HRVATSKA POVIJEST

Croatians in Canada

2005-07-03T23:53:00.000-07:00

Croatians

Croatians

The first Croatians to arrive in Canada may have been 2 sailors from Dalmatia serving as crew on the third voyage of Jacques CARTIER (1541-42) and a miner who accompanied Samuel DE CHAMPLAIN (1604-06). Later, Croatians served in Austrian military units sent by the French government to help defend NEW FRANCE (1758-59) and were involved in the early salmon fisheries of BC, the Cariboo Gold Rush of the 1860s and the Klondike Gold Rush of the late 1890s. Over the main period of migration, which spans the 20th century, approximately 80 000 Croatians have immigrated to Canada.
Origins

Calculating numbers of Croatian immigrants has been difficult because Croatia has since the 10th and 11th centuries been variously a part of the Hungarian dynasty, the Holy Roman Empire, the Austro-Hungarian Empire (to WWI), the Kingdom of the Serbs, Croats and Slovenes (1918-29), the Kingdom of Yugoslavia (1929-41) and the Independent State of Croatia (1941- 45); since 1945, it has constituted one of the republics of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. Croatians were classified with Austrians and Hungarians before 1918, and as Yugoslavs after the formal establishment of Yugoslavia in 1929. It has been estimated that about two-thirds of the emigrants from the former Yugoslavia (which dissolved in 1992) have been Croatian. In the 1996 census 66 940 declared their ethnic origin to be Yugoslavia, which by this extrapolation, about 60 000 may have been born in Croatia. However, only 55 275 declared their ethnicity as Croatian (single response) and 29 220 (multiple response), which could also include Yugoslav, Balkan Slavs and other groups. Further 35 660 declared Croatian to be their mother tongue in the 1991 census, but it is assumed that many others who are in the second and third generations in Canada have classified themselves as English Canadians or may still have declared themselves Yugoslavs. How many Croatians also arrived as refugees from the conflict in 1991-93 is as yet unclear.

The Croatians were predominantly Roman Catholic peasants in the 19th and early 20th centuries, particularly those from the inland regions of Slavonia, Zumberak and Zagorje. The population of the Croatian littoral (Istria, Primorje and Dalmatia) on the Adriatic was somewhat more diverse, comprising some people of Muslim faith and a social mix of traders, sailors, fishermen, woodsmen and herders. Most of the immigration to Canada has been from this coastal region inland to the capital of Zagreb.

Migration and Settlement

Prior to WWI, about 4000 Croatians immigrated to Canada. Between 1928 and 1939 some 12 000 arrived. The third major group of post-WWII immigrants came in a wave of over 100 000 emigrants from Yugoslavia, the majority of whom were from Croatia. The main motive for immigration has been the search for a better life, but in the 1920s and after WWII many Croatians emigrated in protest against political conditions in their homeland. Many recent immigrants have been from an urban and professional class from the larger Croatian towns and cities, eg, Zagreb, Rijeka, Karlovac, Split and Zadar.

Of the 29 Croatian settlements established before WWI, 14 were in BC. Other Croatians settled in Saskatchewan, Alberta and northern and southern Ontario. During the 1920s some 171 settlements were established in the mining towns and mill towns across Canada's mining, forest and agricultural frontier and in Windsor, Toronto and Montréal. The postwar immigrants have largely settled in major cities, particularly Toronto and Montréal. The majority of postwar foreign-born immigrants were part of the industrial labour force, while the majority of the Canadian-born have been employed in the professional, clerical and service sectors of the economy.

Social Life and Community

For the first and second group of immigrants, group life centered about kinship circles reminiscent of the familial and communal peasant zadruga. Fraternal and self-help organizations were established, eg, the American-based Croatian Fraternal Union, which opened its first Canadian lodge in Ladysmith in 1903 and which had 10 000 members by 1971. Other networks were sponsored by political parties such as the Croatian Peasant Party of the 1920s, which founded the Croatian Peasant Society in 1930. Other social, cultural and political activities were promoted by the Communist Party and also by the monarchist Yugoslav organizations in the 1930s. Since the war, organizations have proliferated, eg, the United Croats of Canada, the Federation of Croatian Societies in Canada and the Croatian Cultural Societies. More recently, Croatian folklore and dance groups have enjoyed a certain prominence within the multicultural folklore festivals of urban ethnic communities.

Religion and Cultural Life and Education

The Roman Catholic Church, while unable to serve the isolated frontier communities of the 1920s and 1930s, has played a prominent role in Croatian Canadian life since 1950, the year the first Croatian Catholic parish was established in Windsor. Currently there are parishes and churches in all of the major urban communities, in addition to the community halls and cultural centres sponsored by political and fraternal organizations. Croatians have also enjoyed an active ethnic press, broadly representative of political factions from far left to right. Hrvatski Glas (The Croatian Voice), est 1929 and sponsored by the Croatian Peasant Society, and the Communist Party's Borba (The Struggle), est 1930, are both still published, the latter more recently as Jedinstvo (Unity) and then as Nase Novine (Our News). Other nationalist newspapers include Nas Put (Our Way), Hrvatski Put (The Croatian Way) and Nezavisna Drzava Hrvatska (The Independent State of Croatia). Several writers have also emerged from the émigré community, such as the poet Alan Horiç, who won recognition for his works L'Aube assassiné and Blessure au flanc du ciel. Others in the fields of ballet, classical music and the fine arts have also won acclaim. Chess and soccer are very popular among postwar immigrants. Croatian chess clubs have won at least 2 provincial chess championships and the Metros-Croatia soccer team (later the Toronto Blizzard) won the North American Soccer League Championship in 1976.

The Croatian language was maintained by the family until the 1950s, when informal extracurricular schools were organized by community leaders and organizations. In the 1970s a network of Croatian-language schools established in the US spread into Canada, and a few courses on Croatian language and culture at the university level have been introduced as well. Language skills and cultural traditions have been somewhat lost through assimilation, particularly in the small isolated communities of the 1920s and 1930s, but because of the more recent and greater concentration of Croatians in larger cities, cultural maintenance has been more consciously pursued by community leaders.

With the breakup of the former Yugoslav Republic in 1992 and the official recognition of Croatia as a state, the national self-determination so eagerly sought during the past few centuries was celebrated by Croatian communities in diaspora. In Canada, many Croats contributed to this result both morally and materially, and took considerable pride in the celebration of their long-sought independence.

Suggested Reading A.W. Rasporich, For a Better Life: A History of the Croatians in Canada (1982); N. Paveskovic, "Croatians in Canada," in Slavs in Canada (1968).

The Canadian Encyclopedia © 2005 Historica Foundation of Canada

ANTE CILIGA

2005-06-16T22:43:00.000-07:00

ANTE CILIGA

ANTE CILIGA

It is with an extreme discretion that the French press (Le Monde, October 28, 1992), announced, in some poor lines, the death of Ante Ciliga, in Zagreb (Croatia), without giving the date of disappearance (October 21): he was presented as a former leading personality of the Yugoslav Communist Party, having tasted the Stalinist lagers and those of the Croatian Ustashe. But it is with a certain glare that was celebrated in February 1998 in Croatia the 100th birthday of Ciliga, presented as a "patriot" and a "worthy child of the country", who was personally honorated in 1990 by the General-President Tudjman (Croatia Weekly, Zagreb, March 26, 1998).

Ante Ciliga - to pronounce Tsiliga - became the emblematic figure of the opposition to Stalinism and to the Bolshevik system of State capitalism, set up by Lenin, Trotsky and Stalin, by his major book: In the country of the great lie. (1) This book published in French, in 1938, in Dutch in 1939, always republished, translated into several languages seems to have bodied Ciliga; at the point to let forget the tormented path, finally ambiguous, of a whole political life which did not stop after the Thirties.

For generations of militants coming from the opposition to Stalinism, and also for the historians of the labour movement, the name of Ciliga evokes the irreducible fight of a Left Marxist Opposition to Stalinism, as of the Thirties, at the time where the few voices which rose in the workers and intellectual circles faithful to the principles of the humanistic socialism of Marx were covered by the Stalinist and democratic campaigns praising the extraordinary results of "socialism in one country". Stalinist "Fellow travellers" as Aragon sought to show the virtues of socialist "Russia" and sang the GPU and Stalin in "poems".

Well before at the time of the Cold war, a lot of people "discovered " the reality of the USSR, by the testimony of Khravchenko and others, and that then, with the historical wear of Stalinism, "the fellow travellers" change into virulent adversaries of "Communism ", a voice had resonated which, to the left of Stalinism and Trotskyism, denounced the system of State capitalism set up by Lenin and Trotsky, and completed by Stalin and his regime. To point out this historical context should not however exempt to give a true biography of Ciliga. The path of Ciliga is far from being summarised with his book. It is crossed by hesitations and ambiguities, rich in lessons for whose study the relationship between "internationalist" engagement and old "nationalitarian" reflexes among known figures of Communism. As "left" communist between 1931 and 1935, classified as Left Trotskyist and close to anarchism, Ciliga symbolises all the hesitations of militants of Central and Eastern Europe who became revolutionaries shortly after the First World War, while seeking - consciously or unconsciously - a national "identity". For this reason, the road of Ciliga raises many interrogations on communist "engagement" in Balkans.

I. - From Croatian nationalism to World Revolution.

In addition to the autobiographical elements provided by Ciliga himself, but in Croat (2), we have a French Autobiography (1983) (3). This one - of course - must be corrected according to the facts and archives we have. Ciliga was born on February 20, 1898 in Segotici (Shegotichi) in an Istrian village, in a province of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, where mixed Italian, Croatian and Austrian populations. The risks of the history had left to that Ciliga, Croatian of language and of culture, became successively Austrian citizen until 1919, then Italian citizen until 1945. Descending from a family of Croatian peasants, his grandfather let share in with the young boy interest to the Croatian culture and the fights of national emancipation directed against the Italian Bourgeois and Austrian administration.

After having been a family shepherd until the 7 years age, Ciliga was dealt with by his veterinary uncle in Mostar (Bosnia-Herzegovina) to start primary studies there, then as schoolboy until 1914. In 1912, at the time of the Balkan wars, defining himself as "a Yugoslav Croat of tendency", he started to take part in street demonstrations against the Austrian-Hungarian regime, which dominated Slovenia, Croatia, and Bosnia-Herzegovina. He was interested in the French literature, but also in the "Great French Revolution", finding his heroes in "Rousseau, Voltaire, Diderot, Robespierre and Marat". Feeling himself "Slavic and French at the same time ", Ciliga discovered several fatherlands then: "Croatia, Yugoslavia, Russia and the Slavic world in general being my first fatherland, France became my second one" (4).

Until the war, the young Ciliga left anti-Austrian agitation inside the college. He was expelled from it, measure that was deferred only thanks to the intervention of a Bosnian deputy. But after the assassination attempt of Sarajevo, he was expelled from all the schools of Bosnia, and had to return in Istria. A new, he was excluded from the college to have read and let read to other pupils the Life of Jesus of Renan... What was extremely dangerous in a so much Catholic country. 1914 made of him an eternal wandering man. The war with Italy involved his evacuation in Moravia, where he finished his studies at the college of Brno, in Czech language! But in this Austrian Manchester, where arose with acuity the working class question, he came from there "to regard as logic and probable the end of capitalism and the advent of socialism ". He was about a radical socialist, not nationalist: "... my rallying to socialism was directed from the beginning towards a Internationalist socialism in declared opposition to the national selfishness which prevailed in the European socialist parties engaged in the war." In particular, he understood that Czech ultra-nationalism, like everywhere else, was only a reactionary screen of the Czech middle-class, which was hardly obstructed to oppress its own nationals, peasants and workers.

II. - RUSSIAN REVOLUTION AND COMMUNIST MILITANCY

(1917-1926)

When the Revolution of February 1917 bursts, Ciliga was doing his military service in the Austrian-Hungarian army. From this historic moment the young man, 19 years old, was fascinated by those who want to plow in-depth the Russian lands: the Bolsheviks: "The position of the Bolsheviks - against the imperialist war and for universal peace - without annexations nor repairs - had acquired my sympathy ". But, according to him, "the take-over by force of November 7 " left it filled of doubts. The peace of Brest-Litovsk, in January 1918, disturbed him in his "national" conscience, of "Slavic Austrian ": "...I say to me: Didn’t Lenin pass from the opposition to the imperialist war to peace with the German and Austrian imperialisms, while leaving us, us, Austrian Slavs, under the yoke of the Germans and the Hungarians?" (5).

While undertaking higher education, Ciliga adhered to the Croatian Socialist Party at the time even where Yugoslavia was formed. It hardly caused his enthusiasm: Yugoslavia was placed under the sign of the Bourgeois State, and dominated by the Serb people that Ciliga, as a good Croatian patriot, regarded as "taking in a certain manner the place of the old Austrian and Hungarian oppressors ". But, in spite of this strong "Croatian streak", Ciliga very quickly will become a radical internationalist, racing from a country in to another, to the pursue of the World workers’ Revolution. "When at the beginning of 1919 (January 26-27) took place in Zagreb the conference - and not the congress like he writes it - of the Croatian Socialist Party, Ciliga is the most radical speaker, and immediately forms an autonomous fraction of left, fraction which became Croatian section of the Yugoslav Party in 1920. But from the 20 to April 23, 1919, in Belgrade the Left minority of the Croatian party, the social-democrat parties of Bosnia and Serbia had unified in a Yugoslav workers socialist Party (communist), which had postulated its adhesion to the Comintern (6).

As of this time, Ciliga - but is it the effect of stand back, more than 60 years afterwards? - was convinced that the Yugoslav State was going to collapse: "As of February-March 1919, I had concluded from there that the first Yugoslav State was going to break down for lack of comprehension between the Serbs and the Croats, although this common State had been objectively built in the interest of the ones like others. "

He thought whereas the resolution of these national contrasts would pass by the international Communist Party. Being located in the fraction of radical left, Ciliga was quickly object of the attention of the police; and he had to leave quickly Croatia. Thinking of continuing higher education in France, the taste of the adventure and action carried out it in Hungary in full revolution (spring 1919). He engaged at once in a detachment of Yugoslav volunteers. But he was quickly disappointed by the lack of radicality of Bela Kun’s Hungary in the land question, by his "respect until the autumn of the great land property". Thus, "a revolution which does not touch great property during the first six months is not a true revolution; it is condemned to perish."

This indecision where he saw the moderating influence of Hungarian social democracy decided him to begin militancy in the communist camp. He passed by again in May 1919 in Yugoslavia, little time before the crushing of the councils Revolution by the Entente’s armies. He was then in charge of a clandestine work of organisation in Slovenia, disguised as a hawker of the workers press. He is a chief of the organisation of Ljubljana, under the pseudonym of Rogic. (7) Since 1919, the dismemberment of Austria-Hungary had made of Ciliga, born in Istria, an Italian citizen. He benefited from this status to take part in the organisation of the Maximalist Italian Socialist Party in Istria at the summer 1920, in full revolutionary agitation in Italy. But, as he self writes it, he made the same experiment of Maximalist indecision, which he had observed in Hungary among the Socialists and the Communists. During the factories occupation, he noted that Maximalism and demagogy were combined wonderfully to opportunism and cowardice. He was under arrest in autumn and spent the winter in prison in Trieste and Capodistria. He thought that in Italy the Anarchists would be as radical as the Bolsheviks in Russia, and than Malatesta could be a kind of "Italian Lenin". He understood how much he had been mistaken.

Coming out of prison in February 1921, he plunged in full Fascist reaction. The trade union centre of Pola is set fire to and the workers organisations destroyed. With the peasants of his native district, he organised an armed resistance against the Fascist bands (squadristi). In April, at the head of 30-armed people, a confrontation to Fascists left a death and 5 wounded in the rows of the Black Shirts (Camise nere). This revolt known as "Revolt of Prostina" will remain famous (8).

But of course the army ran to support these lasts, which in addition profited from the support of the Dalmatian authorities, in perfect symbiosis with the Italian State. At that time, already, he interpreted the fall of the Councils in Hungary as the end of the revolutionary wave of 1917-1919. The rise of Fascism consolidated him in this idea. Also, thought it of being centred especially on the preparation of the next wave, theoretically and practically.

From 1919 to 1924, he continued higher education while undertaking his revolutionary activity in Hungary, Italy, Slovenia - in Prague, then in Vienna, and finally in Zagreb (1919-1924). In Yugoslav immigration co-ed, in Prague initially, then in Vienna, Ciliga created communist circles. In Prague, he organised a Marxist Club, then an "International Federation of Marxist Students ". The Czech Slansky, this one of the lawsuits of Prague, was to succeed to him. Speaking Czech perfectly, he entered the press section of the CPT, contributing to the weekly magazine Socialni Democrat (later Kommunist), and to Rudé Pravo. In Vienna, he continued to collaborate to the Czech communist daily newspaper. He had especially the occasion - as delegate of communist students outside - to firmly express his rejection of the alleged tactics of terrorism which had been used by part of the young Yugoslav Communists in 1921. This "tactics" was officially abandoned, to pass to the form of illegal conspirative organisation.

From September 1922 until 1925, he accepted increasing responsibilities in the Yugoslavian communist movement. In 1922, in Zagreb, he takes up the duties of secretary of the party for Croatia and of director of the Borba (9), weekly magazine, the legal and semi-official organ of the CPY, the communist press being prohibited in Serbia, and enjoying a great popularity in workers’ strata. In 1923, he was appointed as member of the central committee. Lastly, during the winter 1924-1925, as representative of the Croatian party, he became member of the central committee of the CP of Yugoslavia (10). In 1920, the CPY would have had 60.000 members and directly influenced 200.000 workers in the trade unions. The Yugoslav Communist Party was indeed in full expansion, in a country where however the percentage of the farming population was 76 %. Having formally excluded the right-wing tendencies, the CPY had adhered to the Communist International (Comintern) during the congress of Vukovar in June 1920. Being parliamentarist, the new Party had conquered many municipalities, of which that of Belgrade. The local elections had given it 59 seats. In a tended social situation, marked by the repression of the railwaymen strike of April 1920, the government passed to the offensive: it dissolves the communist municipality of Belgrade (August 1920), drove out the communist advisers of Agram (Zagreb). Finally, the Yugoslav CP which had played all on the elections lost all: December 29 a special decree (Obznana, i.e. proclamation) pronounced the dissolution of all the communist and trade-union organisations, closed the offices of the CP, and gracefully gave to the social-democrats the communist clubs. A law of July 30, 1921 worsened the situation: it put the CP out the law and drove out it Parliament and municipalities, which it controlled; the death penalty could be applied for propagation of communism (11).

Since 1921, a Left fraction, Leftist Group of the Yugoslav CP had been constituted in fraction, and had taken to contact with the German left-wing KAPD "to denounce the opportunist course of the parties of the Third International" (12). High bodies of the Comintern also underlined that the CPY had been the victim and of its sluggishness and its opportunism. It had not even published the 21 conditions of membership as well as the Theses on revolutionary parliamentarism. For the speakers of the IVth congress of the Comintern, the chiefs of the Yugoslav party turned all their attention on the electoral victories and took care not to frighten the Petty-Bourgeois elements in showing what was a Communist Party and which were its struggle methods (13).

In addition, another unforgivable crime, the CPY did not have built clandestine organisations. Thus, the party was dismembered, and almost ceased existing. Even its legal cover, the Independent Workers Party (Nezavisna radnika partija Jugoslavije or NRPJ), does not succeed in attracting the sympathy of the workers: in 1923, this last did not have any elected official in the general elections. Piteous result, which is not explained only by the faking of the elections and the vigilance of the monarchist police. According to official figures, the number of members passed from 60.000 members to 3.000 in 1928, to go up to 12.000 in 1941 (14), but on Great-Serbian Stalinist positions. It is remarkable that in his Autobiography and his interviews Ciliga did not speak by no means about these internal problems, of the parliamentary question, or of the Left Opposition in the party. Ciliga acquired a political notoriety in the party while being confronted with the thorny problem of nationalities in the Yugoslav State at that time, the Bulgarian Party had shown the leadership of the Comintern and the Yugoslav Communist Party neglected the national question. In fact, the Comintern had been very far in the concessions that it had made, under the pressure of the leading Russian party, vis-à-vis the nationalitarian tendencies in Balkans. The communist Federation of Balkans - created in 1920 and supposed to fraternally bring together Communist Greek, Bulgarian, Rumanian, Yugoslav and Turkish people - became since 1922 a battlefield between Bulgarians and Yugoslavs on the question of the national membership of Macedonia. However during the Vth congress of the Comintern (1924), which had put on the agenda the national question in particular connection with Yugoslavian question, Zinoviev had defined this State as a multinational State dominated by the Bourgeois Serbs and composed of several oppressed people. Consequently, he recommended "the separation of Croatia, Slovenia and Montenegro of the framework of Yugoslavia and their constitution in independent republics " (15).

This congress was also that of the bolshevisation of the sections of the Comintern, on which Ciliga does not blow word. In fact, as notes it the Italian secret police, Ciliga was a partisan of the bolshevisation. In a letter addressed to the communist leader of Trieste Felice Platone, in 1925, he decided for the cells system, which was going to remove any freedom of political debate in the Communist Parties, in the name of the "iron discipline of the party". At that time, therefore, he was far from being adverse, and followed the official line. Ciliga - against "the right-wing tendency"of the party, which envisaged "the constitution of a limited provincial autonomy", (16) and the left which "preferred to leave with the future socialist revolution" - had the care to settle the national question (17) - in total agreement with the Comintern’s orientation. Already, recognised leader, at the top of the Party, he proposed in Borba ( "the Fight ") a radical "counter-project ": the transformation of the monarchical and centralist Yugoslav State in a federative Republic of five national republics (Slovenia, Croatia, Serbia, Montenegro and Macedonia) and two nationally mixed republics (Bosnia-Herzegovina and Vojvodina). He defended this project against the communist chief Sima Markovic, "who seemed to defend Great-Serbian options, while being based on the positions of the Austro-Marxism and of Stalin in 1912" (18). (This project of Yugoslav federation was taken again and put into practice by Tito after 1945.) In any case, Ciliga became extremely popular apart from Serbia, and was co-opted at the Central Committee of the Yugoslav Communist party. He was fully sustained by Moscow for his radicalism. (19).

But, the proposal of the Vth congress to form three independent republics left Ciliga sceptic, since the case of Bosnia-Herzegovina, Montenegro and Vojvodina had overlooked. For Ciliga these plans destroyed Yugoslavia straightforwardly. This Comintern’s policy was applied until 1926. Everywhere, even in Bosnia-Herzegovina, Montenegro and Vojvodina were proclaimed the need "for the self-determination of the people ". Ciliga was the instigator of this policy, as a secretary of the party for Croatia and director of Borba. In an article, he denounced the slavery of 9 million not-Serbs subjected to the dominant, strong Serb nation despite of its 3 million inhabitants (20). As the policy of the Comintern was at that time hostile to the Great-Serbian tendencies - for, undoubtedly, better sticking to the policy of the Bulgarian CP -, Ciliga during the winter 1924-1925 became also member of the Yugoslav Politburo.

With the autumn 1924, at the instigation of Zinoviev, the Comintern inserted in Krestintern (Peasants’ International, subdivision of the Comintern) the Croatian Peasants party (HSS) of Stjepan Radic. On this policy which appeared even for Gramsci as vermin, Ciliga seems not to have emitted the slightest doubt. Well more he called for a united Front with a party that the Comintern at its beginnings would have described as a Bourgeois party (21).

All these leading functions drew to him the attention of the police. Ciliga was expelled in April 1925 from Yugoslavia under pretext that he, born in Istria, was in fact an Italian citizen... Given to the Fascist police and put in prison because of the 1921-armed action, he was released, as well as the 120 peasants who with him had resisted the squadristi, thanks to a providential amnesty. What does not prevent the Fascist police from spying him step by step, under his various pseudonyms: Cegala (Giuseppe), Antonetich.

Emigrated in Vienna, September 8, 1925, he represented the Yugoslav Communist party as liaison officer between the Comintern, the Federation of Vojvodina, and the Balkan communist Federation. He wrote for the Balkan Federation review under the nickname of Antonetich, but also in the Austrian Communist newspaper Siegel und Hammer ("Hammer and Sickle"). Finally in October 1926, he was sent to Moscow, there to teach at the school of the Yugoslav party and to take part in the work of the Yugoslav section of the Comintern. At that time, he would not have never imagined to cast doubt on the orientations of the Comintern, which seemed to him right, and was completely unaware of all the left currents which fought the Comintern’s official line. The names of Bordiga, Korsch are never quoted, although Ciliga - by the organ in Slovenian language Delo (Work) of the Communist Party of Italy - could take note of it.

III. - IN RUSSIA: IN THE COUNTRY OF THE GREAT LIE (1926-1930)

At the time when Ciliga left Vienna for Moscow, important changes had occurred at the top of the apparatus of the Comintern, and consequently in the high bodies of this last one. Bukharin, combined with Stalin, had replaced Zinoviev, who had allied himself to Trotsky. That resulted in an abandonment of the theory of the liberation of the people oppressed into Yugoslavia. Consequently, the right-wing fraction conveying the Serb nationalist tendency, triumphed over it in the party: by a series of manoeuvres Serb Sima Markovic (1888-1939) was replaced at the head of the CPY. But when the national conflicts burst again in 1927, Markovic was relieved of all his responsibilities and replaced by Djuro Cvijic (1896-1938), representative of a moderate fraction of left allied besides with the trade unionists. This Left had made of Zagreb its fortified town. But Bukharin made revoke the direction of "left" and, with the assistance of Bosnian Josef Cijinsky "(1904-1937) (known under the name of Milan Gorkic), bolshevised the party by forming a political centre composed of Yugoslavians living in Moscow. Returned from Russia, where he was since 1915 as prisoner, then fighter of the Red Army, arrived at the end of 1925 Josip Broz, who was going to begin one fulgurating rise in the Party, like man of Bukharin, until 1928, then after his arrest this same year, of Stalin. Two destinies crossed: that of Ciliga going to Moscow, to know the Russian prisons and insulators, that of Tito returning to Yugoslavia to know a slow but sure rise towards the power (22).

Was Ciliga conscious of the risk which he took while going to Moscow, in full purges of the high bodies of the CPY? It is at least what he affirmed in 1937: "... while going to Moscow, I was likely to lose my freedom of movement. But the desire to studying on the spot the experiments of the Great Russian Revolution carried it. The repeated failures that the communist movement in Europe underwent showed the need for improving some, to look further into the tactics of it." (23). All the adventures, disappointments, hopes, imprisonments, the political activity of Ciliga are well known by his book - writing in France between January 1936 and July 1937 - and published by the Editions Gallimard in 1938 under the title: In the country of the great lie. His Siberian exile and the report of his exit of the USSR is described in the second volume (written between 1938 and 1941), and published in 1950 under the title Siberia, land of exile and industrialisation (24). For the comprehension of the Ciliga’s political path, it is necessary to give the broad outline of his testimony, especially at the moment when the media assertion of the fall of Communism overlooks the groups and elements who denounced "the great lie"of the Russian State capitalism, presented by Stalin, and his adversary Trotsky - for once in full agreement - as of " socialism " and a remarkable "model" of development of the "productive forces ". When Ciliga arrived at the beginning of October 1926 in Moscow, he was immediately struck by the misery and the backwardness of the "fatherland of socialism", while noting " the rise of whole social groups ". He arrived at the moment when the NEP sank in the rout, with an increasingly paralysed economy and 2,2 million misemployed people (25).

He realised quickly that the foreigners like him, members of the Comintern, were considered by the Russian working people plunged in misery, like privileged people living like Barins. Since 1924 doctor of philosophy and history of the university of Zagreb, Ciliga was the right person to teach for the Yugoslav section of the Communist University of the Western national minorities (KUNMZ) of Moscow. Each year 25 new pupils went into this School of the CPY - created in 1925 - for a 4 years teaching, especially in Serb-Croat (26).

But Ciliga was not regarded himself a "red academician". Civil servant of the Comintern, he became automatically on his arrival member of the Communist Party of the USSR, whose life seemed "more interesting to him than that of the Comintern". As of his arrival, the organisation seemed to him not like the staff of the world revolution but a simple branch, "without much importance", attached to the propaganda service of the Russian party. While taking part himself in Vth Plenum of the Comintern (December 1926), he realised that this former "Convention of the World Revolution", as defined by Trotsky in 1919, was already in the Stalin’s hands. Listening the speeches of Trotsky, Zinoviev, Kamenev, he was especially impressed by the speech of this last who stressed that the "right" danger in the Russian party was due above all to "the Petty-Bourgeois character (of Russia) and to the weakening of the revolutionary tendencies in the western proletariat" (27).

With the listening of all the debates of the Russian party and especially of the reflections of the Russian workers, noting the repression of the anarcho-syndicalist workers, suspected of publishing an illegal paper which required only the improvement of the working conditions in their factory, Ciliga became very pessimistic on the future of the "socialist fatherland". Whereas before Ciliga - of its own consent - did not nourish any doubt about the accuracy of the policy of the USSR, he came from there to conclude that "the evolution towards socialism was definitively stopped, revolution died, and that consequently all was poured..." (28). In Russia at least. But since 1927 he started contacts with the Russian Trotskyist Opposition (29), whose influence within the frameworks of the party grew day after day. But his own opposition apparently was extremely discrete, since he could take part in works of the Comintern’s VIth congress (August 1928), just before Trotsky was expelled from URSS (30). In fact, the Yugoslav problems will bring Ciliga in the rows of the Trotskyist Left Opposition. There were in Moscow 120 militants of the Yugoslav Communist Party, the majority workers, who, by their jobs, were more engaged in the Russian problems than in the life of the Yugoslav party. Ciliga, under the pseudonym of Zadvornij, played a great part, being member of the political office of the Yugoslav CP. While Ciliga was in Moscow, great changes were producing in the Yugoslav party, on which he seemed to have little information in the insulation of his Moscovite School. The triumvirate Bukharin-Gorkin-Manuilski had solicited - he affirms - a whole underworld which had never had anything to do with the Yugoslav movement and which was sent for "bolshevising" completely the party. In the VIIIth conference of the organisation of Zagreb, the Djakovic-Tito fraction seized the power in the name of the fight against the splitting represented by the "left ". But in August 1928, Tito was arrested and imprisoned during 5 years in Yugoslavia. Djuro Djakovic (1886-1929), Croat like Ciliga, had followed the courses of the Lenin School in 1927-1928. Obliged to return clandestinely to Croatia, for a true suicidal mission, he was assassinated at once in April 1929. The situation of Yugoslav Communism worsened quickly: less because of monarchist repression that following his concessions to the anti-Serb Croatian nationalist movement and especially of the so-called politics "class against class", purely adventurist, issued by Stalin after the VIth congress of the Comintern (31).

In June 1928, the assassination inside the Parliament of the Peasant deputy Radic, leader of the Croatian Peasant party, with the blessing of the Serb nationalist parties (32), put fire at the powders. The national factor definitively took the step on the social factor, nourishing all the adventures of type the nationalist or terrorist. The assassination of Radic, - whose party had been in 1924 member of Krestintern before Radic chosen in 1925 to take part in the royal government - and the disorders which followed in Croatia made it possible for the king of Yugoslavia to build his personal dictatorship in January 1929. He dissolved the Parliament and put out the law the political parties, initially the Yugoslav CP. That occurred in full "third period" of the Comintern, period of calculated adventurism, where the armed insurrection was prepared at each street corner (33).

In a party directed by Russian agents, of whom some were agitators at the service of the police (34), the direction of the CPY was engulfed in the adventurism. It proclaimed that the only solution to the crisis for the working class and the farmers (was) the armed fight, the civil war against the domination of the hegemonic Serb Bourgeoisie. That resulted - in addition to the reinforcement of the anti-Serb nationalist feelings - in duels with the revolver between Communists and police officers. According to Ciliga, and the CPY, repression made among Communists hundreds of deaths; perhaps 30 (35).

It was already enormous; and the party was tiny room for a few hundreds of members. But all this radicalism badly hid CPY’s nationalist gangrene: it supported the nationalist organisations of any edge, which at least since 1928 was concretised by a close co-operation with the nationalist Macedonians (VRMO) (36) and the Ustashe terrorists (37). In 1929, at the time of these tragic events, Ciliga was already formally in the Left opposition. He and his Yugoslav comrades of Moscow made push back with one crushing majority (90 votes against 5) the resolution of support to the Comintern’s policy in Yugoslavia. Interesting fact, the left of the CPY was devoted to a self-criticism of its national policy: "Started from the national question, we were in the presence of the following dilemma: Socialist revolution or Bourgeois revolution in Yugoslavia. The left-wing fraction had formerly recommended exploiting the problem of nationalities in the interests of the revolution. But this exploitation had ended up taking a form such as the Communist Party and the labour movement was reduced by it to serve Bourgeois nationalism of the oppressed people of Yugoslavia. Well before one had seen in France the reconciliation between Red and Tricolour flags, the International and the Marseillaise, one had come from there in Dalmatia to alliance of the Croatian Tricolour and red flags, International and the national anthem Our beautiful fatherland (Nasa lepija domovina). The revolutionary workers’ movement was likely to dislocate themselves in as many simply radical movements than there are nationalities in Yugoslavia." (38).

Ciliga with others had formed a Trotskyist group, in the illegality, with a score of oppositional elements. A centre of 6 members had been named and composed of 4 Yugoslavians: Stanko Dragic, the true person in charge of the group, old member of the central committee of the CPY; Mustafa Dedic, former secretary of the trade-union committee of Herzegovina; Stepan Heberling, coming from Vojvodina; finally Ante Ciliga. There were also two Russians: Victor Zankov and Oreste Glibovskij (39). This group incorporated the woman of Tito, Pelagija Denisova-Belusova, until his arrest and his disappearance in 1934-1935, without Tito protesting (40). This clandestine group was in contact with the Trotskyist organisation of Moscow, which provided it letters and documents of Trotsky and Racovski. In addition, Ciliga and his comrades were in close connection with the Russian factory workers. Of course, the activities of the group were discovered by the GPU. A commission of the Comintern (Soltz commission, name of this one who chaired it), with the servile support of Yugoslav Politburo, decided to exclude Ciliga and two militants of his group for one year (with deferment!). 20 others had to leave Moscow. According to a usual practice of Stalinism, at its beginnings, the apparatus tried "to buy" Ciliga by proposing to him a job well remunerated as archivist and teacher in Leningrad. After having personally seen Kirov, "the boss" before his assassination, he was named part-time lecturer at the Communist University of this City. But he does not pass with weapons and luggage on the side of the new red "bourgeoisie", "camouflaged under the tinsels of bureaucrat". It was in full period of forced collectivisation of the campaigns, where the speech was simple: "That those who want to enter to the kolkhoz put on the left, and those who want to go to Siberia to right!..." (41). The whole followed by appalling famines and massive shootings of the recalcitrant peasants. As for the workers, promised to the "gay and merry life" of the Stalinist quinquennial plans: their wages dropped by 50 % compared to 1913. "We live currently more badly than at the time of the capitalists!". Their demoralisation - which explains partly the triumph of the counter-revolution - was total: "... what can we do now? Can it were possible that we, who wanted the power Soviet, would fight it? " (42).

In fact, although the Dragic’s and Ciliga’s group - according to his terms - was a particular case of an underground life, where were born the new ideas, the Croatian Communist had to note a terrible insulation. The students of Ciliga - coming from the working class - ‘were parvenus of the system, and thus the worst enemies of any authentic labour movement, for such a movement should necessarily seek the destruction of all the bureaucratic system." After discussions with the Trotskyist intellectuals, Ciliga started to have serious doubts about this current and its chief Trotsky. Being interested finally little in the fate of the working class, for them "Stalin (carried out) the essence of the program of the opposition, but with more brutality". He concluded since 1930 - conclusion a posteriori of 1937? (43) - that the State capitalism triumphed in the USSR, sustained constantly as well by Stalin as by Trotsky and the intellectuals of the opposition: "Stalinists and Trotskyists (identify) the State capitalism to socialism and bureaucracy to the proletariat. Trotsky, as well as Stalin, made pass the State for the proletariat’s one, the dictatorship of the bureaucracy on the proletariat for dictatorship of the proletariat, the victory of the State capitalism over private capitalism for socialism, for a victory of this last one." (44).

In this state of mind, where - so he write it - he underestimated his divergences with the Trotskyists, he was arrested on May 21, 1930 in Leningrad, after having visited his comrades of Moscow, more interested by an immediate activity in the factories (leaflets, strike watchwords) that by an activity of theoretical reflection in the long time.

IV - PRISONS, INSULATORS AND SIBERIAN EXILE (1930-1935)

Arrested with his comrades, whereas Dragic escaped the GPU temporarily, Ciliga knew the prison of Leningrad. Each day, prisoners were shot. However, at that time, "the prison is the only place in Soviet Russia where people express themselves in a more or less sincere and open way." And beside that, social demoralisation was so deep that all condemned to dead were keep silent, "without a cry of revolt against the government which put them at death" (45). As Ciliga deduced from it: as the forces of the revolution as the forces of the left were "exhausted".

In November, Ciliga was transported to the insulator of Verkhne-Uralsk, political prison along the Ural Mountain, in the north of Magnitogorsk (46). This insulator was the last place where it could be easy to speak freely, where the press and meetings freedom was exerted. The 250 prisoners (approximately 180 Communists and 70 Anarchists) made political meetings according to the rulebook, with meeting’s president and secretary. The majority was exerted to write articles for hand-written newspapers, which circulated by "the interior post office" (by de means of baskets between the cells). There was even a library with political books. A strong majority of the prisoners was Trotskyist (120 to 140) and received Trotsky’s booklets, pamphlets and circulars. With the presence of Mensheviks, Left Socialist-revolutionaries, 16 Decists ( "Democratic Centralism group"), and of 3 partisans of Miasnikov, there was "a true illegal Parliament of Russia".

According to Ciliga, the social composition of the insulator was primarily "intellectual". There were hardly 15 % of workers. The communist sector of the opposition was composed of 43 % of Jews, of 27 % of Caucasians (Georgians and Armenians), Russians with some representatives of other nationalities reaching 30 %. Interesting fact: the Russian and working class element was especially represented in the Ultra-Left: Democratic Centralism, group, and prevailed in the Miasnikov’s Workers’ Group. This Russian national "phenomenon ", also appeared according to Ciliga - among Anarchists. Among the Trotskyist militants, Ciliga noticed a vast majority of young intellectuals and Jewish technicians coming from the Ukrainian and Bielorussian Petty-Bourgeoisie. According to him, there was among them "a strong group of former soldiers and Chekists ", directly resulting from the Apparatus (48).

Ciliga found in Verkhne-Uralsk his Yugoslav and Russian comrades: Dragic, Dedic, Zankov, Glibovskij. They decided to militate in the "collective of the Bolshevik-Leninists" of the insulator. But those were divided into three tendencies:

A tendency directed by professors Solnstsev, Iakovin and Stopalov. This group, author of the Theses of the three, agglomerated Dingelstedt. It was the largest fraction. It recommended "a reform by in the tops", and finally industrialisation, the quinquennial plans, etc. It wanted "... the same thing as Stalin ", but only in a "more human appearance" (49).

A small group, known as "centre-wing" or "centrist" group, directed by the son-in-law of Trotsky Man-Nivelson and Aaron Papermeister, which was hardly different from "the right-wing" group. It published with this lasts one a common newspaper (hand-written) entitled Pravda v tjurme (" the Truth in prison ").

The Left fraction to which the Ciliga’s friends adhered wanted "a reform by in bottom", being based on the working class. Its theoretical weakness held in what not only it defined the quinquennial plans as "bluff " but it denied the world economic crisis. It published the newspaper Voinstvujuchtchij Bolshevik (" the militant Bolshevik")

Apart from these fractions, only the Trotskyist Densov considered, while citing Lenin, that the Soviet economy was a form of State capitalism.

"The militant Bolshevik" in whom Ciliga under the pseudonym of Richard wrote, was published once per month or every two months, including 10-20 articles, in separated books, with a run of only three copies (1 for each wing of the prison) (50).

Ciliga very quickly belonged to the Left Bolsheviks’ tendency evolving apart from the Trotskyist mould, where "a quotation of Trotsky had the value of a proof " (51). He noted that the Stalinist bureaucracy became "little by little the nucleus of a new leading class "; consequently, it was necessary to carry out wage claiming, as in any capitalist country; and for this reason even to be combined with socialist and anarchist factory workers. For a new fight of the revolutionary working class, there was a need of a new revolutionary party. This position, with 5 years of delay, was finally that of Korsch in 1926, of whose writings Ciliga seems to have been unaware.

The increasingly radical Ciliga’s evolution was initially given - according to him - by the attitude of the Trotskyist majority of the insulator, which required a monolithic position: the "militant Bolsheviks" had to dissolve and suspend the publication of their newspaper, or else they would be excluded. The Left Trotskyist group of the 30 (whose Ciliga) proposed a new editorial board, composed of a representative of each tendency, and publishing only one organ for all the Communists. "The militant Bolsheviks " were not indeed represented in this editorial board.

The Trotskyist known as "right-wing Trotskyists" and the "centrists" excluded them, with hateful methods which proved "that between Trotskyism and Stalinism there were many common items" (52). The other reason was that the GPU, which had agents until the interior of the prison, pushed towards the scission.

The result was that there were (around 1931) two Trotskyist organisations:

* the "Collective of the Bolshevik-Leninists" (majority) with 75-78 members;

* the "Collective of left-wing Bolshevik-Leninists", 51 or 52 members; it published the newspaper Bolshevik Leninist with the pens of V. Densov, N.P. Gorlov, M. Kamenetski, O. Pouchas and Ciliga (53).

The political radicalisation of Ciliga and the "leftist" Bolshevik-Leninists can be explained as much by the horrors of collectivisation and the quinquennial plans as by the rejection of the Trotsky’s positions.

Ciliga noted already - when he taught in Leningrad - all the privileges of the rising class, whereas the worker stagnated in misery. Among the prisoners arriving in the insulator, one of them assure him the massive massacre of Ukrainian peasants (3 million of victims), the deportation from 5 to 10 million Muzhiks, the slow anguish of exiled of Siberia from which the lifespan did not exceed two years. A third of the working class lived in a true slavery, for Stalin’s pharaonic works (Baltic-White seas channel, etc.).

The Trotskyist ultra-left, represented by Ciliga and his friends, was extremely dissatisfied by the Trotsky’s dithyrambic standpoint in 1932 on the "really incredible current successes" of the Stalinist economic policy (54).

Quite naturally opened, in 1932, in the Trotskyist milieu of the prison a rough discussion on the nature of the USSR. One voted for even a resolution for or against the "working class" character of the USSR: this one obtained 15 vote for. Another resolution, defended by what there remained of the "militant Bolsheviks " collected 15 vote, while speaking as Trotsky about a necessary "political revolution on the economic basis of October "; the regime was " above the classes ", but "dictatorship of the proletariat " had disappeared.

But especially, there were "extremist negators", of whose Ciliga. Their resolution, minority, supported by 15 vote, proclaimed that the bureaucracy was a true class hostile to the proletariat; and thus that only the social revolution could lead to socialism.

In 1932 the document, after reading last documents of Trotsky, the rupture of Ciliga and ten militants with the Trotskyist collective was consumed. Like use, a declaration was written where it was clearly announced that the Trostky’s Program reinforced "the illusions of the Western proletariat " in Stalinism, by wearing it of the absurd label of "Proletarian State ". The conclusion was a rejection of the Trotskyism as a left current of Stalinism: "Trotsky and his partisans are too closely related to the bureaucratic regime in the USSR to be able to carry out the fight against this regime until its extreme consequences ". Trotsky was "at the bottom the theorist of a regime whose Stalin is the practitian" (55).

A Ciliga’s article entitled "Bureaucratic or Proletarian Opposition" marked its passage in the extreme left. In fact, in the insulator, the influence of the non-Trotskyist extreme Left was decisive and became more and more extensive, according to Ciliga.

There were first of all the Decists, certainly most divided into fractions. Leninists at the beginning, but against the bureaucratic centralism, they had been against the Workers opposition in 1920. A lot of them had capitulated after the first quinquennial Plan, which seemed to them a victory against the NEP. In the insulator, on the other hand, and undoubtedly elsewhere, they had been radicalised much, but in confusion and division. There were 3 or 4 Decist fractions. But with important nuances, they had approached much the Miasnikov’s Workers’ Group (56), whose leader in Verkhne-Uralsk was Sergej Tijunov. Miasnikovians defined Trotskyism as "an opposition of high-ranking civil servants " of the bureaucracy. They criticised at the root Leninism and "party dictatorship". For them, it was decisive that the workers can have freedom to choose among the concurrent workers parties within the working class. Since 1923, they had gradually arrived at the position that in USSR reigned the bureaucratic State capitalism. (57)

As for the Decists - whose leader S.P. Medvedev (1885-1937) was going to join the insulator in 1935, whereas Ciliga was in Siberia - they had approximately adopted the Miasnikov’s Theses. For the Decist Jak Kosman, Lenin had given industry to the hands of the bureaucracy. For Shapiro, another Decist, the Workers Opposition in 1921 had not represented the interests of the proletariat, but those of the trade-unions’ bureaucracy ". But, on the other hand, in accordance to the positions of the German and Dutch Councils Communists, another Decist Volodia Smirnov affirmed: " There never existed in Russia a proletarian revolution nor a dictatorship of the proletariat. There was simply a popular revolution by bottom and a bureaucratic dictatorship by the top. " As for Lenin, the holy image of the Russian revolution, it was to be broken: "Lenin was never an ideologist of the proletariat. From the beginnings to the end he was an ideologist of the intelligentsia. ".

In fact, for Volodia Smirnov - as for besides Otto Rühle (58) - the Bolshevism expressed, just like Mussolini, Hitler, Ataturk, Roosevelt, a universal tendency towards the State capitalism. Such theses caused scandal until in the ultra-left, and Smirnov was excluded from the group. However an extremely important discussion had opened on this question where clashed Ciliga who considered this capitalist tendency in Russia as relatively "progressist" and Tijunov who saw in it a "purely parasitic phenomenon " (59).

