ASK Balkans Crew '14

As I mentioned in my last post, the Illyrians were one of the first groups known to inhabit the Balkans region. Although the Slavs that now make up the majority of the population have different ethnic origins, references to ancient Illyria have been made in recent times in connection with Balkan nationalist movements.

Ancient history
The origins of the Illyrians are unclear, but they may have been an Indo-European (perhaps from Italy) people group that settled in the Balkan region during the Bronze Age. Other scholars suggest they may have come from more north-central Europe. Whatever their beginnings, references to them began in the 4th century BC from Greek authors. Interestingly, the Illyrians were not as much a single people group as they were a variety of disparate tribes that, at most, may have been characterized by a common language. Early authors who referred to this wide variety of groups in the general region of the former Yugoslavia presumably took the name from a single prominent tribe in the area known as Illyrians. Over the years, despite their heterogeneity, the Illyrians formed kingdoms that were often at war with their neighbors, including Macedonia, Greece and Rome. In the 200s BC, the Illyrians were conquered by Rome, forming the province of Illyricum, which continued through Byzantine rule.

Slavicization
In the 6th and 7th centuries AD, Slavs entered the region, for the most part integrating with and "slavicizing" the ancient Illyrian culture. Throughout the Middle Ages and into the Renaissance, however, the term "Illyrian" was still used on occasion to refer to the people living in that region, despite the reality that most of the people living there had more Slavic than Illyrian origins. In part because the land was historically called Illyria, the name stuck with them to some extent over the years and was never truly lost as part of their identity.

Nationalism
There are several prominent instances in recent history in which Balkan nations have drawn on their Illyrian roots to support nationalist sentiment. In the mid-1800s, Croatian intellectuals started a movement called "Illyrianism" intended to unite all south Slavic peoples under the banner of shared Illyrian heritage. Their overarching goals were a unified language and culture, but in the end, the Austro-Hungarian empire suppressed the movement.
I found this movement interesting because it rests on premises that, from the information previously discussed, really don't hold water. For one, the Illyrians were in reality just one of many distinct groups that inhabited the Balkan region in antiquity. For another, Slavic people are ethnically distinct from the older Illyrians. To claim that all South Slavs share a common Illyrian heritage is at best misguided. Furthermore, I found the push for unification interesting, given the quite explosive (and thoroughly discussed on this blog) ethnic tensions among different Balkan people groups. Perhaps in those days it seemed a not too distant prospect that they could still come together as one. Certainly, Yugoslavia was able to manage it for a while. Still, when "balkanization" is a modern-day term used to describe the fragmentation of a geopolitical region, it is hard to imagine why, a century and a half ago, people would have pushed for unification.
The other significant modern-day reference is Kosovar use of the term "Dardania," the province roughly covering that area in Illyrian times. Curiously, Albanians may have more of a right to call themselves Illyrians, as they are believed to descend from the original people groups of the Balkans, rather than Slavic immigrants from the middle of the 1st millenium AD.

Tracing the history of the Illyrian name in the Balkans yields fascinating insight into their culture. In some ways, the entire region has adopted the name, despite little true connection to the original culture. In other ways, they have spurned the sense of unified identity offered by the idea of Illyria and made very clear distinctions among themselves along racial lines. The relationship of Kosovo to Illyria is a particularly striking example; nationalists claim a connection to the people of that time period and use it as a slogan in their separatist movement, despite the more recently developed undertones of pan-Slavic unity. This historical motif reveals a fascinating interplay between the occasional attempts at regional coherence and the regular tendency to stay as separate entities.

-Trey

NOMs

I set out to write this blog entry with great ambitions of summarizing every Balkan dessert in picture and description format, but it appears that some kind soul on Pinterest has already done a beautiful job: http://www.pinterest.com/bubbleteadinner/sweets-of-serbia/

I challenge anyone to click on that link and just scroll through the pictures without drooling. Words cannot describe what an integral part of my life dessert is. Culturally, it is one of the four fundamental food groups that brings my family together (the other three being pasta, steak, and wine). There have been many instances where we have designed our dinner around what we were having for dessert. My obsession with dessert extends into my career aspirations as well. It is my life goal to be a chemical engineer for a chocolate company someday.

All that being said, when it was recommended that we talk about Balkan food, OF COURSE I'm going to talk about the desserts. If you have not already, please refer to the video I created over Spring Break about one of Croatia's most prized desserts, Kremsnita. Other desserts that sound absolutely divine include the Bajadera Torte, Povitica, Borke, and Tulumbe. They certainly love their pastries! My friend from Croatia recommended a pastry shop that we will have to stop by: Vincek in Zagreb. When exploring all of the recipes and options online, I cannot help but wonder the history behind each dessert and how it played a role in the formation of former Yugoslavia's culture. It's a perfect tie into our ASK question, and I look forward to seeing (and tasting!) firsthand this important part of life in the Balkans.