Ciliga evolved in the same direction as these Left Communist tendencies. After having demolished the image of Trotsky, in whom he did not believe any more - following a report that made him a sailor of Kronstadt on the Trotsky’s responsibility of the 10.000 shot sailors and workers by the Cheka after March 1921 -, he started to break his veneration for Lenin. Although having "a place of honour in the heart of the workers and the Pantheon of the history ", he had become the spokesman of the Soviet bureaucracy ", by liquidating socialism in the economic field. Finally, "Lenin had opened the way to Stalin ".

At the time when Ciliga - with Dragic - were to leave Verkhné-Uralsk to be off-set in Siberia, was based in 1933 in the insulator "a Federation of the Left Communists", strong from 20 to 25 members, including the Workers Group of Tijunov, the old Decists and some Trotskyists.

The year 1933 had opened heavy threats, with the Hitler’s arrival to the power. The question of a new International arose with the bankruptcy of Stalinism in Germany. The left-wing Trotskyists, being unaware of the Trotsky’s new positions, judged that the call to the formation of the Fourth international was "a premature and demagogic watchword". Smirnov decided for the fusion of the social democrats and the Communists. Tijunov, next to the German and Italian Left Communists, decided vigorously against any "republication of the Third International ". Ciliga, supported to him in writing that "the union of two corpses (social democracy and Stalinism) would not produce an alive body ".

There would be to still say much on the political groups with which Ciliga discussed before its departure the insulator: Left Socialist-Revolutionaries, divided - according to him - between the Trotskyism and the left-wing Communism (group of Kamkov); the anarchists who "represented a form of chivalrous ideal ", the Armenians and the left-wing Zionists purely occupied by their respective national problems...

May 18, 1933, therefore, Ciliga left the insulator, his detention having been gracefully prolonged for two years by the OGPU, with the acceptance of Politburo of the Yugoslav CP. Nothing made there: suicide attempt and hunger strike; Ciliga was off-set during almost 3 years in Siberia (Irkutsk, Ienisseisk, Krasnoïarsk), occupying a place of economist for the Dan bank, then for the forest trust Sevpolarles. All his observation of the living conditions, Ciliga largely told in his book (second part, published in French in 1949).

He contacted the Italian embassy in Moscow, by telegrams, and made play his Italian citizenship. He obtained, after grind efforts, an Italian passport. With the assistance of his family in Italy, and in spite of a prolongation of 3 years exile of stay in Siberia in 1935, Ciliga succeeded in being expelled from the USSR, while making play his quality from alien. Without knowing until the last moment if he were going to be sent on the Arctic circle, to be shot, locked up in a camp, Ciliga on December 3, 1935 with the exit from the train at the Russian border left Russia for Poland.

It was the end of the odyssey in the country of the great lie, certainly richest and most instructive by Ciliga’s analysis of the political life of extreme left in the prisons, lagers of the Soviet Gulag Archipelago. On the other hand, his comrade Stanko Dragic, eminently combative and courageous man, after an attempt at escape in 1934 towards Poland, disappeared body and heart in the terrible Solovki Isles.

V. - THE SECOND "ODYSSEY" OF CILIGA (1936-1945)

Of course, all the Ciliga’s manuscripts, letters and notes were removed to him by the men of the GPU, and thus are sleeping in the archives of this organisation.

Without recognising it in his memories and interviews, while passing by Czechoslovakia, Ciliga contacted two Trotskyist militants: Vladislav Burian and Jan Frankel (60), and by this skew Trotsky. Without wasting time, a few days hardly after his exit of the USSR, Ciliga had written to Trotsky, who answered him (61), and with the Bulletin of the Russian opposition. His testimony is published immediately in Russian and French by the Trotskyist press. He launches the idea of a material and political aid in order to come to assistance of the deportees and imprisoned, "under the pressure of the European workers and the democratic movement ". This idea was taken up by Trotsky as of December 1935: he proposed to launch a "Ciliga committee" for the defence of the political Communist prisoners, following the important revelations made by the Croatian Communist (62).

But the divergences with the Trotskyist movement were spread out quickly and openly. Ciliga suggested a committee which would defend the "Bolshevik-Leninists as well as the imprisoned Socialist-Revolutionaries and Mensheviks". He noted besides that, compared to Germany de Hitler, the Trotskyist hastened to call with the common fight of the social democrats with the Stalinists against Fascism. Trotsky refuses. A block with the Mensheviks and "s.r." abroad would be harmful, especially because it would lend the side to the attacks of Stalinism.

Installed in Paris at the end of January 1936, Ciliga published articles in Bjulleten’ oppozitsii (Trotskyist organ in Russian, published in Paris, until 1940). That lasted until May, date on which ceased any written collaboration. Ciliga had committed the "unforgivable crime" to also send articles to the Dan’s Menshevik review in Paris Sotsialisticeskij Vestnik ("the Socialist Messenger ") (63), articles which were especially informative.

Nevertheless, Ciliga, who had been with the extreme Left of the Trotskyism, to join finally in 1933 with certain positions of the Russian Communist Left (Workers Group, Decists) moved away from there to approach gradually social-democrat positions. These were not the positions on the State capitalism which made of Ciliga " a Menshevik" - as it is affirmed by certain Trotskyist which assimilates Communist Left to Menshevism (64) - but its spirit impresses democratic idealism. Trotsky could write, not without reason, June 22, 1936, that Ciliga was not Marxist, but an "semi-liberal element in his thought, humanitarian, idealist, certainly very honest in its kind ". But he also added - what was obviously false with the reading of the book that Ciliga started to write all the year 1936 - that "even in the insulator, he (was) remained what he had always been: an idealistic and exalted Democrat, who, of Stalinist that he was, (was) become anti-Stalinist, but not Marxist for as much " (65).

In fact, all the work of Ciliga was to make known by all average the its experiment in the Russian insulators and prisons, which was made by the translation of Russian of his book published by Gallimard in spring 1938. The Gestapo in 1941 (66) seized besides this book, published in English in London in 1940.

Before the war, the path of Ciliga was going to be contradictory. He lived of his pen; but he wrote also articles for the Messager socialiste in 1937 (67), the liberal newspaper of Zagreb Nova Evropa (68), the Novosti newspaper of governmental tendency, and even the French Syndicalist Révolution prolétarienne (69), oscillating between liberalism, anarchism, and nostalgia of the Croatian country. All this activity in the Croatian press allowed the organ of the CPY, Proleter, to denounce him as "fascist spy". (70).

In summer 1937, he returned to his native village of Istria, where the Fascist police supervised him. On his arrival in Yugoslavia, he was - he claims - decree and put six months in prison (in fact three months); according to him at the instigation of the Stalinist Yugoslavians who had infiltrated the political police, whose chief was a Communist. He could nevertheless regain Paris, as the Titists allowed it, in a purely Stalinist style, in 1952, to show him to having been since Russia an agent of the Mussolini’s OVRA. (71).

It should however be stressed that in 1936 and 1937 Ciliga constantly obtained the renewal of his Italian passport. That made it possible to the Croatian journalist Jan Balkas in the review Cultura (September 1, 1937) to show Ciliga to be with the service and the pay of the fascist government and police. In fact, according to police reports’, Ciliga questioned on August 17, 1937 with the quaestorship of Pola was satisfied to give its history, while ensuring that socialising remainder, he was no more registered with any party. In September 1937, the embassy of Italy noted that Ciliga was of "antifascist feelings without however carrying out any propaganda " (72). December 21, he left Italy for France, where the Fascist OVRA noted all his changes of residence and profession (he taught German at the commercial school Pigier in Saint-Maur and frequented as student the Russian courses at the School of Eastern Languages).

In 1938, Ciliga was already in liaison - whereas he wrote the second part of his book - with "the revolutionary Syndicalists" of the Révolution prolétarienne. At the same time as Victor Serge, Ciliga conducted campaign against Trotsky in connection with his role in the repression of the insurgent sailors of Kronstadt. Those were presented by Trotsky as "completely demoralised elements, men who carried elegant baggy breeches and were capped the made-to-order of upholders ". While being defended to have taken part directly in repression, and by it minimising, Trotsky approved it completely (73). For Ciliga, who remained still faithful to certain positions of the left-wing Communism, "the repression of Kronstadt, the suppression of the Workers’ and Soviet democracy by the 10th congress of the Russian Communist Party, the elimination of the proletariat of the management of industry, the introduction of the NEP meant already the death of the revolution ". There remained nothing any more but the alliance of the State capitalism with private capitalism (74). Ciliga held first hand information of an insurgent communist sailor whom he met in the Leningrad’s prison in 1930, as he brings it back in his book "In the country of the great lie ".

In 1939, some time before the world war, Ciliga was integrated in the discussion circle leaded by the Germans Arkadij Maslov and Ruth Fischer, the Russians Gabriel Miasnikov - old leader of the Workers Group, who lived in France since 1929 -, and the "left-wing Menshevik " Vera Alexandrova, literature critic of Sotsialisticeskij vestnik ("Socialist Messenger ", Menshevik review in Paris). A circle where reigned large disorientation: Arkadij Maslov was pessimistic on the German proletariat, reached "provincialism ". Miasnikov, "a volcanic energy " and "a brilliant autodidact " poured gradually in "Soviet patriotism " starting from the Russian war against Finland (75).

At the time of the rout of 1940, Ruth Fischer and Maslov succeeded in leaving France for the American continent. Ciliga raised the question to embark France for the USA or to remain in this country, "to go on a circular journey through Europe in war, to see by (his) proper eyes the aspects of the crisis and decline of the European continent ". (76).

At that time, Ciliga had already given up any reference to the Marxist and proletarian movement. Influenced, according to its statements, by Keynes and Spengler, he estimated that the revolution belonged to a completed past, that declining Europe would leave clear room "to the ambition of the Kremlin to colonise Europe ". (77).

Having finished his book on Siberia, land of exile and industrialisation, in August 1941, Ciliga - as Ulysses - returned in his "Croatian fatherland", animated by a patriotism which had hardly left him since his youth.

Ciliga made the Paris-Zagreb trip, via Turin, Trieste, Pola in Istria - where he remained two months in the family house -, then passed by Ragusa (Dubrovnik) to go to Bosnia-Herzegovina, then from there to Croatia, where he arrived in December 1941 (78).

For the comprehension of the odyssey of Ciliga, and to answer the libellous charges point by point that he underwent at the Tito’s time, it is necessary to point out some historical facts.

After the invasion of Yugoslavia in April 1941 by the Hitler’s armies, the German emissary in Zagreb had wanted to install Vladimir Macek, president of the Croatian Peasant Party (HSS), and former vice-president of the government reversed by the coup-d’état pro-Allied of March 27 - and who had decided alliance with Hitler and Mussolini. But he had refused to become Head of the Croatian State which Third Reich wanted to create after the dismemberment of Yugoslavia. Therefore the choice of Germany had been directed towards the Ustasha movement, whose chief in Zagreb colonel Kvaternik proclaimed with the radio the creation of the Independent State of Croatia (Nezavisna Drzava Hrvatska, or N.D.H.) and its catch of being able in the name of the poglavnik (chief) Ante Pavelic. It is interesting to note that Macek and his Peasant Party gave support to and invited to collaborate with the new government.

Refugee in Italy, the Ustasha chief - with the help of Mussolini, after "giving" Dalmatia to the Duce - could return to Zagreb on April 15 with his henchmen. Following completely the Axis policy, he declared at once the war to Great Britain, then later to the USSR and the USA. For price of this good behaviour, Germany agreed to give to Croatia Bosnia-Herzegovina, while it installed a puppet government in Serbia, that Italy divided Slovenia with Reich; that finally Bulgaria received major part of Macedonia, and Hungary Vojvodina with its Hungarian "minority ".

The Ustasha State - a few days hardly after its formation - decided to undertake an "ethnic purification", directed against the 2 million Serb living in the Croatian State (against 3,3 million Bosnian Croats and 700.000 "Moslems"). Serbs, Jews and Gypsies were proclaimed "lower races". The result was a ferocious and pitiless terror: 600.000 Serbs were massacred directly or by sending these ones in death lagers; 30.000 Jews were exterminated. In all the country, emergency courts multiplied, whose sentences of death were executory in the next 3 hours. These massacres will last until summer 42, with the blessing of the Catholic Church and Croatian Franciscans, who saw as "blessed bread" the forced conversion of all Serbs who had not been killed. (79).

Dalmatia lately Italian became a land of asylum for persecuted Serbs and Croatians; but also for Serb tchetnici (Chetniks), sometimes combined to the Italians for their zeal in the fight against the Tito’s partisans, and who in their turn will massacre Croats of Dalmatia. In front of the success of Stalinist propaganda and movement in favour of the Serb and Croatian workers and peasants in Croatia, Italy and Germany reflect a brake, by pure interest, with the massacres of orthodox Serbs. (80).

In these conditions Ciliga arrived to Zagreb, via Bosnia-Herzegovina, - not as Pavelic’s companion, as Titoist propaganda (81) supported it. Ciliga was put in prison on a Titoist warrant arrest emanating from former Yugoslavia. According to him behind this arrest there was the Tito’s hand, whose agents would have infiltrated all the police machinery of the Ustasha movement; the Stalinists suggested to the police that Ciliga "was the political representative of Moscow in Yugoslavia and that Tito was only some military specialist in guerrilla " (82).

According to the Mussolini’s police in Croatia, Ciliga was stopped on June 19, 1942 in Sisak by the men of Pavelic on suspicion "of spying in favour of Italy ", as indicated in his file of Zagreb. (83).

At the end of his detention, where he had had a short conversation with Pavelic, who visited the prison, and to whom he explained why he was not any more communist (84) he was sent at the end of June 1942 in the terrible death camp of Jasenovac (85), carrying an indefinite death sentence.

But, as he self acknowledges it, Ciliga had his safety due only to his reputation of anglophilia. Indeed, the defeat of Stalingrad had shaken the Ustasha State. It was born a conspiracy of the Ministers for the interior and defence to make pass the Croatian State in the Allied camp, exactly as for Fascist Italy in 1943. They waited - and Pavelic too - as it seems - who had contacted the USSR and the British government in case of a combined landing in Dalmatia - to pass in the other camp.

Thanks to these interventions in high place, Ciliga was released on January first, 1943 of the camp. This was too thanks to the archbishop Alois Stepinac, but not, as the Titoist propaganda claimed it, for glorifying the Croatian State in various publications. (86)

The Italian police noted however with a certain dislike that Ciliga was abruptly promoted in the Ustasha State. He was placed at the house of the State employees in Zagreb. As journalist, he was named section head of Croatian journalism close to the ministry of the Foreign Affairs, a promotion that incontestably testified a high confidence on behalf of the Ustasha State, and of a not less great compromising with the Ustasha party. That he was defended some later, drove back in his cuttings off, by making a "distinction" between the Croatian State and the Ustashe, cannot dissimulate this collaboration.

Though his flatterers say some, it is certain that Ciliga at that time - whereas he was presented as such in his books on Russia - was any more neither Marxist nor Internationalist, but a Croatian nationalist, apparently pro-Allied, sailing in stinking water of Ustasha.

It is certain that Ciliga published much in Zagreb during all the year 1943 and until the summer 1944. He wrote for the Catholic review, intended for "the intellectuals": Spremnost ("Preparation "). His articles related to his experiment in Russia (88). In the absence of a direct access to the Croatian Archives, it is difficult to realise of the positions defended by Ciliga on other questions, if not indirectly. Thus, for example, September 19, 1943, in Spremnost, he published an article where, after the Italian collapse, he called to the integration of Istria in the Ustasha State, "for the restoration and the reinforcement of the political and cultural Ustashe positions in Istria " (89).

It is not astonishing that with such nationalist feelings, Ciliga - at the time of the Croatian edition in 1943 of his odyssey in Russia (90), was credited from an eulogistic foreword of a Ustasha politician, who flatteringly compared him with Doriot.

That he also wrote in the semi-official organ of the Ustasha State Hrvatski narod ("Croatian People"), as his Titoist adversaries sustained it (91), that is true. On top, as on certain articles of Spremnost, Ciliga kept a total silence in his memories and interviews.

He published, in 1944, in "Istrian dialect" his report on his odyssey in Istria and in the lager of Jasenovac. On this last point, the testimony of Ciliga seems not very reliable and to even reveal anti-Semite feelings. According to him, the Jews, in the camp of Jasenovac, enjoyed a privileged position, assisted even the Ustashe, by supervising the selection of the prisoners; taking part in the execution and baiting themselves - as the Ustashe - Serbs and Gypsies, introduced like "competitors" of the Jews in the control of the camp. This "vision " of the facts is not without to have consolidated the "revisionist " vision of the Croatian history (92).

About spring 1944, Ciliga decided to leave Zagreb, for Austria and Germany, to study "the complex balancesheet which existed between Hitler and the German people " (93). In fact, the situation became delicate for him. Some believed him in the service of some government or secret service, either English, or Russian. In addition, in summer 1944, with the unloading in Normandy, Pavelic realised the place of the unloading would not be any more in Dalmatian. Therefore he could not any more tolerate any pro-Allied tendency in his government. The anglophile opposition (the two ministers Lorkovic and Vokic) was pitilessly decapitated in September 1944 after the attempt against Hitler.

Paradoxically, according to Ciliga, because he was believed a pro-Allied agent, he could obtain a visa for Vienna. He had initially refused in May 1944 to form part of a Croatian delegation to take part in the European antibolshevik congress that Goebbels prepared in Vienna. In consideration of which, for the circumstance, Ciliga had been appointed professor of history and sociology at the University of Zagreb. (94).

At the same time, by twice, he was invited - so he writes it - to pass in the rows of the Tito’s partisans, who in fact controlled all the Croatian Dalmatia and campaigns. He refused by fear, as he write it, of a trap where he would be stopped by the Ustasha police, on denunciation of "the Titists", and carried out.

In fact, he could leave Zagreb for Vienna thanks to Konrad Klaser, the chief of local Gestapo, (95), a former Austrian Communist, who was interested particularly in him. He revealed that Klaser was an agent of Tito, who passed to the Titists in May 1945, and was liquidated in 1948 as Kominformist pro-URSS. This " mole " of Tito believed that Ciliga was "a Communist agent " like him. From July 1944 to February 1945, Ciliga travelled with the visa granted in Vienna and Berlin, noting the atmosphere reigning in the two countries. The end of the war found it in Switzerland, after a stay in Bavaria, where he met the American troops. Well took some to him: "the Titists " massacred in Bleiburg 50.000 Ustashe or alleged such, in May 1945. After 1948, it was the turn of the Kominformists to know the camps and death in arid islands (Goli Otok).

VI. - "JANUS WITH DOUBLE FACE " (1945-1992)

After the World War II, Ciliga will pass all the remainder of its life between Paris, where it lives a few years, and Rome. Its books on Yugoslavia will make known in France, Italy, and other countries as much by the republication of its book on "the great lie" and by its booklet on Lenin (96). One can quote: Yugoslavia under the interior and external threat, in 1951 (97); The State Crisis in Tito’s Yugoslavia in 1972, and finally only in Italian Il Labirinto jugoslavo in 1983 (98) This last book is the last one published alive by him on this subject.

This very strong interest for the problems of Yugoslavia built by Tito was translated in fact by a full engagement in the Croatian nationalist movement, in his "left wing". At the end of his life - in 1983 - Ciliga wrote that by antistalinism "he did not cease supporting the foreign policy of Tito by always criticising advantage its policy interior" in the problem of the nationalities. (99).

In fact, in the immediate future post-war period, Ciliga in Paris did not cease to have activity directed towards Istria, where he went (there was a allied garrison, in this zone which became Yugoslav only at the end of 1947) several times, and missed being removed several times by the police of Tito; but that failed for that, he says, he had friends "among the partisans and in the Tito’s political police" (100).

At the beginning of the Fifties, installed in Paris, Ciliga wrote in French a hostile book against Tito, and which caused a new attempt at removal to him. In fact, the literature published by him of "Serbo-Croatian " takes to a tonality definitely nationalist Croatian, anti-Serb. Will Ciliga raise the question "to when the Croatian people groan under the Serb yoke?" (101). Previously, he wondered, seriously, in the revolutionary syndicalist review Revolution prolétarienne whever Tito would solve the national problem by the real equality "between all the Slaves of the South ", and who would be "true political great man of our country " (102). In 1952, he seemed to have found it, with criticisms, in the chief of the Croatian Peasants party (HSS), Vladko Macek, exiled in the USA (103), to whom he proposed to contribute to "the liberation of the Croatian people" and to take the direction of a Balkan committee (104).

This insertion in Croatian immigration - very composite - was worth to him to be published as far as Argentina in a politico-cultural review moreover largely opened to the Ustashe currents, Hrvatska Revija. - Revista croata, published in Buenos Aires (105), where Pavelic had taken refuge, whom Tito claimed the extradition. It is very characteristic that Ciliga was always opposed to this extradition, taking care well not to publicly criticise Ustashe before the middle of the Fifties.

Installed to Rome about the middle of the Fifties, Ciliga will be affirmed in the Croatian emigration like a politician, of social democrat tendency, publishing his own publications. In the name of the Croatian national Council (Hrvatski narodni odbor), whose base was in Germany under the crook of Ivan Jelic, he published from 1958 to 1960 a bulletin: Bilten Hrvatskog Narodnog Odbora u Italiji (106). Thereafter, this last was replaced by a Bulletin of the democratic and social Action Croatian (Bilten Hrvatske Demokratske I Socjalne Akcije) from 1961 to 1973. In this last social democrat organisation (HDSA), Ciliga was not a simple contributor; he was officially the political secretary (107).

The development of a strong particularly Croatian Yugoslav emigration, then the same events of Yugoslavia, at the end of the Sixties and at the beginning of the Seventies, will give him a growing place and a political recognition in this medium strongly marked by nationalism.

Thus, in 1960 less than 10.000 Yugoslav workers were employed in BRD (West Germany); in 1972, they were 400.000, and 640.000 in 1976. Many others emigrated in Australia, Canada, the USA, and even in Sweden and Switzerland. A majority of them was Croatian. It followed a proliferation of nationalist groups from the Stalinist left to the extreme Ustasha right-wing tendency, splitting groups - for example 100 per 43.000 Yugoslavians in Sweden! - and of reviews (more than 80 Croatian monthly reviews through the world (108).

In addition in 1971 occurred - what in a typical way Ciliga names "Croatian spring" - demonstrations in Zagreb, with Croatian flags and slogans. The CP of Croatia which had besides contacts with the Croatian nationalist emigration supported those, Ustashe included. The major reason was that the Croatian Bourgeoisie was extremely dissatisfied with the federal State: this one obtained a third of the currencies gained by tourism in Croatia, which received only the tenth from it. A severe purge operation by Tito followed; and a certain number of writers and intellectuals were exiled to reinforce the Croatian opposition in exile. It was the true beginning of the decomposition of the Yugoslav Federal State (109).

Ciliga, in this context, continued his activities of "editor ", "person in charge" and "political adviser" of his reviews. From 1974, the review typed with the machine on stencils became a printed quarterly review. It took the name of "With the threshold of the future" (Na pragu sutrasnjice) and lasted until the beginning of the Eighties, seems it. This review of "the writer-editor Dr. Ante Ciliga ", with other many contributions, was marked on the right side. He wanted to be for "a dialogue on the problems democratic, national and social of the Croatian fight "and addressed to "the Croatian public ""line with the left ".

Enjoying a certain notoriety as Croatian social democrat politician, Ciliga tried to be elected in 1975 at the congress-assembly of the Croatian national Council (HNV - Hrvatsko Narodno Vijece); in vain since he obtained only half of the voices required to be nominee (110). This council, pro-Westerner, installed in the USA, had been founded in 1974 gathering however whole, pro-Muscovites with the Ustashe - to try to politically control the million and half of Croats living apart from the borders of Yugoslavia, in the name of the unit of "the emigrated Croatian people" (111).

Admittedly, Ciliga in his writings, since 1971, envisaged the possibility of the disappearance of Yugoslavia. (The right man for the job was, according to him, the opponent Milovan Djilas.) He underlined the risk of the reconstitution of a Serb block, after the disappearance of Tito "with annexation of the mixed areas with Serb minorities"; then "there would inevitably be dangerous tensions which would burst in civil war, war of nationalities, war of religion ". If Serbia remained the dominant power without division of the power with the other national Bourgeoisies, could we add, then "that will lead to the disintegration of current Yugoslavia, a partial confederation including Croatia and the other central and Western republics of Yugoslavia, which will want to adhere to it, Kosovo probably passing to Albania and Macedonia to Bulgaria. " (112).

This forecast, one knows it now, - except for details, since the extension of the conflict to Balkans does not make that to start - was fully checked in the slaughters perpetuated in the name of the Serb, Croatian nation, etc. The Ustashe of 1941 found successors on their level in the Stalinist or former Stalinist parties, reconverted into "the capitalism ", which they are of Serbia, Bosnia and Croatia.

A psychological and political characteristic of Ciliga, in his path of Communist until that of social democrat, will be to research at all costs "united front" of all the political parties, the common agreement in the name of pluralism. But in the last part of his life, that will be carried out under the sign of "the Croatian nation". That stills in 1979, at the moment when the HNV - to which Ciliga had presented his candidature - was in crisis. (113).

Later, in 1980, with the death of the old great chief Tito, Ciliga could announce the end of Yugoslavia, born in 1945. But it was for once more putting ahead a nationalist solution, the creation of a Croatian State, certainly inserted in "a Confederation of 6 sovereign national States " (114). "A true confederation or separation", such was the program of the Ciliga’s group, which in any event put ahead, even in such a confederation, the need for building a Croatian State. It is true that, for once, Ciliga did not annex any more (as in its bulletin of the Sixties) Bosnia-Herzegovina to Croatia... (115).

In the final analysis, all the hidden life of Ciliga, that of the underground of the Croatian emigration, was that of a Croatian patriot, marked by a whole policy "frontist", having broken in practice with its old communist convictions and internationalists.

One can speak with. matter of Ciliga of a figure of Janus with double face: nationalist in the Croatian emigration and " mondialist "in his public interventions, but also its memories and interviews, insofar as that did not relate to Croatia and Yugoslavia.

Thus, since 1945, Ciliga affirmed it that the discovery of atomic energy, and threatens it of a third world war put on the agenda "the world political unification, the planetary official organisation ". And it added: with the birth of "a political movement and social nine, conscious and able to undertake the new tasks which fall on mankind the world political unification and the construction of the planetary socialist company ", internationalism is on the agenda. But it is true that it was for better affirming the need for nations: "the former as the new national States must constitute basic units, autonomous and levelling cells of a new world and supranational synthesis and a new unit ". (116).

These last quotations, the Ciliga’s life even show all the ambiguity (Janus) of the character, in his youth at the time of the debates on the Croatian national question, and since 1938-1940 until its death, pensioned by the new Croatian government, when it returned to Zagreb after the proclamation of independence.

Many militants and not-militants, attaches to the ideal internationalist and recipient of the fight of a working class, that one says disappeared, will not forget its oral testimony - with Marcel Body (117) - at the time of the international conference on Kronstadt from March 1981 in Paris, where it was a question of international revolution, proletariat, fight against the oppression of all the States.

Especially the history of the labour movement, and even the history very short - precisely at the moment when it shows the bloody bankruptcy of the nationalitarian ideology and reality in Yugoslavia even - will undoubtedly retain only the author-witness and militant with "the country of the great lie ".

It is in this book that is condensed the best of the former son of Croatian poor small farmers, this son also of the international Revolution, who had ceased thinking one moment that he was Croatian, to be a man without fatherland nor nation, among other beings who had refused the nation for the hope of a planetary revolution giving rise to the mankind-world.

January 1993

(revised Edition, July 1998)

Philippe Bourrinet.

NOTES

1.Ten years in the country of the disconcerting lie, Editions Champ Libre, Paris, 1977. The title "In the Country of the great lie" was that of the Editions 10/18, published the same year. Le Monde, October 14, 1977 (p. 16) specifies that the republication in 10/18 was seized at the request of Ciliga. There was an English translation: The Russian Enigma, London, Routledge, 1940. In Italian : Dieci anni dietro il sipario di ferro. 1 - Al paese della menzogna dell’enigma. 2 - Sibiria, Casini, Roma, 1951. In castillan, Buenos Aires, 1951; German: Im Land der verwirrenden Lüge. Zehn Jahre hinter dem Eisernen Vorhang, Köln, 1953; and in Japanese, Tokyo, 1953.

2.A. CILIGA, Sam kroz Evropu u ratu ("Alone through Europe in war"), Paris, 1954, p. 157. Complete edition: Sam kroz Evropu u ratu (1939-1945), Editions "Na Pragu sutrasnjice", 586 pages, Rome, 1978.

3.This autobiography of 21 pages, on May 25, 1983, entitled simply "Ante Ciliga ", without mention of place and editor ", was provided to us by Arfé (Arthur) Marchadier. (public Edition in 1994 by the editions La Digitale, Quimperlé, in the compilation of texts: Ante CILIGA, After Russia 1936-1990.) It rests much - sometimes supplements it - on the interview made by Minima and Pier Paolo Poggio, for the Italian review Umana Avventura, in three parts, January and May. 1979, then in January 1980. We thank Arturo Peregalli for us for having communicated a photocopy of it. In November 1992, Vecernji list (Zagreb) published a series of articles on the life and the work of Ciliga.

4."Ante Ciliga ", referred to above, p. 2.

5.Idem, p. 3-6, for the period of 1917 and the Bolshevism. These points are not developed in the Italian interview of 1979.

6.For the history of the Yugoslav CP, cf. Ivan AVAKUMOVIC, History of the communist Party of Yugoslavia, 1964, The Aberdeen University Press; Paul SHOUP, Communism and the National Yugoslav Question, 1968, Columbia University Press, London/New York; Milovan BOSIC, Izvori za istoriju Komunistike partije Yugoslavije (1919-1941), "Izdavaki centar komunist ", Belgrade, 1984. This last book contains an invaluable bibliography, and mentions reprints of the congresses and publications of the CP in Yugoslavia, as well as the Memories of leaders of the party.

7.Autobiography, in French, op. cit., p. 8. Many specific points on the young Ciliga in some Story of the Croatian Communism published as from the Seventies in former Yugoslavia.

8.Cf. APIH (Elio) Italia, fascismo e antifascismo nella Venezia Giulia, 1918-1943, Bari, 1966, p. 156. The file of the police on Ciliga (Roma ACS CCP 1342, file 21538) specifies that he was denounced on April 14, 1921 for revolt with armed hand; under the menace of a warrant for arrest, he took refuge in Zagreb. A document of May 11, 1925 (Prefecture of Pola) note that Ciliga "enjoys a good reputation in the public opinion... is a good speaker and able to make conferences... made an intense propaganda of the Bolshevik ideas especially among the coloni and the working class. "

9.There is reprint of Borba (1922-1923); izdanje, Belgrade-Zagreb, 1972, 1980. Ciliga reproduced his articles of Borba on the national question; cf. infra.

10.It is notable that the book of BOSIC, as of others devoted in Yugoslavia to Croatian Communism does not mention name of Ciliga in the central bodies of the CPY. This conspiracy of silence is at the very least strange and recalls - in the former Tito’s Yugoslavia - methods at one time used to the country of the great lie.

11.Cf. J. SCHÄRF, "the October revolution and the labour movement in the Balkan countries ", p. 206-213, in the October Revolution and the European labour movement, EDI, Paris, 1967.

12.Grulovic directed this fraction. Cf. Protokoll des ausserordentlichen Parteitages der KAPD vom 11 (a) 14.9.1921 in Berlin, published and presented by C. Klockner; VWP, Darmstadt, 1986, p. 16-17.

13.Ivan AVAKUMOVIC, op. cit., p. 65. Quotation of "the Resolution about the Yugoslav question ", Proclamations, theses and resolutions of the first four world congresses of the Communist International, reprint Maspéro, 1969, p. 209-210.

14.Cf. General history of socialism, T. 3, PUF, Paris, 1977, under the direction of Jacques DROZ.

15.Cf. P. SHOUP, op. cit., p. 26.

16."Autobiography ", op. cit., p. 9.

17.It is at least what Ciliga affirms. Face the "right" line of Markovic, "the left ", represented by Djuro Dvijic (1896-1938) defended the idea of a federation of Workers and Peasants Governments in each area. The both tendencies were located on a nationalist basis, where it was not any more question of class struggle.

18.In 1923, Sima Markovic published a booklet entitled Nacionalno pitanje u svetlosti marksizma ("the national question in the light of the Marxism "). Ciliga, under the Mbt signature, retorted in Borba Nos. 29, 37, 38, 44, and 45, from August until December 1923. One will find reprint of extracts of the pamphlet of Markovic and articles of Ciliga, in his review Na pragu sutrasnjice, Rome, No. 2-3, August 1974, p. 253-306: "Sima Markovic-Ante Ciliga polemika o nacionalnom pitanju, 1923 g. ". It is interesting to stress that, while speaking about "a federation of Workers and Peasants governments" - watchword of the Comintern -, Ciliga judged that the Serb-Croatian quarrel was a quarrel between two separate nations and two capitalisms. But he denied that each one of these nations could be an imperialist one compared to the other.

19.Autobiography, op. cit., p. 10. This nomination intervened at the end of 1923. Sima Markovic (pseudonym: Semic) was attacked highly by Stalin, March 30, 1925, in "the Yugoslav Commission " of the Executive of the Comintern, since he was pressed on the Stalin’s booklet of 1912, to justify his position. Cf. Kongresi i zemaljske konferencije KPJ 1919-1937, T II "Istorijskog arhiva KPJ ", Belgrade, 1950, p. 421-424.

20.CILIGA, Autobiography, op. cit., p. 11.

21.Cf. G SOMAI, Gramsci a Vienna, Argalia Editore, Urbino, 1979. Gramsci, member of the Office of Vienna, noted in 1923 that Radic was a crafty, skilful politician, and expert in the compromises, but unable to be a strategist (p. 77, and 114.) On the other hand, in an article of Borba, No. 38, Oct. 18. 1923, Ciliga called for a "Workers and Peasants United Front" with the Radic’s HSS, whose party was accepted in 1924 in Krestintern.

22.For this period, cf. article of CILIGA, "Come Tito si impadroni del Partito comunista jugoslavo ", Corrispondenza Socialista No. 7, July 1961, p. 393-399. Reprint, with a provided introduction of Paolo CASCIOLA (p. 1-8), Quaderni Centro di Studi Pietro Tresso, series Studi e Ricerche, No. 12, February 1989. There is an important article of CILIGA on "the role and the destiny of the Croatian Communists in the KPJ " ("Uloga I sudbina hrvatskih komunista U KPJ "), in Bilten HDSA, p. 1-68, No. 67, 1972.

23.10 ans au pays du mensonge déconcertant, Ed. Champ Libre, Paris, 1977, p. 22-23.

24A. CILIGA, Siberia, land of exile and industrialisation, Editions des Iles d’Or, Paris, which published also texts of Rossi (Tasca), Victor Serge, etc.

25.Idem, p. 45.

26.There existed in the USSR several specialised "communist universities". In addition, one of the consequences of the "bolshevisation" had been to create "communist schools" in all the countries.

27.Idem, p. 26-27. For the speech of Trotsky, in the name of the Opposition, December 9, 1926, cf. International correspondence No. 6, January 14, 1927.

28.Idem, p. 31.

29.Idem, p. 42.

30.Ciliga considered the meetings of the Comintern tedious, and pure chattering, where all decided "in the slides". The book of Milovan Bosic, already quoted, mentions (p. 328), as members of the official delegation: Jakob Zorga (1888-1942), G. Vukovic, M. Brezovic and Albert Hlebec (Lidin). Under the name of Rogic, Zorga, secretary of the Yugoslav party, spoke to thank Bukharin for having liquidated the fractional fights in the CPY. Zorga decided for "a Leninist direction and an iron discipline", finally for a Balkan federation of "Workers and peasants independent republics". No opposition is perceptible. Cf. International correspondence, August 4, 1928 (sixth meeting of July 23, 1928).

31.The course towards " the armed insurrection " was especially put on the agenda at the time of the 10th plenary session of July 1929.

32.For a short outline of the period, cf. Natacha RAJAKOVIC, Ambiguities of the Yugoslavism, from Sarajevo to Sarajevo, p. 21-49, Editions Complexe, Brussels, October 1992.

33.Since spring 1928, the direction of the Comintern was concerned with " military question". In German under the name of Neuberg a handbook had come out on the armed insurrection. Cf. French translation, reprint Maspéro, Paris, 1970: A. NEUBERG, Armed Insurrection. In May 1929, the politburo of the central committee of the CPY put on the agenda "the armed insurrection"; in October 1929, the Central Committee proclaimed that it "was necessary to pass from the defensive to the offensive... and to prepare the masses and the party for the armed insurrection" cf. Pregled istorije Saveza Komunista Yugoslavije, Belgrade, 1963, p. 175-177.

34.Ivan AVAKUMOVIC, op. cit., p. 94-95.

35.A. CILIGA, State Crisis in Tito’s Yugoslavia, Denoël, Paris, 1974, p. 165. Ivan AVAKUMOVIC, op. cit., p. 96, gives 30 killed, much less than the number of Yugoslav Communists shot by Stalin a few years after (approximately 800, according to the historian Vladimir Dedijer).

36.The revolutionary Organisation interior Macedonian (unified) or ORIM (U) in French had been created starting from the ruins of the terrorist movement Macedonian ORIM in September 1925. The VMRO (Macedonian-Bulgarian initials), directed by Macedonian, Communists was a pure nationalist creation. The ORIM known as " historical militarily formed the Ustashe of Pavelic, after 1929.

37.AVAKUMOVIC, op. cit., p. 108-109.

38.CILIGA, Ten years in the country..., p. 67-68.

39.Idem, p. 69.

40.The woman of Tito, of Russian origin, Pelagija, was stopped under her eyes. She was exiled in 1938, remaria and "was rehabilitated" in 1957. She died in Moscow in 1968. This arrest of notorious adverse failed to cost the life to Tito in 1938, for suspicion of Trotskyism.

41.CILIGA, op. cit., p. 105.

42.Ibidem, p. 115.

43.Ibidem, p. 87.

44.Cf. passage on the relationship with Trotsky in 1935-1936.

45.CILIGA, idem, p. 110.

46.Ibidem, p. 179.

47.Ciliga quotes also the insulators of Cheliabinsk, Yaroslav, and Souzdal. In this last was the chief "Decist" V.M. Smirnov who was carried out in 1937. At the beginning of the Thirties, isolators did work: " Letter of the comrade Ciliga " (December 9, 1935), booklet A bas la répression contre-révolutionaire en USSR, Paris, at the beginning of 1936?, Editions Fourth International, p. 6-16.

48.The analysis of the balancesheet of the political forces in Verkhne Uralsk was confirmed by the letter of two "orthodox" Trotskyists of this prison (T.D. Ardachelia and G.I. Iakovin) with Trotsky, on November 11, 1930 (in Cahiers Léon Trotsky 7/8, 1981, p. 184-193.). The "theses of the 3", mentioned by Ciliga for this tendency were republished by the Cahiers Léon Trotsky 6, under the title "the crisis of the Revolution". Cf. also the Cahiers Léon Trotsky 53, April 1994, on " the opposition of left in the USSR ".

49.CILIGA, op. cit., p. 288. E.B. Solnstsev (1900-1936); G.I. Iakovin (1896-1938), F.n. Dingelstedt (1890-1938) all were shot in camps, in particular in Vorkhuta.

50.The two signatories of the letter affirm that Saakian and Kvatchadzé created Voinstvujuchtchij Bolshevik in January 1930. It "was taken in hand by young people (Pouchas, Perevertsev, Emelianov) and was directed towards the Decism" as of the second number. Paolo Casciola announces in its foreword to the book Trotskyist Serials Bibliography (1927-1991), K.G. Saur, München, London, New York, Paris, 1993, p. VII, the contradiction of testimony between Ciliga, on the one hand, and Ardachelia and Yakovin of the other.

51.CILIGA, op. cit., p. 222.

52.For this thesis, to see the book of Willy HUHN, Trotsky - Der gescheiterte Stalin, Karin Kramer Verlag, Berlin, 1973. Translation in French and postface of Daniel SAINT-JAMES, with a text of Paul MATTICK, "Stalinism and Bolshevism", Spartacus , Oct.-Nov. 1981, No. 113 - B.

53.CILIGA, op. cit., p. 209.

54.One can read in a text of Trotsky, published in October 1932, a defence of the USSR, which made certainly howl the imprisoned militants, and even more the workers in the lager-factories or the camps: "We take the workers State such as it is, and we say: it is our State. Despite everything what remains of delays, in spite of the food shortage, the bureaucratic tails, errors, and even despicable tricks, the workers of the whole world must defend with the teeth and the nails in a this workers State their future socialist fatherland." And the former Bolshevik chief added: "socialism like system showed its right to the historical victory not in the chapters of the Capital, but by the practice of the hydraulic stations and the blast furnaces." This theory of the accumulation of capital, like equation of socialism, already exposed by PREOBRAJENSKIJ, the New Economics, 1924, was defended many times by Trotsky. (for the article of 1932, cf. Writings 1928-1940, T I, Marcel Rivière and Co, Paris, 1955, p. 111).

55.CILIGA, op. cit., p. 258-259.

56.Cf. Roberto SINIGAGLIA, Mjasnikov e la rivoluzione russa, Jaca Book, Milano, 1973.

57.For the position of Miasnikov in 1923, cf. the " Proclamation of the workers group of the Russian CP (Bolshevik) ", published in German translation by the KAPD. French translation, in Invariance, series II, No. 6, May 1975.

58.Cf. Carl STEUERMANN (pseudonym of Otto RÜHLE), the World-wide crisis or towards the State capitalism, NRF, Paris, 1932.

59.CILIGA, op. cit., p. 285.

60.Works of TROTSKY, T. 8, EDI, Paris, 1980, p. 34. By error, P. BROUE, gives as year of birth of Ciliga 1896, instead of 1898.

61.Ibidem, p. 34-36, letter of January 2, 1936.

62.Ibidem, p. 54, January 7, 1936. It should be noted that Ciliga was not the only one with to have come out of the USSR in 1935. Arven Davtian, known as Tarov (1895-1943) had given his testimony; he spoke about the " life" in Verkhne-Uralsk, of " the 450 (?) Bolshevik-Leninists, hunger strikes" and mentioned the activity of 3 Czech, in fact Ciliga and his friends. (Bulletin d’information et de presse sur USSR No. 1, January 1936, "Of a letter of Tarov on his escape", p. 10-12; published by the International Secretariat of the L.C.I. (B-L).

63.Articles of Ciliga: Bjulleten oppositsii, No. 47, January 1936, "Stalinskie repressii v SSSR", p. 1-4; No. 48, February 1936, "v borbe za vyezd iz SSSR", p. 11-12; No. 49, April 1936, idem (continuation), p. 7-12. For the articles of Ciliga in Sotsialisticeskij vestnik, in 1936 and 1937, cf. Tables of the Russian review the Socialist Messenger 1921-1963, Paris, Institute of Slavic studies, 1992.

64.The Trotskyist historian Pierre Broué writes for example, without quoting the positions of the KAPD, of Korsch, or Miasnikov, that "the position according to which the USSR had become a State capitalism, which was that of Ciliga, was for a long time that of the Mensheviks." (Works, Trotsky, T 8, p. 65.)

65.Letter of Trotsky of June 22, 1936, in Works, volume 10, EDI, Paris, 1981, p. 123-125. Trotsky required that the Bulletin of the Russian opposition did not publish more any text of Ciliga, and that in spite of the moderate opinion of the Trotsky’s son.

66.That gave to Ciliga the reputation of anglophilia. In the Seventies, there was an English republication.

67.Sotsialisticeskij Vestnik No. 7/8, April 27, 1937; No. 11, June 12. In the No. 7/8, Ciliga made print the letters sent to the Bjulleten Bolchevikov-lenintzev (August 1936 and April 1937). He approved the action of the "ultraleftist Communists"; he was not a " Bolshevik-Leninist" but "unorganized". He wanted to work for the building of a "united front of the oppositional Communists, Socialists and Anarchists against Stalinist bureaucratic terror" (p. 24.) This position of calling to the "united front" showed, on the contrary, an increasingly clear distance of the positions of the Communist Left, of which one of the characteristics was the rejection of any "united front".

68.Nova Evropa was a Croatian newspaper appearing since the beginning of the Twenties, where intellectuals in favour of the Yugoslav national unity expressed themselves. In 1938, Ciliga sent an article where he affirmed that the war would not occur soon. Cf. CILIGA, Sam kroz Evropu u ratu, Paris, 1954, p. 6.

69.La Révolution prolétarienne, No. 278, September 10, 1938, "Insurrection of Cronstadt and destiny of the Russian Revolution".

70.In Proleter (1929-1942), organ of the central committee of the Yugoslav Communist Party, Ciliga is many times denounced as "Trotskyist and Fascist spy". Cf. No. 2-3, May-June 1936; Nos 2, 3, 7, 10, and 13 of 1937; and No. 1-2, January-February 1938.

71.A "Committee of the Yugoslav journalists in exile", affirmed in a French leaflet (Paris, April 22, 1952) that "while (Ciliga) was in Soviet Russia, he was excluded from the (Yugoslav) party under the double charge to have belonged to the Trotskyist group and to have served the Yugoslav secret police. Thrown in prison by the Soviets, he had drawn some aid from the Italian consul in Moscow in 1937. By which bargaining the Italian consul had succeeded in releasing Ciliga, it is secrecy still kept by the Kremlin. Once released, Ciliga entered to Yugoslavia where he lived under the protection of the police. Then, he settled in Italy and made the shuttle between Rome and Paris, as agent of the OVRA (political police of Mussolini)". The key of this leaflet (BDIC, Nanterre, Q part 7230) is in the conclusion: " (Ciliga calumnies) the Serbs and the orthodox religion".

72.The political folder on Ciliga in Rome established by the OVRA (Archivio Centrale di Stato, CCP 1342) defines him as "attentatore", "comunista pericoloso". A police report notes that he could make condemn June 1939 a French Stalinist newspaper showing him to be paid by Goebbels.

73."... I take the full and whole responsibility for repression of the revolt in Kronstadt". Text of Trotsky, in Fourth international, August 1938. Included in the book: Victor SERGE and Lev TROTSKY, The fight against Stalinism, texts presented by Michel DREYFUS, Maspéro, Paris, 1977, p. 213-216.

74.New publishing, Paris, 1983; quotation p. 16-17. In English, The Kronstadt Revolt, Freedom Press, London, 1942.

75.CILIGA, Sam kroz Evropu u ratu, 1954, p. 13-20, on Miasnikov. The review of Maslov, janv. 1939, No. 1 - Cahiers d’Europe - Europäische Monatshefte - published a text of Ciliga, " the Masters of the Country", p. 29-33.

76.Autobiography, p. 14.

77.Ibidem, p. 14.

78.Sam kroz Europu u ratu, Rome, 1978, Part II, " U balkanskom vrtlogu: tri godine u NDH".

79.For the framework of the events, to see: Ladislaus HORY and Martin BROSZAT, Der Kroatische Ustascha-Staat (1941-1945), Schriftenreihe der Vierteljahrshefte für Zeitgeschichte, Nummer 8, Stuttgart, 1964. K. MENEGHELLO-DINCIC, "the Ustasha State of Croatia (1941-1945)", Historical Review of World War II No. 74, Paris (in French), April. 1966. Fikreta JELIC-BUTIC, Ustase i Nezavisna Drzava Hrvatska 1941-1945, Zagreb, 1977. For the role (little glorious) of the Vatican and the Croatian Catholic Church, cf. Hervé LAURIERE (pseudonym of Branko Miljus, former Serb minister in the royal government of Yugoslavia in 1939, taken refuge in Paris), Murders in the name of God, 1951, Paris, "La Vigie".

80.On the 1,7 million killed out of the war, two thirds were victims of other Yugoslavs. Concerning Dalmatia under Italian Military Occupation, to see O. TALPO, Dalmazia; una cronaca per la storia (1941), Rome, 1985. It arose from the German reports that the 40.000 railwaymen of Croatia were pro-Communists, that the peasants (80 % of the population) were hostile to the Ustashe authorities; that the "Moslems" of Bosnia - the " flower of the Croatian nation" according to Pavelic - were gained by the " partisianism" of Tito.

81.What is true it is that a homonym of Ciliga, veterinary surgeon, formed part of the team of Pavelic. Perhaps it was about the Ciliga’s uncle, who was a veterinary inspector to Mostar. Cf. also "memories" of a former high-ranking civil servant of the Ustasha State: V. VRANCIC, Branili smo Dravu ("We defended the State", sic), index, two volumes; Knjinica Hrvatske Revije, Barcelona - Munich, 1985. Another homonymy, that of Ante Pavelic: the member of the Serb-Croatian Coalition of 1919, which constitutes the provisional government of the Southern Slavic provinces, of the same name (1869-1938), should not be confused with the chief of the Ustasha movement (1889-1959).

82.Autobiography, p. 15.

83."Rapporto del ufficio dell’ispettore di P.S. in Croazia", October first, 1942 (CPC 1342, Ciliga, Archivio dello Stato, Roma).

84.This version is in the interview of Ciliga, carried out by Umana Avventura No. 9, January 1980, p. 38.

85.Cf. R. TRIVUNCIC, Jacenovac i jasenovacki logori ("Jacenovac and camps of Jacenovac"), Jacenovac, 1974.

86.The leaflet already quoted affirms that it is Gestapo which asked for the arrest of Ciliga, as OVRA’s agent, and the archbishop of Zagreb, Stepinac, made him leave prison (whereas Ciliga was in a death camp). Amid other things, Ciliga is denounced by the mysterious committee of Yugoslav journalists as " the leader-writer of the Ustashe newspapers Spremnost (imitation of the newspaper Das Reich de Goebbels) and Hrvatski Narod; that starting from February 1943 "he did not cease of glorifying the participation of the Independent Croatian State to the war efforts against the Allied and the Yugoslavian Partisans." What is sure, all the political ambiguity of Ciliga during the war gave form to such charges. As for the Stepinac archbishop - become cardinal in 1956, whereas Tito had imprisoned him in 1946 per 16 years - he adopted an attitude more than ambiguity during the Ustasha period, but brought his individual assistance to the persecuted Serbs, Jews and Croats, unlike the archbishop of Sarajevo, Ivan Saric, openly Ustasha.

87."Generale Rapporto dell’ufficio dell’ispettore di polizia in Croazia, dirigente della XI zona OVRA", Zagreb, February 19, 1943 (in CPC 1342, already quoted).

88.Ante CILIGA, Deset godina u Sovjetskoi Rusiji (" Ten years in Soviet Russia"), Zagreb, 1943; collection of articles reprinted of the Spremnost review. The first article was published on February 14, 1943 with the title "10 years among the Bolsheviks". The Fascist police - in its report of February 19, 1943 on Ciliga - defines the Spremnost review as an " official organ of the Ustasha movement".

89.Quotation extracted from the book of JELIC-BUTIC, op. cit., p. 273.

90.The foreword to the pamphlet of 1943, 10 godina u S.S.S.R., written by Aleksander Seitz, praised Ciliga as "a Croatian intellectual fighting against the Bolshevism".

91.Hrvatski Narod was a general public daily newspaper appearing twice per day. Like all the other newspapers, it was controlled by the new Ustasha power.

92.CILIGA: Storice iz prostine - on his travel in 1941-1942 through Dalmatia, Bosnia and Croatia - editions Matica Hrvatska, Zagreb, 1944 (Mentioned by Ciliga.). Testimony of Ciliga on Jasenovac, where he affirms that at a certain time the "Jews" directed the camp before "being eliminated by the gypsies" was used by General-President Franjo Tudjman in his book published in 1990 on the "Desolation of historical reality", with some anti-Semite perfume. Tudjman made thereafter (on February 10, 1994) public excuses at the international Jewish Community, in front of the international reactions, and engaged to withdraw the litigious passages of the English edition of his book. See Franjo TUDJMAN, Bespuca povijesne zbiljnosti. Rasprava o povijesti i filozofiji zlosilja, "Nakladni zavod Matice Hrvatske", Zagreb, 1990, p. 318-320. Tudjman claims that the Pavelic’s regime had a "philosemitic" (sic) policy and minimises considerably the number of the victims in Jasenovac.

93.CILIGA, Sam kroz Europu u ratu, 1978, Rome; 3rd part, " U Becu, Berlinu i Bavarskoj ".

94.CILIGA, State Crisis in Tito’s Yugoslavia, p.145. Ciliga refused, writes it, to leave for this congress. He tells that after September 1944, during the purification of the Ustasha State, he was required in Zagreb by the Gestapo. The 1952 leaflet ,mentioned above, affirms that "Ciliga was named attached cultural of Croatian independent State in Berlin where he remained until the defeat of Hitler".

95.CILIGA, State Crisis in Tito’s Yugoslavia, p.144-145. Cf. also his Autobiography, p. 16.

96.A. CILIGA, Lenin and Revolution, "Cahiers Spartacus", Paris, January 1948. Undoubtedly written in 1938.

97.Editions des Iles d’Or, 1952, and not 1950, as indicated in his "autobiography".

98.Edizioni Jaca Book, Milan, 1983.

99." Autobiography ", p. 17.

100.State Crisis in Tito’s Yugoslavia, p. 146.

101.A. CILIGA, "Dokle ce hrvatski narod stenjati pod srpskim jarmom?" In subtitle: " Diskusija o suvremenim problemina hrvatske politike", Paris, Christmas 1952.

102.A. CILIGA, " the Southern Slavic people between East and West", in La Révolution prolétarienne, November 1950. He also affirmed that "the crisis of the Serb hegemony is the nucleus of the current Yugoslav situation" (Underlined by Ciliga itself.)

103.Vladko MACEK (1879-1964) wrote Memories in English language: In the Struggle for freedom, New York, 1957.

104.CILIGA, Dokle ce hrvatski narod stenjati pod srpskim jarmom, already quoted, p. 81. To note in this booklet formulations more than doubtful on the Ustasha movement. While stressing that the policy of Pavelic had led to the catastrophe, by a "unreal anti-Serb chauvinism" - but was it about simple " chauvinism" in the case of the massacre of 600.000 Serbs?- and "to the enslavement to Italy and Germany", he wrote: " Despite that, Pavelic and the Ustashe achieved a basically positive role in the history of the Croatian people" (p. 40.) Undoubtedly the construction of a bloody "Croatian State"... Here, Ciliga could not further push compromising with the Ustashe.

105.A. CILIGA, "Nacionalizam I komunizam u hrvatskosrpskom sporu" ("Nationalism and Communism in the Serbo-Croatian disagreement"), in Hrvatska Revija, No. 4, p. 365-396, March 1951. This article was the same one as that which was appeared in the Roman newspaper Libertà, in March, in serial. The review was directed by Antun Bonifacic and Vinko Nikolic, close relations - if not in - movement Ustasha.

106.To find itself there a little in the nebula of the Croatian emigration which goes from the Ustasha extreme right to Croatian national-Communism pro-Moscow, see Stephen CLISSOLD, " Croat Separatism: Nationalism, Dissidence and Terrorism", No. 103, January 1979 of Conflict Studies, British review. For the description of the Croatian emigrated press on all the continents, cf. Hrvatska Revija Jubilarni Zbornik 1951-1975, Munich-Barcelona, 1976, p. 358-369. Ivan Jelic published a H.N.O. Bulletin in Munich. His brother, Branko Jelic - who published Hrvatska Drava was on the other hand pro-Soviet, calling to the independence of Croatia in exchange of naval bases for the USSR in the Adriatic.

107.Cf. Bilten HDSA No. 37-38, 1965, p. 10. (Letter to Branko Jelic.)

108.Stephen CLISSOLD, op. cit., p. 8.See too Hrvatska Revija, op. cit., p. 368. The various Ciliga’s reviews are also mentioned (p. 358.)

109.Cf. PhD of D.S. STEFANOVIC, Origins of the Croatian crisis of 1971, E.H.S.S., Paris, June 1979.

110.Na pragu sutrasnjice, No. 5, December 1975, p.129-144.

111.Stephen CLISSOLD, op. cit., p. 17. That went from the Ustasha HOP (Croatian Movement of Liberation) to young refugees of the so-called "Croatian spring" of 1971, while passing by the HSS (Peasant Party), the HRS (republican left), and the Socialist and Communist (Kominformist) parties. According to the author, the HNV condemned terrorist violence, by providing moral and financial assistance to the stopped Croatian terrorists.

112.CILIGA, Crisis of State in Tito’s Yugoslavia, Denoël, Paris, 1974, p. 344. (In Italian: La crisi di stato nella Jugoslavia di Tito, ED. Odep, Rome, 1972.)

113.This research of the "united front" of all the Croatian political parties of the right-hand side to the left, one finds it in the Ciliga’s activity in the HNV, where existed strong cleavages between Ustashe, republicans, and Socialists. In the No. 13 (Nov. 1979) of Na pragu sutrasnjice, p.157-158, Ciliga required vis-à-vis the "current crisis of the HNV" a political pluralism with the "old nationalists", the " young nationalists", the members of the Peasant party HSS, and the " Croatian Communists of democratic and national orientation".

114.CILIGA, Izjava Petnaestovice. - Konac Titove Yugoslavije i zadati Hrvastske politike (" Declaration of the 15 - end of Tito’s Yugoslavia and tasks of the Croatian policy"), Lund (Sweden), July 10, 1983 (booklet).

115.First Bilten HDSA, in 1963-64, shown a chart of Europe, on the cover of the Bulletin, where Croatia (indicated in black) included Croatia strictly speaking increased of Bosnia-Herzegovina,… as between 1941 and 1945.

116.Autobiography, p. 20-21. In the same way of calling to a world community, one can also read in his book on Tito’s Yugoslavia, op. cit., p. 208: " internationalism and universalism are the concretisation of human solidarity, essential bases to carry out the world unification and the future Socialist Community".

117.Marcel BODY (1894-1984) wrote a book of testimony on Bolshevik Russia, after returning to France and becoming Anarchist and Pacifist: My years in Russia.

http://www.left-dis.nl/uk/cileng.htm

Prof. fra Andrija Nikić: OSLOBOĐENJE IMOTSKE KRAJINE OD TURAKA

2005-06-16T16:42:00.000-07:00

Profesor mostarskog sveučilišta, franjevac i publicist, dr. fra Andrija Nikić, sudjelovao je na "online" diskusiji IMOTAcaffe foruma u prosincu 2002. te pritom objavio svoj povijesno-znanstveni rad glede oslobođenja Imotske krajine od Turaka 1717. godine. Evo toga rada:

OSLOBAĐANJE IMOTSKE KRAJINE

Riječ s povodom

Putnik, dolazeći iz Hercegovine, kad prođe uzduž bekijskog polja i obavi poslovi na tvrdom graničnom prijelazu sa pet ulaza, izbije na okuku što je pravi cesta koja se uspinje prema Gradu na gori na koji ga vuče produženi zvonik Crkve Sv. Franje i odjednom ugleda Goru ispresijecanu ulicama, išaranu eletričnim stupovima, redovima drevnih stabala, topola i raznog drveća. U daljini, u lakoj izmaglici, možda će nazrijeti tok rijeke Vrljike. Pitomost toga predjela odmah očara namjernika navikla na krševitu pustoš koja dijeli Hercegovinu od Hrvatske, gdje je lakše zamisliti geološku nego ljudsku povijest.

Na sjeverozapadnom dijelu zelenog mora, u sjeni Prološca nazire se Prološko blato s ostacima franjevačkog samostana, a ako se penje uz brežuljak stigne se do stare tvrđave koju Imoćani naprosto zovu Grad, stere se Imotski, utonuo u zelenilo, tako da se jedva naslućuje da je to u davnini bilo poprište ljutih bojeva i velike patnje.

Imotska krajina smjestila se iza planine Biokovo, na tromeđi Bosne i Hercegovine sa Dalmacijom. Zauzima prostor od oko 600 km2 . Sa sjeveroistoka omeđena je bosansko - hercegovačkom granicom, na jugu je makarskim primorjem, a sa sjeverozapada sinjsko-omiškim prostorom. Nalazi se na nadmorskoj visini od 260 metara (Imotsko polje) do 440 metara (grad Imotski). Prostor Imotske krajine možemo podijeliti u tri prirodne cjeline: kraško područje uz obod polja, te prostrane kraške površine i uvale na širem prostoru - imotsko polje, kao veliko tektonsko ulegnuće, te planinski masiv Biokovo.

U tom golemom prostoru krša voda je izdubila i oblikovala obilje najraznovrsnijih oblika, među kojima predvladavaju fenomeni jezera. Njima Imotska krajina obiluje. Najbrojnija su suha jezera. Budući da se radi o izrazito vapnenačko - kraškom terenu, ovo je hidrografski siromašno područje. Vodene površine koncentrirane su na kraška jezera (Modro i Crveno, Dva Oka, Prološko jezero, Galipovac, Knezovića jezero, Krenica, Jezerina itd.) koja se podzemnim tijekovima hrane vodom, te Prološko Blato i rijeka Vrljika, a povremeno i tijek rijeke Suvaje.

Kraški predio Imotske krajine siromašan je vegetacijom, te predvladava nisko raslinje - makija, dok u brdskim predjelima ima šuma pretežno bjelogorice: hrast, grab i jasen. Ljudi se uglavnom bavili uzgojom stoke. Nažalost, u treće tisućljeće ušlo je vrlo malo blaga sitnog i krupnog zuba.

Druga reljefna cjelina je Imotsko polje sa Prološkim blatom, te izvorišni i gornji tok rijeke Vrljike. Prološko Blato kao povremena i prirodna akumulacija kod visokog vodostaja prekriva dva kraška jezera Provaliju i Krenicu. Iz ove vodene površine strši otočić na kojem se nalaze ostaci nekadašnjeg franjevačkog samostana. Ovaj kompleks zanimljiv je više kao hidrografski fenomen, povoljan za lov i ribolov nego kao fenomen kraškog reljefa.

Izvorišni dio Vrljike, osobit je po nizu kraških vrela i jezera (Dva Oka). Značaj ove rijeke je neprocijenjiv za Imotsko polje jer ga ona obilno natapa. Vrljika je inače poznata po rijetkoj endemskoj vrsti mekousne pastrve. Imotsko polje, gotovo je u cjelosti obrađeno, zasađeno pretežno vinovom lozom.

Tako, planinski masiv Biokovo i njegove istaknute i dostupne točke predstavljaju izvanredne vidikovce. Svojevrstna atrakcija su pećine vječnog leda, ispod vrha sv. Jure . Biokovo je i obitavalište divokoza i muflona. Veliki dio Imotske krajine u klimatskom pogledu je pod utjecajem mediteranske klimatske struje. To obilježje zahvaljuje reljefnim prilikama i otvorenosti prema dolini Neretve. Ovakva klima utječe na uspijevanje nekih izrazitih mediteranskih kultura (maslina, smokva, badem). Međutim, hladni prodori bure koji stižu preko Dinare, utječu bitno na klimatsku sliku posebno sjeveroistočnog dijela Krajine, te su tamo zime nešto oštrije.

Imotski je povijesni gradić u Imotskoj krajini. Smješten je između na Gori uz rub Imotsko-bekijskog polja, koje se prostire uz srednji tok rijeke Vrljike. Nalazi se na 330 metara nadmorske visine i udaljen je dvadesetak kilometara zračne linije od mora, koje uz planine na sjeveru najviše utječe na klimu.
Grad i okolica obiluju prirodnim ljepotama. Imotski se nalazi na raskrsnici važnih cestovnih pravaca, koji vode od sjevera - Zagreba, pa prema Međugorju, Čapljini i istoku prema Mostaru, Sarajevu, drugi pravac ide preko Posušja u Tomislavgrad. Takav zemljopisni položaj Imotskog davao mu je poseban vojni i politički značaj. Poznato je da su na ovom području još od rimskog doba pa sve do današnjih dana bile stacionirane razne vojne jedinice.
Grad predstavlja administrativno, političko, kulturno i gospodarsko središte Imotske krajine, a teritorijalno pripada Splitsko-dalmatinskoj Županiji. Danas je grad spojen sa selima Vinjani i Kamenmost, te zajedno čine jedinstvenu urbanu cjelinu s preko 10 tisuća stanovnika.
U samom gradu živi oko 4 tisuća stanovnika.
Gospodarstvo je nerazvijeno i ne odgovara potrebama stanovništva Imotskog i Krajine, radi toga, a u potrazi za poslom veliki ih je broj emigrirao u zemlje Zapadne Evrope.

Danas je na području Imotskog i bekijskog bazena u gospodarstvu zaposleno manje od 1.000 radnika, dok je taj broj prije domovinskog rata, 1990. godine, bio oko 10.000 radnika. Ovo naglašavam jer pored svih u prošlosti prisutnih gospodarskih problema na području Imotskog i Imotske krajine moglo se je živjeti, a što uveliko potvrđuje i činjenica da je prema svim dosad izvršenim popisima stanovništva, posebno prema popisu iz 1991. godine, na ovom području bilježen samo demografski rast stanovništva.

Burna povijest Imotskog i Imotske krajine ostavila je brojne tragove na ovim prostorima, a iz nje vuku korijene prepoznatljivi i autentični simboli grada, Tvrđava, jezera i Gospa anđeoska.

Prvi narod koji je obitavao na ovom prostoru jesu Iliri. Iz tog razdoblja datiraju brojne gomile i gradine rasute diljem Imotske krajine. Bogata nalazišta iz tog vremena nađena su u Postranju i Sebišni. Oba nalazišta dala su pravo bogatstvo nalaza.

Najpoznatije ilirsko naselje bilo je Setovia - Studenci, mjesto nedaleko Imotskog. Setovia je kao utvrda i vojno središte ilirskog plemena Delmata odigrala važnu ulogu u borbi Ilira i Rimljana. I sam car Oktavijan boravio je u ovim krajevima nadzirući te borbe, što potvrđuje od kakve je važnosti bila ova utvrda za daljnji tijek ratovanja.

Nakon pokoravanja Ilira ovo područje postaje dio rimske provincije Dalmacije. Da bi ovaj kraj što bolje politički i gospodarski vezali uz ostala područja izgradili su mnoge puteve i ceste od kojih je većina i do danas u upotrebi. Podizali su logore i naselja za svoje veterane i koloniste. Jedan takav logor bio je u Prološcu o čemu svjedoči nadgrobna ploča podignuta pripadniku IX rimske legije. Tu je nađen i kameni reljef s likom Diane, božice lova iz 2. stoljeća, zatim kameni zapis posvećen Cereri, te drugi posvećen Trivijama, kao i kipić Fortune - Izide.

Najvažnije rimsko naselje bilo je na području današnjih Runovića (8 km od Imotskog). Tu je bio poznati rimski municipij Rus Novae, a bio je povezan s glavnom antičkom saobraćajnicom Salona - Novae - Narona. Treće važno mjesto je Lovreć odnosno rimski Tronum ili po nekim historičarima Ludrum, za koji se pretpostavlja da je porušen istovremeno kad i Salona.

Kršćanstvo se u ove krajeve rano proširilo, tako da iz tog vremena imamo nekoliko arheoloških nalazišta s ostacima ranokršćanskih crkava. Najznačajnija je ona na lokalitetu Bublin (Zmijavci) a koja datira koncem 5. st. To je bazilika koja je u sklopu imala i zgradu krstionice sa krsnim zdencem u obliku križa. U samoj bazilici nađen je još jedan zdenac manjih dimenzija, što ovu crkvu svrstava među rijetke primjere bazilika sa dvije krstionice. Imala je veoma bogatu kamenu dekoraciju oltarnih pregrada s reljefnim prikazom biblijskog motiva sv. Danijela u borbi s lavovima.

Druga značajna crkva iz ovog vremena nalazi se u Cisti te još jedna u Prološcu.

Dolaskom Hrvata u ove krajeve, utemeljena je kao zasebna jedinica hrvatska župa Emotha - Imota. Iz tog vremena datira i tvrđava u Imotskom, na kojoj je pronađen veliki kameni ulomak s motivom pletera.

Najnovija arheološka istraživanja potvrdila su postojanje još jedne starohrvatske crkvice i to u Prološcu, sagrađene na temeljima starije, ranokršćanske crkve.

Dolaskom Turaka (1493. g.) nastupaju velike promjene u životu ovdašnjeg puka. Imotski postaje važno vojno uporište i upravno središte. U Imotskom i po drugim mjestima obnavljaju se utvrde. Nakon posljednjeg tursko-mletačkog rata 1717. godine ovaj prostor dolazi pod vlast Mlečana koji utvrđuju Imotski kao isturenu točku prema granici s Turskom. Iz tog vremena datira sadašnja granica prema Hercegovini.

Padom Mlečana Imotska krajina dolazi pod vlast Austrije pa Francuske. Iz vremena francuske uprave sačuvana je cesta preko Turije, koja se i danas zove Napoleonova cesta. Nakon pada Napoleona Austrija ponovo zauzima Dalmaciju.

U to vrijeme jača narodni pokret za ujedinjenje Dalmacije sa Hrvatskom. Među zaslužnim narodnjacima ističu se fra Rajmond Rudež, Ante Rossi i don Mihovil Pavlinović.

Tada je u Imotskom osnovana i jedna od najstarijih čitaonica u Dalmaciji 1868. godine. Ona je odigrala važnu ulogu u kulturnom i političkom životu cijele krajine.

Vihor Prvog i Drugog sv. rata nije mimoišao ni ove krajeve. Velika su stradanja doživjeli ovdašnji ljudi zbog svojih nacionalnih i rodoljubnih ideja, a u sklopu toga i masovna iseljavanja koja su najizrazitija bila 50-tih i 60-tih godina. Danas je stanovništvo prepolovljeno, a mnoga domaćinstva ostala su pusta.

Grad Imotski smješten je u dubokom zaleđu dalmatinske zagore. Od mora je udaljen 50 km, od Splita 100 km. Ima obilježja primorskog gradića i po pogledu kamene arhitekture i klime. Sam grad smjestio se na impozantnoj uzvisini zvanoj Podi, nadmorske visine 440 metara. Zahvaljujući tome dominira nad Imotskim poljem i zaseocima.

Prema službenim podacima ispostave Zavoda za zapošljavanje na samom kraju 2000. bilo su 3584 prijavljene osobe, što je za 17 posto više od istog razdoblja 1999. godine. Statistika bilježi da veći broj nezaposlenih od Imotskog imaju samo Kaštela i Sinj. Samo 50 osoba je krajem prošle godine uposleno u tvornici trikotaže Trimot d.d. u stečaju. Najviše prijavljenih u Imotskom ima NKV radnika, njih 1032, te 1500 KV-VKV radnika. Sa srednjom stručnom spremom posao čeka 846 radnika, a sa VŠS-om ih je prijavljeno 98 te sa VSS-om 108. 1)

Gradom dominira tvrđava zvana Topana koja se smjestila uz obronke Modrog jezera. Tvrđava je nastala u 10. stoljeću. Zbog svog dominantnog položaja nad većim dijelom Krajine, kroz povijest je imala važno strateško značenje.
Turci su njome vladali preko 200 godina, sve do 1717. Današnji izgled tvrđava je zadržala iz tih vremena. Danas je ovo omiljeno mjesto posjeta Imoćana zbog blizine gradu i izuzetnog vidikovca. U ljetnim mjesecima na ovom se mjestu održavaju i razna kulturna događanja.

Modro jezero nalazi se gotovo u samom gradu te je prikladno za šetnje, a u ljetnim mjesecima je i kupalište. Ništa manje ne zaostaje ni nešto udaljenije Crveno jezero. Ova jezera, kao i mnoga druga nastala su urušavanjem podvodnih špilja, a ima ih 19, smještenih u bližoj ili daljoj okolici grada.
Crveno jezero najdublje je u Europi. Dubina depresije kreće se od 396-485 metara, a dubina vode je veća od 250 metara.

Uz Modro i Crveno jezero vezane su mnoge priče i legende. Crveno jezero opjevano je u pjesmi (nepoznata autora), o bogatom i okrutnom Gavanu i njegovim velebnim dvorima, čijim je urušavanjem nastalo ovo jezero. Modro jezero vezuje se uz legendu koja je opjevana u narodnoj pjesmi o Hasanaginici. Njemački pjesnik Goete uočivši njenu vrijednost preveo je na Njemački jezik, a onda se prevodila i na mnoge druge svjetske jezike. Tema ove balade odigrala se u ovim krajevima, a grob glavne junakinje Hasanaginice nalazi se prema priči u blizini Modrog jezera, na predjelu zvanom "Gaj".

U Imotskom postoji bogata muzejska zbirka smještena u franjevačkom samostanu. Tamo su smješteni vrijedni izlošci iz svih razdoblja kroz koje je ovaj kraj i narod prolazio. Među posebno vrijednim su izlošci oltarne pregrade ranokršćanske bazilike iz Zmijavaca (5. st.) te veliki antipedij (goblen s euharistijskim motivom, 18. st.).

Franjevci u ovim krajevima imaju dugu tradiciju. Prvi njihov samostan nalazio se na Jauku (izvor rijeke Vrljike). Na tom mjestu još uvijek se vide ostaci temelja, neposredno uz ruševine crkve Velike Gospe koja potječe iz 14. st.
Cijeli ovaj predio dobili su benediktinci još u VI. stoljeću.

Današnji samostan u Imotskom datira se u 1738. godinu nakon odlaska Turaka iz ovih krajeva.

1. KRATKA PROŠLOST IMOTSKE KRAJINE

Prošlost Imotske krajine možemo podijeliti na tri važna razdoblja. Prvo seže u najstarija vremena sa stanovnicima Ilirima, Rimljanima i Hrvatima. Drugo razdoblje od dolaska Turaka 1493. do njihova izgona 1717. Treće je od konca srpnja 1717. do do danas.

U srednjem vijeku hrvatska župa Imota, koju oko 950. godine spominje Konstantin Porfirogenet, pripadala je Humu, odnosno Zahumlju, Humskoj zemlji. U povelji hercega Stjepan od 1. lipnja 1454. Imotski je u posjedu hercega Stjepana Kosače i pirpada Hercegovini.

U isto vrijeme (1463.) kad su Turci osvojili Bosnu i veći dio Hercegovine počeli su ugrožavati Imotsku krajinu pljačkajući njezino zemljište, naročito plodno polje i njegovu okolinu. Prema turskom popisu iz 1475., odnosno 1477. godine Imotski, Vrgorac, Makarska, Bast, Brela i brojna mjesta upisan je u sastav Hercegovačkog sandžaka. Iako je osmanlijska okupacija bila postupna i temeljito pripremana, ona je u svojoj završnoj fazi bila silovita i praćena teškim pustošenjim i razaranjima. Konačno su Turci zauzeli, cijelu Krajinu, nakon pada Imotskog 1493. godine. 2)

Nakon učvršćenja u Imotskoj krajini Turci su napadali i osvajali susjedne predjele. Tako su god. 1499. prodrli do Splita i odveli zarobljenike u Hercegovinu. God. 1501. prodiru do Trogira i osvajaju Marinu. Zbog učestalih turskih prodora prema moru i u cetinsko područje iste (1501.) godine prodire Ivaniš Korvin sa 700 konjanika i 500 pješaka u Cetinu s namjerom, da udari na turski Imotski. 3) Nakon neuspjelih napada i obrane Vladislav sklapa 1503. s Turcima primirje na sedam godina. Ovim primirjem turska vlast se još jače učvršćuje u Imotskoj krajini. To primirje, čini se, još više je ohrabrilo Turke te su iste godine mostarski i hercegovački sandžaci skupljali vojsku u Imotskom i očekivali pomoć od Skender-paše kako bi osvojili i preostalo hrvatsko područje što ga je svojatala Mletačka republika. Konačno svi planovi su propali. A nakon isteka primirja god. 1510. ponovno dolazi do sukoba s Turcima. Čak 12. ožujka 1537. i Klis je pao u turske ruke i ubrzo postaje sjedište sandžakata, kojemu pripadaju: srednja Dalmacija i okrajci Bosne. A nakon više uzastopnih ratova, pustošenja i paljenja god. 1541. sklopljen je mir s Turcima. Po tom sporazumu Turci su postali gospodari čitavog primorja južno od Cetine. Od 280 sela, kaliko ih je tada bilo, Mlečanima je ostalo samo njih 19 u zadarskoj okolici, a sve ostalo je pripalo Turcima. 4)

Četrdesetih godina sedamnaestoga stoljeća izbio je Kandijski rat (1645.). U tom ratu Mlečanima se pridružilo stanovništvo između Neretve i Cetine. za vrijeme višegodišnjeg ratovanja bilo je dosta gubitaka i na jednoj i na drugoj strani i na području Imotske krajine. To je period brojnih pljačkanja i otimanja sredstava za život i ljudi. Mnogi ljudi su uhvaćeni, odvedeni i prodavani kao robovi. Te akcije su bile posebno česte između god. 1682. i 1688.

Kroz to vrijeme hajduci i uskoci su iz Imotske krajine preveli silu plijena i učinili mnogo zla, ne samo turskim pristalicama, nego i siromašnom hrvatskom narodu. Na ove strahote tuži se i ondašnji župnik Vrhdola. Ti ustanici, ističe se u tužbi, (hajduci) primorci i izbjeglice iz Imotske krajine, u razmaku od 24 godine za vrijeme Kandijskog rata i kasnije, odveli su iz okolice Imotskoga, Glavine, Prološca, Vinjana, Runovića, Gorice, Sovića i t. d. 1364 zarobljenika. Među njima je bio i dobar dio kršćanske raje, koja je prodavana kao radna snaga za teški rad na galijama. Toj akciji su se suprostavili fratri. 5)

Vrijedno je citirati dio Izvještaja fra Pavla iz Rovinja koji je god. 1640. posjetio i samostan u Blatu. Evo njegova tekata: »... Ujutro trećeg dana Uskrsa, 10. travnja uzoru, otišli smo od kneza Marka zahvaljujući mu na gostoprimstvu. Stigosmo u Imotski (zapravo, u Blato na otočić) t. j. u njegov samostan, u predvečerje. U ovom samostanu stanovalo je 8 svećenika, 4 klerika, 3 laika i 4 mladića (đaka) na nauku. Oko otoka su tri ograde, jedna iznad druge. Unaokolo se vide brda puna stoke - i koza i ovaca. Čuje se pjesma janjaca, ta se čuje milju daleko - be, be, be - pjesma pastirica, koncert žaba, itd. Uistinu je uživanje, na jednom mjestu toliko raznih glasova. Oci imaju tri drvena čamca za prevoz. Ovi oci mi rekoše, da su radi velikog turskog uznemiravanja prebacili neku robu u Poljica, kao paramente i drugo, i da su tamo počeli graditi drugi samostan, ali da Turci to ometaju. Jednom ocu, koji je bio u Italiji, rekoh: 'Dragi oče, vi ste navikli na one lijepe predjele u Italiji, pa zašto ste se vratili u ovu bijedu, u ove pogibelji da vas nevjernici neprestano muče?' Odgovori: ‘Mnogopoštovani oče, Domovina!« 6)

Mirom od 6. rujna 1669. Mlečani su dobili Klis i još neka mjesta u Dalmaciji. Poljica i primorje južno od Cetine de facto postadoše mletački a de jure turski. Stoga se Turci nisu odrekli svojih prava na ove krajeve, nego su od njih tražili poreze. Tako je god. 1682. došlo 350 Turaka Imoćana, Vrgorčana i Gabeljana na Makarsku da kupe porez za bosanskog pašu. Prikupili su 600 groša i, kao redovito, opljačkali franjevački samostan. 7)
Slične akcije će se susresti i nakon oslobodenja Imotske krajine tijekom cijelog osamnaestog stoljeća. 8)

U početku Bečkog rata (1683.-1699.) popravljane su dalmatinske tvrdave. Kao utvrdeno mjesto često se spominje i Imotski. Ta tvrdava je jedinstvena i nije sastavljena iz više dijelova. Ona je dominirala cijelom okolicom do podnožja Biokova, ogranka Mosora i čitavim imotskim poljem.

Za vrijeme spomenutog rata jedan dio Imotske krajine pokušao se odcijepiti od Turaka i pripoji Mlečanima. To su bila sela: Proložac, Runovići, Vinjani, Zagvozd i Župa. Oni su zatražili zaštitu od Mlečana, ali ih ovi, Karlovačkim mirom (1699.) ponovno prepustiše Turcima. 9)

Iza Karlovačkog mira (1703.) vratili su se i imotski franjevci u svoj samostan na Blatu. Tada franjevci pastoriziraju cijelu Krajinu. Taj potez upozorava na činjenicu da su franjevci učvršćivali svoju jurisdikciju i, još presudnije, prisutnost na području na kojem se širila sudska i politička vlast Imotskoga. A to je bio veliki dio Imotskog polja u susjednoj Hercegovini i mali dio Bosne. 10)

Uza sve dugogodišnje tursko vladanje u Imotskoj krajini (224 godine), Turci nisu uhvatili dubljega korijena. Uzrok tome, izgleda, su: buđenje katoličke svijesti koju su podgrijavali franjevci i povezivali je uz hrvatsko nacionalno biče, zatim blizina primorskih gradova, oslonac u Mletačkoj Republici i česti upadi hrvatskih uskoka s mletačkog teritorija. Navedene činjenice, te upadi domaćih hajduka i hrvatska narodna pjesma, većinom u desetercu, podržavali su nadu i imotskih krajišnika u skoro oslobodenje od turske vlasti i poticali ih na otpor. 11)

2. SINJSKO-IMOTSKI RAT

Ni početkom XVIII. stoljeća Turcima se nije dalo mirovati. Tako već 8. prosinca 1714. Turska je navijestila Mlečanima rat u namjeri da bi joj otela Moreju (Peloponez, na jugu Grčke). Rat je započeo 1715. godine. Slijedeće godine (1716.) u rat se umiješala i Austrija. Jedan od povoda rata bio je i crnogorski ustanak; koji je buknuo na ruski poziv i zahvatio Crnu Goru i Hercegovinu. Ustanak je završio bez uspjeha. Iz bojazni od turske osvete jedan dio naroda iz tek spomenutih zemalja pobjegao je na mletački teritorij. Taj rat je, međutim, donio Mlečanima proširenje u Dalmaciji i to na području Imotske krajine. Mlečani su, ipak, izgubili Moreju.

Evo i nekoliko pojedinosti.
U početku rata Turci, pod vodstvom Mustaj-paše Čelića, Mostarca, udarili su na Sinj sa 60.000 vojnika, ali ondje su sramotno nastradali. Nakon postignuog uspjeha pod Sinjem Mlečani su se uputili prema Imotskom. Za vrijeme tog rata mostarski trgovac Šoić pobjegao je iz Mostara u Imotski. Tu se, pored drugih, stavio na raspolaganje Mlečanima. On im je zajamčio platiti topove ako ih izgube pri osvajanju Imotskoga. Pored Šoića, Mlečanima su se za ovaj pothvat obratili imotski franjevci s fra Stipanom Vrljićem (iz Gorice) i fra Lovrom Šitovićem (iz Ljubuškog). 12) Oni su predvodili sklanjanje oko 800 katolika (iz više od 200 obiteiji) na područje Omiša. Na njihova imanja u Imotskom polju doselile su katoličke obitelji iz Hercegovine; odnosno s turskog područja.

Tako 16. srpnja 1718: godine piše providur general Mocenigo: »Matiša Alilović dovede u imotsko polje 240 obitelji iz hercegovačkih sela i Mostarskog Mlata, Goranaca i Broćanca, nad kojima od bijaše glavar, kako ga je hercegovački paša bio postavio i dao mu dostojanstvo age i plaću. U toj njegov župi, stoji u istom dokumentu, ima 570 ljudi sposobnih za oružje. On mi se oviti dana predstavio nudeći svu čeljad Prejasnoj Republici. Ja sam ga vrlo rado prihvatio, ističe isti Mocenigo, obdario i naredio, da se ovi novi doseljenici - nasele po Imotskom polju. Dao sam im imanja, naglašava isti general; pa će tamošnja granica biti bolje čuvana.
Ovoj seobi pridonio je i knez Pavao Despotović Caralipeo iz Omiša, koji se sa spomenutim-Alilovićem dopisivao. 13)

U jasna nesigurnim okolnostima franjevci iz samostana s otočića na Blatu pobjegli su u Omiš. S fratima je, kao i redovito, pobjegao veći dio katolika iz sela: Opanci, Lovreć, Studenti, Lokvičići, Ričice i Poljica, njih oko 800.
Naselili su se oko Zadvarja.
Fratri su se, privremeno, sklonili u kuću Ivice Perinovića-Franceschi blizu Vrulje u Dobrču - današnji Pisak -, jer u Omišu nisu mogli naći prostraniji stan za sve svoje članove: Tu su provodili težak život boreći se i strepeći od lopova i zlih ljudi, koji su iskorištavali ratno stanje te krali i pljačkali. Tu ih je ostalo petnaest (15): od siječnja do 25. srpnja 1715. godine. I mletačka vlast je zapazila taj pokret: Tako je: 13. kolovoza 1716. glavni mletački providur zapisao u svom izvještaju: »U Omiš su došli fratri iz bosanskog samostana sv. Franje. Doveli su više od 200 obitelji; koje su tamo bile pod njihovom duhovnom upravom. Ja sam im na njihovu molbu i na mlobu omiškog vijeća dopustio da sagrade samostan na Skalicama (u Omišu). 14)

3. OSLOBOĐENJE IMOTSKE KRAJINE

Na molbu braće Šoića, podrijetlom iz Mostara, i fratara, odluči generalni providur Dalmacije Alojzije Mocenigo III. oteti Turcima imotsku tvrđavu, a s njom i čitavu krajinu. Stoga Mocenigo naredi izvanrednom providuru Baldu da skuplja vojsku. On prenese topove, municiju i hranu do Zadvarja. 15)

3.1. Rat za oslobođenje

Da bi spriječio Turke iz raznih susjednih krajeva i onemogućio im da pruže pomoć Imotskom, Mocenigo je poslao Semitecola prema Neretvi, Nonkovića prema Trebinju i Stonu, a Vrgorčani su imali obavezu spriječiti dolazak pomoći iz Livna i Glamoča. Kad je sve bilo dobro organizirano, Mocenigo zapovijedi generalu Emu i serzent-majoru Rizzu da otpočnu napadom na Imotski. 16)
Uza sve dugogodišnje tursko vladanje u Imotskoj krajini
(224 godine), Turci nisu uhvatili dubljega korijena. Uzrok tome, izgleda, su: budenje katoličke svijesti koju su podgrijavali franjevci i povezivali je uz hrvatsko nacionalno biče, zatim blizina primorskih gradova, oslonac u Mletačkpj Republici i česti upadi hrvatskih uskoka s mletačkog teritorija. Navedene činjenice, te upadi domaćih hajduka i hrvatska narodna pjesma, većinom u desetercu, podržavali su nadu i imotskih krajišnika u skoro oslobodenje od turske vlasti i poticali ih na otpor. 17) Ističe se s ponosom da su franjevci skupljali narod za taj pothvat, a spremali su se i Mlečani s ostalim svojim privrženicima u drugoj polovici mjeseca srpnja 1717. godine.
Sami događaj oslobađanja, tom prigodom, ovdje nas najviše zanima.

3.1. 2. Oslobađanja Imotskog od turskih zuluma

Najsigurniji opisi oslobađanja Imotskog, a potom i Imotske krajine ostavio nam je generalni providur Alvise Mocenigo u svojim spisima. Ti spisi su pisani talijanskim jezikom, a čuvaju se u Povijesnom arhivu u Zadru. Tamo sam ih pronašao, preveo, popratio bilješkama i pripremio za tisak. Kako me je Vaša radoznalost preduhitrila, s posebnom radošću, Vam, bez svih bilježaka, prilažem neke od suvremenih izvješća kako bi pobudili radoznalost ljubitelja Imotske krajine, te da pohitile za cjelovitom poviješću Imotske krajine. Izvješća donosim kronološkim redom:

1. kolovoza 1717. / 167 - 183 /

Opis oslobođenja Imotskog opisao je generalni providur za Dalmaciju i Albaniju Alvise Mocenigo u svom izvještaju od 1. kolovoza 1717. na slijedeći način. Pismo je uputio nadležnim vlastima u Veneciju a prijepis izvještaja zadržao u Zadru.

Presvijetli Vojvodo!
Božja blagonaklonost umnožava blagoslove na Vašom Presvjetlosti i mom odanom srcu pruža veliko zadovoljstvo što mogu državnoj (općoj) svojini predati novu zemlju (mjesto), nove podložnike i novu državu. Pošto je hrabrošću državne Armije utvrda Imotski u Hercegovini zbacila barbarsku otomansku vlast, sretnom sudbinom došla je pod Mletačku (Veneeijansku) zaštitu, pridružujući se državnim slavnim zauzećima. Pošto mi je naređeno da pokušam pothvat u korist zadnjeg sretnog pothvata u Mostarskom Blatu, kao što sam prije spomenuo, čvrsto sam se prihvatio zadatka i, nadvladavši sve poteškoće koje su se urotile, posvetio sam ovih zadnjih dana sve sile da to svladam. Pustivši na časoviti odmor Krajišnike (Krajine), odabravši od njih broj koji sam smatrao dostatnim za zadatak, iz Trilja sam se prebacio u Radotulju(?) pod Zadvarjem, gdje sam putem preko Omiša, slabim i teškim putovima s upotrebom mnogo volova i sa 160 gustardozi(?) (nosača?), najprije sam naprijed poslao top koji je povjeren Gov. Co. Paulo Caralipeo, koji je tu posvetio takvu pažnju, brigu i trud, s kim manevrirajući/postupajući) ozbiljno od početka mog dolaska u Provincije s novim podložnicima i s povjerenim propisima (odredbama) za pothvat, obavljao je s velikom svojom zaslugom do konca zauzeća.
Ujutro 23. prošloga srpnja pođoh odavle i marširajući u potpunom redu, kako dolikuje, nađoh se navečer na 25., nakon dosadna i naporna puta s artiljerijom i sa svim trupama u Imotskom polju.
Tu nađoh očekivane Konavljane i Krajišnike (Krajine) koje su pod vodstvom Gosp. Sarg-to Genere(?) Baron Spare, poslao sam naprijed Gosp. drugim putem ali povezano sa zadatkom koji sam ostavio, nakon što (je) Gov. Zuane Franceschi zauzme varošicu i pošto je počeo po koji sukob između naših i Turaka, koji su se zatvorili u tvrđavu. Kako mi je bila glavna nakana da štedim krv vojnika, koji toliko novca koštaju državnu blagajnu, tako postrojivši vojsku u bojni red, pokazah se s topom na očigled neprijatelja pozivajući ga na predaju. Neprijatelj to odbi obrazlažući da to ne može učiniti radi stranih Turaka, koji su se strkali na obranu, ali treba vjerovati da su ga ohrabrivale za otpor obilna snabdjevenost za koju se pobrinuo prethodnih dana, pomoć koju se nadao dobiti iz susjednih gradova, dok se je u susjednom polju u Duvnu skupljale grupe Turaka, a također ga je sokolila i prirodna gotovo neosvojiva utvrda. Takvom mi ju je također u crtežu pokazao inženjer Camozini(?); takvom su je također otkrili i gospoda Generali i drugi inženjeri. I u to sam se i sam uvjerio kada sam se osobno približio da pogledam mjesne okolnosti.