Recent and Modern Day Racial Tensions in the Balkans

Last weekend, I had the privilege of hearing Wall Street Journalist Cameron McWhirter speak about racial tensions at TEDxGeorgiaTech. The talk didn’t focus on the Balkans, but he mentioned the region briefly in his talk. This sparked my interest, so I followed up with him during lunch and got his perspective on the conflicts in the Balkans. I found it very informative and interesting getting to hear from someone who has researched racial tensions around the world as a career and visited the Balkans to investigate the issues there.

                One interesting point that Cam brought up was that because these racial tensions are long standing and deeply rooted in the history of the region, there have not been any successful long term solutions. In recent history, former Yugoslavia was ruled in a communist fashion under Josip Broz Tito from 1939 until his death in 1980. This communist state suppressed the tensions by prohibiting anyone from publically show discontent due to ethnic or religious conflict. As a result of this suppression of conflict, many, including Tito, thought Yugoslavia had solved its historical ethnic conflicts. In reality, these conflicts were still present and even increased in intensity because people had to hold in their views. Cam mentioned that this was one of the major factors that led to the Balkans War in the 90’s. The region was like a boiling pot of water. Eventually, the pot’s lid will be pushed off because of the rising pressure within the pot (this is my engineering analogy for the blog post). People’s ethnic conflicts were suppressed so much that they built in intensity until they eventually exploded into a war when the veil of communism was dissolved.

                I wanted to see what Cam wrote about the Balkans in the past, so I googled one of his older articles. I found an article about the Balkans written in 1996. The article in the Cincinnati Enquirer critiqued the Dayton Accords as a solution to the Balkans War in the early 90’s. In the article, Cam quotes a 67 year-old Muslim woman from Sarajevo as saying “I don’t believe this is a long peace. No one does.” This was 18 years ago. It makes sense that this would be the perspective of someone in the region right after the Balkans War, but I’m curious to see what the current opinions are for people in region when we visit in a few weeks. Are there still tensions being suppressed by the Dayton Accords, or have people actually settled into a more peaceful coexistence? We’ll certainly find out when we visit!

                Cam also predicted that we might experience different interactions based on what country we’re visiting. I’m curious to see if his prediction holds true or not. I wonder if people in different countries, or even in different cities within the same country, will treat American visitors differently. I noticed subtle differences in how different cultures treated foreigners when I was in Europe this summer. Based on my experiences, I expect the differences to be slight, if noticeable at all, for how people treat us in these countries. It will also be interesting to compare the perspectives of people from different countries on the war and the present day tensions.

                Cam’s Ted Talk ended with a call to remember racial and ethnic conflicts in the past and raise awareness of these instances so as to prevent history from repeating itself. I wonder if we can record our experiences and make them presentable so others know what we learn on the trip. Just an idea to consider.. In any event, I’m very excited to visit the Balkans and talk to the locals there in a few weeks!

Source: http://enquirer.com/bosnia/stories/bosnia0421.html

Historic and Contemporary Effects of Globalization and Imperialism on the Balkans

In a philosophy class I took while studying abroad on the Pacific Program (Allie George was there!!!), we examined the solvency and moral grounds of international monetary and trade agreements between developing and developed countries. While meeting in our air-conditioned conference rooms at westernized resorts in Fiji (a severely impoverished country under the control of a de facto military dictatorship), we discussed the intentions and consequences of the developed world’s attempts to grow economically by seeking to support (manipulate?) and engage (exploit?) the nascent markets of developing countries.

In my paper for that class, I wrote about how fragile such artificial and contrived economic support is to the native economies. I drew upon literature to submit that such schemes, over time, make the developing nation dependent upon the capricious charity of the developed world; if a developing nation wishes to be taken seriously, scholars argue, it must be willing to participate in an international economy that is not sustained by such loans and aids. Even more, by accepting such munificence from other countries, developing nations give up power and influence, and developing nations are often shut out of the very negations that concern them. What results is a status quo of power that lies almost completely in the developed world.

As for the developed world, whose citizens wish to take actions against global poverty, actions designed to be humanitarian are often wasteful or counterproductive; one legal scholar suggests that “it is the height of naiveté… to believe that the government should intervene in the trade process but that political intervention will not backfire against their interests”.