Opis imotske utvrde

Ona leži na vrhu jedne pećine koja se znatno uzdiže nad ravnicom, koja joj ostaje na jugu, i sa sve tri druge strane okružena je vrlo dubokom dolinom na dnu koje je voda jednog jezera. Na samom njezinom pročelju su zbijene njezine utvrde i zauzimajući joj četiri fasade čitavi vrhunac samoga kamena (pećine), po svojoj naravi nepristupačan sa svih strana nema mjesta kuda bi se moglo popeti da se zauzme mjesta osim na jugu, koji je također zatvoren jakom (uzbrdicom - falsa braga?), iako vrlo uskom na svojoj površini.

Kako bi bilo previše teško i opasno ne samo porazmjestiti vojsku, kao i upotrijebiti minera za zid koji je postavljen na tolikoj visini na kamenu (pećini), tako isto protiv ostalih triju strana baterije se mogu malo koristiti jer je obronak vrlo kamenit i uzdiže se visinom više od 100 koraka nad podnožjem.

Uglavnom takav je njezin položaj, da ju je priroda utvrdila takvom utvrdom jakom i vrlo malo pruža pristupa umjetnim tvorevinama. Ipak pouzdavajući se samo u zaštitu Božju, gdje je stalno čitavo moje povjerenje, pokušao sam vojničkim pokusima sreću. Pošto sam po noći doveo nasuprot utvrdi artiljeriju koja je pomagana pohvalnom pažnjom zapovjednika bataljuna Rizzoa, na zgodno su mjesto postavljene baterije, tako da su ujutro na 27. (srpnja) počele uznemirivati paljbom. K tomu se je ujedinila paljba mušketira, koju su naši neprestano podržavali, smješteni u kućama i tornjevima varoši, koje okružuju utvrdu u sredini.

Branitelji su pokazali veliku hrabrost to pokazujući da ih ne brinu (štete?) koje su unutar tvrđave prouzrokovala taneta bomba, mužara i topova, te su neprestano odgovarali paljbom mušketira. Njihova se je postojanost i neustrašivost mnogo bolje vidjela kada su baterije dva puta u zrak digle skladišta streljiva i kada su Morlaci mogli s nepojmljivom hrabrošću, penjući se jedan na drugoga, preskočiti prvi bedem i zauzeti ga, provalivši vrata i odvodeći pet Konavljanskih plemića, zauzevši jednu zastavu i postavivši na zidove zastavu Vaše Presvjetlosti kao znak skorog sretnog zauzeća, jer neprijatelji, povukavši se u drugi bedem i zabarikadiravši njegova vrata kamenjem, nisu prestali da obasiplju paljbom Morlake, koji su izlazili van u nekom neredu odvodeći spomenute Konavljane i više košnica meda i drugu robu, da preko 300 vojnika kojima je zapovijedao Gen. Co. de Nostiz(?) da uđu i koji su velikim dijelom maltretirani i pritisnuti od mušketira i kamenja koje su na njih bacali Turci.

No, dok je ipak prvi bedem ostao u našim rukama i pošto se je vidjelo da je vrlo teško i gotovo nemoguće osvojiti druge, jer su smješteni na jednoj litici ili stijeni sa strukturom (građevinom) koliko starom toliko čvrstom, uputih neprijatelju drugi poziv na predaju upozoravajući, da se potakne njihova odluka, na prednost državne armije u zauzeću tvrđave.

Pomoć duvanjskih Turaka

Međutim, kako sam preko izvješća doznao da na Duvanjskom polju, samo osam sati udaljenom odavde, Turci formiraju jedinice pješadije s namjerom da jedan dio idući jednim putem iznenadi naš tabor, a drugi idući brdima da navale na baterije. Tako odmah naredih da se zauzmu sva isturena mjesta i rasporedivši bojni red, doživio sam izvanrednu utjehu kad sam vidio da sve trupe i Krajina ima živu želju da mu se pruži prilika da se okuša s neprijateljem i da ga pobijedi.

Lako je mogao nastati sukob, da se nisam prije nego se u to upustim pobrinuo da podignem na oružje čitavu granicu s namjerom da svugdje na protivničkoj strani unesem strah i zavist. Zadržavši galije u Opuzenu i narod iz Makarske, mogao je onaj Svij. Gosp. Izvanredni Providur Semittecolo po mojim uputama mnogozaslužan svojom aktivnošću i žarom pokrenuti one u Mostaru i Počitelju.

Zapovjednik Nonković prodirući sa svojim narodom prema Stocu i Trebinju popalio je žito zasijano po poljima i ujedinivši one iz Popova i Carina probio se je prema Ljubinju, odakle je izišlo deset zastava turskih s pješadijom i konjicom da ih prisili na uzmak nakon jedne bitke od dva sata i da ih natjera u bijeg uz osam mrtvih i jednim zarobljenim. Opljačkavši polovicu toga velikog mjesta, s ratnim plijenom krupne i sitne stoke, konja, odjeće, i zauzećem nekoliko kršćanskih obitelji koje su se u sukobu svojevoljno stavili pod našu zaštitu.

Sličan koristan efekt učinio je u Livnu zapovjednik Dragoni (Thems?) kojega sam odaslao s jednim odjelom konjice u (Brnaza) u sinjskom teritoriju, prebacio se je u Prolog i spuštajući se u to prostrano polje popalio je prvih dana preko tisuću kola sijena ponavljajući i po drugi put požare s još većom štetom po neprijatelja i držeći ga uvijek na oprezu razboritošću i bez pothvata pokazao je hrabrost koja ga resi i koja je ostala očita u pothvatu Mostarskog Blata i u svakoj drugoj prigodi priteknu u pomoć tvrđavi svaki put kada to potrebe budu zahtijevale, kojima se, naravno, treba nadati (očekivati).

Dok sam ja bio zaokupljen takvim nužnim poslovima, Turci su se nastavili skupljati u Duvanjskorn polju s namjerom da dođu tvrđavi u pomoć. Ta nada skupa s naravi položaja, gotovo neosvojivom, očeličio je otpor branitelja, i da se oduševe na ustrajnost ti branitelji, Turci su pokušali proturiti u tvrđavu pismo s izrazom simpatija i hrabrenjem, koje pismo, kad mi je dopalo u rake, poslao sam kopiju Vašoj Presvjetlosti.
Doista vojska, koju sam utaborio u toj širokoj ravnici, bila je nestrpljiva da vidi neprijatelja i da ga potuče, ako bi mu stvarno pomoć prispjela, ali on se nije nikada usudio da se pokaže na očigled našemu taboru. Samo se je 30 njihovih konjanika vidjelo na vrhu jednoga brda, koje gleda na tvrđavu, opalivši nekoliko pušaka nadali su se da će im dati znak da je pomoć blizu, a nisu znali za predaju, koja je bila četiri dana prije.

Kako sam saznao da prije spomenuto okupljanje o kojemu je svijet pričao sastojalo se od samo 8 ljudi, koji su svedeni na tri skupljeni s više strana, većinom narod s brda državne službe.

Pošto sam brižljivo takvim i tolikim predostrožnostima osigurao logor od bilo kakvog neočekivanog iznenađenja i usredsređujući stalno pažnju na glavni cilj, uvidjeh da nema načina da se tvrđava zauzme jurišem, moralo se je pobrinuti pod svaku cijenu da se osvoji pomoću mina. Naredih da se taj posao počne bez čekanja na inženjera. Trudili su se na tome bezuspješno kroz čitavu tu prvu noć, jer branitelji, bacajući odozgo neprestanu kišu kamenja, uvijek i neprestano su ometali. Dođoh tu osobno da pružim pomoć, ali iako sam sve rasporedio kako treba, drugi pokušaj svršio je isto kao i prvi te se je nekorisno izgubila i druga noć u neuspješnom poslu.

U svakom slučaju ne usporavajući nimalo studij svojih nastojanja, htjedoh nanovo nadodati i napore svoga prisustva i prelazeći u napad osokolih glasom i oduševih nagradama radnike da si podignu ogrtače kako bi s pomoću njih mogli mineri, bez previše očita rizika, pridonijeti hrabrom pothvatu za koji se mislilo da je jedini način da se promijene mišljenje divljih (okrutnih) branitelja i da se postavi na zidine utvrde državna zastava.

Kad je operacija počela, s obzirom na kvalitetu zida, posljednja poteškoća, koja se je toliko povećala u svom nastavku, kada se je otkrilo da iza prvoga zida ima i drugi zid između kojih je stavljeno nešto zemlje.

Predaja tvrđave

Pošto je prepreka uklonjena s pomoću Božjom i vještinom inženjera Carnozinia(?), koji je hrabrošću, trudom i znanjem odgovorio kako treba, bio je prikraju posao koji su kroz dva cijela dana i dvije cijele noći radili toliki radnici. Kada su neprijatelji vidjeli vrlo sigurnu opasnost da (će) morati pasti pod ruševinama tvrđave i iznenađeni smrću 27 njihovih, koji su ubijeni bombama, izvjesiše bijelu zastavu s namjerom da izađu na sastanak i da pregovaraju o predaji.

Pošto je data dozvola trojici prvaka da se spuste pod moj šator, izložiše mi da će predati tvrđavu ako se njezinim braniteljima dozvoli da iziđu s oružjem i opremom i ako im se dadne pratnja da mogu sigurno otići u Mostar ili u Ljubuški.
Pošto je sazvan savjet za te prijedloge, bili su čvrsta i jednodušna mišljenja Presvij. Gosp. Izvanredni Provider Balbi i gospoda generali Co. de Nostiz, generalni poručnik Primoldi?, generalni Sarg. gen. Baron Sparre i Kamerier da se ponuda treba prihvatiti.

Zaista, lako se je moglo pretpostaviti (razumjeti) da se je i doista postojanost i nevjerojatna hrabrost s kojom su neprijatelji branili tvrđavu, lako mogla pretvoriti u konačnu očajnost po kojoj bi više voljeli ostaviti pod ruševinama tvrđave živote nego izgubiti slobodu, kad je mišljenje bilo da se tvrđava mora držati za zaštitu široke ravnice koju je ona štitila i brojnog pučanstva novog podaništva, koje želi da nad njom uspostavi vlast i to tim više što ne bi bilo moguće bez utroška mnogo vremena i mnogo novca i uvijek u opasnosti od uznemirivanja koje bi neprijatelji mogli poduzimati koji joj stoje nasuprot da je iz temelja ne obnove.

Zaključeni su ugovori i ja sam izložio da se moraju predati zastave, oružno streljivo i živežne namirnice.
Sve je točno izvršeno pošto su 103 Turčina izišli iz tvrđave, predavši meni pet zastava, primivši pod mudrom upravom Nadintendatna Nakića pratnju koja im je dodijeljena do Ljubuškoga kao najbližeg mjesta, i to jutro pred njihovim očima izvjesivši na te zidine slavne znakove časnoga zaštitnika (sv. Marka).

Važnost imotske tvrđave

Tako tvrđava Imotski ima sreću da se s pomoću Božjom pripaja sretnom vlasništvu Vaše Presvjetlosti. Velika je njezina vrijednost radi položaja koji joj pruža jaku obranu, da kad se samo okom pogleda vidi se da je to istina.

Štiti Omiš, Zadvarje, Primorje, Makarsku i Vrgorac i otvara put prema Duvnu, Ljubuškom, Počitelju i Mostaru. U jednoj i drugoj državi izdižu se vijenci brda punih šuma i pašnjaka, a iznad svega teritorij se produžava u prostrana i plodna polja, koja su u svijetu poznata kao najprostranija i najbogatija od svih mnogobrojnih starih i novih zauzeća Vaše Eminencije i među susjednim otomanskim provincijama.

Čini je plodnom jedna rijeka imenom Vrljika, koja izvire u podnožju jednoga brda, kao u sredini njihovih polja i koja teče do Trebižata, miješajući s njime svoje vlastite vode i tekući s njim gubi se u vodama Neretve.

Bivša turska uprava u tvrđavi

Sedam aga ili sedam kapetanija sa sedam kompanija straže nad njegovom zaštitom i jednomu imenom i po dužnosti Dizdaru povjerena je njegova uprava. Uostalom to je u pređašnje vrijeme bilo jedno od vojvodstva Hercegovine i pošto (što?) sve obitelji, koje su u posljednje vrijeme pripojene državnom podaništvu i tolike još druge žele da se pripoje, može se nadati da se u toj ravnici ustali bogati izvor prihoda kao povećanje državnog vlasništva.

U tako sretnim okolnostirna, Bog je htio da mi dodijeli veliku čast da se predam za Domovinu i da sa svojim malim sposobnostima poslužim za jedan dobitak, koji je nakon dvaju prethodnih sretnih pothvata bio treća akcija, koju sam sretno završio u roku od samo tri mjeseca, otkad se nalazim u Provinciji pod teretom ove primarne uprave na slavu državnog imena, na čast armije i na povećanje države.

Da bi se uspjelo u specifičnosti ishoda pothvata, morao sam nadvladati sve one teške nezgodnosti, koje su se pojavljivale u prijevozu topova, oruđa i namirnica, putovima, koji su bili i dugi i očajni, u opsadi tvrđave koja se bez čuda ne bi mogla zauzeti kad bi bila snabdjevena topom i sa žarom (hrabrošću) neprijatelja pri sukobu i u činu ometanja operacija.

Bog je također pomogao i nakanu davši snagu i tijelu i duhu iscrpljenim od umora i nezgoda dao mi je sreću da pokrenem i podložnike i vojsku i da mognem s pomoću jednih i drugih učinim korisnim prve momente svog poniznog zadatka na korist obožavane Domovine.

Želio bih imati u ruci potrebna sredstva i odobrenja da idem naprijed i da pronesem silu naše armije i na druge utvrde Hercegovine da iskoristim početnu sreću, ali budući da su s mojom brigom povezane i nezgode Albanije, moram pospiješiti svoj povratak u Split i neću kasniti da to učinim čim, kako se nadam, kroz nekoliko dana se pobrinem za tolike potrebe tvrđave i za (... ?).

Potražnja novčanih sredstava

Međutim, neka mi dozvoli državna velikodušnost dozvolu da zamolim vrhovnu naklonost jedino iz razloga svoje službe.
Ako je u svako doba potrebno imati novca, to je posebno potrebno s obzirom na neposredne zadatke u kojima, osim mjesečnih plaća, koje su same po sebi povećane radi ostanka Regimente Grisona(?) i Bataljuna Parma, koje ja plaćam prije nego odem iz Splita i dolaskom druge vojske i drugih brodova u tu luku, ne samo da se povećavaju izvanredni izdaci, nego i same misije postaju sve sporije radi dužine putovanja i radi zakašnjenja Krajišnika (Kajika?).

Moja je dužnost počašćena da to sve podastrem mudromu sudu Presvijetlog Senata, razmatrajući pažljivo što je neophodno, da se ne izgubi prilika otvaranja, za koje ću nastojati biti hrabar da odvagnem koliko bi mogla biti korisna za svaki pothvat pomoć Gosp. Gen. Solenburga i još kojeg inženjera s Levanta.

Novi plan

Nakon toga znam da je moja dužnost da vam podnesem plan napravljen u momentima, popis pješaka Krajine, trupa topa(?) koji sa sobom vodim, kao i obavijest o mrtvima i ranjenima, pridržavajući si da dadem izvješće o izdacima prigodom jednog drugog sastanka, koji će kao svjedočanstvo moje pažnje prema ekonomiji, pače i u prilikama tolikih potreba, mislim biti dostojan državnog blagonaklonog odobrenja. Imam čast unaprijed poslati Vašoj Eminenciji sedam zastava, jedan timpan i jedan bubanj, koji su zauzeti i ove dvije zastave u pohodu na Mostarsko Blato, a drugih pet, koje su predali turski zapovjednici tvrđave, dobro znajući, da samoj Preuzvišenosti Vojvodi treba zahvaliti na časnim uspjesima pobjede, koja je sretno završena pod pokroviteljstvom Vašeg Uzvišenog Imena.

Zaslužnici i nagrade

Presvijetli Gospodin izvanredni Providur Balbi bio mi je sudrug u patnjama i naporima i sudjelujući svojom neumornom zauzetošću ne samo brigama za logor nego i za napad postigao je čame odlike svojoj poštovanoj zaslužnosti koja ga resi.

S hvalevrijednom ustrajnošću slijedili su me gospoda E. Pio Botta Calbo(?), E. Simon Cvntarini, moj nećak, E. Antonio Primaru i prelazeći preko svih opasnosti, natjecali su se u želji da se istaknu u plemenitoj strasti služenja Domovini. Također i gospodin E. Giacomo Baldu sopracomito, kojega sam morao povesti galijom i s jednom (karsalionom?) biskota, zaslužio je svaku pohvalu radi brižljive pažnje kojom mi je snabdijevao logor tako potrebnim rekvizitom. Neumorna je bila zauzetost gosp. Gen. Co. de Nistiza, korisno dugo iskustvo i dobro poznata vojnička vrlina gospodina Fen. Gen. Primicaldia(?), pohvale vrijedna srčanost gospode Gen-la Sparse i Comena(?). Sags. Magr. Rizzo, zapovjednika bitke, pokazao je dobro srce kojim služi, u vodstvu konjice bio je potpuno precizan Sarg. Mag. di Battag. Antonio Medin(?). Policije švicarska, njemačka, talijanska; konjica hrvatska i dragoni iz sve Krajine s njihovim zapovjednicima potpuno su zadovoljili, a za svoju sam stražu odabrao mještane Splita pod vodstvom gosp. Can.(?) Antonia Alberti, koji je na svoju zaslugu i moje zadovoljstvo udovoljio svim zadacima svoje službe. Konačno dostojna se je vrhovne državne pohvale pokazala ova hrabra i vrijedna nacija. Spremno i poslušno se je pokoravala svakoj mojoj zapovijedi u tolikim i tako čestim potrebama transporta namirnica, oruđa i streljiva, nadvladavši s odlučnošću koja je za svaku pohvalu prvo iskušenja i u sadašnjem je sukobu pokazala nanovo hrabrost, kako je znala pokazati uvijek svjedočanstvo nepokolebljive vjere.

Zahvalnica na svetkovinu Gospe od anđela

Kao što je dužnost kršćanske pobožnosti da u svakoj sreći prima i spozna ruku Svemogućega, tako će se sutra (2. kolovoza 1717.), u znak pokornosti vrhovnom naređenju koje mi je saopćeno časnim duždevim pismom, (na) koje(?) s obavještenjima o pomorskoj pobjedi, koju je izvojevala velika Armata Vaše Presvjetlosti, koje mi stiže sada, održati poniznim molitvama (kao?) zahvala Njegovu Milosrđu koje se je udostojalo rezervirati pobjedonosnom oružju Vaše Eminencije čast da pobijedi neprijatelja na moru i na kopnu i da postavi znakove Vjere na jednoj tvrđavi, gdje su se lažnim kultom tijekom tri stoljeća 18) častili (štovali) lažni idoli muhamedanstva.

Međutim, da ne bi Vašoj Eminenciji okasnila obavijest o mojim postupcima, tako i o sretnom uspjehu, šaljem ekspresnom felukom (šajka, mala lađa) Gen. Peiegrina Morosinia, koji je došao sa mnom u Dalmaciju u svojstvu Majora Provincije. Tu dužnost izvršuje u svemu točno i pošto mu je pridodata i ona majora logora, zaslužno ju je vršio, radeći bez obzira na sve nezgode i opasnosti, državnoj je službi bilo na korist vojno iskustvo koje posjeduje i talenti kojima je nadaren.

Moje poštovanje u tome dok se ide naprijed da se u Presvijetlom Senatu razmatra koliko bi mogao biti koristan susret same feluke da brižno čuvam velikodušnu naklonost.

Moj duh duboko predan poslušnosti ponovno Vas moli i zaklinje da bi na vrijeme bila poduzeta takva proviđanja bez kojih bi državna armija olabavila, a meni bi ostala žalost što ne mogu nastaviti nastavak državnih dobrobiti kada konjukture, oduševljenost vojske i okolnosti privatnih poslova potiču unutarnje nade moga srca da gaji vrlo korisne nade.

Zaključak izvještaja

Zaključit ću ovo s napomenom da imajući o polju Ruda grube podatke i poduzevši pomno promatranje na čitavo stanje Canalla(?), koja ima za čast da služi Vašoj Eminenciji u ovoj Provinciji, s potpunim sam zadovoljstvom u srcu našao da je narod i Canalli(?) u najboljem stanju i da ta vrsta vojske ima vrsne i iskusne časnike.

Kako je prošlih tjedana poginuo upravitelj jedne od Hrvatskih regimenta Antonije Mršić, tako su mnogi časnici, koji s pravom po zaslugama aspiriraju na promaknuće, toplo mi je preporučivano da za to upražnjeno mjesto postupim za promocije koje budu održane po Pravdi (Sudu). Međutim, imajući na umu da se je ovdje u Provinciji nalazio jedan eskadron te regimente i dva časnika vrhovnog štaba, činilo mi se da je prikladno da ih uslišam, pogotovu što su ratnih nevolja bili tu s mačem u ruci protiv neprijatelja.

Pošto je Gosp. Gen. Nostiz(?) razmotrio sve razloge konkurenata, on je prosudio da su zaslužni da budu promaknuti Doll. Ten. Co. Zorzi Radoš, a u čin Ten. Coll. gosp. Sarg-to Magr. di Brigota Pietro Lorenzo Pellegrini, a treći a čin Sarg-to Magr. kapetan Nikola Krajina. Pošto sam saznao za sami izbor pridodat dekretu optacije, potvrdio sam spomenute časnike svakoga u svom činu, a povjerio sam Kompaniju da Canalti(?) gosp. Col. Mršića kapetanu Co. Lorencu Zorzi Radoš.

Nadam se da će sama promaknuća, koja priopćavam na znanje poštovanim vlastima, zaslužiti vrhovnu potvrdu Vaše Eminencije da uliju uvijek novu srčanost onom koji korisno služi Općoj Stvari. 19)

Imotski, 1. kolovoza 1717.

3.1.3. Svečano slavlje

Blagdan Gospe od Anđela - 2. kolovoza - upisan je zlatnim slovima u današnju Imotsku krajinu.
Na taj dan 1717. godine uspjela je kršćanska vojska, pod zapovjedništvom mletačkih časnika, osloboditi Imotsku krajinu od stoljetne turske tiranije i pripojiti je svijetu kulturne civilizacije. Nije to bilo lako. Ipak se uspjelo. Sudjelovali su domaći sinovi iz svih krajeva Dalmacije u hrabrom pothvatu. Posebno su se isticali Imoćani i Sinjani.

Nečuvenom hrabrošću nasrtali su na donje bedeme Tvrđave. Prvi se popeo na gornje bedeme i izvjesio mletačku zastavu sv. Marka Ante Vrdoljak, vojnik sinjske čete. Za to je dobio doživotnu penziju od dva dukata na mjesec. Turci su se predali. Oko 300 njihovih časnika i vojnika, serdar Nakić je, prema dogovoru, odveo u Ljubuški i tu ih predao.

Blagdan Gospe od Anđela posebno se štuje u franjevačkom redu. Baš na taj dan - 2. kolovoza 1717. - gvardijan imotskog samostana sv. Frane, fra Stipan Vrljić zahvalio je Bogu i Majci Božjoj na pobjedi i s vojskom ispjevao "Tebe Boga hvalimo". Odmah je od naroda sakupio svotu novca i dao naslikati sliku Gospe od Anđela. Vojska je potom u donjem dijelu Tvrđave sazidala crkvu, posvećenu Majci Božjoj. U nju je gvardijan i prvi župnik, fra Stipan Vrljić, postavio Gospinu sliku.

Umjetnik ju je naslikao uljenim bojama na tri spojene daske. Do danas je svetinja Imotske krajine i zaštitnica Imoćana.

Do 1718. imotski kraj protezao se od Roškog polja do Vranića, od Klobuka do sinjskih predjela. Pripadao je Hercegovini. Čitav taj kraj 1717. oslobođen je od Turaka. Mlečani nisu trpjeli muslimane u krajevima u kojima su vladali. Kroz godinu dana (1717.-1718.) uspjeli su očistiti čitav taj kraj od begova. Raja koja je željela ostati na svojim ognjištima primala je kršćanstvo. Ustvari, to su bili Hrvati katolici, koji su iz vlastitog interesa prelazili na Islam.

Kad je 21. srpnja 1718. sklopljen u Požarevcu mir između Austrije, Turske, Mletaka i Dubrovnika, nastala su nova razgraničenja. Imotski je kraj prepolovljen. Današnja Imotska krajina pripojena je Dalmaciji. Pod turskom vlašću ostali su krajevi koji danas pripadaju općinama Tomislavgrada, Posušja i Gruda.

Prazne predjele, koje su napustili Turci, Mlečani su nastanili Hrvatima iz zapadne Hercegovine. Ujedinjeni s domaćim stanovništvom, stvorili su današnju Imotsku krajinu.

4. Gradski upravitelji

Prvi kolonel Imotskog postade Mate Šoić iz Mostara, a poslije njega Ivan Dešković. Pod mletačkom vlašću bijaše dosta naših ljudi, koji uskočiše s turskog na mletačko područje i proslaviše se u mletačkoj vojsci kao vrsne vojskovođe. Oni su na čelu svojih sunarodnjaka prenosili slavu našeg junaštva, a sve na korist Mletačke Republike. Za uzvrat dobivaju posjede koje je naš narod, otimajući ih od Turaka, natopio svojom krvlju.

Zauzimanjem Imotskog i njegove krajine Mlečani protegoše ime Dalmacije i na to područje. To su bili zadnji uspjesi i zadnje njihovo širenje na štetu hrvatskog teritorija. Oni ih nazvaše »Aquisti novissimi«. Tim osvojanjima pripade Mlečanima sva današnja Dalmacija do granice Imotski-Vrgorac-Metković i dalje, kako je to uglavnom ranije bilo određeno. Granice su priznate i potvrđene mirom u Požarevcu 21. srpnja 1718. godine. Međutim, granica je na terenu utvrđena i ispravljena južno od Metkovića na štetu Mlečana od strane mletačkog povjerenika Alvisa Moceniga i turskog Mehmed Efendi-Sialya u periodu izmedu 1721. i 1723. godine. 20)

Ispravljanjem hercegovačke granice na štetu Mlečana ostade pod Turcima jedan dio zemljišta oko Trebinja (Hutovo, Popovo, Obraće, Zupci i Carina). Jedan dio stanovništva ne htjede ostati pod Turcima, nego se preseli na mletačko područje. Mocenigo ih naseli oko Imotskog polja. Tom prilikom dođe i 180 pravoslavnih obitelji u Imotsku krajinu i nasele se na više mjesta oko polija, najviše istočno od Krivodola, gdje i danas živi više desetina pravoslavnih obitelji. Kako su se doselili s crnogorske granice, nazvaše svoj zaselak Crnogorci.

Nekoliko godina nakon toga posebnom mletačkom dukalom uredila se posebna pravoslavna crkvena općina za pravoslavne iz Imotske krajine (10. lipnja 1722.). Doveo ih je kaluđer Vasilije s još dva svećenika i jednim đakom. Jedan dio doseljenih pravoslavaca sa svojim svećenicima naselilo se u Glavini. Kaluđer Vasilije i ostali sveštenici dobiše dukalom od 6. prosinca 1725. na uživanje devetnaestipol kanapa zemije. 21)

Katoličko stanovništvo u Hercegovini očekivalo je da će Mletačka vojska nakon osvajanja Imotskog osloboditi i Hercegovinu. Nažalost to se nije ostvarilo. Turci prozvaše najbliži dio Hercegovine Imotskom Bekija - što znači ostatak. I jedinstveno imotsko-bekijsko polje, jedna zemljopisna i privredna jedinica, bi podijeljena. To se pripisuje turskom zlatu kojim je bio podmićen mjernik Cavrović, a valjda i još koji Mlečanin. 22)

5. Stjecanje posjeda

Starosjedilačko stanovništvo na području oslobođene Imotske krajine kao i doseljenici s turskog područja, posebno iz Bekije, dobivali su od mletačke vlasti određene posjede. Mletačka vlast je. ovisno od konfiguracije pojedinih područja, zavisno od broja osoba pojedinih obitelji dodjelivala pojedinoj obitelji posjede: okoćnicu, obradivu zemlju i dio šume. Stručno osoblje je išlo na teren i upisivalo u katastarske knjige posjede koji su pripadali dotičnoj obitelji. Katastarske zapise su pohranjivali u administraivnom centru u Zadru i tako je nastala vrlo vrijedna serija katastarskih knjiga. Te knjige su višestruki izvor za proučavanje odgovarajućeg područja i plemena.
Čini mi se vrijednim navesti, primjera radi, jedan primjer iz katastarskog popisa. Naime, nakon naredbe drugog generalnog providura za Dalmaciju i Albaniju gosp. Nikole Eviso od 7. listopada 1725. na slijedeći način je podijeljena zemlja u Poljicima, selu Imotske krajine 12. svibnja 1726.

A. Obitelj Mate Gudelja sa šest članova dobila je slijedeće posjede:

Br. 149. U Cvitanovića Docu dobila je tri četvrtine i 56 tabli između (posjeda) Grge Vulića Božina i Gabre Gudelja Martinova.
Br. 172. U Podvornici dobila je polje od četiri četvrtine i sto dvije table između vrta nižepotpisanoga i spomenutog Gudelja.
Br. 173. Vrt i kuća od jedne četvrtine i 50 tabli koja graniči s istoka sa spomenutim Gudeljom.
Br. 180. Na brdu Garište dobiva sedam udolinica od tri četvrtine i 96 tabli. Ostale dvije četvrtine pripadaju Martinu Gudelju.
Br. 254. U imotskoj Pasiki dobila je posjed između Martina Gudelja i Jure Klienka.

B. Obitelj Filipa Kulundžića od sedamnaest članova dobila je slijedeće posjede:

Br. 85. U Dubravi je dobila polja dvije četvrtine i 50 tabli šume, između posjeda Grge Kulundžića Nikolina, harambaše.
Zatim je dobila osam udolinica okruženih šumom od tri četvrtine i 33 table.
U Rupovom Dolu je dobila jednu četvrtinu i 76 tabli polja.
U Pokrovnici je dobila polje s kućom u visini od 5 kampa i dvije četvrtine, te 151 tablu između (imanja) Šimuna Karauna i učitelja harambaše Kulundžića.
U Podvelikim Grmom je dobila jednu četvrtinu i 69 tabli polja između posjeda Josipa Matkovića i Ivana Čavline.
U Provu je dobila 192 table do vrta Filipa Kulundžića.
U Rupi je dobila tri četvrtine i 180 tabli polja između Grge Livajića Jurina i Stipana Ćorluke, te Luke Livajića.
Nadalje, dobila je i posjed u površini od jedne četvrtine i 90 tabli koja graniči s juga posjedom hrambaše Kulundžića i učitelja Grge Aliesak-a. Dobila je i pojatu koju okružuje šuma sa 160 tabli.
U Pod Kuku je dobila tri četvrtine i 54 table koje s juga dodiruje posjed Jerke Matijaševića.
U Donjem Polju je dobila polje od tri četvrtine i 54 table što graniči s juga s posjedom Jerke Matijaševića.
Nadalje, u Donjem Polju je dobila dvije četvertine i 198 tabli što graniči s posjedima Mihe Runušića (?) i učitelja Progon-a.
U imotskoj Pasiki je dobila dvije četvrtine polja što graniči s posjedima Mate Zuića i Stipana Čorluke.

C. Obitelj Bože Crnić-a od deset članova dobila je:

U Docima tri udolinice, dvije četvrtine i 132 table ograničene šumom.
U Karpešini pet djelića vinograda u površini od jedne četvrtine i 192 table okružene sa svih strana šumom.
Mešljavac okružen šumom i kamenit u površini od dvije četvrtine i 181 tablu.
U Pod Klancu polje od tri četvrtine i 147 tabli što s juga graniči s posjedima Luke Livajića, a sa zapada graniči s imanjem Martina Gudelja.
U Docima pet udolinica s površinom od tri četvrtine i 56 tabli okruženih sa svih strana šumom.
Karpešine Njive dobiva polja pet dijelova od 3 četvrtine i 92 table okružene šumom.
U Vukanjevoj Strugi - prema prološkom katastru - dobiva tri četvrtine i 84 table polja. Polovica pripada Anti Vujoviću, jugom graniči s posjedima naroda iz Zagvozda.
U Banjevcu - dobiva tri četvrtine prološkog polja što s juga graniči posjedom Stipana Lapentića a sa zapada Mihe Runušiča.

D. Obitelj Marka Šušnjar-a od devet članova dobala je:

U Donjem Polju polja od 2 table između južne strane posjeda Frane Miletića, a sa zapada Bože Vuletića.
U Bristu posjed od tri četvrtine i 107 tabli što jugom graniči s posjedom Mate Chielića (Kielić?), a zapadom spomenutim harambašom Kulundžića. Vinogradinu čija polovica pripada Ivanu Largetiću, a graniči jugom s posjedima Jure, Luke i Grgura Livaića, zapadom graniči s kamenjarom. Posjed je od jedne četvrtine i 51 table.
U Pod Greblju posjed od tri četvrtine i 112 tabli što graniči jugom s posjedom Marka Juke i zapadom Luke Livaića.
U Podvornici dvije četvrtine i 189 tabli. Posjed graniči s onim Andrije Zuića i Luke Livaića.
U Meašu posjed od jedne četvrtine i 184 table. Posjed graniči s onim Ivana Bunušića i Mihe Lozića.
U Vurolini posjed od jedne četvrtine i 50 tabli. Posjed graniči s onim Marka Juke i Benkovinom.
Piran i kuća je okružen kamenjarom jedne četvrtine i 22 table.
Tri dijela u Benkovini, od kojih su dva plodna. Graniče s posjedima Marka Juke, Ivana Margetića, spomenutog Šušnjara i Ivana Margetića. Posjed je od jedne četvrtine i 46 tabli.
U Vuarikovišću jednu četvrtinu i 179 tabli.
Siloviši su okruženi kamenjarom sa svih strana. Obitelji je pripalo 168 tabli.
U Krču posjed od jedne čtvrtine i 8 tabli.
U Cerovcu njezina je jedna četvrtina i 50 tabli. Graniči s posjedima Marka Juke i Jakova Vujevića.
Sibsin Dolac - dvije četvrtine i 75 tabli, okruženih šumom pripalo je navedenoj obitelji.
Sirčina - dvije četvrtine i dvije table.
Krivi Dolac, polovica je Marka Juke, a spomenuta obitelj dobila je 165 tabli.

E. Obitelj Ante Vujevića od devet članova dobila je:

U mjestu Buljevac dvije udolinice od jedne četvrtine i 161 table.
U Buljevcu što granici s Mihom Jurićem u dva polja dobila je dvije četvrtine i 105 tabli.
Demirovac, što graniči s Mihom Jurićem i Grgom Sterile, dobila je u površini od jedne četvrtine i 42 table.
Rugotina - dvije četvrtine i 174 table pripale su ovoj obitelji.
Dubrava - predjel od pet četvrtina i 71 table. Jugom i zapadom to graniči s imanjem spomenutog Vujevića.
Kuća i vrt graniče s Vujevićevim posjedima, a zapremaju površinu od dvije četvrtine i 9 tabli.
U Dragi je dobila 102 table.
Dubrave, što graniče s Vujevićima, površinu od jedne četvrtine i 89 tabli.
Vukanje Struge u površini od tri četvrtine i 84 table pripale su o obitelji. Zemljište je na području Prološca. Drugi dio pripada Jakovu Vujev:
Čanjavice u prološkom polju - jedna četvrtina pripada ovoj obitc Taj posjed graniči s imanjem Mihe Lozića i Andrije Zeca.

F. Obitelj Jakova Vujevića od osam članova dobila je:

U Cvitanovića njivama jedno polje od dvije četvrtine i 113 tabli izme posjeda Andrije Zuića i Guozur(?) Aliutka.
Na brdu Garišta je dobila četiri posjeda od tri četvrtine i 20 tabli. Nada kamenjara jednu četvrtinu 60 tabli.
Na Cerovcu je dobila jednu četvrtinu i 140 tabli. Na istom mjestu okruženom poljem dobila je jednu četvrtinu i 156 tabli.
Kuća s dvije sobe i Podvornica s vrtom graniči jugom s posjedom Stipana Lapendića u površini od jedne četvrtine i 108 tabli. Kuća je okružena šumom, a ima površinu jedne četvrtine i 103 table. Na istom mjestu posjeduje još dvije četvrtine i 168 tabli. Vrt ima 135 tabli.
Kuketina s jednom četvrtinom i 154 table. Isto sa 165 tabli.
Na brdu Garište sedam udolinica, čija je polovica vlasništvo Mihe Ćurića(?), dobili su dvije četvrtine i 98 tabli. 23)

Sličan popis bi se mogao navesti za većinu sela Imotske krajine. Ti popisi bi otkrili pretke pojedinih prezimena, te lokalitete koji su vezani uz pojedina prezimena i nadimke.

Međutim, posebnu pažnju privlači dioba zemljišta u imotskom pol nakon prokapanja kanala i odvodnjavanja šireg područja. Ta zemljišta dijeljena su skupinama obitelji po naredbi generalnog providura Jakova Boldu od 30. rujna 1746. To močvarno zemljište koje je prije poplavljivala rijeka Vrljika dodijeljuje se na slijedeći način:

A. za 87 obitelji barjaktara harambaše Mihe Busrtilo iz sela Zagvo za radove i nadnice učinjene u iskopavanju zapuštenih kanala, kao što je pod zakletvom zasvjedočeno pukovniku Krajine i od njega na slijedeće parcele zemljište je određeno kako slijedi:

Br. 15. Komad zemljišta u Pašiću zvan Krvavica. Istokom graniči s rijekom Vrljikom, sjeverom s posjedima barjaktara harambaše Hajduk, jugom barjaktarom harambaše Grančić i zapadom privatnim imanjem što je god. 1726. razdijeljeno Camozini-ma (?) .
Br. 3. Zemljište u Topoli. Sa sjeveroistoka graniči barjaktarom harambaše Hajduk, sa jugozapada barjaktarom Dučiće, sa zapada državnom livadom i sa jugoistoka Jarugom . . . . . . . . 6.
Br. 14. Drugi komad u Kljenovačkom polju. Graniči sa sjevera barjaktarom harambaše Đurić, s juga je Otok, s istoka Jaruga . . . 32.

Četiri obitelji Bačići posjeduju (imanje) u mjestu zvanom Zaotok. On graniči s juga imanjem harambaše Bušić, sa sjeveroistoka Jaruga Šipovača sajugozapada Otok.

Na slijedećoj stranici slijedi slična razdioba za 78 obitelji barjaktara harambaše Zvane Kulundžića.

Potom slijedi razdioba imanja za 25 obitelji barjaktara harambaše Ante Đurića iz sela Lokvičići.

Na četvrtom mjestu nalazi se dioba posjeda za 87 obitelji barjaktara harambaše Nikolića Serdarija(?) Mršića iz Prološca.

Na petom mjestu je raspodjela posjeda za 17 obitelji barjaktara Jure Hajduka iz sela Vrbaca(?).

Na šestom mjestu je ispisan posjed za 44 obitelji barjaktara harambaše Đukića u selu Podlug.

Na sedmom mjestu su upisane čestice za 39 obitelji barjaktara harambaše Tomasovića u Vinjanima.

Na osmom mjestu su čestice za 29 obitelji barjaktara Ante Bušića. Nakon toga slijede gruntove čestice koje se dodjeljuju za 26 obitelji barjaktara Martina Grančića iz »Tvrđave« (Imotskog).

Navest ću nekoliko pojedinosti.
Br. 11. Teren u Pasiću zvan Krvavice graniči sjeverom s posjedom barjaktara Burstilo, s juga s imanjem barjaktara Sindika, s istoka rijekom Vrljikom i s juga posjedom serdara Tadića.
Br. 10. Zemljište u Topoli graniči sa sjeveroistoka s posjedom barjaktara Kulundžića, s jugozapada imanjem barjaktara Tadića, s juga Jarugom i sa sjeverozapada državnim posjedom.
Br. 9. Zemljište u poljani selu kljenovačkog polja graniči: sa sjeverozapada s imanjem serdara Dučića, sa sjeveroistoka Jaruga, s juga posjedom barjaktara Društva bombardira i sa jugozapada rijekom Vrljikom.

Br. 2. Uz navedeno, Petru Vukosavljeviću dodaje se jedan komad zemlje u Pasiću. On graniči sa sjevera s imanjem gosp. pukovnika Cernizza, s juga posjedom barjaktara Mrkonjića, s istoka rijekom Vrljikom i sa zapada posjedom istog Cernizze.
Nadalje, Grgo Perić(?) u Krenicama ima svoj posjed. Od graniči sa sjevera cestom, sa zapada s posjedom Ivana Perze, a s istoka i juga pašnjakom. Ivan Perze u Krenicama ima posjed koji graniči sa zapada i juga pašnjakom, sa sjevera cestom, a s istoka s posjedom Grge Perića.

Na desetom mjestu su upisane parcele za 75 obitelji barjaktara Mihe Mrkonjića iz Zmijavaca.

Na jedanaestom mjestu upisane su parcele barjaktara harambaše Mijata Vodanovića (?) iz Župe.

Na dvanaestom mjestu slijedi zapis za 55 obitelji barjaktara harambaše Karla Gudelja iz Župe.

Na trinaestom mjestu nalaze se upisane katastarske čestice za 30 obitelji barjaktara harambaše Grge Knezovića.

Slijedeći broj odnosi se na Četu učenika topništva s tvrdave. Pročitajmo je skupa: Tu živi 28 obitelji.
One su dobile slijedeće čestice:

Br. 5. Zemljište u Pasiću zvano Krvavica. Graniči sa sjevera barjaktarom harambaše Kulundžića, s juga barjaktarom harambaše Nikolić, s istoka rijekom Vrlikom, sa zapada zemljištima koja su podijeljena godine 1725. Camazini-ma.
Zemljište u Topoli. Graniči sa sjeveroistoka barjaktarom harambašom Bušić, s jugozapada barjaktarom harambašom Hajduk, sa sjeverozapada državnim zemljištvom i s juga Jaruga.
Br. 10. Zemljište u Kljenovačkom polju graniči sa sjeverozapada barjaktarom harambaše Grančić, s jugozapada posjedom barjaktara Tomasovića i Jaruga.
Br. 20. Josip Vjenić(?) dobiva dio u šumi Lug u Zmijavcima, skupa s Križanom Skakom.

Na petnaestom mjestu su upisane čestice koje od sada pripadaju za uzdržavanje 22 obitelji barjaktara serdara Riste Danilovića.

Na šesnaestom mjestu slijede čestice za 21 obitelj barjaktara serdara Jove Sindika.

Na sedamnaestom mjestu su upisane čestice za 21 obitelj barjaktara serdara Riste Tadića.

Na osamnaestom mjestu su upisane zemljišne čestice za 18 obitelji barjaktara serdara Nikole Dučića(?).

Zapisnik završava s rednim brojem devetnaest, gdje se ponovo poziva na naredbu spomenutog providura Jakova Boldu od 30. rujna 1746. Po toj naredbi doznačena je zemlja Stjepana Cernizza iz ove Krajine, to jest za pomaganje pri kopanju kanala uz rijeku Vrljiku, koja je prouzrokovala poplave u poju. Stjepan je dobio parcelu u Pasiću i zemljište u Topoli.

Na koncu su doneseni i posjedi koji pripadaju raznim crkvenim institucijama i crkvama. 24)

Na temelju sličnih katastarskih zapisa može se saznati i za postojanje ondašnjih obitelji s brojem članova. Ovdje ću navesti popis obitelji iz Kamenmosta i Podbablja iz god. 1725.

REDNI BROJ/IME I PREZIME/ BROJ ČLANOVA

1. Marko Mišević 7

2. Marko Gazilović 5

3. Ilija Vuksan 4

4. Blaž Vuksan 10

5. Ivan Krasnić 15

6. Luka Dragutinović 20

7. Nikola Jovanov 2

8. Bože i Marko Talić 11

9. Mijo Stojanović 5

10. Toma Perkušić 8

11. Mate Lučić-Dodig 6

12. Marko Lučič-Dodig 6

13. Marko Vujanić 5

14. Križan Vulić (?) 10

15. Ivan Glavaš 10

16. Andrija Kristić 3

17. Blaž Vuksan 6

18. Nikola Znaor 4

19. Pavao Znaor 5

20. Komnen Krajinić (?) 7

21. Sava Krajinić 4

22. Marko Asljinović 7

23. Grgo Perić 7

24. Luka Perić 8

25. Dragutin Delić 7

26. Aleksa Rasović 3

27. Ivan Picokarić 4

28. Nikola Zaharijić 3

29. Vasko Dragutinović 5

30. Marko i Jure Milasović 15

31. Mitar Rasović 7

32. Petar Vuičić-Boban 6

33. Petar Picokarić 6

34. Miroslav Ninković 7

35. Ivan Pavlčić 4

36. Miloš Vulnović 6

37. Lazo Stoianović-Zlatar 5

38. Karlo Bakita 5

39. Šimun Bakita 4

40. Ivan Lončar 11

41. Mate Lončar 5

42. Mijo Tvrtković 8

43. Boško Milutinović 6

44. Mate Radić 4

45 Mirko Stojanović 15
25)

Tako je godine 1725., prema navedenom popisu, u 45 obitelji iz Kamenmosta i Podbablja živjela 371 osoba.