The Balkans has not been immune to such international policy failure. In exploring the historic roots of these problems, I came across an article that insisted that these problems are the modern manifestations of imperialism. In my class and in my paper, we commonly used the IMF as an example agent in these international constructs. The IMF regularly grants emergency loans to countries that cannot find a private lender to fund their existence; in exchange for the financial resources, the IMF requires that the developing nation implement a set of policies. However, it is regularly argued that the IMF is unable to effectively evaluate what actions should be taken on a local level because they are unfamiliar with the country’s economic history, conditions, cultures, and environments. Though the government itself is readily equipped with such insight, the recipient governments are sacrificing policy autonomy in exchange for funds, which can lead to public resentment of the local leadership for accepting and enforcing the IMF conditions.

Some articles that I read—though notably Marxist—discuss how the international meddling that has occurred has crushed the chances for the Balkan working class to ever develop into an independent and sustainable consumer class. To quote one:

“In a word, for the past 19 years, Bosnia has been like a colony of the EU. Under its control, the formerly state-owned industries have been privatized. Workers' control (which nominally existed in Yugoslavia) has been all but abolished, and the country has been turned into a playground for Western imperialism. Just to give one example, 85% of the country's financial sector is controlled by Austrian banks, and only 3% by Bosnian ones. Meanwhile, the standard of living is still significantly lower than it was when Tito's rule ended in the 1980s, the country's industrial base has been almost completely obliterated and unemployment has reached a spectacular 44.6%. IMF loans are now a vital source of income for the country.”

The Uniqueness of the Balkans

"How does the physical environment and ancient human history relate to a cultural interactions in the former Yugoslavia?”

Through doing research about the Balkans, I've discovered that so many things interest me about the area, from the food and culture to the landscape and trails. I was even more intrigued when I learned about how the history of Yugoslavia and the progression of that society to present times has impacted the various culture groups in the surrounding areas of the Balkans. It truly is fascinating to think how the actions of the past and the environment that surrounded people thousands of years ago can so heavily impact nations today!

The Zagreb Cathedral is the tallest building in Croatia, which in and of itself would be incredible to see. But if that's not enough to totally impress you, the history will be sure to blow you away. The cathedral was originally built in 1093, but it was destroyed by the Tatars in the 1200s. When the Ottomans invaded in the 15th century, the cathedral was fortified with surrounding walls for more protection. As the years progressed, elements continued to affect the cathedral, one of which even included an earthquake in 1883. This history is the driving force behind my curiosity in the Zagreb Cathedral. A place like this tells a story that no place in the United States can tell, primarily because the history of the US doesn't go back that far. It epitomizes the once united nation of Yugoslavia and in my opinion, serves as a metaphorical example of how the history of this nation has changed over the thousands of years following its construction. While this cathedral was being built, it was strong, sturdy, and served as a unifying landmark for the area. But, as dissenting opinions clashed and people began to disagree, the walls slowly crumbled and the cathedral began to deteriorate. However, it stands today, despite the conflict and disagreements that arose. That's just plain flat out inspiring if you ask me, and I can see this as being an excellent representation of the physical environment and historical elements that are addressed in our ASK question, making it a great location to visit while in Zagreb.

On a completely separate note, one thing that I've noticed in my reading and our Thursday meeting discussions is that the countries that once belonged to the former Yugoslavia now have very nationalistic identities and are extremely proud of their country. When I hear the word "nationalism," I typically think of cookouts and pool parties of the 4th of July and saying the pledge of allegiance. For these countries (Serbia, Croatia, Bosnia) I feel like it's a completely different story. After World War II, Josip Broz Tito became the leader of Yugoslav and ruled the people with an iron fist up until he died. Then, once the Soviet Union collapsed, the ripple effect of democracy spread throughout much of Eastern Europe, Yugoslavia included. When political factions arose, the interests of these three different regions began to become very distinct and personalized. The more prosperous Croatia supported plans that the less wealthy Serbia opposed, sending this unified country into chaos. Eventually, Bosnia, Serbia, and Croatia all declared themselves independent countries, but still continued to have deep rifts in their relationships with each other. It is here that we begin to see how Yugoslavia's history impacts the way that these countries interact with one another today. They each strongly support the country they come from, and since they know their country's history, I imagine that they are not too fond of the other regions that disagreed with them or fought them in wars. We don't typically view countries positively that fight the United States, so it would make sense that the former Yugoslavian nations would have some tension with one another as well. This leads to the conflict that exists today between these three cultures. Angela explained something really interesting to me, and that was the fact that they all speak a language that is basically identical (with the exception of some slang), but they are each insistent on keeping their language unique to their own specific country: BOSNIAn, CROATIAn, and SERBIAn, These language distinctions only further illustrate how the history of the Yugoslavia breakup had damaged their outlook on one another today, making interactions much more tense and difficult.