6. Neslobodni oslobođenici

Gotovo kroz cijelo osamnaesto stoljeće i dalje susreću se brojni dokumenti na turskom, talijanskom i drugim jezicima koji svjedoče o uvedenom običaju da na području Imotske krajine katoličko stanovništvo mora plaćati nekadašnjim vlasnicima pojedinih posjeda odgovarajuće godišnje takse za zemlju koju obraduju i s koje ubiru plodove. Narod se tome protivio, ali Mletačka Republika, čini se, podržavala je taj običaj, da se ne bi zamjerila turskoj vlasti koja je u susjedstvu. I u franjevačkom arhivu u Mostaru, da ne spominjem one u Zaostrogu, Makarskoj i Omišu, čuvaju se brojni dokumenti - uglavnom na turskom jeziku - s kojima se tijekom osamnaestog stoljeća ubiralo porez na posjede koji su jedno vrijeme - od osvajanja do gubitaka - pripadali pojedinim Turcima na području Imotske krajine. 26) I Mletačke vlasti su dobivale slične dokumente i oni se čuvaju u povijesnom arhivu u Zadru. Konačno je i to pitanje trebalo riješiti. Brojne dokumente i njihovo riješenje sačuvao je pukovnik-upravitelj Imotskog Franjo (Francesco) Danese i poslao 1. lipnja 1793. generalnom providuru Alvisu Marinu u Zadar. Sažetak tih dokumenata i korake što ih je činio spomenuti pukovnik Marin on sam je sažeo i citirao u svom poduljem izvještaju i poslao u Zadar. Ukratko rečeno sve to se odnosi na potražnje turskih gospodara od stanovništva Imotske krajine na kućarine, pašarine, zemljarine koje još uvijek, protjerani Turci, smatraju svojim vlasništvom. Tako u praksi, prema njihovim zahtjevima Imotska krajina još nije oslobođena od Turaka. 27)

Reklamacija koju je Visokoj Porti upravio kadija i prvaci grada Ljubuškog u ime podložnika toga grada i Bekije, te hercegovačkog sandžakata koji se protezao i na područje Imotskog kao i ponovljena upozorenja mletačkih vlasti dali su povoda da 20. listopada, a zatim i 1. prosinca nalože spomenutom Danesu da se riješi to teško pitanje sa svom brigom njegovog zalaganja, vjernosti i dužnosti kako bi se predusreli neredi koji prijete i uporna potraživanja. Stvar te žalbe je nejasna, jer se protivi činjenici i običaju i začudujuća je radi žalbe o sporazumu. »Radi nedostatka preventivnih tragova, morao sam - ističe spomenuti Franjo - utrošiti i vremena i proučavanja kako bi što delikatnije obavio naloženi mi zadatak«. Pošto je poduzeo korake u tom obratio se nadležnim organima, čak i uredu vanjskih poslova i zatraži od njih dokumenat »tko je tu bio, bez znanja i dozvole susjednih upravitelja, da se zabrani sječa drveća i da se zabrani obradivanje zemljišta koje nije doznačeno ni iznajmljeno, da bi se na taj način doznalo odakle dolazi udarac te nerazumne žalbe«. Kad je to učinio, imotski upravitelj se susreo sa serdarima Bilićem, Vučemilovićem i Budalićem i pobrinuo se da obavijesti sve seljake koji slučajno do tog dana nisu uplatili kućarinu, zemljarinu i pašarinu da svi osobno dođu i odmah podmire posjednike. Time je upravitelj, kako sam priznaje, »namjeravao da si prištedim formalne prisilne uplate i da izbjegnem čudenje susjeda (pograničara) i da bi u isto vrijeme olakšao teret plaćanja podložnika«. Potom isti upravitelj ističe da je nastojao uhvatit dva razbojnika »koji su još ostali, nakon uništenja brojne grupe uništenih zločinaca«.

Pošto je to postigao, nastojao je da sami graničari, posebno oni iz Ljubuškog i Ostatka (Bekije) izjave “da je to pradavni običaj, koji je po sebi opovrgavao spomenute da su oni dozvoljavali ispašu, obrađivanje zemljišta i sječu drva ne silom, nego s njihovom izričitom dozvolom nakon uplate redovitih taksa i onih dogovorenih unutar turskih carskih posjeda koje su oni davali mletačkim podložnicima«. Potom je spomenuti upravitelj, s pratnjom otišao u Vrgorac. Pozvao predstavnike turske uprave iz Ljubuškog i razgovarao s njima o »općekorisnom isušenju zajedničke Imotske doline«. To je bilo koncem studenog. Uspio je prijeći granicu Mule vice-kapitana te se susreo s 22 Turčina. Izložio im je svoju želju i osvrnuo se na žalbu stanovništva s područja Imotske krajine, kao i onih iz Vrgorca i pokazao nadležnima tri pisma bosanskog vezira. 28)

»Moj je stav bio, nastavlja isti upravitelj, pred tom figurom i pred četvoricom glavnih aga, koji su ga slijedili da ukažem takoder na druga ponašanja njihovih podložnika, na pljačke, nasilja i ugnjetavanja, koja su trpjeli naši pastiri putnici, spomenuvši mu i najnovije pokolje« koje je učinio njihov podanak dok nije pao pogubljen od mletačkih pandura skupa s nekim njegovim drugovima. Potom ističe da je kroz prošlo vrijeme vladao mir mettu susjedhim krajevima, ali ga uznemiruje naplačivanje kućarine i pašarine i nadodaje: »Pravio sam se da mi je neugodno, jer jedan civilizirani i razumni razgovor, koji što se mene tiče nije ni za čim drugim išao, nego da se vidi, da se upozna i medusobno se saobraća, da je s njihove strane zagorčen njihovim mrskim uspomenama na staru animoznost, dok je moja namjera bila i sada je da ih uvjerim o lijepoj discipliniranosti, koja je sada umjeravala vladanje mletačkih podložnika moga okruga s podanicima Porte, koji, ako su imali kakve žalbe i prava što se tiče paše i obrađivanja, samo ako ne bi premašivale vrijeme moga službovanja . . . pokazao bih se spremnim da im dadnem znak i daljnjeg dobra uredenja da ih udobrovoljim, ali na način suglasan s Ugovorom i pravednošću.«

Iz daljnjeg teksta slijed da spomenuti upravitelj nije bio dobronamjerno shvaćen ni prihvaćen. Turski predstavnici su željeli da on što prije ode i vrati se u Imotski. A to potvrđuju i naknadna pisma što su ih turske vlasti slale nadležnim mletačkim upraviteljima. Na povratku prema Imotskom spomenuti Danese je upozoravao glavare pojedinih sela »da seljaci postupe za njihovo rješenje u stvarima prema inostranstvu u granicama naznačenih vrsta posjeda« dok traje njegova uprava. 29)

Da bi izišao u susret turskim potražnjama Danese je s »upraviteljima grada Mostara i feudalcima Bekije uskladio zadovol,jštinu njihovih kredita, desetina, kućari:na, šumarina i pašarina na način, po mjeri i svrsishodnosti dotičnih sposobnosti dužnika iz vremena ne starijeg od moje uprave i prema csobama kreditora, a to potvrđuje i hrpa dokumenata koje podnosim . . .«. 30)

Nakon osvrta na priloženu dokumentaciju upravitelj Imotskog se zaustavIja na slučaju u Ričicama. »Zaslužuje, piše isti, dostojnu pažnju Vaše preuzvišenosti i četvrti literarni sastav analogan sporu između sela Ričice i bogatog posjednika Ferhat-bega, sina glasovitog Miralim-paše. On već dugo godina povećava znatne sume gotova novca za koje to brojno selo, oskudno javnim doznakama a isto tako sve ostalo od teritorija okupiranog od pomoraca, a posebno onih iz Omiša, uživa godišnje da obraduje i da se služi ispašom prostranim blagim mjestima Zavelima, Baronie tvrdokornog Turčina za svotu od 160 reala. Pošto su ovi podanici zanemarili dogovore i pošto su se plaćanja umanjila radi kuge, radi glada i najzad radi rata izmedu dvaju carstava koji je rasijanom držao obitelj bogatog Turčina, a i s druge strane selo se nadalo da će s imaginarnim uspjehom autsrijske vojske to selo biti zauzeto i tako riješen dug koji se toliko puta tražio, te su tako dapustili da se njihov dug popeo na sumu od 1520 reala.« Da se riješi i taj spor upravitelj se nada pomoći serdara Bilića. 31)

Nakon više krivičnih slučajeva upravitelj Imotskog Danese piše: »Nakon ovoga što sam imao čast obavijestiti, sada mi preostaje naznačiti Vašoj Preuzvišenosti, da je važno da se uspostavi disciplina na prolaz podanika na ljetnu ispašu i također da se oslobodi od nekih novina u nametima na njihovo rezervirano ponašanje protiv turskih nadležnosti i na način koji plaćaju porez, što pridonose za pašarinu, što od toga dobivaju, što traže za rezervaciju obradivanja turskih zemljišta koju nisu iznajmili posjednici u ovoj turskoj ravnici kada ostane posušena, ili bar na manje prisilno ponašanje i prikladnije da se osiguraju nakon ljetine, odnosno kućarine i desetine, koje većinom odnose kradomice od grabežljivosti Morlaka k naivnosti muslimana. I da sudska administracija, kako prema jednima tako i prema drugima bez razlike, potrebna je zatim norma jednostavnosti koja bi isključivala nasilja, nezakonitosti . . . i onu tešku dobit, koja sada vlada sa sumnjivim razočaranjem onoga koji hoće da ima upliva u vlasti . . .«

Konačno spomenuti upravitelj ističe: »U toj stvari, naredio sam, prema Vašim naređenjima, priključivši moje ovlaštenje, na 21. ožujka podložnima da ne dopuštaju da se poduzima obrađivanje preko granica koje dijele dvije države kojemu od Morlaka, koji ne bi imao odobrenje Uprave ili ugovor turskog vlasnika o predavanju zemljišta niti da dopuštaju ispašu i sječu bez prethodne dozvole Poglavara sve dotle dok se spozna da su Vašom izričitom vlasti proglašeni zaboravljenim metode i discipline i propisane opreznosti po kojima se hoće, da se to verificira da bi se izbjegle one prvašnje obaveze, koje bi se vremenom i oslobadanjem podložnika mogle jednako probuditi.« 32)

Prema turskim dopumentima, izgleda, da se uobičajena praksa o zadržavanju vlasništva na zemljište odseljenih Turaka u Imotskoj krajini zadržala i prvih desetljeća devetnaestoga stoljeća. 33) To, bez ikakve sumnje, pokazuje nebrigu Mletačke vlasti za što veće dobro katoličkog stanovništva u Imotskoj krajini. Vlast je na taj način dopustila Turcima da, preko poreza, nastave osiromašivati katoličko stanovništvo i van granica njihove vlasti.

ZAKLJUČAK

Nakon 224 godine turskog upravljanja 2. kolovoza 1717. Imotska krajina je oslobodena. Požarevačkim mirom (1718.) tursko gospodstvo je zamijenjeno s mletačkim. U borbama za oslobo8enje Imotskog borili su se naši ljudi na strani Mlečana. Sve do nedavno - do god. 1947. - na Širokom Brijegu čuvala se jedna zastava pod kojom su se Imoćani borili s Turcima. Zastava je bila velika 74 x 97 cm, bijela je s crvenim križem. U borbama je sva izrešetana mecima. Pod ovom zastovom Imoćani su osvojili Imotski. 34)

Da bi što više pridobili simpatije naroda Mlečani su razdijelili osvojenu zemlju pojedinim obiteljima. Tako su nastale vrlo vrijedne katastarske knjige, prepune brojnih podataka.

Kako je stanovništvo u Imotskoj krajini god. 1717. bilo prorijedeno zbog iseljavanja, a i povlačenja s Turcima u Bekiju, Mlečani dovode nove stanovnike, medu njima i pravoslavne, te ih naseljavaju u Krajinu.

Jedna od posebnosti koja je prešla u običaj bila je praksa da preko sto godina, pojedine turske obitelji, traže s bivših svojih posjeda u Imotskoj krajini takse na kućarinu, pašarinu, zemljarinu i slično. Očito je tu zakazala mletačka vlast, kojoj nije bilo stalo do bržeg ekonomskog napretka stanovništva Imotske krajine.

Svake godine Imoćani se sa zahvalnošću sjećaju velike pobjede izvojevane kršćanskim oružjem i posebnom pomoću Majke Božje. Općina je to činila vanjskim slavljem. U predvečerje su se na Topani palili "svitnjaci". Uz gruvanje "mačkula" i veliki vatromet gradska je glazba držala koncert. Komunistička vlast to je prekinula. Čak je zabranila procesiju gradskim ulicama. U slobodnoj državi Hrvatskoj sve se obnovilo. Blagdan Gospe od Anđela službeno je proglašen Danom grada Imotskoga. (...) 35)

________________________________
1) V. B. Š. Jutarnji list, 13. siječnja 2001.
2) Usp. ANDRIJA NIKIĆ, Oslobođenje Imotske krajine od Turaka, Čuvari baštine, Zbornik radova simpozija u prigodi 250. obljetnice (1738.-1988.) prijenosa Franjevačkoga samostana u grad Imotski, Imotski, 1989., str. 173.-189.
3) Usp. Arhiv za povjesnicu jugoslavensku, sv. 6. Zagreb, 1863., str. 206-207.
4) Usp. P. PISANI, Mletački posjedi Dalmacije od XVI. do XVIII. vijeka. Bullettino, 1981,, str. 100-101.
5) Usp. A. UJEVIĆ, Imotska..., str. 80.
6) Usp. Starine JAZU, 29/1890., str. 19.-23.
7) Usp. A. UJEVIĆ, Imotska…, str. 83.-84.
8) U arhivima franjevačkih samostana postoje dokumenti na turskom jeziku koji se odnose na navedenu temu. Usp. ANDRIJA NIKIĆ, Franjevački arhiv, Mostar, 1984. - kazalo imena: Imotski, kao i brojne dokumente u Povijesnom arhivu u Zadru.
9) Usp. ANTE LULIĆ, Memoria della Provincia. Spalato, 1867., str. 40.
10) Arhiv franjevačkog samostana u Imotskom Prijepis samostanske kronike iz franjevačkog samostana u Omišu. Tu su, odmah ispočetka popisane župe koje su alužili imotski franjevci na području i današnje Bekije.
11) Usp. A. UJEVIĆ, Imotska…, str. 73.
12) Usp. Andrija Nikić, Fra Lovro Šitović i njegova djela, Mostar, 2001.
13) A. KUZMANIĆ, Spomeni iz moga dnevnika, Narodni list (Zadar), 1878., br. 47.
14) Citirano prema: A. UJEVIC, Imotska…, str. 88.-89.
15) Da je to bilo teško učiniti, priznaje i spomenuti Mocenigo u dokumentu od 2. siječnja 1720. gdje ističe kako su ljudi teškim, dalekim i neprovoznim putovima prevozili i na sebi prenosili topove.
16) Usp. POVIJESNI ARHIV U ZADRU – dalje PAZ, Dispacci Alvise Mocenigo, knj. 2, (1717.), ff. 12.-23., 167.-187., 189.-215. i na više mjesta.
17) Usp. A. UJEVIĆ, Imotska…, str. 73.
18) Točnije 224 godine. To je vremensko razdoblje od 1493. do 1717. godine.
19) PAZ, Dispacci, Lib. II., ff. 167.-188.
20) Usp. S. ANTOLJAK, Dalmatinsko pitanje kroz vjekove, Zagreb, 1944., str. 52.
21) Usp. N. MILAŠ, Pravoslavna Dalmacija, Novi Sad, 1901. Kod Ujevića, str. 90.-91.
22) O zastavi je pisano u Glasniku sv. Ante, god. 32, br. 5 (153.-154) i br. 6 (193.-196). Usporedi i bilješku br. 18.
23) PAZ, Katastar Poljica. Fotokopije dokumenata dobio sam od gospodina Nikole Mandića. Nikoli izražavam zahvalnost na usluzi. Original dokumenta napisan je na talijanskom jeziku, ali, nažalost, Nikola nije prepisao i točnu signaturu fonda, pa to ovdje nisam mogao navesti.
24) Na podacima izražavam zahvalnost Nikoli Mandiću.
25) Na podacima izražavam zahvalnost Nikoli Mandiću.
26) FRANJEVAČKI ARHIV U MOSTARU, Acta Turcarum, br. 946. Kopija berata kojim se čuvaru mostarske tvrdave dodjeljuje timar od 1650 akči u nahiji Imotski (1723.). Usp. br. 960., 220. - kopija berata kojim se Ahmedu dodjeljuje timar od 1600 akči u župi (nahiji) Imotski.
27) PAZ, Dispacci Alvtse Mocenigo, knj. 2, ff. 181v-182v. Tu piše da muslimanske obitelji koje su napustile Imotsku krajinu ne trebaju uživati plodove za zemlje. Danesev spis se nalazi u fondu: Dragomanski spisi, filca 9., pozicija 6.
28) PAZ, Dragomanski spisi, filca 9., p. 6., 17.-33.
29) PAZ, Dragomanski spisi, filca 9., p. 6., 34.-55.
30) PAZ, Dragomanski spisi, filca 9., p. 6., 56.-75.
31) PAZ, Dragomanski spisi, filca 9., p. 6., 76.-92.
32) PAZ, Dragomanski spisi, sv. A.
33) FRANJEVAČKI ARHIV, Acta Turcarum, br., 420 i sl.
34) Usp A. UJEVIĆ, Imotska..., str. 91. Može biti da je autor znao za naknadno pljačkanje bogate Širokobriješke knjižnice, muzeja i arhiva koja je 1947. doživjela svoju kataklizmu. To je uništeno u ime širenja “kulture i prosvjete” kako je masnim slovima pisalo na zidovima samostana. Naime, grafitima je na popaljenom i opljačkoanom širokobriješkom samostanu bilo napisano: Naša je osveta kultura i prosvjeta! Sarkastično! I zid, a ne samo papir, može podnijeti da se na njemu svašta piše.
35) VJEKO VRČIĆ, Stare slave djedovine, Grad na gori, list imotskih župa, br. 2., (26.), Imotski, 1996.

Napisao:
Prof. fra Andrija Nikić

Je li ljudevit Gaj bio prevarant i lažljivac?

2005-06-06T19:08:00.000-07:00

Večernji list, 13. svibnja 2005.

POVIJESNE KONTROVERZE: Je li Ljudevit Gaj bio prevarant i lažljivac?

Piše: Stjepan Laljak

Što reći o čovjeku koji od cara Franje Josipa moli "neki orden koji odgovara njegovim zaslugama"? Potom moli čak 80.000 forinti dugoročnoga zajma jer je radeći za opću hrvatsku stvar zapao u velike dugove. Pa opet moli cara da ga za zasluge (za koje je, pogađate i sami, potrošio velik novac) nagradi svotom od 55.000 forinti i da mu povrh svega udijeli plemićki naslov kao znak carske milosti!

Taj "vođa ilirskoga preporoda, tiskar i urednik itd., itd." i sami pogađate bio je Ljudevit Gaj. A neobjavljeni spisi o Gaju čuvaju se u Nacionalnoj i sveučilišnoj knjižnici još od 1894. godine i do danas našoj javnosti nije dostupna istina o Gaju. Sve to tek je uvod u ono što se zbilo prije punih 150 godina!

Preporoditelj Ljudevit Gaj (1809.-1872.), kao što se zna, bio je ujedno i vlasnik tiskare u kojoj je 1835.-1848. tiskao i izdavao glasovitu "Danicu". No, nakon 1848. godine od hrvatskoga preporoditelja Gaj postaje režimski čovjek pod Bachovim apsolutizmom koji od države dobiva golema sredstva za izdavanje službenih "Narodnih novina" i tiskanje tiskanica. Iako se hvalio da mu tiskara godišnje donosi 12.000-15.000 forinti zarade i time se prikazivao kao uspješan i častan čovjek prava istina je sasvim drukčija.

Gaj je tražio da mu se tiskarska usluga plati unaprijed. Tako je 1852. godine od financijskog ravnateljstva tražio predujam od 3000 forinti, od Odjela za bogoštovlje i nastavu (danas je to Ministarstvo znanosti i obrazovanja) traži 1853. monopol (ali ga, na sreću, nije dobio!) za tiskanje svih školskih udžbenika...

Taj isti Gaj nije 1855. platio neku globu te moli oprost od financijskog ravnateljstva. Godine 1856. državna blagajna opominje ga zbog neplaćenih kamata, a zagrebačkom Poglavarstvu 1854. nije podmirio dug za prodane školske knjige... Shvativši prljavu igru, Vlada 1853. otkazuje ugovor za izdavanje službenoga lista... Gaj financijski tone sve dublje, ali se svim snagama (i vezama) bori da javnost to ne dozna. Ponovno piše u Beč i moli 30.000 forinti subvencije, od cara ponovno traži 30.000 za "podmirenje dugova", opet unaprijed moli dvogodišnju subvenciju za "Narodne novine"...

Kamo je odlazio novac koji je stizao sa svih strana kao predujam za tiskanje knjiga možda nikada nećemo doznati. Pouzdano znam i to da je Gajevu tiskaru obilno pomagala i Matica hrvatska plaćajući unaprijed tiskanje knjiga koje su izlazile s velikim zakašnjenjem.

Sve što se čuva u NSK (zbirka rukopisa) samo je uvod u ono što sam pronašao u Hrvatskom državnom arhivu. Urednik Ivan Perkovac (1826.-1871.), bivši tajnik Matice hrvatske i prvi hrvatski profesionalni novinar (nije slučajno ulica uz Hrvatski novinarski dom prozvana njegovim imenom!), u najstarijem hrvatskom oporbenom listu "Pozor" (konkurencija režimskim Gajevim "Narodnim novinama") razotkrio je još 1863. Gajevu prevarantsku igru.

I kad je Perkovac (za kojega će Šenoa reći da je bio utjelovljenje poštenja i nepotkupljivosti) otkrio istinu u "Pozoru" 31. prosinca 1863. te objavio članak "Gajev konkurs", potegao je Gaj sve svoje doušničke (bio je poznat kao bivši "tajni savjetnik") i političke veze i uspio Perkovca strpati u zatvor ! Spis o tom procesu, kojim je 1864. Perkovac osuđen na 8 mjeseci zatvora, čuva se u zbirci rukopisa HDA i do danas je ostao neobjavljen i nepoznat!

Sve je počelo s knjižarom i papirničarom J. A. Kienreichom iz Graza koji je Gaju prodao papir u vrijednosti 10.000 forinti, ali Gaj to godinama nije platio. U međuvremenu se doznalo da i mnogi drugi vjerovnici u Zagrebu, ali i širom Hrvatske, potražuju od Gaja goleme iznose. Ukupni Gajevi dugovi popeli su se na gotovo 250.000 forinti!

Kad je Perkovac objavio istinu o Gaju, Stol sedmorice u Zagrebu 7. svibnja 1864. potvrđuje presudu Banskoga stola od 24. veljače 1864. zbog "zločinstva nastojanja zavedenja na neposlušnost, na uzbunu i odpor proti sudbenim odredbam (...) te osuđuje Ivana Perkovca na osammiesečni zatvor i gubitak jamčevine od 300 forinti".

Što je to Perkovac napisao i čime je prekršio zakon da je morao biti osuđen na 8 mjeseci tamnice? Prvo, Perkovac je otkrio da Gaj duguje knjižaru Kienreichu 10.000 forinti, da je presuda protiv Gaja pravomoćna ili će mu Kienreich zaplijeniti tiskarske strojeve. Drugo, otkrio je da Gaj vjerovnicima (bilo ih je otprilike 70!) duguje oko 250.000 forinti, a da sva Gajeva imovina ne vrijedi više od 80.000 forinti. Stoga je Gaj proglasio stečaj da se što bezbolnije izvuče iz dugova.

A sad ono treće, najvažnije: kako bi iskoristio opću pomutnju, Gajevi su fiškali počeli obilaziti vjerovnike uvjeravajući ih da će, potpišu li priznanice, dobiti četvrtinu stvarnoga duga, ali samo ako to ne doznaju ostali vjerovnici... Dakle, sa 1000 forinti Gaj je kanio otkupiti 4000 forinti duga! No, ni tu priči nije kraj. Vjerovnici su osnovali tvrtku "Gaj i društvo" sa sedmeročlanim odborom na čelu. Od prihoda tiskare podmirivat će se kamate, porezi, troškovi i plaće zaposlenika. No, Gaj je i to izigrao: izabrao je svoje ljude u odbor, a sebe postavio na čelo tvrtke, tako da ni za sljedeće tri godine nijedan vjerovnik nije dobio ni forinte!

O tome Perkovac piše: "Tako se dogodi u historiji stečajevah nečuveno čudo (...) da je nov odbor upravu svega kolikoga imutka povjerio samomu g. Gaju, da njime upravlja na korist vjerovnikah ! On sada uživa kuću i imanje, štampa svoje novine u vjerovničkoj tiskarnici; al neplaća nikomu ništa (...) ni poreze, ni kamate, ni vjerovnike (...) akoprem osim toga vuče plaću od 2.500 for. kao urednik službenih novinah; a sve to na očigled oblastih od jednoga kr. savjetnika.

Pozivlje se štovano hrvatsko obćinstvo, neka kaže, je li to u redu? Neka kaže, valja li to, da dužnik obiluje a vjerovnici stradaju? Neka izjavi, je li tobožnja lojalnost dovoljan štit i od ovakova postupka? Neka kaže, ima li tomu zlu u Hrvatskoj lieka?"

Tko je Frane Peričić, tajnoviti tzv. 20. čovjek Bugojanske skupine koja je 1972. ilegalno ušla u Jugoslaviju? - VL. 7.VI.05.

2005-06-10T14:37:00.000-07:00

www.vecernji-list.hr

07.06.2005 18:22
OTKRIVAMO Tko je Frane Peričić, tajnoviti tzv. 20. čovjek Bugojanske skupine koja je 1972. ilegalno ušla u Jugoslaviju nadajući se da će podići ustanak, a čiji su članovi ubrzo ili poginuli ili osuđeni na smrt

Bili smo idealisti, a ne teroristi

Autor ZVONIMIR DESPOT

U Sukošanu kraj Zadra mirnim umirovljeničkim životom, tik uz more, živi Frane Peričić, danas 85-godišnjak, koji je za svoje godine i te kako živahan i lucidan. Živi s kćeri, zetom i unukama s kojima se 1991. vratio iz Australije. Bave se turizmom tu je kamp "Seka" te kuće za iznajmljivanje.

Nadzor
No Frane Peričić iza sebe ima uzbudljiv životopis koji je poznat tek njegovoj rodbini i prijateljima. Dakako da je za njega znala i bivša jugoslavenska tajna služba, kao i tajne službe nekih drugih zemalja. Štoviše, sigurno je bio pod njihovim stalnim nadzorom. Frane je, naime, bio član Bugojanske skupine koja je 20. lipnja 1972. ilegalno ušla u Jugoslaviju, o čemu smo nedavno pisali, a za Večernji list pristao je prvi put javno prozboriti o toj akciji kao jedan od njezinih neposrednih svjedoka.

Međutim, nije prešao austrijsko-jugoslavensku granicu, za razliku od 19 njegovih sudruga koji su u akcijama ubrzo ili poginuli, ili bili likvidirani, ili osuđeni na smrt. Frane se s njima pripremao u improviziranom logoru šest kilometara od jugoslavenske granice, u okolici Klagenfurta, bio je zadnji koji je vidio one koji su prešli granicu, a 14. lipnja 1972. u logoru mu je rečeno da ipak neće ići s njima, nego da će ostati sa ženama dvojice braće, Ambroza i Adolfa Andrića.

Ušao sam u HRB iste godine, 1963., kad je u Hrvatsku ušla tzv. grupa Tolić-Oblak. HRB je funkcionirao kao i druge hrvatske organizacije, ali tajno, i najviše je radio na tome da se Hrvati prebace u domovinu, ali u tome baš i nije puno uspio. Nastojali smo kod Hrvata stvoriti zajedničko tijelo koje bi se borilo za hrvatsku državu, ali nije išlo. U HRB nije mogao biti primljen bilo tko. Provjeravalo se da onaj tko se prima nije špijun, da nije Jugoslaven i da je pošten, a usto je trebao imati i dvije-tri preporuke članova HRB-a. Tako sam i ja ušao u organizaciju, u kojoj sam bio blagajnik za australsku državu Victoriju, a zatim sam bio i stožernik. I moram vam reći da Udba našu organizaciju nikad nije probila, barem ne u Australiji i danas tih dana prisjeća Peričić.

Akcija
Prema njegovim riječima, ideja o formiranju Bugojanske skupine i ulasku u Jugoslaviju potekla je od već spomenute braće Andrić te od Pavla Vegara. Akciju su počeli pripremati već nekoliko godina prije jer su prvi njezini sudionici iz Australije u Europu počeli dolaziti već 1969. godine.

U akciju su bila uključena 23 člana HRB-a, neki iz Australije kao ja, a neki iz Europe. Mi u Australiji već smo se pripremali za nju, ondje smo nabavili i neku opremu i naoružanje te ga prenijeli iz Australije, ali prava priprema počela je u Njemačkoj i Austriji. U Australiji se skupljao novac, ljudi su čak i svoje kuće založili, samo da pomognu u organizaciji akcije. Ja sam u Europu došao 1972., pri čemu moram spomenuti da su s nama išle i naše žene i djeca.

Došli smo s australskim putovnicama, a braća Andrić su jedini imali krivotvorene, jednu australsku i jednu francusku. Svi smo se na kraju našli u Salzburgu gdje je pala konačna odluka da idemo u Jugoslaviju. Skupina je trebala doći do tromeđe Dalmacije, Bosne i Hercegovine kako bi akcija bila svehrvatska sjeća se Peričić koji je oko mjesec dana ostao u Europi nakon odlaska iz logora, a onda se vratio u Australiju iz koje se konačno 1991. došao u svoje rodne mjesto. Mjesec dana nakon njihova odlaska u Jugoslaviju doznao je da je akcija propala.

Još dok sam bio u Europi, čuo sam što se s njima dogodilo. Čak su i za mene neki govorili da sam izdajica. To mi je bilo samo smiješno. Ljudi su vjerovali da će uspjeti. Bugojanska skupina tako je bila zadnja oružana akcija koju je HRB organizirao sjetno će na kraju Peričić.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

HRB najozloglašenija organizacija ustaške emigracije

Prisega organizaciji na bezuvjetnu pokornost

Hrvatsko revolucionarno bratstvo osnovali su 1961. u Australiji Geza Pasty, Josip Senić, Jure Marić i drugi. HRB se predstavljao kao "borbena organizacija svjesnih hrvatskih rodoljuba, koji su postavili zadaću osloboditi hrvatski narod od tuđinskog nasilja, te državu Hrvatsku ponovno uskrisiti u njezinim etničkim i povijesnim granicama".

Jugoslavenske službe, prema elaboratu o HRB-u koji je 28. lipnja 1984. načinila jugoslavenska Uprava za istraživanje, analize i informiranje Saveznog sekretarijata za unutarnje poslove u HRB-u su vidjele "najozloglašeniju organizaciju ustaške emigracije". HRB je bio organiziran po uobičajenim pravilima revolucionarnih organizacija.

U njoj je postojao šifrirani način djelovanja i svaki je član imao konspirativno ime. Za svakog novog člana morala su jamčiti dva djelatna člana, a primljeni član je morao položiti prisegu kojom se obvezao na bezuvjetno pokoravanje organizacijskim propisima i na ispunjavanje organizacijskih zadataka.

Dana 25. studenoga 1996. tajnik Glavnoga revolucionarnog stana HRB-a Ivan Kršan priopćio je odluku HRB-a da prestaje s radom. No, neki njegovi članovi s time se nisu pomirili. Među njima je i Frane Peričić. On, naime, tvrdi, da HRB nikad nije prestao s radom! Tvrdim da HRB nikad nije prestao s radom. Bilo je vijesti da je ugašen, ali to nije točno. No, glavni cilj HRB-a je ispunjen, a to je samostalna hrvatska država, tako da više nema potrebe za nekim akcijama.

Ima nas članova HRB-a dosta i ovdje u Hrvatskoj, koji smo se vratili, povremeno se sastajemo, ali to je više-manje prijateljsko druženje i razgovor, a ne planiranje nekih akcija napominje Peričić.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Najviše smo trenirali hodanje

"Bugojanci" su nešto opreme i oružja nabavili u Australiji, a najviše u Njemačkoj. Oprema je kupljena legalno u jednoj njemačkoj trgovini. Nakon opremanja, uslijedile su zadnje pripreme u logoru kod Klagenfurta. Svakodnevno smo najviše trenirali hodanje te nošenje ratne opreme. Članovi skupine na sebi su imali ljetnu američku vodootpornu uniformu, šilt kapu s hrvatskom zastavom, kabanicu, cipele i čizme, ranac, četiri ili pet automatskih pušaka, 13 pištolja, osam pušaka s prigušivačem, dvije teške puške, nešto bombi, streljiva napretek te oko 60 kilograma eksploziva.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Od Sukoštana i natrag

Rođen je prije 85 godina također u Sukošanu, na istoj zemlji gdje i danas živi s obitelji. Od 1942. do 1944. bio je u ustašama, pa je prešao u partizane, nakon rata radio u Osijeku, a 1953. emigrirao je u Australiju, u Melbourne, gdje je sve vrijeme radio kao fizički radnik. Ondje je 1963. došao u dodir s Hrvatskim revolucionarnim bratstvom i tako je, kaže, sve počelo.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ideal važniji od žrtve


		Zašto su išli u akciju? Frane Peričić kaže da su ih vodili samo ideali. Bili smo idealisti. Cilj nam je bio da Hrvatsku oslobodimo jugoslavenštine. Mislili smo da će se preko nas u Hrvatskoj dići ustanak te da ćemo zatim moći uspostaviti samostalnu i nezavisnu Hrvatsku. To nam je bio jedini cilj. I nije se uopće spominjalo niti razgovaralo o tome hoće li netko do nas poginuti ili neće napomenuo je Peričić.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Doveli smo u Melbourne Vladimira Šeksa i Đuru Pericu

HRB je u Australiju doveo i Vladimira Šeksa te Đuru Pericu. Bilo je to prije više od 15 godina. Šeks je u crkvi u Melbourneu govorio kako nama Hrvatima ne trebaju ni Pešta, ni Beč, ni Beograd. Za nas u Australiji bilo je to čudo, da tako govori netko tko dolazi iz Jugoslavije.

Narod je poludio, odmah smo otvorili knjigu darovatelja u koju se upisalo 60 osoba. Svaka osoba darovala je tisuću dolara. Skupljalo se i dalje, pa je osnovan i HDZ. No Šeks nije htio uzeti novac. Rekao je da će javiti ako bude trebalo otkrio nam je Frane Peričić.

---> Constitution of the Neutral Peasant Republic of Croatia

2004-09-25T09:22:00.000-07:00

Croatian Studies

Constitution of the Neutral Peasant Republic of Croatia

as discussed by the 4th sitting of the republican majority of Croatia under the rule of the Ban (head of the government) on the 5th and 6th day of March, 1921, accepted by the 5th sitting of the said republican majority of representatives on the 9th day of April 1921, and promulgated in the sitting of the 26th day of June 1921, in the capital city of Zagreb.
Published by L. Kezman, LL. D., Croatian deputy, Secretary General of the Croatian Republican Peasant Party.
Pittsburgh, Pa., 1923.

NOTE

The present edition of the Constitution of the Neutral Peasant Republic of Croatia has, in the first place, been intended for the members of the Croatian Republican Peasant Organizations in America.
From this edition of the Constitution have been omitted the territorial provisions of Section A, number 2 of its original text, which omission is due to the actual changes effected by the popular vote cast at general elections of March 18, 1923. Pending constitutional amendment by the Assembly, the declaration, contained in the resolutions, passed by the Croatian Representative Assembly on March 25, 1923, stating that Croatia-Slavonia-Dalmatia shall be regarded as indisputable and incontestable territory of the Croatian Nation, may provisionally serve as a formal regulation of the point in question. (See appendix).
It may be taken for granted that amendments relative to territory will abide by the universally acknowledged right of national self-determination as the principle, and the plebiscite to be held within certain bordering areas as the method, by application of which the state territory may be extended or reduced.
Besides territorial regulations there has been omitted from this edition also the political preamble from Section B, number I, entitled "World and home factors which have been at work in making small nations subject of international law."
Both passages, territorial and introductory, have also been barred from the recent edition of this Constitution published at Zagreb, which fact will remove from my proceeding any possible censure of arbitrariness.
These and such other amendments to this Constitution as may deem necessary to the Nation will be made the subject of deliberations by the respective Assembly, if not earlier, then when the times comes for the Constitution of Croatia to take effect.
That this time is no longer far distance, such is the unanimous conviction of the Croatian people.

Pittsburgh, Penna., August 1st, 1923. Dr. L. K.

A. THE REPUBLIC OF CROATIA.

1. NAME OF STATE.

The State shall bear the name: The Neutral Peasant Republic of Croatia.

2. THE STATE TERRITORY OF THE NEUTRAL PEASANT REPUBLIC OF CROATIA.

(See note on page 1st and appendix).

3. CITIZENSHIP.

The citizenship shall be Croatian.
The manner of acquiring the right of a citizen and all other particulars shall be enacted by a special Citizenship Act.

4. THE STATE AND NATIONAL HERALDIC BEARINGS.

The State and National Heraldic Bearings shall consist of a checky shield emblazoned with 12 argent (white) and 13 gules (red) squares with an azure edging and the device of a plough.

5. NATIONAL FLAG.

The State Flag shall be the Croatian national red-white-blue tricolor.
The same flag with the national heraldic shield shall be used as commercial flag.

B. GENERAL.

Origin and Purpose, Characteristics and Principles of the Neutral Peasant Republic of Croatia.

I. World and Home Factors which have been at Work in making small nations subjects of international law.

(See note on page 1st..)

II. Characteristics of the Neutral Peasant Republic of Croatia.

1. ABSOLUTENESS AND CONTINUOUSNESS OF THE NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY. THE REPUBLIC.

The Sovereignty of the Nation is absolute and continuous. It is exercised by the nation through a plebiscite on territorial and constitutional questions, and through its right of initiative and referendum on legislative questions. From this absoluteness and continuousness of the national sovereignty results the perfect and unlimited right of national self-determination in all matters of internal state organization.
Croatia, consequently, is a Plebiscitary Republic.

2. GOVERNMENT BY PEASANT MAJORITY.

According to the established principle of the constitutional democracy, the decision of all state affairs lies in the hands of the majority of representatives returned at a general election.
The peasantry of Croatia, forming the overwhelming majority of the nation, is incontestably entitled to this right of decision the moment it has won that majority at a general election.
Croatia, consequently, is a peasant republic.

3. PEACEFUL DISPOSITION AND NEUTRALITY.

Perfect neutrality in every international conflict, besides the acknowledgment of its right to self- determination, has, ever since the end of the world war, been the very question of every small nation's existence. A standing army is generally, and among peasants particularly, apt to undermine the foundations of morals, wealth-production, civilization and liberty. For these reasons our plebiscitary republic is pacific and neutral. There shall be no standing army, but all citizens shall have to make themselves fit for the defence of their home and country according to the provisions laid down by a special National Defense Act.
The most elementary military instruction shall always be combined with general instruction as well as with a special teaching of the general principles of wealth- production and with a universal national working obligation.
For the maintenance of internal safety and order a special civil force shall be organized.

4. HUMAN RIGHTS IRRESPECTIVE OF CITIZENSHIP SAFEGUARDED.

For humanity's sake the following rights shall be safeguarded to every person temporarily or permanently residing on the territory of the Neutral Peasant Republic of Croatia.

a) Personal Safety and Inviolability.

With regard to his or her body every person shall be inviolable. Nobody can be arrested or deprived of his or her personal liberty without a court warrant adducing legal grounds for this proceeding. This warrant shall be read to or served on the person to be arrested before the very act of arrest.
The civil force responsible for the maintenance of public order shall be authorized to arrest without such a warrant persons caught in the very act of a murder, robbery, arson, burglary or theft, and shall immediately hand them over to a court.
The arrested person shall be released, if 24 hours have elapsed after his or her arrest, and the court has failed, in either case, to begin with the investigation of his or her case.
The arrested person shall in no case be kept confined for a longer period than a month after the commencement of the trial.
If the court officers fail to fulfill these two provisions of the Constitution, the prisoner shall be at liberty to leave the prison and nobody shall have the right to prevent him from doing so.
Whosoever violates these provisions, and particularly the police and court officers, shall be personally responsible to the law, and their pleading of having acted upon higher orders shall not be accepted.
The acquitted prisoner shall be entitled to a compensation fixed by law. Every grown-up person shall have the right to sue for redress whenever anything against anybody's personal safety or inviolability has been done.

b) Punishments.

Capital punishment shall be abolished.
The imprisonment shall be combined with work. During the trial such work shall be imposed upon the prisoner as corresponds with his calling, but after judgement has been pronounced, this must not necessarily be so. Duration, kind and enforcement of such work shall be enacted by a special Act.
There shall be no corporal punishments. Any physical ill-treatment of a person on trial or prisoner shall be punished, unless it be a crime of a legally graver kind, by at least an instantaneous dismissal from service.

c) Freedom of Motion.

Within the boundaries of the State territory of Croatia every grown-up person shall be allowed to go where he or she likes, and live where he or she pleases, and nobody shall be interned or confined or expelled either from a community or from the State. Aliens shall not be extradited to be tried for acts considered in their respective countries as political crimes.

d) Inviolability of Home (Dwelling-Place).

A person's home (dwelling-place) shall be inviolable. A search-warrant, if justified by law, may be granted only by a court, and a person's premises shall be searched only by a magistrate himself. A member of the civil force may enter a house only when called for assistance by the inmates.
For the observation of these rules both the police and the court officers shall be personally liable to the law. Under a person's premises his house, the court-yard, and all farm-buildings are to be understood.

e) Letter Secret and Postal Delivery Safeguarded.

The delivery of postal consignments, particularly of letters and newspapers, shall be guaranteed by a special Act, which shall also provide for the inviolability of the letter secret and for the keeping secret of all telegraphic and telephonic messages.

5. THE FREE PEASANT HOME.

The Peasant State is an organic community of free and organized households.
For the general improvement of every single peasant home (family) there shall be enacted a special Farmer's Inheritance Act providing also for liberal facilities of peasant husbandry on the lines of the ancient common unwritten social communities law brought into harmony with modern thought and requirements of peasant classes. Another Act shall provide for the exemption of a peasant's home and property from execution and again another for the internal family organization and authority. The latter act shall also provide for the free establishment of new social communities.

6. FAMILY ORGANIZATION.

The Family is the primary factor of moral education and acquisition of principles on which general culture of mind and production of wealth are based.
A special act shall lay down the duties of the family as to education, culture of mind and teaching of principles of wealth production.

7. PERFECT EQUALITY OF BOTH SEXES.

Both sexes shall have equal rights.

III. Principles of Organization of the Neutral Peasant Republic of Croatia.

1. THE REPUBLIC IS A MORAL COMMUNITY OF SENSIBLE BEINGS.

a) Freedom of Meeting.

The freedom of meeting, being one of the most natural necessities of man, shall be universal.
The authorities shall in no case and for no reason whatever have the power to forbid the holding of a meeting or gathering.
For gatherings and meetings on private premises or on private ground permission shall have to be asked for of the respective owner.
Of a meeting to be held on a public place generally used or otherwise convenient for that purpose the competent authorities for the maintenance of public order shall have to be notified before the commencement of the meeting at the latest by anyone of its organizers either orally or by a written notice which may be simply posted up on the said authorities' office door.
Meetings in public buildings which are either generally used or otherwise convenient for that purpose, such as public schools, town halls, etc. shall be held by political associations or parties in the same order as they have been notified, and in the same way as in open public places. By the Meeting Act freedom of speech at all meetings shall be safeguarded according to the principle that any interference with a speech held at a meeting, or with the order during the same, forms an infringement of one of the most natural human rights without which there can be no progress. Any infringement of such nature shall be punished by a special punishment.

b) Liberty of Press.

The Press as the chief means of diffusing human thought and knowledge shall be entirely unhampered. No censorship shall be established and no newspaper shall in any case be suppressed.
Only political associations or parties shall be allowed to issue political newspapers. Every article on politics, every notice, and every article referring to a person's name shall have to bear the full signature of the writer. All leaflets, irrespective of their contents, shall also have to be signed by the author's full name.
No special licence from the authorities shall be necessary for the starting and issuing of a newspaper. The responsibility for any article shall always rest with the writer except in case of his absence abroad, when the chief of the political association or party (if the article in question has appeared in its paper) shall be held responsible for it. For personal affronts offered through a newspaper the shortest possible procedure shall be enacted by a special act.

c) Liberty of Associating.

No association of any kind whose activities are public and whose members exercise control over its management and property shall need a permission of the authorities for its starting and working.
Political parties which have been publicly formed and have adopted a party program of their own shall be considered as public associations and normal organs of political life.
Membership of secret societies shall be made punishable by law.

d) Responsibility of Public Officers.

Every public officer shall be entitled to obedience to his orders as long as he keeps within the limit of law. Any disobedience to legal orders as well as the issuing of illegal orders shall have immediately to be accounted for in ordinary court and the offender shall be tried according to criminal law.
For injuries done to individuals by either the state or by the officers of the autonomous bodies, the state or the respective autonomous body (parish, county) shall be made answerable for the injured individuals at an ordinary court.

2. THE REPUBLIC IS A WEALTH-PRODUCING ORGANIZATION.
a) Universal Working Duty. Everybody's Right to Life worthy of man.

Wealth cannot be produced without work. A nation cannot produce wealth, unless every member of the community does his share of work. The most obvious postulate of justice is that everybody should enjoy the fruits of his or her own work.
There shall be no requisitions at all, and in cases of expropriation for common good the manner shall be provided for under an Act. The State as a wealth-producing community shall pass a special Universal Working Duty Act, a General Farming Experience Act, and an act on everybody's right to life worthy of man.
The peasant majority of the nation shall be engaged in agricultural pursuits in their free homes.
The life interests of this majority are inseparable from those of other wealth-producing classes.
The peasant state shall ensure the regularity of working of all wealth-producing industries, but it shall especially secure the industrial production of the country by the passing of a Working Men's Rights Act by which to the whole working classes movement adequate consideration shall be given. Nobody shall be obliged to do any work without a consideration. In future there shall be neither commandeering of vehicles nor of labourers for any purpose whatever. A special act shall be passed on the right to strike.

b) The Foundations of the Production of Wealth. Agrarian Reform. Liberty of following a trade or profession.

Farming forms the foundations of the wealth-production.
A special Act shall be passed to the effect that large estate forests, at present in State, Church and private possession be handed over into the nation's possession so that pasture and timber thereof shall be adequate to meet the wants of every peasant household, and the fuel wood, as far as possible, the requirements of every other citizen. The existing joint Ownership Parishes Act and the Landed Property Communities Act shall be altered in the same spirit.
All state, church and private large estate ownerships shall be abolished. No estate shall be allowed to surpass in extent the largest existing peasant estate in the same county. On the exceptions to that rule, taking into consideration model farming, co- operative progressive farming, and the farming industry, special act shall be passed. By a special Home Colonization Act farmsteads shall be established for the home colonization of farmers on the whole area got by the breaking up of large estates. The same act shall provide for farming areas left uncultivated and for peasant households where there are no children. Moreover, by a special act provision shall be made for the acquisition of farmsteads of their own by peasants who are agricultural labourers and for persons who, though not being peasants, have satisfied the requirements of the General Farming Experience Act. There shall, first and foremost, take place a restitution to the peasantry (Landed Property Communities, social communities and sole owners) of all that landed property which had been taken away from them by an unjust or inaccurate partition of such property (on the occasion of the so called segregation, when the feudal serfdom was abolished). The vested interests of all present owners in such property shall be taken into account inasmuch as they do not collide with the principles set forth above.
In adjudicating compensations for landed property the principal question before the decision of the issue shall be, how a particular large estate has been acquired. The adjudication of compensations for landed property shall be provided for by a special Compensation Act.
Everybody shall be allowed to follow any occupation, and particularly any trade he has learnt and to the extent of his skill. Under a special act special qualification shall be required for the exercise of, and the control shall be established over, professions having any relation to human life or health, or being of primary importance to the people.
Every kind of trade shall be perfectly free, but special tariff advantages shall be granted only to co-operative societies of producers and consumers.
On principle, there shall be no custom duties. Subject to custom duties shall be made by law only articles of luxury, but other kinds of goods only in cases of a foreign state trade policy making the adoption of this course imperative.

c) Banking and Credit.

All the banking business done should go to increase and improve the production, but particularly so of agricultural production.
The Republic will issue paper and metal money as a legal tender for the exchange of goods, and will guarantee for its value.
A special Act shall provide for the encouragement of granting individual credits to farmers and for the promotion of the accumulating co-operative farmers' savings to enable the farmers to supply their wants, and to exercise control over the transactions of every single banking institution.
A normal development of the whole national economic life is conditioned by an orderly working and organization of parish, county and state finances. The fundamental principles of these finances shall be laid down by the Constitution.

d) General Insurance.

General Insurance shall be enacted by law to provide for the relief of persons suddenly becoming disabled to earn their living and especially for old age, lest anybody should, without his or her own fault, go without the means of living.
In the same manner, lest anybody should suffer loss of property without his or her own fault, general insurance of all property shall be enacted against damage done by elementary disasters such as fire, flood, hail-storm, earthquake, as well as epidemics.

3. THE REPUBLIC AS A CULTURAL ORGANIZATION.

a) Religion.

Religion is the foundation of morals. Religion in general and the Christian doctrine in particular is the foundation of sound education.
Christian Churches and all public religious communities shall enjoy perfect freedom of teaching and professing their religion, of observing their religious rites, and of intercourse with their coreligionists and church authorities without the boundaries the Republic.

b) Judiciary.

Under a special Judges' Independence Act the separateness of the judiciary from legislature and government as well as the independence of judges shall be safeguarded.
There shall be neither military nor other special courts nor special police and administrative courts.
The court proceedings shall as a rule take place in the centre of the economics parish or, if necessary, on the spot.
Proceedings, at least those in the lowest courts, shall be public and oral. Expeditiousness of legal proceedings shall be enacted under special acts.
The people's share in the legal proceedings through its jurors and assessors shall be regulated by special laws.
Every person charged with felony or misdemeanor shall be put on his or her trial before the jury.
The jury lists shall be made out in the manner that the majority of the jurors shall consist of peasant household heads of the district of the competent court.
The court shall be competent to examine the laws of the country as to their being in harmony with the Constitution as well as the legality of various decrees. They shall be competent to decide in disputes on competence between the national government and the autonomous authorities as well as in disputes of individual citizens with either the government or the autonomous authorities.

c) Education.

National education in school and without it being a matter of concern of the whole nation, the whole Republic shall take not only the principal care of the national education but shall also, if need be, bear the necessary expenses.
The elementary school shall bear distinctively peasant characteristics having for its primary object a thorough and lasting literacy of the people.

1) School for Literacy.

The economic parish shall in every village (hamlet, place) establish a public school where children and grown-up people shall be taught reading and writing gratuitously. Children shall be supplied with books and stationery gratuitously, and all expenses arising therefrom shall be borne jointly by the parish, the county and the whole Republic as enacted by a special Literacy Act.

2) Common National School.

With regard to the cultural and wealth-producing principles taught in the Common National (elementary) School in villages as well as in towns the said school shall be an eminently peasant institution.

3) General Training of the Youth of the Country to Work. Learning of Russian and German Languages.

All male and female pupils shall, after leaving the Common National (elementary), School. for a period of at least two years, be trained to various practical wealth-producing trades according to the existing facilities or expediency, but always combined with general mind cultivating instruction and practical teaching of the Russian and German languages.

4) National School for General Instruction.

All the existing, so called secondary schools (grammar-schools, secondary schools where ancient languages have been substituted by modern languages, and lyceums) shall be abolished. They shall be substituted by National Schools for General Instruction with a curriculum extending over a period of no more than 4 years. Grown-up people shall also be allowed to attend these schools. Hand in hand with this instruction shall be conducted the training to practical work, either during the scholastic year or during the prolonged vacations.
In these schools there shall be neither marks nor certificates given as in present use, and English shall be taught in them.
Only those pupils who have regularly for two years attended above mentioned practical training courses shall be allowed to attend this National School for General Instruction.

5) Technical and Trade Schools.

Besides National School for General Instruction there shall be established a large number of special technical and trade-school(agricultural, handicraft and commercial schools) where instruction shall be given simultaneously with that in the National Schools for General Instruction.
Besides continuation courses for the Russian and German languages there shall be special courses held in these schools for general instruction.
On leaving the National School for General Instruction students shall have choice to enter schools for learned professions to study for various professions such as schools for agriculture, law, architecture, engineering, surveying, pharmacy, veterinary science, and schools for teachers of elementary schools. The curriculum of these schools shall not extend over more than three years.
The existing University in its present form, pretending to be the highest school, shall be abolished and transformed into a number of scientific institutions. The Faculty of Medicine and the High Technical School (School of Engineering) shall be retained and there shall be established a Professorial Faculty for professors going to be teachers of National Schools for General Instruction and of Schools for various learned professions.
Lectures given at the Professorial Faculty shall be free, but to lectures given at various University scientific institutions shall be admitted only persons (students) able to show at an entrance examination a sufficient knowledge to attend the lectures with profit.

6) Other Educational Institutions not connected with schools.

Private Schools.
The organization of other educational institutions not connected with schools shall be regulated by a special Act.
Anybody may establish various schools and hold courses provided they shall harmonize with the spirit of this Constitution and shall keep within the limit of the School Act.

d) Public Health.

The citizens of the State form the main source of its vitality and intrinsic value. Under a special Public Health Act sanitary administration shall equally be provided both for villages and towns so that even the most indigent part of population shall have the benefit of medical attendance and medicine.

C. SPECIAL SECTION: Organization of the Neutral Peasant Republic of Croatia.

I. Exercise of National Sovereignty.

By virtue of its absolute and continuous sovereignty the nation will organize the whole of its cultural and wealth-producing activities, determine every citizen's rights and duties and see to their being carried out either directly itself or through the agency of its elected representatives or appointed national officers respectively.

1. DIRECT EXERCISE OF NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY.

The boundaries of the country or state established by the nation's history can be rectified only by the nation's plebiscite demanded by a majority of grown- up citizens (electors) of a boundary county.
100,000 citizens can by a petition signed by their own hands demand a plebiscite to be held on the following points:

1.) the convening and the dissolution of the Constituent Assembly;
2.) the closing of a session of the Legislative Assembly before the expiration of its legal period;
3.) the resignation of the president and vice-presidents of the Republic.

30,000 grown-up citizens can by a petition signed by their own hands suggest the passing through the Assembly of a new bill or the making of an amendment or the abolition of an existing law (legislative initiative).
By the same kind of petition the nation may demand a plebiscite for the sanction of any law within a period of 2 months from its having been passed through the Assembly (referendum).
Laws relating to vital national questions - such as alliance with foreign states, raising loans without the boundaries of Croatia, making of laws of the reorganization of land-ownership and inheritance relations (the agrarian reform) - shall have no legal power without this referendum.
The registering of signatures as well as all the business of conducting the plebiscite and the referendum shall be done by the courts as laid down by a special Act.

2. EXERCISE OF NATION'S SOVEREIGNTY THROUGH RETURNED REPRESENTATIVES.

a) National Constituent Assembly. National Legislative Assembly.

Members for the National Constituent Assembly shall be elected in the same way as those for the Legislative Assembly with the difference that for every single member of the former only half the number of votes necessary for the election of the latter shall be required.
It shall assemble a fortnight after the general election has taken place. It shall have sovereign powers and shall dissolve itself of its own will.
If three months have elapsed after its convening, the nation may address a petition to the president of the Republic demanding a plebiscite on the dissolution of the Constituent Assembly. This petition must bear original signatures of at least 100,000 citizens.
All laws are made by the National Legislative Assembly whose members are elected for a period of 4 years. The suffrage is universal, exercised equally by men and women voters, the only restriction being the age which must not be less than 18 years.
Statutory elections shall take place on the first Sunday in September, but if the Assembly has been dissolved, they shall be held on 9th Sunday after its dissolution.
The number of representatives is not fixed, but depends on the number of given votes.
A representative is elected, if 6000 electors have voted for him.
Every party shall put forward a list for its candidates for all constituencies of Croatia. By the same act of voting for a candidate the voters vote also for the candidate's party. A candidate for whom 6000 voters have voted shall be considered as elected. Any number of votes failing to reach this total or exceeding it shall be accounted in favor of the candidate's party.
Besides those candidates who have been elected representatives by receiving the full 6000 votes, every party shall be allotted the number of representatives resulting from the division of the remaining total of given votes by 6000, the mode of the allotment being as follows. The candidate who has received the largest majority of votes next 6000, shall be elected first and so on until the remainder of the sum total of votes to be divided in this manner has been reached. If this latter remainder exceeds 3000 votes, one more representative shall be allotted to the party which has got them.
Every citizen possessing the right of voting shall be eligible for a representative.
Elections shall take place in parishes. They shall be conducted by courts. Under a special Act delegates of every party interested in the contest shall be admitted. The Board of Seven (the highest court of justice) shall examine and determine the validity of the return of every single elected representative.
The ordinary session of the Assembly shall begin on the 15th October and end on the 15th March. The assembly shall sit without interruption on weekdays only.
Extraordinary sessions may be summoned:

1) if demanded by one fifth of representatives;
2) if the Assembly convenes after having previously been dissolved;
3) if a petition with legal initiative has been presented by the nation;
4) if a question of immunity of a member arises; and lastly
5) if a substitute of the president has to be elected.

Every debate must be attended by at least one third of all the representatives, and when a vote is going to be proposed, by at least one half.
National representatives i.e. members of the Constituent Assembly and the Legislative Assembly shall enjoy not only general personal inviolability which is guaranteed to them as to human beings, but they shall also enjoy an absolute immunity for anything they have said or written in the Assembly or without it during the period of their being representatives, irrespective of the Assembly sitting or not, as well as during the time of the dissolution of the Assembly until the elections have taken place.
For none of his doing, either in speech or in writing, during that period shall a representative ever be called to account.
If a representative should be caught in the very act of committing a crime involving the loss of his claim to immunity from the arrest safeguarded to any person by this Constitution, notice shall at once be given to the president of the Assembly. The president shall, if the Assembly is in session, on the same day, and if in recess, within three days, assemble the Sessional Committee of Immunity which shall by a vote of two thirds of all its members present decide whether judicial proceedings should be instituted against that member or not. This resolution shall have to be adopted by the whole body of representatives of the Assembly within 3 days, if the same is sitting, and within 8 days, if not.
But, if all the measures as here set down have not been taken, such a representative shall be considered free and shall be at liberty to leave the prison, and no person, under personal responsibility, shall have any right to prevent him from doing so.
For any other action done by a member only the Assembly shall have the power to declare that member deprived of his privilege of immunity on the motion of two thirds of the members of the Immunity Committee.
The Privilege of Immunity shall become operative the moment, when the District or the Chief Election Committee has declared a candidate elected by a sufficient number of votes, and it shall become void the moment, when the Chief Election Committee has ascertained the number of the newly elected representatives.
The right of voters to be elected representatives themselves being practically another aspect of the right of voting of all the electors and consequently an act of national sovereignty, any check to personal liberty of an elected representative, on whatever valid judgement it might have been based, shall be stopped the moment, when the privilege of Immunity has taken effect.

b) County Meeting.

The County Meeting shall consist of an equal number of delegates from all the associated economic parishes forming a county. These delegates shall be elected by the Parish Meeting for a period of 4 years from among all grown-up parishioners. They shall be elected at the same election as the parish councillors.
Every two years half the number of the members of the County Meeting shall be re-elected.
The County Meeting shall be empowered to make by-laws within the limits of its autonomy.
The management of the county affairs shall be conducted according to the established principles of progressive community co- operation by the County Administration Committee presided over by a president called zupan.
This committee and its president shall be elected by the County Meeting.

c) Parish Meeting, Parish Council.

Parish Meeting shall consist of all grown-up parishioners of unblemished character. It shall assemble, discuss and conduct business on the principles of progressive community co-operation. The Parish Meeting shall elect the parish councillors whose president shall be called mayor (nacelnik).
It shall have the power fo making by-laws within the limits of its autonomy.

II. INTERNAL ORGANIZATION OF THE REPUBLIC

1. EXERCISE OF THE NATIONAL SELF-GOVERNMENT.

The whole existing political administration shall be abolished, and the division of the country into political administrative parishes, political administrative districts and political administrative counties shall disappear.

The existing, purely political, administration, largely supported by the police force, shall be substituted by the administration on economical and sanitary principles.

a.) The Peasant's Household or Home.

The fundamental unit of this administration shall be the peasant's household or home i. e. every farm (homestead) as the primary wealth-producing and educational unit bearing the general national characteristics.
These national characteristics shall mainly depend on the number of the members of a farmer's family and each representative (male or female) of such a farmer's family or farmer's household a respectively shall be given, under a the Economic Parishes Act, as many votes in the parish as there are persons in his family.
The legal titles and position of town-residing families and particularly of the working class families as well as of all families having no home (homestead) of their own shall be formulated by a special Act.

b) Economic Parish.

The primary territorial unit of the whole of this administration shall be the economic parish which shall, as a rule, consist of every village by itself, but where people want it or circumstances require it, it shall consist of several small villages or hamlets, principally of such only as are within the limit of a landed property community or a parish forming at present one tax-collecting unit. A special Economic Parishes Autonomy Act shall be passed on the principles of the general and special peasant progressive community co-operation.
The extent of the sphere of the parish autonomy shall be the same as that of the county, and shall be limited only by actual ability of exercising it. The economic parish as a member of a county shall perform only those duties the performance of which it has voluntarily engaged, and it is only through this function that it shall be considered as an organ of the county.
To meet the expenses incurred by its own sphere of activity the parish shall possess quite independent means obtained by levying of parish rates (sources of taxation and amount of rates to be fixed by the parish council) e. g. tobacco-growing, distilling alcoholic drinks and other similar taxes not imposed by the state itself.

c) County

Counties are formed by the voluntary association of economic parishes. They form organizations of a wider area and simultaneously of a higher degree of wealth-production, education and national health. Their sphere of action shall be laid down by a special County Organization Act.
Under this act the manner of Association of economic parishes into permanent county areas shall be enacted. All economic parishes within the boundaries of the existing political districts shall without delay join to form temporary counties, and the management of their affairs shall remain in the hands of the existing county and district qualified civil service staffs.
Under a special County Self- Government Act the county shall retain its independence in all matters except those belonging to the state sphere of action, such being: country finance, national defense, judiciary (with a special organization of its own), schools, from the National School for General Instruction upwards, as well as all matters bearing upon the production of wealth, means of communication and public health inasmuch as the last mentioned three relate to the whole country or fall within the sphere of international agreements and obligations respectively.
The government of the country cannot make the county its organ in any sphere of its activities, but it may attach to the county civil service staff special government expert officers whose duty shall be to perform functions having reference to matters concerning the whole state.
To meet the expenses incurred by the management of affairs within its own sphere of activity the county shall possess independent financial means of its own.
Both the economic parish and the county shall be autonomous (self-governing) in the fullest sense of these words. These words mean that both the parish and the county shall have the power, with in the limits of the law, to make their own by-laws with binding legal power, and that they shall not be interfered with either by the President of the Republic or the government of the country.
A special Poor Parishes and Counties Grants Act shall lay down the manner of granting poor parishes and counties of the whole republic financial aid for all those needs which are of common national interest.
The parish by-laws shall be made by the Parish Meeting and those of the county by the County Meeting. These by-laws shall be submitted to the national Government with the only purpose of having them examined as to their keeping within the limits of the Parish and County Autonomy Act.
If the national Government be of opinion that these limits have been exceeded, the by-laws shall at once be presented to the Board of Seven who shall have to decide the matter at issue within a month at the latest. If the said Board does not decide it within that period, the Government shall return the by-laws to the parish or county respectively provided with the only remark that they have been examined. In no case shall the by-laws remain with the Government longer than a month.

d) Municipal Self-Government.

The title of Royal Free Town shall be abolished.
The economic parishes shall in future not be allowed to unite with urban districts, whereas the former rural administrative parishes and the individual urban districts belonging to the same tax-collecting areas and having a predominant peasant population shall be allowed under Economic Parishes Act to separate from urban districts and join the economic counties.
Under a special Urban Districts Self-Government Act towns shall be given autonomy on the same scale as economic counties so that the working classes, the tradespeople and the remaining wealth- producing town population shall actually have in their hands the decision in all matters of town government through the town-council elected on the principle of the universal secret equal suffrage.

2. EXERCISE OF NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY THROUGH THE NATIONAL GOVERNMENT.

National affairs shall be administered by the President of the Republic together with the National Government.

a) National Affairs.

The principal national affairs are:

1) Administration of justice.
2) Production of Wealth of the Nation.
3) National Education and Instruction.
4) National Health.
5) National Defense.
6) Permanent Relations with other Nations and States.
7) State Finance.

A minister shall be entrusted with the management of each of these departments. He must possess adequate qualification necessary for the efficient working of his department. He may be, but need not be a member of the National Assembly. He shall conduct business with the help of other specialty qualified officers (deputy ministers) each of whom shall be the head of a special ministry sub-department.
The specially qualified officers at the head of various ministry sub-departments shall be called deputy ministers. They shall perform their work according to the instructions received from the minister and under the control of specially delegated Assembly Commissioners chosen from among the representatives.
A special Government, Organization Act shall lay down the controlling duties of the Controlling Assembly Commissioners and the duties of the deputy ministers.

b) The President of the Republic (Ban.)

At the head of the administration of National Affairs shall be the president of the Republic, called also Ban. He shall be elected for a period of 4 years by a plebiscite to be held on the first Sunday of May and shall enter upon his office on the 1-st of July of the same year.
Any person entitled to be elected a representative shall also be eligible for the president, if nominated by 60,000 electors or by that party of the Assembly which has received that number of votes at last election. The two vice- presidents shall also be chosen at the same election.
In case of the president's death, resignation, absence or inability (indisposition or otherwise) the first vice-president shall act as his substitute during his absence or till the end of the period for which he has been elected. The second vice-president shall act as the substitute of the first vice- president in the same way in all above mentioned cases.
As president elect and vice- presidents elect respectively shall be considered those candidates for whom the largest number of electors has voted. The president cannot be simultaneously a representative nor can the vice- presidents act as representatives so long as they are performing the duties of a vice president.
The official residence of the president shall be the city of Zagreb.
The president is the representative of the Republic and the head of the National Government, the members of which he alone shall be authorized to appoint and remove. He shall choose the various members of the Government from among the representatives of the National Assembly and other citizens.
The National Government shall administer all national affairs under the political responsibility of the president, and the president shall be responsible for his policy only to the nation.
The Nation as well as the Assembly can, the former by a petition with 100,000 original signatures registered within a month, the latter by means of a resolution carried by two thirds of all its members, demand the president's resignation.
On the 4th Sunday after the Board of Seven have found that the petition submitted has been properly signed or 4 weeks after the resolution demanding the president's resignation has been passed by the Assembly, a plebiscite using the formula: "the president so and so has to resign" or "has not to resign" shall be held.
If the plebiscite decides for the president's resignation, not only the president but also both the vice-presidents shall resign. The Assembly shall, if sitting, without delay, with a simple majority and within 24 hours after the plebiscite at the latest, and, if not sitting, within 8 days, elect the deputy president.
On the 4th Sunday after the deputy president's election a general election shall take place with the purpose of electing the new president. If between the deputy president's election and the first Sunday of May there should happen to be an interval of only 6 months or less, the said extraordinary president's election shall not take place, but the president who had been newly elected at an ordinary election shall enter upon his office as soon as the Board of Seven have declared him elected. The president who has been elected at an extraordinary election shall also immediately enter upon his office.
A special Presidential Election Act shall be passed upon presidential election, on the president's entering upon office, and on every change in the presidency of the Republic.

c) Relations to other Nations and States.

The Republic of Croatia will never use secret diplomacy in international affairs and will not recognize any secret international treaties.
The Neutral Peasant Republic of Croatia is a living member of the great human community which is slowly but surely undergoing the transformation into a great world federative republic.
The Ministry for Foreign Affairs shall have no so-called diplomatists. Abroad, the Republic, of Croatia as an organization of both peculiarly Croatian and general human wealth-producing and cultural elements shall have only her consuls whose duty shall be to watch her commercial and cultural interests. Their main care shall be to look after life, health and well-being of her citizens abroad.

d) Defence and Safety of Home and Country.

There shall be no Universal Military standing army training Duty in the Republic. It shall be substituted by an universal national working duty system including the general obligation of home and country defence. Every person living within the territory of the republic shall be required for a period of 6 months to do work for the republic as specified by the Universal Working Duty Act.
For the most part of this period, but at least for 4 months, every person shall have to do work of public utility such as building roads, hydraulic and drainage work, etc., tending to the raising of the productivity of soil and other kinds of similar public work with the purpose of cutting down national expenditure as much as possible by enabling the Government to dispense with paid work.
Less time, but no more than two months, of this period shall be employed on all kinds of physical exercise and on the special t training for the defence of Home and Country (militia). If any special training should require more time, the fittest men shall, if necessary, be chosen, who shall then devote even full 6 months to that training.
The Universal National Working Duty can be imposed on women only by a plebiscite which shall be held as soon as demanded by a petition of 30,000 grown-up inhabitants of the Republic, but women shall be employed only near their homes, and in such a manner that neither their honour nor health shall suffer in any way.
Everybody's duty to defend his home and country shall last to his death.
With the national defence shall be combined also the organization of a special civil force for the maintenance of public order. The training required for the commanders of this civil force as well as the headquarters of the respective militia districts shall be fixed by a special Act. The area of this militia districts shall correspond to that of jurisdictional and tax-collecting districts.

e) State Finance.

Progressive income-tax as the principal state tax shall be imposed by a special Act. Every year, during the budget debate, the National Assembly shall fix the amount of the income-tax based on the assessment of the tax-payers, proportionally to their income, according to the progressive principle i. e. the larger the income the larger the percentage of the income-tax.
The amount of the income absolutely necessary for a person's subsistence shall be fixed by law and shall not be taxed with more than 1 per cent.
On the income-tax no rates shall be levied.
Revenue-taxes can be imposed only by the National Assembly, but county and parish rates respectively only by the county and parish meeting respectively.
No one can be exempted from taxation.
Neither taxes nor any kinds of rates shall be imposed on the most necessary means of supporting life such as bread and flour, salt, milk, kerosine.
No state, county or parish moneys shall be expended unless their expenditure has been provided for by the budget, the county, or parish estimates respectively.
The annual budget shall be debated and voted upon by the National Assembly, and shall remain in force only a calendar year.
The National Government shall present to the National Assembly the budget for the coming year together with the statement of income and outgoings for the previous year. The National Assembly shall have no power to raise the various items of expenditures as forecasted in the estimates, but it shall have the power to cut them down or even to strike them off. If there should happen to be any savings, the Assembly alone shall be authorized to decide what use should be made of them.
The state, county and parish estimates respectively shall always be debated and voted upon for the coming financial year. If the state, county or parish estimates respectively for the coming year have not been voted for, nobody shall be obliged to pay those state taxes, and county or parish rates respectively which have not yet been voted for by the National Assembly, the County and the Parish Councils, so long as the said estimates lack the sanction of these bodies. Any demand for payment of such taxes and rates by the authorities or even unauthorized enforcement of such payments shall be punished as an abuse of official authority.
The exclusive right (monopoly) to sell certain articles of general consumption shall be reserved to, and shall be exercised only by, the Republic.
Under the Auditors' Act a special Government Audit Department shall be established with the purpose of auditing all State accounts.
Under the Auditors' Independence, Qualification and Responsibility Act the independence competence and responsibility before the Board of Seven of the whole audit official staff shall be safeguarded.
The duties of the Audit Department shall be to examine and correct the state, county and parish estimates in the manner specified by a special act and authorize the appropriation of state, county and parish moneys granted. It shall further watch the keeping of expenditure within the limits of the budget. It shall moreover point out those items of county and parish expenditure which have exceeded the amount by the county and parish estimates, and it shall finally close the State accounts.
The Audit Department shall present the annual budget financial statement with a report and a freely expressed comment thereon, through the president of the Republic to the National Assembly for the final examination and sanction within reasonable time to enable the National Government to present to the Assembly the Financial Statement for the past year simultaneously with the budget for the coming year.
For each district forming a tax-collecting area the Republic shall establish a tax-collecting office. The area of these districts shall coincide with that of jurisdictional and militia district. They shall be smaller than the existing administrative districts, but larger than the existing administrative parishes, the aim of the Republic being to facilitate the collection of taxes by tax-collecting offices in all the parishes of their area.

3. ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE.

Sentences shall be pronounced in the name of justice and law.
Courts of justice can be established and abolished only by law.
Judges shall be independent. They can be neither removed to another place, nor pensioned off before the completion of their 65th year, nor dismissed against their own will unless a competent judgement has been pronounced against them for bad behavior.
After the completion of his 65th year every judge must retire with a pension.
Vacancies on the staff of judges of Low Courts shall be filled on the competitive system, the High Court giving preference in appointments to those competitors who have been longest in the possession of a qualifying examination certificate. Judges for the Court of Appeal and the Board of Seven shall be chosen by the members of these courts themselves among the whole body of judges and barristers of the country.
The first judges of all courts to be appointed shall be nominated by the president of the republic himself. Judges shall not be classed according to their salaries which shall be increased gradually and automatically after a certain number of years to be fixed by law, according to the length of service.
One hundred of grown-up citizens (male or female) of unblemished character earning their own livelihood, and at least 30 years old can by a petition signed by their own hands demand from the Board of Seven that an official enquiry should be instituted against a judge. Such an enquiry shall commence at once and shall be terminated within a month at the latest by a judgement pronounced jointly by the court and the jury.
The area to be served by the lowest courts shall be determined by a special law. These areas shall be called jurisdictional districts and coincide with the tax collecting and militia districts respectively.

III. Final Organization Work of the Neutral Peasant Republic of Croatia.

Acts by which the provisions of the Constitution are carried out and supplemented.
All Acts mention of which is made in this Constitution shall form an integral whole together with the Constitution. They are to be made by the Assembly during its first ordinary session or during the summer extraordinary session of the same year, as the case may be.

APPENDIX

Resolutions of the Croatian Representative Body, Returned at General Election on March 18, 1923, Passed in its First Plenary Sitting, Held at Zagreb, The Capital City of Croatia, on March 25, 1923.
The Representative Body of the Croatian Nation returned at the general election hold on the territory of the Serbs, Croats and Slovenes on the March 18, 1923., i. e., the overwhelming majority of the total number of representatives elected within the indisputable territory of the Croatian Nation (Croatia-Slavonia-Dalmatia), to wit, 61 out of 83, and a minority of representatives from Bosnia and Herzegovina - 9 out of 48 - this minority being supported for the first time in the Bosnian history by both Mussulman and Catholic Croats united in the great movement for a new type of government based on social justice, which movement is as early as now backed by the majority of Bosnian population - passed in its first plenary sitting of the March 25, 1923, held at Zagreb, the capital city of Croatia, the resolutions as follows:

I

The Croatian Representative Body accepts, agrees to, and approves of, all declarations, resolutions, policies and, in the main, all proceedings of the late Representative Body returned at the elections of Nov. 28, 1920. Accordingly, this Representative Body regards itself as the sole legal and legitimate successor of the Croatian Parliament (Sabor) of Zagreb, which de jure never has discontinued to exist, since it could be neither dissolved nor abolished by any act not emanating from the Constituent Assembly of the Serbs, Croats and Slovenes, but only by passage of a resolution or act voted upon by the said Constituent Assembly and adopted by a qualified majority of the said Assembly under exclusion of any outvoting, these conditions being required by the resolution of the Croatian Parliament passed on October 29, 1918, but which resolution has been infringed upon by the Belgrade men in power.
This Representative Body regards itself, as well as the Representative Body elected in 1920 regarded itself, as Parliament (Sabor) of the Croatian Nation. In omitting, however, a formal installation as parliament it does so only to ward off the danger of civil or internal war, which, from the pacifist and humanitarian standpoint of this Representative Body, would be a crime and an evil even more atrocious than an international war.

II

The foundations of the policy of this Representative Body shall remain:

1) Interpreting, respecting, and enforcing the will of the Croatian people;
2) Full and unlimited right of national self-determination;
3) Practical pacifism and real humanitarianism, which for our country can be secured only through its organization and recognition as a neutral peasant republic.

III

A just and durable agreement between the Croatian Nation and the Serbian Nation shall constitute, as well as it did heretofore, one of the chief tasks of the policies of the Croatian Representative Body.
This Representative Body considers the humanitarian and republican program of the Croatian people as the first and foremost aim to be realized. It is this very aim towards which all efforts shall be directed and on which depends the solution of the question, whether or not a delegation of Croatian representatives shall be sent to Belgrade.

IV

The Croatian Representative Body regards the actual common international frontiers of the Serbs, Croats and Slovenes as a territorial adjustment most suitable to the present political conditions in Europe, this being so both from the Croatian national point of view and from the European point of view.
It is so from the Croatian point of view, because the Croatian people have been united within the common frontiers of the Serbs, Croats and Slovenes as never before in their history, and more especially so, because those common frontiers embrace now, after centuries of separation, the whole incontrovertible territory of the Croatian Nation (Croatia, Slavonia, Dalmatia), whose more than millennial continuity as a sovereign and more or less independent state has never been interrupted from 852 AD to October 29, 1918, on which day the Croatian Parliament in Zagreb proclaimed Croatia (Croatia, Slavonia, Dalmatia) a fully independent state. This full independence of the Croatian state did immediately take effect in the practical exercise of this independence under recognition by the kingdom of Serbia, after which Croatia effected the mutual association with Bosnia, Herzegovina, Slovenia, Batchka, Banat, Barania into a federative republic with its center in Zagreb, which republic was officially styled "The state of the National Council of the Slovenes, Croats and Serbs" and was in a solemn way recognized by the kingdom of Serbia under a special treaty agreed upon, and signed, at Geneva, November 9, 1918, by the Serbian government (Nikola Pashich) and representatives of all Serbian parliamentary parties on the Serbian part, and by Dr. Koroshetz and Dr. Trumbich on the part of the National Council of Zagreb.
Furthermore, this actual community of international frontiers among the Serbs, Croats and Slovenes is a question of European and universal interest, because every change of these common frontiers - and particularly a violent one - would be able to provoke such conflicts and, on the part of certain neighbors, such pretensions as would endanger European and even world peace.

V

The Croatian Representative Body regards as null and void and as non- binding upon the Croatian Nation, and consequently, lacking any legal and moral value, all laws, regulations, ordinances and other acts issued or imposed by the government of Belgrade as far as they affect the indisputable national territory of Croatia, because all these laws, rules, regulations and acts have been made without any previous consultation of, or approbation by, the Croatian Parliament; have been made contrary to the clearly expressed will, and in spite of reiterated protests, and without any concurrence, of the Croatian Representative Body elected in 1920; finally, because the enforcement of these laws, rules, regulations and decrees is tolerated, and the Belgrade men of power are obeyed, by the Croatian people only as far as the latter are forced to do so under the pressure of threats of armed force or under the real application of that force.
In particular, this Representative Body, resuming the resolutions of the late Representative Body returned in November, 1920, declares and proclaims as null and void, and without any binding force on Croatia (Croatia, Slavonia, Dalmatia) both all Belgrade acts passed on loans and all acts, rules, regulations and decisions through which the Belgrade men in power have aimed and still are aiming to deprive Croatia of her national and state property, and at settling the great economical and social problems on lines contrary both to the centennially established principles of peasant freehold and to the existing landed property conditions, over which the political authorities, and still much less the agents of the Ministry of Police, have no legal power, this especially being so of the important problem of agrarian reform.

VI

This Representative Body considers, as did the late Representative Body, the whole administration of the Belgrade government over Croatia as a mere usurpation, against which a continuous resistance is practiced both by the Croatian people as a whole and by the overwhelming majority of the Croats as individual citizens, so that this usurpation is incapable of establishing any tolerable, much less settled, political and economical conditions. If the innumerable acts of violence, lawlessness and ordinary crimes perpetrated by the agents of Belgrade authorities, particularly the barbarous every day bastinado of citizens, civilians and soldiers, the cruel torturing in all, and in particular in military prisons, have caused no revolution, civil war, and foreign intervention this fact is to be ascribed only and solely to the high standard of general consciousness of Croatian people and to the extraordinary strength of their political organization able both to keep the Belgrade oppression and violence within certain limits and to maintain the general conviction that such a political ability and organization accompanied by the triumphant electoral results of March 18, 1923, will finally awaken such an interest of the public opinion of European nations and more especially the attention of the League of Nations all to inspire the Belgrade men of power with the respect for the self-determination of the Croatian people, unless their love for justice and a correct understanding of interests common to both peoples, Croatian and Serbian, are not strong enough to incline them to that respect.

VII

The Croatian Representative Body in concordance with the new international public law regards itself fully equal to every parliament. In the event of failure of all attempts to come to a just agreement with the Serbian people, the condition of which agreement is that the Croatian political and national equality with the Serbian political and national individuality shall be recognized, this Representative Body will apply for support to all European and other parliaments, particularly to the congress of the United States of America, which in its courses of action is not bound by those regards which to an extent restrict European parliaments and which in its highly favorable position may, prior to any other, take into consideration the most important fact that the Croatian people in their claim to independence are not only perfectly unanimous, but also possess all cultural, social, economical and political prerequisites for actual exercise of their sovereignty, so that they are in no need of any military, financial or any other foreign help whatsoever, and want only a purely moral support.
An appeal from such an authority will probably persuade the Belgrade government that now, after the world war, and almost in the very center of Europe, it may not by most brutal and most violent methods of the darkest periods of the Middle Ages continue to carry out a regime of oppression and plunder over the whole Croatian Nation under the mendacious plea of the existence of one tri-named nation of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes.

http://www.croatianstudies.org/index.php?action=page&id=66

S. Šego: Recollections of Stalin's Labor Camps

2004-09-25T09:15:00.000-07:00

Croatian Studies

Stjepan Sego

Stjepan Sego (1913-1990), a Croat from Herzegovina, was captured by the Soviet troops in Hungary in 1948 and was taken to the Soviet Union where he spent eight years in labor camps. Thanks to Khrushchev's destalinization policy, he was freed in 1956, came to the United States, and lived in Chicago till he died in 1990. We bring here the English translation of a text the late Stipe Sego wrote in Croatian about his experiences in the Soviet prison camps ( American Croatian Review, Year V, No. 1-2, 1998, pp. 48-50)

After long investigation, hearings, and torture in Hungarian prisons, I, and the others, was to be sent to Russia.

We arrived at the Hungarian border. It was wrenching to look out from the train and to see the Hungarians being torn from their homeland, and the same was with Austrians. We departed on the road to the unknown. The train moved below the Carpathian Mountains toward Lvov. We were removed from the train and transferred to a huge camp. I don't know its capacity, but the number of its internees was nonetheless gross. The usual method of counting by barracks was not employed, but rather, the count was by "corps." I know of six such corps, but, undoubtedly, there were more.

We were in Ukraine, which, during the war, was well organized with the aim of establishing a free and independent Ukraine. Their beloved leader was Stepan Bandera. Since the Germans, in their blindness, were opposed to an independent Ukraine, Bandera worked against them. Hitler ordered him captured and placed General Meljnik in his place, thus dividing the Ukrainian forces.

The "Banderites" were a powerful group and were prepared. They spread their organization deeply throughout eastern Ukraine which was under Soviet control. When the war ended, they continued their battle deep in the woods. Since the terrain was favorable to guerrilla warfare, they were able to maintain themselves for a long time. The Soviets had their hands full well into l948. Real battles took place. The Soviets wanted to exterminate them at all costs. Even the slightest hint that a village had any contact with the "Banderites" was cause for it to be destroyed without mercy.

Those residents not killed in such raids were summarily sent to Siberia. That rule applied to all including mothers with small children, as well as old men and women. We found such persons in the camp to be under the most extreme conditions.

So that their deportation might be covered by some element of "law," it was always listed under some sort of "judgment" which carried a penalty, almost consistently, of some 25 years imprisonment. Those fortunate souls to whom no wrong other than that they were from such Ukrainian villages could be attributed, were sentenced up to 5 years and were retained in those camps. All others were sent on the icy road to Siberia.

Hunger, terrible hunger, reigned in the camp we were in. All that one possessed was given up for a bit of bread. The vast majority, unfortunately, had nothing to give. That horrid camp was my first encounter with the "Russian [socialist] heaven."

We found ourselves in this camp for 14 days before our transport moved forward.... Cold and hungry, packed like sardines, our boxcars rolled on for a full two weeks. Ultimately, they allowed us to exit the cars. Half of us were unable to even stand upright. Those who were able to move were taken to another camp. The barracks were empty. There was but one stove in the very center of the barracks. The barracks were infested with bugs eager to get their share of the newly arrived victims.

Inta was the name of the place we arrived at. That is the name of the place and the province it is part of. Its geographic area is about that of France. Two additional provinces lie before us and the North Sea, namely, Yarkuta and Varkuta. These lie in the sub-polar region.

When the weather is clear, one can see the Urals. Tundra surrounds us all about. No inhabitants other than prisoner can be found in the regions mentioned. Only the camp's personnel are free. They founded little villages for themselves and erected schools for their children.

All three provinces are situated in a coal-rich basin. The prisoners work the mines. The quality of the coal produced is poor. It is said to be too "young," and, as declared by the experts, would need at least another million years to "ripen." Nonetheless, it is mined and shipped across Russia.

The area is that of the Tundra and has no forests. Dwarfed shrubs only are to be found. The climate is bitter cold and is often as cold as minus 50 C.

Inasmuch as the region is near the Pole, the days are six months in length and the nights as well. Thunder is not heard, nor is there any rain, except occasionally. The Northern Lights are quite common.

The camp we are situated in is only temporary. The Province has 13 coal mines and each mine has its own camp, the exception being if two mines are in close proximity. One camp then serves both mines. The food at this camp was a bit better and we seemed to improve our health somewhat.

The residents of our camp were from all corners of the world -- Americans, Japanese, Chinese, and others. They were punished for ostensibly spying. A "fertile" source of prisoners for the Russians was Vienna, and, in a similar fashion, Berlin.

A common destiny haunts all those in the far North, a destiny none of them even dreamed of. We all underwent a physical exam while interred in the camp. We were divided into three groups. The first was to work under ground. The second worked outside, while the third, including those who are sick, worked as servants to the camp.

After five weeks, I was sent to a mining camp of some five thousand internees. The very first days were quite difficult since I knew no one.

The camp was quite extensive and was well fortified. Escape from the camp is impossible, and, ultimately, it would have been futile. It was surrounded by barbed wire four meters wide by three meters high. Watch towers with klieg lights lay behind the fence for the guards. Between the rows of barbed wire trained dogs roamed.

The mine was about a kilometer distant from the camp. The road leading to the mine was secured in the same manner as the camp. It was, in fact, a corridor through barbed wire.

I was horrified each morning as I watched the night shift returning. They were as black as the coal they mined. They had no place to wash themselves, the excuse being that the lavatories were not yet completed. Dirty, they consumed their thin soup, and half dead from exhaustion, went to sleep.

By nationality, one fourth of the prisoners were Russian, one fourth prisoners from western Ukraine, a fourth from the Baltic peoples (Estonia, Latvia, or Lithuania), and the final fourth was made of those of us who were from a mixture of peoples outside the borders of the Soviet Union.

It is said that some 30 to 40 million prisoners were to be found in Soviet camps. Regions under German occupation were especially hit supposedly because they were "collaborators" with the Germans.

I was told by present inmates of the camp that conditions were notably better than those directly after the war. At that time, prisoners were sent there to build a railroad to be used to transport the coal which was to be mined. They were simply transported to the site and under armed guard were made to erect the very barbed wire fence meant to keep them in. They lived with the sky as their roof, without barracks or any protection from the elements. It is no surprise that few were able to survive the ordeal. This is why the claim is made that beneath each railroad tie a human skeleton can be found.

To my good fortune, I discovered a Ukrainian in the camp who had lived in Croatia. He was my helper and my protection in my most difficult moments. May God reward him!

I was especially pleased that I could finally speak with someone, especially in my own Croatian tongue.

The prisoners were separated into work brigades. Each brigade had its "strukach" which in Russian meant its "denunciation," or, as we might say in Croatian, its "cancer." Even though such a person is never formally known, somehow one always intuited who it was.

Every prisoner was given a number worn on his back. The numbers were large enough to be easily seen at a distance.

Should a prisoner utter a word of criticism against the regime, or commit some sort of infraction, the "strukach" would remember his number and the prisoner would be called in the next day for his punishment. The most heavy punishment was the "kaiser.' That was a room so tiny that a person could not even lie down. The prisoner is left with his own clothes, to the extent he has them, and is made to spend the time in the bitter cold. He is given 300 grams of bread and water each day, and a meal every third day.

Just as everything in the communist system is done by plan, so too there is a "plan" for everything in the camp. Each mine has its "rules," that is, how much coal is to be extracted. If it fails to meet its quota, the prisoners are punished, and if the mine exceeds its quota, the managers receive a "premium."

A quota of l00% was established. Food was distributed from 5 large cauldrons on the basis of that percentage. If the quota was met, namely, l00%, then we received hot water with a few remnants of beans. If we exceeded our quota, namely 110%, then the second cauldron was used giving us a bit more beans in the hot water. In both cases we ended up hungry. If we aimed for more production, the stomach was somewhat fuller, while at 150%, the prisoners were full. However, to achieve 150% meant to give one's all, and to work like an ox. One could endure that for a while, but, ultimately, one would succumb.

The communists would, with sarcasm, quote the Bible and say: "He who does not work, need not eat either." Further, they would point out that all power descends from God, and hence, so to does that of the communists, and so, the need to obey. They are masters of man's exploitation.

Under such a regime of hunger and work, the prisoners had to vie with each other, and hence, our mine carried first prize over the others and was rewarded with a good library. The communists said we had need of good "breeding," while we simply wished for a generous crust of bread.

The library was indeed a good one. Along with a good representation of Russian literature, there was a smattering of foreign classics as well. I was amassed at the number of German works: Goethe, Schuller, Heine, and others. I found a copy of our own Gundulic's "Osman." We were allowed to borrow the books for a ten day period.

Newspapers from Moscow, one copy each, were also available. The were placed between panes of glass so that each side could be read. Each barracks had a bulletin board loaded with satirical items, mostly caricatures of foreign leaders. Since Tito was on a wartime footing with Stalin at the time, he was the frequent butt of such satire. One such cartoon showed Tito all bloodied with a hatchet in his hand decapitating someone's head. The inscription below the cartoon read: "Traitor -- Fascist."

Loud speakers were placed in our barracks and they ripped our ears apart and destroyed our nerves. It was unbearable to listen to them at the time of Stalin's illness and death.

The Russians did not like Stalin, but they had great fear of him. He was the incarnation of cruelty. He was the infinite ruler over millions of his subjects, and he simply removed all who were not to his taste. He liquidated almost all of the October Revolution's leadership.

A popular man in Russia at this time is General Zhukov, a wartime hero. Stalin pushed him into the background. He would like to have liquidated him as well, but it would have been inconvenient.

Camp life in that far northern outpost was horrid. The worst was the fact that the mines were always damp. A man had to work while soaked as though in the rain, and still wet had to return to the camp. Hunger, exhaustion, dampness, and the cold, worse yet, the hopelessness of the situation, a picture of the blackest future, dogged the men and brought them to despair.

Even though it was difficult to come by Vodka, and even though it was strictly forbidden, somehow and from somewhere, it appeared. It was of the worst sort, the kind that tears the nerves apart, nonetheless, it was consumed for sake of relief and with resignation. It also brought with it evil consequences which often led to fights which sometimes ended in tragedy.

To my joy, a fellow Croat from one of the other camps arrived. My joy was short-lived. One of the wagons disengaged while at work and he was killed. When I heard of the accident I went to pay my respects to my lost fellow sufferer. It was hard to recognize his mangled body. Thus my dear Murat Lojo, a son of Bosnia, from Kalinovnik, breathe his last in the far northern regions of Russia. He was a lieutenant in the famous "Black Legion" under the legendary Jure Francetic wherein he spent the entire war.

Through a Ukrainian friend who had good connections in the camp, I was able to improve my situation somewhat. He was helpful to me in many instances. Through his efforts, I was able to attend a course in "geology" conducted by one of the engineers. I was thus able to rid myself of heavy duty. I was given the task of testing the coal. As the coal passes through a grinder, sample particles are taken and are place in a laboratory kiln to determine its caloric value.

Because the camp had good production in l950, we realized a significant improvement in our meals. Even the communists came to realize that hungry men are not as productive as satiated men.

The camp acquired brass instruments. There were musicians among us and when the work brigade exceeded l50% production, the band would greet us at the camp entrance and escort us to the kitchen. The kitchen and its cauldrons are the goal of hungry men.

When it was to their advantage, the communists tried anything. The camp was quite active, in fact, at times we even had a movie.

There are those in Russia known as "blatni" ("dirty"). The connotation of this is somewhat akin to the American "gangster." Such individuals appear strange to the normal person. They deserted during the war and yet achieved political status. They refuse to work, yet when they arrive at the mess hall, the cook must give them that which is best, otherwise they will pay the consequences. Politics really does not concern them, rather they simply live to do evil and to steal. Their bodies are tattooed. They always present a threat to peace-abiding men. Communism tolerates them, I suppose, for their own reasons. The managers of the camp wish to win them over to their side and thus, give them the better jobs, for the other fear them.

The "blatni" have their own unwritten law, one that is quite strict. Once inducted into their group, one needs to be subject to their wishes. If you cross them, death is as certain as it would be in the American "syndicates." It is said that they even take an oath of loyalty. Those who escape the clutches of the group end up working for the regime and are called "sukes." An open battle between the "blatni" and the "sukes" is commonplace. People end up dead.

The "blatnis" are unforgiving and harsh. A package arrives from home, of course for either a Russian or a Ukrainian containing boots, and immediately one of the "blatni" say, "I lost my boots while playing cards, pull off your boots." If a person does not wish to bow to the wishes of the "blatni", he is in trouble, for all the other "blatnis" are behind their fellow "blatni."

In the meanwhile, the Ukrainians who fought in the forests with the revolutionary Bandera, and the Russian prisoners were fiercely opposed to the "blatnis." These Banderites, for whom the communists could not show direct links with Bandera, else they would have been killed, often fought real battles with the "blatnis", and frequently prevailed.

I, myself, was witness to the guards removing four "blatnis" from one of the other camps from the showers. In a flash, five men appeared from one of the barracks and shortly, found themselves in a pool of blood. They killed all of them. The Banderites saw in them a group of "blatnis" of a higher caliber who were "owing" to them. The judgment was swift. There was no inquiry.

I was forced to live under such conditions and to await my fate. My documents, which followed me to the camp, recorded that fate -- 25 years!

(From American Croatian Review, Year V, No. 1-2, 1998, pp. 48-50)

Source:
http://www.croatianstudies.org/index.php?action=page&id=64

---> Letters of Protests against Persecution of Croats in the First Yugoslavia

2004-09-25T09:07:00.000-07:00

Croatian Studies

American intellectuals organized by Roger N. Baldwin, Chairman of the International Committee for Political Prisoners, sent the following letter to the Yugoslav representative in Washington on November 24, 1933.

Dr. Leonide Pitamic,

Minister of Yugoslavia,

Washington, D.C.

Sir:

For some years past dispatches in the American and foreign press have indicated that political prisoners in Yugoslavia are suffering inhuman treatment. This committee has noted the reports and has on occasion intervened in behalf of some particular prisoner as have many associations and individuals throughout the world interested in checking persecution for political opinions and activities.

More recently, we have obtained documentary material form one of our associates, Louis Adamic, and American writer of Yugoslav birth, lately returned from a year's stay in his native land as a fellow of the Guggenheim Foundation. Mr. Adamic's standing as a writer of integrity and accuracy is above question. We have substantiated to our satisfaction the genuineness of the material he has brought corroborating previous information.

In the light of these reports, and Mr. Adamic's specific information, we desire to protest, through you, to your government against the whole system of political persecution which marks the regime in Yugoslavia today and particularly against the incredible tortures inflicted on political prisoners under that system. These reports involve authentically reported tortures at police headquarters in Belgrade, Zagreb, Ljubljana, Sarajevo, Skoplye, Novi Sad and other cities, as well as in various state penitentiaries. They affect the various groups opposed to the policies of the present government: the Croat, Slovene, Moslem, and Macedonian nationalists; the Socialists, Agrarians, and Communists.

These reports make it evident beyond question that scores if not hundreds of these prisoners are beaten and tortured before being brought to trial. The records show about 120 known cases of persons either directly killed or so tortured that they died. Such cruel and revolting methods employed during the so-called examination of prisoners are described as sticking needles under prisoners' fingernails, placing live coals between armpits and body, prolonged beating on the soles of the feet, driving sharp instruments into the heels and perpetrating outrages upon sexual organs. These methods are used in attempts to force confessions incriminating themselves and other men and women active in opposition movements.

But the tortures described are not confined to the period of preliminary examination. They continue after commitment to prison. Even those prisoners convicted of such trivial offenses as distributing opposition literature or belonging to opposition groups are systematically beaten and starved. Some are reliably reported as having been inoculated with disease germs, others have had iron bands clamped around their heads for months at a time. Conditions in the prisons are reported to be so inhuman that many prisoners must sleep on the bare floors of their unheated and wet cells. Against these unbearable conditions 248 men and women in the Sremska Mitrovica Prison are now said to be on a mass hunger strike.

Solitary confinement of political prisoners and for long periods of time is another method against which we direct our protest. A reliable report come to us that Dr. Yovanovitch, former professor at Belgrade University, a well know political economist and leader of the Yugoslav Peasant Movement, is, or until very recently, was for several months in solitary confinement. We are advised, too, that Dr. V. Machek, leader of Croat Peasant Party, in serious ill health, is incarcerated under unsanitary conditions which may lead to his death.

We learn, too, that scores of prisoners particularly among the intellectuals, are exiled to the malaria-infested regions of Macedonia where they are required to report to the local police every few hours day and night.

Your government must be aware that knowledge of brutalities such as these arouses the indignation of the civilized world. In the name of a section of the American public opposed to such severity against political opponents, we protest against the policies and methods of your government. So long as 2100 opponents remain in prison under conditions such as these they are a standing indictment of the claims of your government to recognition by the civilized world.

While we are aware that condition in prisons in our own country are not above reproach, that political persecutions sometimes take place here as elsewhere, we are just as quick to condemn them here. But of all the reports which have come to us in recent years these from Yugoslavia are among the most appalling and barbarous.

We are, Sir,

Very truly yours,

For the Committee: Roger N. Baldwin, Chairman.

Authorized Signatures William Allen White, Author, Editor-Publisher of Emporia (Kansas) Gazette

Theodore Dreiser, Novelist, Poet, Dramatist; New York

Arthur Garfield Hays, Author, Lawyer; New York

Oswald Garrison Villard, Editor, Author; New York

Mary Austin, Author; New Mexico

Sherwood Anderson, Novelist, Poet; New York

John Dos Passos, Novelist, Dramatist; New York

Norman Thomas, Author, Political and Civic Leader; New York

Harry Elmer Barnes, Historian, Publicist; New York

W. E. Woodward, Novelist, Biographer; New York

Burton Rascoe, Author, Critic; New York

Ernest Boyd, Author, Critic, Editor; New York

Kyle Crichton, Author, Editor; New York

Edmund Wilson, Author, Critic; New York

Upton Sinclair, Novelist, etc.; Los Angeles

Bruce Bliven, Author, Editor; New York

George Soule, Author, Editor; New York

Louis B. Boudin, Author, Historian, Lawyer; New York

Benjamin Stolberg, Author, Critic; New York

Mrs. Paxton Hibben, Author, widow of close personal friend of late King Peter of Yugoslavia

John Haynes Holmes, Minister, Publicist, Civic Leader; New York

Erskine Caldwell, Novelist; Maine

Horace Gregory, Poet, Critic; New York

Grace Lumpkin, Novelist; New York

Clifton Fadiman, Critic, Editor; New York

Richard L. Simon, Publisher; New York

Eliot White, Minister; New Jersey

Lenore G. Marshall, Editor; New York

Carleton Beals, Writer; New York

Newton Arvin, Critic, Professor; Northampton, Massachusetts

George Leighton, Author, Editor; New York

Carey McWilliams, Author, Critic, Lawyer; Los Angeles

V.F.Calverton, Author, Editor, Critic; New York

Alfred M. Bingham, Editor; New York

James Weldon Johnson, Author, Poet; Connecticut

Margaret Reese, Social Worker; New York

Nels Anderson, Sociologist; Columbia University

Edward J. Allen, Economist; Columbia University

Florence L. Voorhis, Librarian; Seth Low Jr. College

John M. Brewster, Professor; Seth Low Jr. College

Paul C. Clifford, Professor; Seth Low Jr. College

Matthew N. Chappell, Professor; Seth Low Jr. College

Einstein Accuses Yugoslavian Rulers in Savant's Murder

The following article concerning the assassination of Dr. Milan Suffly appeared in the New York Times on May 6, 1931.

Charges the Slaying of Sufflay, Noted Croatian Leader, Was Inspired by Government. Links King to Terrorism

Protests With Heinrich Mann Virtually Lays Parliament Killing Monarch

Increase in Cruelty Seen

League for Rights of Man Is Urged to Take Action Against "Horrible Brutality" of Belgrade Regime.

Berlin, May 5.-Accusing the Yugoslav Government of the murder of a Croatian, Professor Milan Sufflay, who was struck down in the streets of Agram (Zagreb) on Feb. 18, Professor Albert Einstein and the novelist Heinrich Mann, the brother of Thomas Mann, have sent a joint letter to the international headquarters in Paris urging a protest against the "horrible brutality which is being practiced upon the Croatian people." The letter also was signed by the German headquarters of the league.

The Paris headquarters, upon receipt of the communication, immediately undertook steps toward an effective protest to Belgrade.

"As the professor was walking home on the fatal day he was attacked from behind with an iron rod, according to our information, and felled," the letter of protest reads. "On the next day, he died and he was buried on the twenty-second beside other Croatians."

Professor Sufflay was noted for a long list of scientific books, the letter continues.

"Yet Agram newspapers were not allowed to report his activities, and the news of his death was suppressed," the protest goes on. "Condolence telegrams were not delivered. The time of the funeral was not allowed to be made public and the raising of the mourning flag on the university was forbidden. The authorities went so far as to expel those school children who took part in the funeral and to remove wreaths which were bound with the Croatian national colors from the grave.

"The name of the murder was known. It was Nikola Jukitsh. His organization (Young Yugoslavia) likewise is known. It was even known that arrangements for the murder had been worked out on the night of the eleventh in the home of the military commandment of the city, General Beli Markowitsch, at a session in which members of the Young Yugoslavia organization, Brkitsh, Godler, Martschetz and the murderer Jukitsh, took part. Yet the Agram police officially stated the next day that the name of the murderer was not known.

Turning to the events leading up to the murder, Professor Einstein and the other signers charged that when the King visited the Croatian capital in January numerous leading Croats received letters, signed "For the King and Country," in which their lives and those of their families were threatened if they uttered any protest while the King was there. Professor Sufflay received one of those letters, it is charged.

"The name of these terrorist organization was Young Yugoslavia, the protest continued. "The King, in an address to the organization, told how the Croatian representatives to the Parliament had been put out of the way at his request. An example of this was the shooting of a Croatian leader on the floor of the House on June 20, 1928."

Following the King's visit the murder of political and intellectual leaders of the Croatians was openly demanded in the government press, says the letter.

"The official organ, Nascha Sloga, in Suschak, on Feb.18 wrote,'Skulls will be spilt.' The same evening Professor Sufflay was struck down," the letter says.

In January the delegates to the Croatian National Assembly sent a memorandum to Geneva calling attention to the situation in Croatia.

"The facts show that the cruelty and the brutality practiced upon the Croatians only increases," Professor Einstein's letter says. "In view of this frightful situation, we urge the International League for the Rights of Man to do everything possible to suppress this unrestrained rule of might which prevails in Croatia.

"Murder as a political weapon must not be tolerated and political murderers must not be made national heroes. The league should muster all possible aid to protect this small, peaceful and highly civilized people."

Sufflay a History Professor

Professor Milan Sufflay, who was murdered in Agram (Zagreb) on Feb.18, had been a Professor of History at Zagreb University for ten years. He had written many works on the history of Albania. In 1920, because of his connection with Croat extremists, he was sentenced to two and a half years' imprisonment for lese-majeste and high treason. On his release he resumed his political activities.

Protest against the Yugoslav dictatorship of King Alexander have been frequent since the murder of Professor Sufflay and the many "suicides" of Croats and Macedonians in the prisons of Belgrade and Zagreb.

Three Serbs were arrested in Vienna recently who were alleged to have been sent there on a murder mission with the knowledge of the Zagreb Chief of Police.

The bitter feeling in Yugoslavia has resulted in numerous bombings and assassinations.

When King Alexander proclaimed the dictatorship two years ago his chief problem was the deadlock caused by the refusal of Croatia to be dominated by a parliamentary government recruited largely from extreme Serbian sources.

Source:
http://www.croatianstudies.org/index.php?action=page&id=65

---> A. Čuvalo: A PARTIAL LIST OF PERSECUTION OF CROATS IN THE FIRST YUGOSLAVIA

2004-09-25T09:00:00.000-07:00

Croatian Studies

Appendix to 'Persecution of Croats in the First . . . '

Ante Cuvalo

Also see the article related to this appendix

Also see: Letters of Protest

1918

Sep. 9 About 100 Serbian soldiers arrived for the first time at the town of Vukovar and, among other misdeeds, confiscated boats loaded with grain on the Danube river.

Oct. 29 Croatian Sabor (Parliament) broke off all ties with the Habsburg Monarchy (Austria-Hungary).

November A number of leading Croatian intellectuals in Zagreb receive letters threatening to hang them on light poles. Many people were afraid to walk the streets at night. Among the arrested in Zagreb were: Ivica dr. Frank (people's representative), Aleksandar Horvat (people's representative),Ante Matasic (general), Mirko dr. Puk (lawyer), Pavao Rauch (former ban/viceroy of Croatia), and Drago dr. Safar (lawyer).

Among the arrested and then forced to retire were the High Court Judges: Milan Accuti, Mirko dr. Kosutic, and Josip Tarabochia.

Among those forced from Zagreb into hiding were Ljudevit dr. Ivancic (priest in Zagreb) and Lovro dr. Radicevic (priest in Zagreb)

Nov.8 Franjo Sarkotic (general in Sarajevo) arrested.

Nov.9 Zvonimir Vukelic (newsman in Zagreb) arrested.

Nov.16 Mihovil Mihaljevic (field Marshall) forced to retire.

Nov. 17 Izidor dr. Krsnjavi (univ. prof. in Zagreb) forced to retire. Ivan Malus (school supervisor in Zagreb) forced to retire. Milan dr. Sufflay (a leading intellectual and univ. professor in Zagreb) forced to retire. ? Heim (judge in Zagreb) forced to retire.

Nov. 21 Lacko Labas (provincial governor in Bjelovar) forced to retire.

Nov. 22 Antun Liposcak (general) arrested.

Dec. 1 Kingdom of Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes formed (renamed Yugoslavia in 1929).

Dec. 4 Zagreb newspaper "Hrvatska" banned.

Dec. 5 The gov. officials in Zagreb were ordered to declare this day a holiday with public celebrations in honor of the Serbian king Peter's "krsna slava." After the morning parade in honor of the king, Croatian soldiers stationed in Zagreb began a parade of their own, with their marching band. They protested unification with Serbia and demanded a democratic republic of Croatia. The marchers were met by force. On that day 9 Croatian civilians and 5 soldiers were killed, and 7 civilians and 10 soldiers were wounded. (It is estimated that over 100 people were hurt or killed but the newspaper were forbidden to write the truth.)

Among the killed were: Mato Gasparovic, Nikola Ivsa, Stjepan Juresa, Viktor Kolombar, Dragutin Kostelac, Josip Lupinski, Andro Martinko, Milos Mrse, Slavko Scukanac, ? Sentmartoni, Mijo Stanicer, Miroslav Svoboda, Antun Tasner-Juricic, and Ferdo Versec.

Among the arrested was the general Ante Matasic. Jailed over two months and then retired. Arrested again in 1929. After his release, his movements were restricted to the city of Zagreb.

1919

Gendarme forces maltreated large number of peasants in Zdala, Severin, Raca, Popovaca, Grubisno polje, and other places. Many of them were striped naked and beaten.

Jan. 6 The following Croatians were sentenced in Zagreb because of the Dec. 5, 1918 demonstrations: Ivica Percic (soldier) to 10 years,Rudolf Cecelja (soldier) to 7 years, Josip Simatovic (soldier) to 7 years, Ivan Babic (soldier) to 3 and a half years, Janko Herceg (soldier) to 3 and a half years, Franjo Kovacic (soldier) to 3 and a half years, Dragutin Mort (soldier) 3 and a half years, Adolf Schwartz (soldier) to 3 and a half years, Blaz Barac (soldier) to 1 and a half years, Stjepan Crncec (soldier) to 1 and a half years, Franjo Gasparac (soldier) 1 and half years, Marko Koren (soldier) 1 and a half years, Marko Majsl (soldier) 1 and a half years, Mirko Milosak (soldier) to 1 and a half years, Janko Pomjan (soldier) to 1 and a half years, Tomo Potlacek (soldier) to 1 and a half years, Josip Ruklic (soldier)to 1 and a half years, Konrad Skrebin (soldier) to 1 and a half years, Stjepan Tresoglavac (soldier) to 1 and half years, Mirko Vragovic (soldier) to 1 and a half years, Mustafa Basagic (soldier) ?, Mirko Drobac (soldier) ?, and Andrija Fijan (soldier) ?.

March Two elected parliamentary representatives from the Croatian Party of [State] Rights/HSP, dr. Prebeg (lawyer) and dr. Pazman (university professor) arrested.

Military censorship of the press imposed in Croatia.

Mar. 8Croatian Republican Peasant Party/HRSS/ sent memorandum to the U.S. President Wilson and to members of the Peace Conference in Paris asking for self-determination of the Croatian people.

Mar. 25 President of the Croatian Republican Peasant Party (HRSS), Stjepan Radic, and two of its board members arrested. Although no charges were filed against him, Radic was held in jail without a trial untill Feb. 19, 1920. He was arrested again on March 22, 1920 and finally, he was released on Nov. 28, 1920, the day general elections, in which he and his party won an overwhelming majority of votes in Croatia.

May Josip Zrnek (worker) died in jail under torture.

July 13 Three people (a restaurant owner in Zagreb, his wife and a waitress) arrested by military authorities and badly beaten because the man said "This is not a Greater Serbia."

July 22 Spontaneous rebellion of soldiers in Varazdin.

August Army confiscated all the goods that Croat emigrants had brought with them returning from the USA.

Bartol Vukovic (peasant from Brodska Varos) killed by gendarmes.

September A Croat police officer in Zagreb beaten and maltreated by military authorities.

A "prominent citizen" in Zagreb 70 years old beaten, maltreated, and his dog killed on his own property by a military captain.

1920

A group of "well-respected citizens" in Sisak arrested while eating in a restaurant, kept overnight in the local jail and maltreated because gendarme Lolic was drunk and he felt like doing it.

"Many peasants" beaten in the name of king Peter and forced to genuflect three times and give homage to the Serbian traditional military cap, known as "sajkaca."

A veterinarian in Petrinja, after being asked to come to the office of the local commanding army officer, was maltreated and beaten by the officer. After escaping, the veterinarian was beaten again the next day by the same officer.

February A man was killed by soldiers in Sisak. While his wife was crying over his dead body, the commanding colonel swore at her and gave her two hard blows.

Feb. 20 Nine peasants in Delnice badly beaten by soldiers. Their money was also taken.

Mar. 22 ? Teslic, a Serb and a former Austrian Colonel, attempted to kill Stjepan Radic during a public gathering of the Croatian Peasant Party in Sisak. When Radic was about to begin his speech, Teslic fired four shots at him. After escaping the assassination, Radic was arrested and finally released on Nov. 28, 1920, the day of general elections.

Apr. 16 All public meetings banned in Croatia.

July A military colonel took a boat from a Croat citizen in Petrinja. After his complaint, four soldiers were sent to bring the man to the military compound. They were unsuccessful. But the next day, the citizen was found, beaten, and maltreated.

August Soldiers attack a number of civilians in Zagreb.

September A "large number" of peasants were killed during the attempts of the gendarmes and the military to put down peasant rebellions in northern Croatia. "Many peasants" were killed in Kutina county. Two peasants killed in Ivanjska.

Sep. 5 Forced branding of large domestic animals.

Peasants rebel in Veliki Grdjavac.

Josip Sulicek (peasant) killed by gendarmes.

Sep. 6 A peasant from Sveti Ivan Zeleni killed by gendarmes.

Sep. 8 Ivan Likoder (peasant from Repusnica) killed by gendarmes.? Pintaric (peasant from Repusnica) wounded by gendarmes. Ivan Vraznic (peasant from Repusnica) wounded by gendarmes. Gabor Uroic (peasant from Repusnica) wounded by gendarmes. ? Alapic (peasant from Gracanica) wounded by gendarmes.

Sep. 9 ? Gunjak (peasant) arrested and on the road from Osekova to Kutina killed by gendarmes. ? Pokaz (peasant) arrested and on the road from Osekova to Kutina killed by gendarmes.

Sep. 10 30 peasants in Petrinja badly beaten by the gendarmes in front of other citizens.

Sep. 16 3 peasant huts with all possessions burnt by gendarmes in Novoselce near Zagreb.

Filip Halic (79-year old peasant from Novoselce near Zagreb) killed by gendarmes in front of a hut in his vineyard.

Oct. 4 City Mayor of Vinkovci publically attacked by Serb military officer.

Nov. 28 Elections for the Constitutional Assembly. Croatian Republican Pleasant Party/HRSS/ received majority of votes in Croatia. Its leader, Stjepan Radic, released from jail on the election day.

Dec. 5 Croatian youth organization "Sokol" banned.

Dec. 12 Anti-Croatian demonstrations in Ruma/Srijem. Croatian businesses and homes attacked. All public signs written in Latin script demolished. Military authorities in the town were protecting the attackers.

Dec. 15 Mirko Marcinko arrested and severely tortured.

Dec. 20 Vinko Zugcic (peasant from Novoselce near. Zagreb) arrested and killed by gendarmes.

Vid Zavolic (peasant from Novoselce near Zagreb) wounded by gendarmes.

Dec. 22 A major strike by miners in Husino near Tuzla, Orasje, Breza, and other mining places in Bosnia. Gendarmes, "People's Guards" (Serbian volunteers), and army unites put down the strike. 32 miners and peasants were killed and many more seriously wounded. Robbery, rape, and expulsion from homes followed. Croatian settlements were special targets because the desire was to portray the Croats as Communist sympathizers.

Dec. 29Government in Belgrade issued a document, "Obznana", by which the Communist Party was banned in the country. Persecutions intensified.

Dec. 30 Stjepan Supanc (worker) killed in Vukovar.

1921

Jan. 4 Anka N. (Postal clerk in Vukovar) attacked by soldiers, maltreated, and arrested.

Jan. 26 The following Croats arrested in Zagreb. Trial began on June 12, 1921. On August 6, 1921 sentenced to:Pavao See 12 years, Rudolf Vidak 4 years, Milan dr. Sufflay to 3 and a half years, Jakov Petric to 3 years, Franjo Skvorc to 3 years, Dragutin Taborsak to 3 years, Josip Spoljarec-Drenski to 2 years and 4 months, Ivan Havelka to 8 months, Milan Galovic to 6 months,Ivan Kovacic to 6 months, Gabrijel Kruhak to 6 months, Ivo dr. Pilar 2 months, Andrija Medar freed, Antun Pavicic freed, and Florijan Stromar ?. Feb. 16 18 mineworkers in Tuzla condemned to death by hanging.. One of the condemned miners was Jure Kerosevic.

June Vladimir Copic arrested and sentenced on Feb. 2, 1922 to 2 years.

June 29 Unsucccesful attempt to assassinate king Aleksandar in Belgrade. Excuse to attack sympathizers of the Left and other opponents of the regime. It is estimated that about 10.000 people were arrested in the country and maltreated.

June 28 Centralist Constitution for the newly unified country approved by 233 votes; 35 delegates voted against, and 161 representatives were absent in Belgrade Parliament. July 2 150 workers arrested and maltreated in Split and sentenced from 3 to 8 months.

July 21 ORJUNA (Organizacija Jugoslavenskih Nacionalista/ Organization of Yugoslav Nationalits) attacked and seriously injured four "communists" in Split.

ORJUNA attacked and damaged the house of Mr. Jelaska in Split. ORJUNA demolished the house of Mr. Pinto in Split.

ORJUNA attaked and demolished the house of dr. Vrankovic in Split. July 22 ORJUNA attacked offices of Zagreb papers "Obzor," "Hrvat," and "Jutarnji list." It led violent anti-Croatian demonstration in Zagreb.

ORJUNA attaked "Radnicki dom" (Workers' Hall) in Osijek.

July 24 Rudolf Horvatic (civil servant in Zagreb) wounded by a railroad police, Dusan Kruzica, while riding a train from Sesvete to Zagreb.

Ivan Kosanda wounded togather with Rudolf Horvatic.

Zlatko Arnold (bank clerk) killed by a railroad policeman, Dusan Kruzica, while riding on Sesvete-Zagreb train.

August Catholic religious congress in Split attacked by ORJUNA.

A Catholic religious procession in Sinj attacked by gendarmes.

Aug. 2The Law for the Protection of the State was approved by Belgrade Parliament. Persecutions intensified.

Aug. 9 Drago Gizdic (worker in Dubrovnik) killed by ORJUNA.

Aug. 16 King Peter died. Because the Zagreb's city council did not send a special delegation to the funeral, it was dissolved.

Dec. 11 The "Croatian block" won the municipal elections in Zagreb. But the elected representatives were not allowed to govern. A special city Commissar was appointed be Belgrade.

1922

Newspaper "Hrvatski Glas" banned.

Equipment belonging to youth organization "Croatian Sokol" in Ogulin confiscated and given to the "Yugoslav Sokol." During a public gathering of the "Yugoslav Sokol" that followed in the same town, several leading Croats jailed.

About 400 Croat teachers and professors were dismissed from their jobs.

Jun. 8 King Aleksandar married Romanian princess Mariola. Croatians not welcomed at the wedding. The wedding costs were over 65 million dinars.

Jan. 29 A large number of peasants, including women and children, were attacked and mercilessly beaten by 14 gendarmes in the village near Topusko. Many were incapacitated for a long time because of the harsh beatings.

Feb. 21 ORJUNA attacked members of "Croatian workers union." Army intervened on the side of ORJUNA.

Feb. 23 Ivan Colovic arrested and sentenced to 2 years. Spent 7 months in jail before the trial.

Djuro Salaj arrested and sentenced to 2 years. Spent 7 months in jail before the trial.

March A number of Croatians were attacked by ORJUNA members who were armed by pistols given to them by the military authorities.

? Snidarsic (Zagreb lawyer) shot by ORJUNA members. There was no investigation.

ORJUNA members attacked the house in Zagreb where retired Croatian military officers were having a private party.

June ORJUNA undertook major attacks throughout Zagreb.

June 4 A large number of the "Croatian Sokol" children and their escorts, mostly women, from Karlovac, Jastrebarsko, Ogulin and other towns attacked by local Serbs during the Sokol's field trip to Plitvice Lakes. A number of people injured, investigation was not permitted and no one was punished.

June 14 All chapters of the organization "Croatian Woman" banned and its property comfiscated because they participated in organizing a pilgrimage to the tomb of Ante Starcevic three days earlier.

Women's organization "Katarina Zrinski" also banned because of the pilgrimage to the grave of Ante Starcevic.

Zagreb chapter of the "Croatian Sokol" banned and posessions confiscated because they made a pilgrimage to the tomb of Ante Starcevic three days earlier.

July ? Rozic killed in Zagreb.

Dec. 9 Franjo Vrtat (Novigrad near Koprivnica) jailed for organizing HRSS meetings.

1923

At an ORJUNA meeting attended by the Minister of the Interior an open discussion on assassinating Stjepan Radic (the leader of the Croats) too place.

January During the pre-election campaign, a young man in the village of Kras (Dobrinjstina) was killed after a HRSS public meeting. During the same period, a man was killed in each of the following places: Crikvenica, Otocac, and Vrginmost .

Three HRSS representatives from the region of Sibenik were jailed.

Four members of the HRSS Main Board were jailed.

Three HRSS representatives from Cepin (Osijek) were jailed.

ORJUNA attacked Croatian Sokol members in their hall in Gospic. Because of the attack, the local Sokol organization was deprived of the hall.

Armed ORJUNA members clashed with Croatian youth in a coffee shop in downtown Zagreb. Eight people were wounded.

Jan. 28 ORJUNA members broke up a Croatian Republican Peasant Party (HRSS) gathering in Vinkovci.

February ORJUNA attacked political gatherings organized by Prof. Kerubin Segvic in Split.

ORJUNA attacked two followers of the HRSS in Drnis.

ORJUNA assaulted Dr. Vandekar, son in law of Stjepan Radic, in the town of Metkovic.

ORJUNA attacked a public meeting of the HRSS in Tuzla.

Feb. 3 Public meeting of the HRSS in Kostajnica broken up by ORJUNA members and their simpatizers. Those attending were attacked and more than 30 of homes were damaged.

Feb. 4 Six people seriously, and 18 lightly wounded by ORJUNA members in Crikvenica. One of the wounded died next day.

Feb. 5 Offices of the "Hrvatski list," newspaper in Osijek, raided and vandalized by ORJUNA. A bomb was thrown into the main office.

Feb. 8 ORJUNA members placed a bomb in the hall of the Croatian workers union in Dubrovnik. Local government officials in the region of Dubrovnik banned public gatherings of Croatian political parties.

March Marko Grsic Filipovic wounded by a bullet in the head in the town of Senj.

A Zagreb Croat who stated that he would vote for Radic was forced by a gendarme to kiss the picture of Nikola Pasic, the leading Serbian politician at the time and a symbol of Greater Serbianism.

In Koprivnica, gendarmes opened gun fire on Croatian peasants.

In Split, any one who cried out "Long live Radic" received a 30- day jail sentence.

Gendarmes attacked a peasant from Cerje Tuzno and robbed him of his possessions.

Mar. 4 Peasants from the village of Cukovac (Ludbreg) were fired upon because they prepared a welcoming celebration for the HRSS leaders, including Stjepan Radic. Those who fired on the peasants were not punished. Instead, a peasant from Cukovac, a sympathizer of Radic, was sentenced to a one day jail term for not voting "properly."

ORJUNA and its sympathizers attacked a public meeting of the HRSS in Otocac. Two peasants were wounded and a 14 year old boy was killed.

Mar. 18 After police attacked and dispersed a crowd gathered in Zagreb, OJUNA members opened fire on those running from police. A 16-year old boy was seriously wounded and a 20- year old man and a woman received lesser injuries.

Mar. 18 Second general elections held in the KSHS. The HRSS received an overwhelimg vote among the Croatians (420,000 votes and 69 Deputies).

April Jurije Soce (Sarajevo) killed by ORJUNA members.

June Kerubin Segvic on trial. He wrote in an article that ORJUNA was helped by the government.

Jul. 21 Stjepan Radic, President of the HRSS left the country and visited London, Vienna and Moscow looking for international understanding of the Croatian cause.

1924

Mime Rosandic (forestry engineer) arrested and maltreated.

April ORJUNA member attacked Jewish properties in Zagreb.

Aug. 1 Stjepan Radic, leader of the HRSS returned from abroad to Zagreb. It became clear that the outside world did not want to hear about "the Croatian question."

November A gendarme attempted to assassinate August Kosutic, a leading politician in Croatia in Kastel Stari. Treated for head wounds in gendarme station. Jailed right after his return to Zagreb. Soon after, he took a long trip to the USA in order to avoid physical attacks or even assassination.

The Minister of education, S. Pribicevic, retired 3 leading professors (supporters of HRSS) at the Zagreb University. One of the three was Dr. Ladislav Polic. Dec. 23 Declaration to ban the Croatian Republican Peasant Party/HRSS because it joined the Socialist International. Its public meeting and all its publications were banned. The law of public order and protection of state to be implemented against the HRSS, all its archives to be confiscated, and its leadership arrested.

1925

January Police harassed leading Croatian politicians, among them Dr. Josip Lorkovic, Dr. Albert Bazala, Dr. Stjepan Skrulj, Dr. Stjepan Buc, Dr. Krajac, and others.

Seven peasants from Kustosija (near Zagreb) arrested because they displayed a Croatian flag.

The HRSS and Communist representatives in the Osijek city council were stripped off their political positions.

Jan. 1 The Law for the Protection of State, originally passed against the Communists, extended to the Croatian Republican Peasant Party/HRSS/. Criminal procedures were undertaken against its leadership.

Jan. 2 Police searched apartments and offices of all leading HRSS politicians in Zagreb and throughout the country. Many of them were arrested and released after a short detention. But the following were arrested and kept in jail for 6 months: Dr. Vladko Macek, Dr. Juraj Krnjevic, Dr. Stjepan Kosutic, Augustin Kosutic, Josip Predavec. A few days later, the secretary of the HRSS, Serif Kuzmic, was also arrested.

Offices of Osijek newspaper "Hrvatski list" raided and editors maltreated.

The house of Ivan dr. Loncarevic (lawyer in Mitrovica) raided and vandalized.

Jan. 3 600 peasants from Sibenik region arrested, taken to Sibenik, and about a half of them were jailed.

A number of Croats in Sibenik jailed. Among them were: Marko Berovic, Augustin Bujan (priest), Josip Drezga, Dr. Miho Jernic (dentists), Mate Kalmeta, Sime Zenic, Ivan dr. Krnic (former gov. high official). Next day, he was taken to Ogulin. Three Croatian homes in Susak/Rijeka raided.

Jan. 4 Ten members of the HSS in Imotski arrested.

Prof. Pavao Brkic arrested.Dr. ? Cuzzi (Split) arrested. Josip Paf (Sinj) arrested.Prof. Kerubin Segvic (editor of "Croatian Review" in Zagreb) arrested.Dr. ? Sokol (Split) arrested. Pavao Vucic (Sinj) arrested.Dr. Mile Vukovic (Imotski) arrested.

Jan. 5 Stjepan Radic, President of HRSS, arrested. Rudolf Bicanic (economist in Zagreb) - his apartment raided. Dragan Devcic (merchant in Djakovo) jailed for 14 days. Stjepan dr. Hefer (lawyer) jailed for 14 days. Ivo dr. Majcan (lawyer) arrested. ? Mirtejic (in Djakovo) jailed for 14 days.

Pavle Radic (leading man in the HRSS and Croatian representative in Belgrade parliament)- his apartment in Belgrade raided.

Viktor Tomlinovic (priest in Nasice) jailed.Djuro Turkalj (in Djakovo) jailed for 14 days.

All school teachers members of the Croatian Peasant Party dismissed from their jobs.

Jan. 6 Gendarmes opened fire on a crowd of Croats in Ozelj near Karlovac. One peasant killed and two wounded.

Jan. 7 "Croatian Sokol" youth organizations in Velika, Mihaljevac, and Brestovac near Pozega banned.

Jan. 8 Offices of the "Srijemski Hrvat," Vukovar paper, raided and vandalized.

Seven peasants in Ceric near Vukovar arrested.

Dr. Ivan Majcen (Donji Miholjac) jailed for 6 days.Matijevic (president of the HSS in Bogdanovici) jailed with a number of other HSS members.

All HSS representatives and their secretaries in Donji Miholjac jailed for 5 days.

Jan. 9 In the village of Ladjevac, a local priest (Rev. Mikan) was arrested.

Jan. 13 "Hrvatski List," Osijek newspaper, banned. After changing the name into "Hrvatska Zora" it was banned also. Jan. 13Rude Bacinic, a leading HRSS representative from Dalmatia, arrested in Belgrade.

Jan. (mid)The president of the local election committee and a member of the HRSS, Prof. Josip Hager, was arrested. He was accused of insulting the king and the regime. Besides being suspended from teaching, he was arrested again at the end of the month and sentenced to a 10 day jail term.

Jan. 25"Hrvatski Branik," Vinkovci newspaper, banned.

Jan. 31 Djuro Zivic, a HRSS sympathizer, from Novo selo (Varazdin) was arrested, kept in jail till Feb. 8, 1925, and the case against him dragged on till 1927.

Jan. (end) Dr. Milovan Zanic was arrested.

The secretary of the HRSS Zagreb branch arrested

Police in Varazdin attempted to prevent the HRSS from handing to the local court the election lists and harassed the leading HRSS officials in the city, Dr. Ursic and others.

Nikola Separovic, a baker from Vela Luka living near Delnice, arrested. Accused of insulting the Belgrade regime. Feb. (beg.) Gendarmes beat up four peasants in the village of Lukavac. Two of them were seriously hurt.

Feb. 8 The day of elections, police, gendarmes, and even military forces were employed throughout Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina to intimidate the non-Serb electorate. Many members of local election committees were harassed and/or arrested. There were numerous clashes between the voters and the gendarmes, and a number of people were injured and even killed.

In a clash between the gendarmes and the voters in Veliko Trgovisce a peasant was killed, and two gendarmes were wounded. Next day, 20 peasants were arrested and, after long tortures, 11 were released and 9 put on trial.

In the village of Stajnica (Lika) four peasants were killed (including an 80 year old woman) and many were wounded by the gendarmes. Stajnica was a stronghold of the HRSS party.

The mayor of the town of Susak (near Rijeka) was suspended from his functions and deprived of his salary because he was not supporting the Serbian Radical party.

In the village of Straznjevac (Varazdin) gendarmes arrested more than 10 peasants accused of displaying a flag with a slogan: "Faith in God and Peasant Solidarity" and of preventing the gendarmes from arresting the HRSS committee-men. After being maltreated and kept in jail for a while, they received from one to four months prison terms.

After the election results were announced, the HRSS supporters were prevented by police, gendarmes, and the military throughout Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina from celebrating the victory.

Feb. 8 General elections - HRSS gained total victory among the Croats.

Feb. 11 "Hrvatski List," Osijek daily newspaper, banned again.

Feb. 17 "Hrvatski Glas," Osijek daily newspaper and successor to "Hrvatski list" banned.

Mar. 22 Dr. Albert Bazala (leading intellectual and people's representative) physically attacked by Serbian members of parliament.

May 25 "Novi List," daily newspaper in Susak/Rijeka, banned.

July 18 Stjepan Radic was released from jail. He and his party joined the government in Belgrade. His party's name from now on is simply Croatian Peasant Party /HSS/; the adjective Republican is abandoned.

1926

May Attempt to assassinate Stjepan Radic (leader of the HSS) in Srijemska Mitrovica

1927

January On the island of Krk, displaying of the Croatian flag was banned and civil servants and school teacher came under special pressure because the local elections were coming up. (Jan. 23, 1927). In Varazdin, the city council and the city mayor were removed, and a government official (a gendarme officer) took control of the city.

In Osijek, a communist election leaflet stating "Long live the Republic" was banned.

On the island of Korcula, the HSS candidates were arrested.

In the provinces of Backa and Baranja, the HSS candidates and supporters were under great pressure to abandon their loyalty to their political party. Jan. 4 The ban against the HSS activities (imposed at the end of 1924) was abolished.

Jan. 23 On the day of local elections, about 2000 HSS members were coming to greet Radic at his home in Zagreb. Police dispersed the crowd and injured a number of people.

Aug. A regional representative of the Serbian Democratic Party from Vrelo near Korenica was arrested and sentenced to a 14 day jail term. The Serbian Democratic Party in Croatia came under pressure because its leader, S. Pribicevic, abandoned his policy of Serbian unitarism and became a federalist.

Aug. 28 In Sv. Jakov (near Crikvenica) gendarmes dispersed a HSS meeting and arrested one participant.

Sep. (beg.) In the village Krivi Put (Lika) the president of the local HSS was arrested and sentenced to 14 days of prison.

In Ludbreg, two HSS members were sentenced to a 14 day jail term each. Spt. 11Parliamentary elections. During these election there were no major eruptions of violence but voting manipulation by the regime was worse than in previous elections.

1928

June 20 Serbian Parliament representative, Punisa Racic, opened fire in Belgrade Parliament on Croatian deputies. Stjepan Radic mortally wounded (died on Aug. 8,1928), Dr. Djuro Basaricek killed, Pavle Radic killed, Dr. Ivan Pernar wounded, and Ivan Grandja wounded.

June 20-22 Massive demonstrations in Zagreb. 5 people killed; 50 wounded, more than a hundred arrested.

Dec. 4 Zagreb students demonstrated. Several killed and wounded by the gendarmes. 1929

Jan. 6 King Aleksandar assumed all power in the country, dismissed Parliament, suspended Constitutions, and banned all political parties.

April 30 Djuro Djakovic and Nikola Hecimovic, after being arrested and tortured, were led to the country border and shot.

May Dr. Milovan Zanic (lawyer and a former representative in parliament from Nova Gradiska) sentenced to 6 months for suggesting that king Aleksandar should be asked to return civil rights to the citizens. He had been arrested also in previous years.

June 28 The leader of the Serbs in Croatia, Svetozar Pribicevic, once right-hand man of the Belgrade regime, was confined to a small village in Serbia for his cooperation with the Croat political leaders. From 1931 till his death in 1936, he lived in exile.

July 17 Dr. Ante Pavelic (Zagreb lawyer and representative in Belgrade parliament) condemned to death in absence and his property is confiscated.

Gustav Percec condemned to death in absence and his property is confiscated.

Oct. 3 Displaying of Croatian flag is banned. Oct. 31 The following Croats were arrested and sentenced on June 30, 1931. Marko Hranilovic (student, 20 years old) condemned to death by hanging plus 20 years jail term!! Matija Soldin condemned to death by hanging plus 20 years jail term. Hung on November 25, 1931..

Stipe Javor (from Brinje/Zagreb merchant ) to 20 years. Because of beastly tortures he died in jail on March 27, 1936. Stipe Javor's wife and two daughters were also arrested and maltreated in order to force him to talk. Antun Herceg (newsman) to 20 years. Dragutin Kriznjak (peasant) to 18 years. Stjepan Horvatek (merchant's helper) to 15 years. Pavao Glad (hospital clerk) to 15 years. Milan Siladi (blacksmith from Busevac) to 6 years. Antun Vezmarovic (forest guard) to 5 years. Luka Markulin (peasant from Odra) to three years. Mijo Bizik (craftsman) to 18 months. Marija Hranilovic (Marko's sister; secretary) to 18 months. Gabrijel Kruhak (office clerk in Zagreb) to 18 months. Janko Kruhak (craftsman) to 18 months. Mirko Kruhak (office clerk in Zagreb) to 18 months. Stjepan Markulin (peasant from Odra) to 18 months. Mile Starcevic (office clerk) to 18 months. Luka Cordasic freed. Josip Knoblehar freed. Stjepan Kopcinovic freed. Stjepan Novacic freed. Cvjetko Stahan freed. Mijo Babic escaped the country and condemned in absence. Zvonimir Pospisil condemned in absence. Mladen Lorkovic (Zagreb lawyer) avoided the arrest by escaping the country .

Dec. Blaz Djogic (peasant from Siroki Brijeg) killed by gendarmes

Dec. 5 King Aleksandar banned the "Croatian Sokol" that had over 40,000 members.

Dec. 19 Vilko Begic (military colonel) arrested. Freed on June 14, 1930.

Jaksa Jelasic (professor in Zagreb) arrested and sentenced to 3 years plus the loss of civil rights for 4 years.

52 Zagreb students arrested together with Begic and Jelasic.

Dec. 29 The following Croats were arrested, tried in Belgrade, and on June 14, 1930 sentenced: Ivan Bernardic (merchant's assistant from Barilovic) to 15 years, expulsion from Zagreb for 3 years, and the loss of civil rights for life. Stjepan Matekovic (craftsman from Kostajnica) to 10 years. Filip Paver (state clerk in Zagreb) to 10 years. Martin Franekic to 8 years the loss of civil rights for life.Ivan Skrtak to 6 years and permanent loss of civil rights. Cvjetko Hadzija to 5 years and the loss of civil rights for 5 years. Ante Stefanac to 4 years and the loss of civil rights for 4 years. Velimir Mocnaj (book store owner in Karlovac) to 3 years and the loss of civil rights for 3 years. Ivan Prpic (lawyer from Jastrebarsko) to 2 years. Ivan Ban (merchant's assistant from Kresevo) to 1 year and loss of civil rights for 3 years. Franjo Veselic to 1 year. Ljubomir Kremzir to 6 months. Pavao Margetic to 6 months. Bozo Arnsek freed. Mirko Debanic freed. Albin Gasparac freed. Franjo Kuntic (restaurant owner) freed. Ivan dr. Lebovic (lawyer) freed. Milan Levnajic freed. Antun Stefanic freed.

1930

Ivan Rosic jailed 14 days for placing a wreath on the grave of Stjepan Radic. Jan. 4 Dr. Vladko Macek (leader of the HSS) arrested, tried in Belgrade and freed on June 14, 1930. Seven Croatian prisoners that were acquitted together with Macek at the trial in Belgrade and four of their lawyers were celebrating their release. That was considered a crime and all were sentenced to a 30 days prison term.

May Over 100 Croats arrested. Accused of planning to place an explosive under the train taking a delegation to see the king in Belgrade. Among them were: Antun Budrovac - later sentenced to a jail term. Franjo Canic - later sentenced to a jail term. Franjo Carevic - later sentenced to a jail term. Antun Herman (shoemaker in Djakovo) - later sentenced to a jail term. Zeljko Klemen - later sentenced to a jail term. Karlo Kovacevic - later sentenced to a jail term. Sime Mikic - later sentenced to a jail term. Ivan Ruskan - later sentenced to a jail term. Luka Stjevic - later sentenced to a jail term. Anka Sultajs (woman) - later sentenced to a jail term. Andrija Tilman (postal clerk in Djakovo) - later sentenced to a jail term.

June Josip Predavec (Vice President of the HSS) condemned to 2 and a half years of prison.

1931

During the year "a number of Croats" killed by Chetniks and/or gendarme forces.

Zvonimir Topilnik (bank clerk in Livno) died in jail under torture.

Dr. Dragutin Toth arrested and tried with 13 more members of the HSS.

Ivan Jedlicka tortured and died in Virovitica prison.

Jan. 14 Obrad Pavlovic (Croat from Backa) killed near Italian border.

Feb. ? Bosnjakovic (craftsman in Djakovo) died in jail under gendarmes' torture.

Josip Poropat (young man from Zagreb) killed by gendarmes and his body was thrown from the 3rd floor into the courtyard.

174 Croats arrested in Zagreb

Feb. 17Djuka Ilijanic (peasant) died in Zagreb under torture.

Feb. 18Dr. Milan Sufflaj (a leading Croat intellectual) assassinated.

April Ante Pavelic (peasant from Bosanski Brod) arrested and severely tortured. After his release, escaped to Austria and soon died of complications caused by tortures.

May Josip Nadj (merchant from Ferdinandovac) died in jail under torture

May 4 Trial of 22 Croats began in Zagreb. Among the 22 volunteer defending counsels was Dr. Vladko Macek, leader of the Croatian Peasant Party who a year earlier was himself tried and acquitted in Belgrade. (See Oct. 31, 1929)

May 23 In Belgrade, 3 Croats were sentenced to death, one of them in absence. 11 others received a total of 126 years jail terms. Two were sentenced to 20 and 15 years, but they escaped the country. One of the accused was acquitted.

June Milka Hranilovic (a woman) jailed because of her son's activities.

June 31 Ante Crvic, Ignac Domitrovic, and Mijo Seletkovic were condemned in absence.

July 12About 12,000 people attending the Eucharistic Congress in Omis. Gendarmes opened fire on the masses. Two people killed and many wounded.

July 23 Six months after their arrests, a group of Croats tried in Belgrade and sentenced. Among them, Ivan Rosic (shoemaker's assistant) to death by hanging (hung).

Aug. 1 man (peasant from Lencak near Lasinja) killed by gendarmes. Aug. 10Ilija Petrovic (Nova Gradiska) died under prison torture in Zagreb.

Aug. 11The following Croats were sentenced: Ivan Ljevakovic (father's name Matin from Lipak; streetcar controller in Zagreb) to death. Later commuted to life imprisonment. Ivan Ljevakovic (father's name Franjo; peasant from Lipak) to 15 years. Adolf Miler sentenced in Belgrade to 15 years. Ivan Saub to 10 years. Petar Nozaric to 2 years. Stjepan Papac to 2 years. Ignac Terihaj to 10 months. Milan Lukac (from Nova Gradiska) freed. Josip Miklausic - cooperated with prosecution. Martin Nagy - cooperated with prosecution. Hung himself in jail. Supposedly suicide.

Dec. 8 Chetniks in the country of Benkovac terrorized Croats who did not participate in the elections. Five peasants killed and many wounded. 1932

Villages in Lika region were terrorized and possessions confiscated after the Lika rebellion.

129 Croats were tried for verbal "insult of the king's name" in the regions of Petrinja, Bjelovar, Zagreb, Ogulin, and Varazdin alone.

Pastor of the Catholic parish in Krasna/Lika arrested because of his "provocative" sermon. A number of Croats in Pazariste/Lika were severely beaten by gendarmes. Among them were: Joso Alivojdic, Petar Dasovic (75 years),

Ilka Hodak (24 year woman), Tomo Marinkovic (beaten daily for 10 days), Jerko Rukavina (70 year), ? Smiljcic (14 years), Manda Stimac (older woman), Jure Zivkovic - his skull was broken and the gendarmes left him for dead.

23 people (from 23 to 92 years of age) severely beaten by gendarmes force in Brusani/Lika. Among them were: Sule Devcic (92 years old) and Mican Lisac (73 year old)

Ivan Domitrovic (peasant from near Imotski) killed by the Chetniks in his home.

Jozo Olujic (Opanci/Imotski) killed by the Chetniks.

Towards the end of the year, a group of Croats were arrested and sentenced in Jan. 1933. Among them: Franjo Furlan to 7 years, Stjepan Tomljenovic 7 years, Sime Balen to 4 years, Nikola Busljeta to 2 years, Mile Sikic 6 months, Antun Balen freed, and Jakov Kubretovic freed.

Five Croats killed on the border to Italy and to Hungary.

Towards the end of the year, 121 people (mostly peasants from Prijedor region) brought to trial in Banja Luka.

Feb. 18 Ive Dusevic (20 years old man from Ljubac/Zadar) killed by Chetniks.

Feb. 20 A peasant in Bosanski Brod killed by gendarmes.

March Blaz Savic (peasant in Benkovac region) deprived of any assistance because of his nationality and political beliefs- died of hunger.

Mara Troskat (a woman in Banjevac/Benkovac) deprived of any assistance because of her nationality and political beliefs - died of hunger.

Nikola Zrilic (Sopoti/Benkovac) deprived of job and social assistance because of his nationality and political stands - died of hunger.

Mar. 4 Many peasants from Lisani/Tinja arrested and held in jail for a long time while their children had no food.

Mar. 6 Students at the University in Zagreb display 3 Croatian flags; many of them arrested and maltreated. Branko Buzjak (student in Zagreb) seriously wounded by police.

Mar. 25 ? Aljinovic (truck driver in Ston/Peljesac) killed by Chetniks

April 4 The Government led by General Petar Zivkovic, known for his harsh rule, forced to resign. Hops were high that the new Government would be less oppressive, but such hopes did not materialize.

April 24 About 200 peasants expressed their disatisfaction by marching to the city of Ludbreg. March crushed by gendarmes, leaders arrested and punished.

Apr. 30 Jakov Peraic (peasant in Polaca/Zadar) killed and robbed by a Serb border guard.

May A large number of people maletreated, beaten, arrested or punished by other means in Suska/Rijeka, Bjelovar, Ogulin and other places.

May 12-14 About 600 peasants peacefully demonstrated demanding removal of the local administration in Kosinj/Lika. Gendarmes crushed the protest in blood.

May 15 Gendarmes crushed spontaneous political demonstrations in Senj. Many people were injured, arrested, and punished.

May 26 Gendarmes used a brutal force to crash demonstrations in Split. A large number of people arrested and maltreated.

June Tomislav Corak (peasant from Brdari/Sanski Most) killed by gendarmes.

Ivan Eres (peasant) killed by gendarmes near Hungarian border.

June 7 An attempt to assassinated Dr. Mile Budak, a well known Croatian writer, takes place in Zagreb.

June 14 Attempted murder of two men in Zagreb by members of Young Yugoslavia.

June 20 Commemorations for the Croatian victims shot in Belgrade parliament in June 1928. Arrests, beatings, and shootings by gendarmes take place in many parts of Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina. Secretary of HSS in Bosanski Brod arrested. Gendarmes open fire on the crowd gathered in front of the local jail.Twenty people wounded and many more arrested.

Stjepan Matkovic (Bosanski Brod) killed by gendarmes. A peasant (Bosanski Brod) killed by gendarmes. A peasant woman (Bosanski Brod) killed by gendarmes.

June 20-21 A large number of peasants from Draganic/Karlovac arrested and maltreated.

June 29Gendarmes opened fire on a Catholic religious procession in Stubica/Zagorje. One man and one woman were killed. Numerous people wounded. Many were maltreated and jailed after the event.

July Ivan Kajda and Pavao Lukac (peasants from Virovitica) killed by gendarmes. Aug. Two peasants in Donja Stubica/Zagorje killed by gendarmes.

Aug. 16 Gendarmes attacked the village of Braslovlje/Samobora. A few peasants were killed and several wounded.

Sept. After the "Lika Rebellion" many Croatians jailed and most of them, after being beaten and tortured, where released. Twelve of them taken to Glavnjaca jail near Belgrade where they were maltreated and spent 9 months before they were tried. Andrija Artukovic, Marko Dosen, Josip Tomljenovic, Ivan Saric, and Nikola Oreskovic escaped from the country.

"A few dead and several wounded peasants" (in Oroslavlje/Zagreb region). Gendarmes used violence because Croatian flag was hoisted.

Pasko Kaliterna (merchant in Split) and Fabijan Plazinic (Split) jailed, tried in Belgrade, and freed on March 14, 1933.

Sept. 14 Stipe Devcic (peasant in Jadovno, Lika) killed by gendarmes.

Sept. 21 Djuro Kemfelja (peasant from Stubica Gornja) jailed and sentenced to 18 months in Belgrade on March 14, 1933.

Petar Posaric jailed and sentenced to 8 months in Belgrade on March 14, 1933.

Oct. Viktor Kosutic jailed; sentenced to 10 months in Belgrade on March 14, 1933.

? Pecnikar (railroad official in Zagreb) died as a consequence of police tortures.

Oct. 5 Dr. Ivan Pernar (leading Croat politician) jailed and sentenced on March 14, 1933 to 1 year of jail term.

Oct. 17 Dr. Vladko Macek, leader of the Croatian Peasant Party, arrested on account of an interview printed in an English newspaper.

Nov. Luka Devcic (peasant from Lika) died in jail under gendarmes' torture.

Nov. 20-28 Three peasants from Nin county killed by gendarmes.

Dec. ? Frkovic (craftsman in Benkovac) died under gendarmes' torture. Sime Grgic (Nin) died in jail under gendarmes' torture.

Mile Kordun (peasnat from Mumici/Nin) killed by gendarmes.

? Misura (tavern owner in Benkovac) died as a consequence of gendarmes' tortures.

Dec. 5 "About 100 students and city people" arrested and tortured because of an explosion that took place in Zagreb on Dec. 1, 1932. Dec. 9 Miro Perkovic (peasant from Ljubac/Nin) killed by gendarmes.

1933

98 people were tried for verbal "insult of the king's name" in the regions of Petrinja, Bjelovar, Zagreb, Ogulin, and Varazdin alone.

"At the beginning of the year," 8 people were jailed from 10 to 14 days in Podravina.

Ivan Borac (peasant from Razanci/Zemunik) mortally wounded by a Chetnik in front of the church right after the church service.

Ante Dobrila (post-office clerk in Senj) sentenceed to 14 years.

Marko Dosen (merchant from Lika) escaped from the country because of persecutions. His family was also persecuted and their business license suspended in May of 1933.

Sime Dusevic (peasant from Asin near Nin) killed by gendarmes Milivoj Cumic. He also killed P. Grgic and was decorated with the "Medal of St. Sava" for special merits.

Ivan Gabaj (peasant from Hlebine) is arrested, severely tortured and then shot to death by gendarmes.

Franjo Mraz (peasant from Hlebine) tortured and killed by gendarmes.

Pavle Perkovic (peasant from Perkovici near Sl. Brod) killed by Chetnik Rusic.

? Rasic (peasant from the region of Sl. Brod) killed at a public meeting by Chetniks.

? Rupcic (from Senj) sentenced to 3 years of jail.

Vladimir Secko (merchant's helper in Senj) sentenced to 18 years of jail.

About 600 large animals were confiscated by gendarmes and 48 houses and barns were torched in northern Dalmatia and Lika, especially in Podgorje and Devcici.

? Stojilovic (peasant from Oreskovica) killed on the day of local elections by Zivot Radivojevic. Drago Vlahovic (clerk in Senj) sentenced to 8 years of jail.

Blaz Vukutin (peasant from Pakostani) died because of tortures suffered in jail.

Jan. 60 peasants from Djelkovac, Koprivnica, and other villages in the area were led barefoot to Prlog jail where they were maltreated and tortured.

The following peasants were jailed and gravely tortured: Antun Babat, ? Dretar, Josip Havajic (Tortured to the point of death. Last minute medical intervention kept him alive.), Josip Jurasin, Franjo Makar, ? Petkovic, ? Stancin, Pavao Turek, and Ignac Zlatar. Sandor Trajber killed by gendarmes near Donja Lendava.

Jan 21 Dr. Valdko Macek (Leader of the Croatian Peasant Party/HSS) jailed. Charges filed against him in March. He is transferred to state security jail in Belgrade. Sentenced to 3 years of jail term on April 29, 1933.

Feb. Vilko Begic jailed.

Vladimir Bogovic (clerk in Karlovac) commited suicide because of persecutions.

Feb. 15 Josip Silobrcic (pharmacist in Biograd near Zadar) jailed and tortured.

40 peasants from the region of Sibenik arrested and taken to the city. All accused of anti-state activities. After 185 days of solitary confinement, Silobrcic and 10 others were taken to Belgrade and declared innocent on December 20, 1933 because the charges were brought against them "arbitrarily."

Mar. 11 Antun Ivanov (peasant from Preko/Zadar) tortured to death while in jail.

Mar. 14 Cvjetko Nizic (from Preko/Zadar) tortured to death while in jail.

April Ruzica Knezevic (peasant woman from Perusic) died because of the beatings she suffered at the hands of gendarmes.

April 18 A group of peasants from Recice were taken to Karlovac jail and tortured. One of them, Andrija Pavlic suffered terrible tortures.

April 24 Gendarmes used force to suppress students' demonstrations in Zagreb.

April 29 Gendarmes used force to stop student demonstrations in Zagreb. May About 200 students in Zagreb jailed and terrorized for displaying Croatian flag.

Josip Kostelac (student in Zagreb) jailed and greatly tortured. Sentenced in December 1933.

? Bekavac (peasant from Prolozac/Benkovac) killed by a Serb member of the Sokol organization.

Sime Dijan (Lika) sentenced to 6 months because he did not report suspected nationalists to gendarmes.

Petar Grgic (Murvice/Zadar) killed by gendarme Milivoj Cumica.

Andrija Nadnicic (Lika) sentenced to life imprisonment.

Five others tried with Nadnicic received sentences from 3 to 8 years.

May 20 The following peasants and former HSS parliamentary representatives from the region of Garasnica were jailed: Tomo Madjeric, Misko Racan, TomoVojkovic, At the same time, many peasants from the region were terrorized by gendarmes and taken to Zagreb prison in order to reveal a presumed "great plot" against the state.

July A woman killed in an attack on a Catholic religious procession in Split.

More than 50 Croats accused of belonging to Ustasha movement were tried in three groups in Lika. Among them the following were sentenced: Josip Cacic to life imprisonment, Stjepan Mabasa to life imprisonment, Milan Silhovic 10 months, and others in the group received jail terms from 6 to 15 years.

July 10 After spending 9 months in the notorious Glavnjaca jail near Belgrade, the following Croats were sentenced: Jure Rukavina (forcefully retired officer) condemned to death. Tortured so much that he had to be carried on a stretcher to the court. It was expected that he would succumb to the tortures and die, the king commuted the sentence to life imprisonment. After the king's assassination the sentence was commuted to 20 years. Jerko Sudar to "eternal servitude" (after king's assassination the sentence was commuted to 20 years). Leopold Super (peasant from Brusani) to 20 years. Ivan Abramovic (a young craftsman) to 15 years. Jure Gazic to 15 years. Antun Super (shoemaker from Brusani) to 15 years. Josip Baric (peasant from Brusani) to 12 years. Josip Vukic (merchant's helper from Tribalj/Crikvenica) 10 years. Ivan Rukavina (peasant from Pazariste Donje) to 3 years. Dane Babic (peasant from Brusani) to 9 months. Josip Super (from Brusani) freed. Pavao Baric (peasant from Brusani) freed. A week later, the third group of suspected "Ustashe" was tried in Lika.

July 14 J. Predavec murdered.

July 24 Mirko Neudorfer (former gov. minister and HSS representative) murdered at Ladislavac/Zlatara.

Aug. Augustin Franic (peasant from Sukosani/Dalmatia) killed by Chetniks.

Sept. 9 Ivo dr. Pilar (59 year old well known intellectual and opponent of the regime) officially committed suicide but it is believed that he was murdered.

Sept. 27-28 A large number of students in Zagreb jailed and/or terrorized.

Oct. A terrorizing expedition into the village of Vinice and the surrounding area takes place. This resulted into: Josip Krobot (peasant from Gornje Ladanje/Varazdin) killed. A few hundreds of peasants severely beaten and terrorized.

Dec. 1 Post-office clerk (Selska cesta) killed for singing Croatian patriotic songs.

Dec. 16 King Aleksander in Zagreb. Failed plot to assassinate him discovered.

Dec. Massive arrests (more than 1000 people) and maltreatments in Zagreb. Many of them highschool students. Others expelled from the city.

1934

"Many peasants" arrested in Koprivnica region. Among them the following were sentenced to life inprisonment, later commuted to 15 years: ? Horvatinovic (from Gola), ? Novak (from Gola), ? Posezi (from Gola), ? Suboticanec (from Gola), Janko Varga (from Novacka Gola), ? Pavlic (from Djelkovac), ? Petak (from Djelkovac), ? Sabol (from Djelkovac), ? Vuljak 1 (from Djelkovac), ? Vuljak 2 (from Djelkovac), ? Vuljak 3 (from Djelkovac), ? Sijak (from Grbasevac), and ? Vutuc (from Grbasevac).

"About 100 peasants, workers and students" in Zagreb arrested and maltreated. About 20 people severely tortured.

Ivan Saric (peasant from Zemunik) beaten so badly by gendarmes that he died of the injuries received.

Jan. 11 Ivan Varga (peasant from Dubrave/Medjimurje) killed by gendarmes. In July 1934, his son received a bill to pay 13.15 dinars for the five bullets by which his father was killed.

Mar. 13 Trial of eight Croats begins in Belgrade. They are sentenced on March 21, 1934: Stjepan Pizeta (peasant from Gornje Ladanje/Varazdin) condemned to death. Franjo Zrinski (peasant from Gornje Ladanje/Varazdin) condemmned to death. Tomo Kelemen (mason from Gornje Ladanje/Varazdin) "perpetual servitude." Mijo Kalaman 1 (mason from Gornje Ladanje/ Varazdina) to 1 year. Mijo Kelemen 2 (peasant from Gornje Ladanje/ Varazdina) to 1 year. Marko Krobot (peasant from Gornje Ladanje/Varazdin) to 5 months. Josip Petkovic freed. Milja Brodar (woman) freed.

Mar. 29 Josip Begovic (student in Zagreb) condemned to death by hanging. Petar Oreb (worker from Vela Luka/Korcula) condemned to death by hanging. Hung on May 12, 1934. Antun Podgorelec (masonary apprentice from Suhopolje/Vinkovci) condemned to death by hanging; later commuted to life. After spending three months in jail where they were tortured, a group of eighteen people were sentenced: Nikola Murkovic (lawyer from Gospic) to 2 years, Ante Vlajnic (merchant in Perusic) to 20 months, Martin, Dosen (Licki Osik) to 12 months, Dr. Fran Binicki (pastor in Licki Osik) to 10 months, Mile Butkovic (merchant from Perusic) to 10 months, Nikola Kolacevic (merchant from Kaniza) to 8 months, Mate Zalovic (peasant from village of Vuksice) jailed eight months, Nada Kolacevic (housewife from Gospic) to 6 months, Nikola Polic (pastor in Gospic) to 6 month, Andrija, Brkljacic (Gospic) to 5 months, Ante Brkljacic (Gospic) to 5 months, Mate, Brkljacic (peasant from Kaniza) to 5 months, Josip Matijevic (student from Kaniza) to 5 months, Nikola Matijevic (student) to 5 months, Ivan Stilinovic (peasant from Gopsic) to 4 moths, Marko Smolcic (student under age from Karlobag) sent to a home for delinquent youth, Ivica Murkovic (a retired military officer from Gospic) to ?, and Mime Rosandic (forestry engineer from Gospic) freed but kicked out from work.

Mar. 30 Mato Keselic - (peasant) ambushed and killed by gendarmes near Vrpolje.

Apr. Villagers in Sv. Kriz (Krapina) openly protested against terror of the local gendarmes. Repraisals followed and over 50 villagers were jailed and maltreted.

Apr. 12 About 100 Zagreb Croats arrested and maltreated.

Apr. 20 Two peasants in the village of Lanusa near the Italian border killed.

May 30 Trial of eight Croats began. They were sentenced on June 4, 1934: ? Zindric was aquited. Josip Katusic (permanent residence in the U.S.A.) to death. Ivan Barakovic (civil servant in Osijek) to 15 years of prison. Others received received from 6 month to 10 years jail terms, including Stjepan Crnicki (civil servant in Zagreb).

Aug. Valentin Rosulja - (peasant) killed by Chetnik brothers: Jovan, Milan and Nikola Djurcic.

Josip Sabov - killed by chetniks in Horgac, Backa.

Aug. 1 Ivan Kovacevic - (peasant) killed in Otocko near Bosanski Brod.

Sept. Four political trials: Two people condemnd to death, five received life sentences, and others received sentences from one to 15 years.

Ivan Lucic - (worker) died in Susak(Rijeka) jail while being tortured.

Sept. 11 The following were sentenced in Zagreb from 10 to 24 months of prison terms because of an "anti-state" leaflet: Vinko Begic, Juraj Horvat,Andrija Hrsak, Ljudevit Ivekovic, Dr. Ivan Pernar - lawyer (30 months), Andrija Raspor, Karlo Sejkot, Lenka Stimac (woman),

Sept. 20 The following were sentenced: Stjepan Sever (peasant from Podravina) to 12 years. Ivan Kraljic (people's representative from Podravina till Jan. 6, 1929) to 8 years. Stjepan Prvcic (peasant from Podravina) to 8 years. Blaz Badalec (peasant from Podravina) to 6 years. Ivan Glavak (peasant from Podravina) to 3 years. Marija Glavak (peasant woman from Podravina) to 3 years. Ivan Ostriz to (peasant from Podravina) 2 years. Ivan Horvatinovic (peasant from Podravina) to 2 years. Marija Badalec (peasant from Podravina) to 1 year.

Oct. 9 King Aleksandar assassinated in Marseilles.

1935

From January 1935 to January 1936, 96 people were killed by gendarme forces.

Members of the "Catholic action" maltreated throughout Croatia just because they belonged to a Catholic organization.

A number of the members of the Catholic organization "Zrinski" in Djurdjevac were arrested. They were severely beaten in Pitomaca, on the way to prison, and again while investigated in jail. Teenage boys in the village of Djurdjevac had their hands beaten by gendarmes so hard that they were disabled for a lengthy period.

A number of villagers were hid in the nearby woods out of fear of the gendarmes and they were afraid to come back home. The whole village lived in fear.

A number of peasants beaten up by gendarmes in Mala Erpenja, the region of Krapinske Toplice. Among them were: Stjepan August, Florijan Belin (60 years old), Makso Golubic, Rudolf Golubic, Slavko Golubic, Juraj Juranic, Makso Juranic, Mirko Juranic, Andro Kordej,Franjo Kos (50 years old), Janko Mihel (20 years old), Josip Mihel (70 years old), Vilim Mihel (40 years old), Franjo Rusek (35 years old),Otokar Sostaric, Viktor Sostaric (merchant), Vjekoslav Stengl (25 years old), Makso Svecnjak, and Stjepan Svecnjak.

A "multitude of peasants" beaten up by gendarmes in Zabok. Among them: ? Sepec (beaten by five gendarmes while plowing his land), Marko Bivol, and Ivan Borovcak.

Peaceful peasants terrorized by gendarmes in Vojni Kriz near Cazma. Among the most severely beaten were: Franjo Ciglencki, Franjo Krivacic, and Danijel Magdic.

14 peasants beaten up by gendarmes in Sesvete near Ludbreg.

In Bizovac (Valpovo) gendarme supervisor Vasilije Dinic, arbitrarily arrested Stjepan Kis and beat him severely while in jail. The same officer beat Andrija Perosevic, who ended up in the hospital because of the severe beating.

In Adolfovac near Osijek workers, Luka Vukovic, Antun Gurdel, and Milan Grgic, were arrested, and beaten to unconsciousness. Vukovic's teeth knocked out; had to be taken to Osijek hospital; Grgic's breast bone was broken. From the local gendarme station they were dragged to Osijek prison and beaten severely.

Janko Simatic (peasant from Adolfovac) severely beaten by gendarmes.

Ivan Krelo (peasant from Kravice near Osijek) on the way home from work arrested, taken to gendarme station, and severely beaten. As a consequence he lost hearing on one ear.

Ilija Kereman and Josip Gorzan (peasants from Laslovo) severely beaten by gendarmes.

20 peasants beaten up by gendarmes in Korodje near Osijek. The most severely beaten were: Tobi Arpadz, Marko Mihalj, Mihalj Miskolic, Danijel Pozar, Feri Sabo, and Janos Sosaj.

200 people from Zitnik and Klanac/Lika walked to Gospic to protest the stealing of voting registration lists. They were ambushed by gendarmes using military rifles. Bozo Markovic (76 years old) was first seriously wounded and then a gendarme used a bayonet to finish him off. Martin Starcevic (38 years) was also killed; first shot and then his skull was smashed by a gendarme. Joso Lulic (58 years) was seriously wounded. Stipe Markovic (36 years) was hit by four shots in the back. Also were wounded: Nikola Milinkovic ( 28 years), Ivan Snjaric (40 years), Ivan Zupan (30 years), and 28 other people.

Gendarmes attacked peasants in the village of Dobranje near Metkovic, maltreated them and killed Ivan Devija.

Group of peasants returning from Starigrad (island of Hvar) to the village of Vrbanj were attacked by gendarmes and severely beaten. A day after, gendarmes beat up 39 villagers.

Rev. Blaz Tomljenovic (pastor in Smiljan/Lika) sentenced to pay 500 dinars because of a Sunday sermon.

Rev. Ivan Ilijic (pastor in Dubasnica/Krk) sentenced to pay 500 dinars for having another well known priest from nearby Krk, Rev. Milan Defar, help him during the Easter holidays. He is charged with sheltering an "unknown person"!

Rev. Milan Defar (priest from Krk) arrested on false charges and later banned from teaching catechism in the local highs chool.

Rev. Janko Medved (priest in Novalja/Pag) chained and taken by boat to the town of Rob, publically humiliated, and sentenced to 8 days jail term.

Rev. Ivan Condic (pastor in Rascani/ Imotski) arrested while in Sinj, led to Zagvozd. While there, the local gendarme commander, Ilija Gajic, cursed his "Catholic God," called him swine, criminal, and other names, and knocked him to the floor and maltreated him physically over two hours. A day after, Condic was sentenced to 12 days of jail and to pay a 1000 dinars fine.

? Pavlinovic (a merchant from Imotski region) arrested together with Rev. Ivan Condic, maltreated by gendarme commander in Zagvozd and sentenced to 12 days of jail and a 1000 dinars fine.

Gendarmes killed "several people" and injured many others in Primosten near Sibenik.

Feb. 19-20 Gendarmes killed 15 and injureed many Croatian peasants in Sibinj and Slavonski Brod.

May 4 Msgr. Ivan Mrakovcic, chancellor of the Krk diocese, arrested. In order to humiliate him, he is led through town by a group of gendarmes as the worset criminal.

May 5 General elections held.

In the village of Vid, near Metkovic, gendarmes maltreated peasants including children on election day, and positioned two machine guns in the village threatening the population.

On election day, Rev. Mate Rahelic, pastor in Hreljina, arrested at 11 P.M., taken to Susak/Rijeka jail, and held without being charged.

May 11 Franjo Sostaric (peasant from Selnice/Zlatar) shot and killed by gendarmes.

May 19 Gendarmes opened fire on a crowd of local peasants in Kravarsko near Zagreb after a Church celebration. As a result: Djuro Virek and Antonija Jambris (woman) were killed, and Franjo Kanceljak, Stjepan Cekovic, and Franjo Virek (Djuro's son) were seriously wounded. A number of other peasants were injured.

June 23 Chetniks attack Croatian guests in a well-known restaurant in Zagreb.

Aug. 23 After 11 months of imprisonment and torture, trieal of 37 Croats started in Sarajevo. They were: Antun Alaupovic, Ivan Brcic, Jelisaveta Car (woman), Josip Car, Mate Coric, Stefica Erbic (woman), Tugomir Gelic (Franciscan priest), Mijo Grgic, Antun Hladnik, Leopoldina Hladnik (woman), Marija Hladnik (woman), Tereza Hladnik (woman), Nikola Jarak, Dragutin Juric, Vjekoslav Juric, Vjekoslava Juric (woman), Ante Kacic, Franjo Kolumbic, Augustina Korac (woman), Filip Korac, Miron Kozinovic (Franciscan priest), Blaz Lorkovic,Ela Lorkovic (woman), Josip Milinkovic, Ana Pecek (woman), Emil Pecek, Franjo Pecek, Rafo Prusina (Franciscan priest), Petar Puljic, Ana Sef (woman), Donko Surjan, Petar Surjan, Augustin Tomic (Franciscan priest), Ivanka Trampus (woman), Augustina Ungerman (woman), Franjo Ungerman, and Jozefina Ungerman (woman). Sentences were given on September 17, 1995.

Dec. 11 A few gendarmes were forcfully entering many houses in the village of Djurdjanci/Djakovo and empting them of all posseasions. The official excuse was tax collection. After the peasnts' resitence to this terror, over 20 more policmen arived at 2:00 A.M. next morning and a large number of peasnats were taken to the local gendarme station. Half-naked, cold, and hungry they were severly beaten and maltreated for a few days. Among other tortures, they were forced to hit each other. Even those who came to village as visitors were beaten and arrested. Men from the village that were not arrested were in hiding in the woods for days. The real cause of the terror: some of the villagers participated in the celebration of the 100th anniversary of the Croatian anthem in Djakovo on December 8, 1935.

The leading gendarme torturer was Avdo Kujundzic (stationed in Djakovo) and the local acuser was an ill-reputed Chetnik Andrija Separac.

Among the arrested and/or tortured were: Adam Begovic, Anka Begovic (maltreated) (woman), Antun Begovic, Bozo Bosnjakoic, Ana Bosnjakovic (woman on the run), Ilija Bosnjakovic (10 year olf boy), Ivan Bosnjakovic, Marko Carevic, Andrija Djakovic, Pavao Kovacevic,Andro Kusic, Nikola Lett (merchant), Mijo Lett (merchant), Pero Lovrenovic, Ivo Majanovic (the village elder), Ivo Majanovic, Damjan Marinovic, Kuzman Marinovic, Franjo Merc, Fabo Nikolic, Ivan Perkovic, Martin Prokopec (visiting the village), Pero Salic, Mate Saric, Pavo Saric, Pero Saric, Martin Sners (old man), Manda Spanjovic (attempt of rape) (woman), Marko Stojkovic (53 year old; visiting the village), Stipe Trepsic, and Marko Vrtaric.

ADDITIONAL PARTIAL LIST OF CROATS WHO WERE IMPRISONED DURING MONARCHIST YUGOSLAVIA.

Asancaic, Nikola (merchant from Gospic) Bacic, ? (shoemaker from Senj) Bakovic, Pero (student in Zagreb) Balan, Sime (student from Jablanac) Baradic, Jako (peasant from Banjevci/Benkovca) Bedekovic, Vjekoslav (merchant's helper in Gospic) Begovic, Vaso (restaurant owner in Begovici) Bernobic, Pavle (lawyer in Virovitica) Bicanic, Rudolf (lawyer in Zagreb) Biljan, Marijan (sailor from Kuklica/Preko) Biljan, Tomo (type-setter in Kosinj) Bizik, Mijo (merchant's helper in Koprivnica) Bosnjakovic, Marija (peasant from Andijevci) (woman) Bozjak, Mate (peasant from Kraljev Vir) Bradic, Ante (peasant from Starigrad) Brcko, Franjo (peasant from Kraljev Vir) Brkljacic, Zivo (peasant from Kaniza) Budak, Ante (student in Zagreb) Budrovac, Antun (tailor in Budrovici) Bulat, Krizan (peasant from Banjevci/Benkovac) Busljeta, Nikola (worker from Starigrad) Buterin, Sime (peasant from Starigrad) Buterin, Vicko (restaurant owner from Starigrad) Butorac, Ivan (forest guard from Pazariste Donje) Butorac, Zorka (secretary from Senj) (woman) Cacic, Ivan (peasant from Klanc) Cacic, Josip (state employee from Gospic) Cacic, Martin (peasant from Pazariste Donje) Cacic, Nikola (peasant from Pazariste Donje) Cacic, Nikola Jr. (peasant from Pazariste Donje) Cacic, Vice (shoemaker from Buzina) Carevic, Franjo (office clerk from Djakovo) Cerovski, Bozo (office clerk from Zagreb) Cilovic, Djuka (electritian from Zagreb) Cudina, Marko (peasant from Pridraga) Dasovic, Stipe Peasant from Lukovo Sugarje) Davidovski, Dragan (from Zagreb) Devcic, Dragica (peasant from Lukovo Sugarje) (woman) Devcic, Ivan 1 (peasant from Lukovo Sugarje) Devcic, Ivan 2 (peasant from Lukovo Sugarje) Devcic, Ivan (called Jovo) (peasant from Likovo Sugarje) Devcic, Manda (peasant from Lukovo Sugarje) (woman) Devcic, Marko (peasant from Lukovo Sugarje) Devcic, Martin (peasant from Lukovo Sugarje) Devcic, Nikola ((peasant from Lukovo Sugarje) Devcic, Nikolica (peasant from Lukovo Sugarje) Devcic, Pavao I. (peasant from Lukovo Sugarje) Devcic, Pavao S. (peasant from Lukovo Sugarje) Devcic, Zorka (peasant from Lukovo Sugarje) (woman) Dian, Drago (peasant from Sukosani) Dobrila, Ante (post-office clerk from Senj) Dosen, Ante (peasant from Rizvanusa) Dosen, Ivica (peasant from Lukovo Sugarje) Dosen, Jadre (restaurant owner from Gosipic) Dosen, Lovro (peasant from Lukovo Sugarje) Dosen, Martin (peasant from Licki Osik) Dosen, Martin M. (peasant from Lukovo Sugarje) Dosen, Milka (peasant from Rizvanusa) (woman) Dosen, Misko (peasant from Rizvanusa) Dosen, Stipo (peasant from Rizvanusa) Drazic, Ante (peasant from Sukosani) Ersetic, Feliks (merchant's helper from Vukovar) Faber, Stjepan (locksmith from Zagreb) Fehervari, Stjepan (bookstore clerk in Osijek) Ficke, Nijo (peasant from Imrovac) Filipovic, Ivan (tailor from Vinkovci) Fiocic, Franjo (worker from Gosipic) Francetic, N. (peasant from Licki Novi) Frkovic, Juraj (merchants helper from Gospic) Frkovic, Marko (harness-maker) Frkovic, Martin (harness-maker from Benkovo) Frkovic, Pero (peasant from Gospic) Frlen, Franjo (worker from Susak/Rijeka) Frlen, Senta (from Susak/Rijeka) (woman)? Furjan, Djuro (locksmith from Martinec/Cazma) Gajer, Mile (peasant from Udbine) Galovic, Josip (peasant from Desinec) Galovic, Mate (peasant from Perusic) Gasparovic, Josip (from Brod na Kupi) Gasparovic, Stjepan (mason's helper from Crikvenica) Glavak, Ivo (peasant from Fercec) Glojnaric, Mirko (newsman??) Vidi Gmaz, Milan (peasant from Oroslavlje) Goric, Jure (peasant from Novigrad) Gradicek, Matija (merchant from Oroslavlje) Gradicek, Mijo (peasant from Oroslavlje) Gross, Aleksandar (cabinet-maker'shelper from Djakovo) Gruhek, Gabrijel (clerk from Zagreb) Grzan, Ivan (cabinet-maker from Pazariste Donje) Gutic, dr. Viktor (lawyer from Banja Luka) Gvozdic, Ivan (cabinet-maker from Soljani) Harapinac, Miso (peasant from Spisic/Bukovica) Hecimovic, Luka (lawyer from Perusic) Herceg, Antun (newsman from Zagreb) Horvat, Franjo (harness-maker from Zagreb) Horvat, Jurica (printer from Zagreb) Horvat, Vlado (printer from Zagreb) Horvatic, Vid (clerk from Zagreb) Hronic, Franjo (peasant from Trnik) Hronic, Mijo (peasant from Trnik) Hronic, Stjepan (peasant from Trnik) Ivanovic, Josip (peasant from Markovci) Jandric, Imbre (peasant from Trnik) Japundzic, Josip (clerk from Gospic) Jedvaj, Stjepan (restaurant owner from Bistra) Jelic, Ivan (clerk from Brezine) Jelic, Pasko (merchant's helper from Knin) Jelkovic, Mijo (peasant from Recica) Juretic, Filip (peasant from Sibinj) Jurisic, Ivan (Peasant from Perusic) Jurisic, Ivan 2(Peasant from Perusic) Jut, Vjekoslav (shoemaker from Perusic) Kapovic, Mira (from Visi?) (woman) Karcic, dr. ? (lawyer from Ruma) Karlic, Stipe (peasant from Slatnik) Kartela, Andrija (peasant from Puticani) Katalinic, Vlado (student from Senj) Kirhmajer, Mile (barrel-maker from Djakovo) Klanac, Juko (peasant from Posedarje) Klemen, dr. Zeljko (lawyer from Osijek) Knez, Ferdo (clerk from Srijemska Mitrovica) Kolacevic, Ivan (bookshop owner from Gospic) Kozarcanin, Ivo (writer and poet from Zagreb) Kraljevic, Andrija (peasant from Banjevci/Benkovac) Kraljic, Ante (restaurant owner from Zagreb) Krekovic, Dane (peasant from Perusic) Kruhak, Mirko (shoemaker from Konjscina) Kugler, Bojan (clerk from Zagreb) Lamesic, dr. Marko (lawyer from Ruma) Lanec, Juliusk (locksmith's helper from Senj) Lenac, Franjo (house-painter from Senj) Levacic, Mijo (peasant from Merhatovec) Levaic, Tomo (merchant from Sibenik) Ljevakovic, Ivan (policman from Lipik) Ljevakovic, Ivan (peasant from Lipik) Lucic, Kazimir (merchant from Slavonski Brod) Magus, Mato (restaurant owner from Senj) Malbasa, Stjepan (clerk from Dugopolje) Mandusic, Sime (worker from Rupe) Marinac, Antun (cabinet-maker from Pazariste Donje) Marinkovic, Marko (peasant from Banjevci/ Benkovac) Markovic, Ivan (peasant from Perusic) Markulin, Mara (peasant from Odra) (woman) Markulin, Petar (peasant from Odra) Markulin, Stjepan Jr. (Peasant from Odra) Martinovic, Josip (sailor from Kuklica) Martinovic, Tomo (peasant from Kuklica) Matijas, Josip (clerk from Trogir) Matonicki, Djuro (student from Virje) Menjaka, Ivan (peasant from Kosut) Micek, Ivan (worker from Batin) Micurin, Tomo (peasant from Trnik) Mihovilic, Ivan (truck-driver from Senj) Mikic, Jure (mechanic from Djakovo) Mikic, Simun (merchant from Djakovo) Miklauzic, Josip (worker from Zagreb) Miler, Adolf (peasant from Sirac/Daruvar) Milinkovic, Vinko (merchant from Gospic) Milkovic, Mijo (shoemaker from Drenovci Brodski) Mirkovic, N. (Student from Gospic) Miskulin, Mate (merchant from Gospic) Mokrovic, Franjo (from Zagreb) Muhar, Ivo (peasant from Klanac) Muhar, N. (Peasant from Pazariste Donje) Murkovic, Ivan (peasant from Gospic) Nadinic, Fudrija (peasant from Sukoisani) Nemec, Blaz (mason from Merhatovec) Nemerschmidt, Albin (upholster from Gospic) Niksic, Tomo (merchants helper from Gospic) Novak, Vinko (peasant from Novacka) Nozaric, Petar (shoemaker from Breznik) Oljica, Josip (peasant from Sukosani) Ozanic, Marko (waiter from Vrgin Most) Papac, Stjepan (printer from Krasno) Papista, Ivan (tailor from Zabok) Paricic, Roko (peasant from Lukovo Sugarje) Pasaric, Pero (railroad clerk from Zagreb) Pavici, Roko (peasant from Lukovo Sugarje) Pavicic, Ivica (peasant from Lukovo Sugarje) Pavicic, Josip (peasant from Lukovo Sugarje) Pavicic, Lovro (peasant from Lukovo Sugarje) Pavicic, Marijan (sailor from Poljica) Pavicic, Martin (peasant from Lukovo Sugarje) Pavicic, Pavao (peasant from Lukovo Sugarje) Pavicic, Pavlica (peasant from Lukovo Sugarje) Pavicic, Vid (peasant from Lukovo Sugarje) Pavlic, Josip (peasant from Djelkovac) Perkovic, Pero (peasant from Brinje) Peter, Stjepan (carpenter from Djelkovac) Petrovic, Stjepan (merchant's helper from Hlebine) Pill, Tomo (peasant from Ruma) Plese, Pavao (policeman from Ramljani) Pocrnic, Ivan (clerk from Perusic) Polegubic, Petar (peasant from Banjevci/ Benkovac) Polegubic, Tomo (peasant from Banjevci/ Benkovac) Poljak, Rok (peasant from Bistra) Prpic, Ivan (student from Senj) Prsa, Josip (post-office clerk from Oborovo Prvcic, Stjepan (peasant from Koprivnica) Pusic, Marija (house-maker from Zagreb) (woman) Radeljak, Stjepan (worker from Zagreb) Rajkovic, Nikola (clerk from Zagreb) Rancevic, N. (Court clerk from Senj) Reli, Franjo (barber from Osijek) Ribic, Ivan (sailor from Biograd) Rozman, Stjepan (peasant from Bistra) Rukavina, Juraj (retired officer from Perusic) Rupcic, Nikola (student from Licko Lesce) Ruskar, Ivan (merchant from Bernardovac) Rusko, Djuro (peasant from Gola) Sabic, Sime (mason from Sunja) Sabol, Stjepan (from Djelkovac) Saric, Karlo (peasant from Lukovo Sugarje) Saub, Ivan (merchant from Pakrac) Secke, Vlado (painter from Senj) Sepek, Franjo (butcher from Zagreb) Serzija, Marija (peasant from Banjevci/Benkovac) (woman) Sigecen, Misko (peasant from Martinec/Czama) Sijevic, Luka (peasant from Djakovo) Sikic, Mile Student from Jablanac) Siroki, Ivan (peasant from Novacka) Sjak, Rudolf (peasant from Grbasevac) Sjaus, Ivo (peasant from Tribalj) Sjaus, Mile (peasant from Tribalj) Skolic, Djuro (tailor from Zagreb) Skrlin, Josip (peasant from Bistra) Smolcic, Mato (peasant from Gospic) Smolic, Sime (peasant from Sukosani) Smolic, Slavo (peasant from Puticani) Sokac, Bartol (peasant from Stubica Donja) Sostaric, August (blacksmith from Zebovac) Spanic, Tom (peasant from Desinec) Spehanac, Ante (clerk from Karlovac) Starcevic, dr. Mile (professor from Zagreb) Starcevic, Ivan (peasant from Klanac) Starcevic, Josip (peasant from Pazariste Donje) Starcevic, M. (peasant from Klanac) Starcevic, Martin (peasant from Pazariste Donje) Starcevic, Mile (peasant from Pazariste Donje) Starcevic, N. (peasant from Pazariste Donje) Stilinovic, Milan (truck-driver from Kaniza) Stimac, Ivan (forest guardian from Perusic) Stimac, Lenka (peasant from Perusic) (woman) Stimac, Manda (peasant from Perusic) (woman) Strtan, Ivan (butcher from Zagreb) Subotinec, Babro (peasant from Novacka) Sucek, Djuro (peasant from Kraljev Vrh) Sucev, Valent (peasant from Kraljev Vrh) Sudar, Ljerko (peasant from Brusani) Suhan, Jakov (peasant from Knigora) Suletic, Grga (worker from Dubrovnik) Sultaj, Anka (secretary from Djakovo) (woman) Super, Dujo (peasant from Brusani) Svast, ? (clerk from Senj) Tomasic, Ivan (peasant from Djelkovac) Tomasic, Stjepan (peasant from Djelkovac) Tomljenovic, I. (from Novoselo) Tomljenovic, Ivan (student from Gospic) Tomljenovic, Stjepan (worker from Cavle) Tonkovic, Stjepan (peasant from Nebojane) Toret, Josip (merchant from Sisak) Troskat, Mate (peasant from Banjevci/Benkovac) Turk, Stjepan (peasant from Oroslavlje) Ujhari, Stjepan (worker from Sombor) Valic, Adam (merchant's helpeer from Jelenje) Varga, Janko (peasant from Otocka) Vedric, Stjepan (peasant from Novacka) Vezmanovic, Stjepan (forest-guard from Busevac) Vidak, Sarlota (from Zagreb) Vlahovic, D. (proprietor from Senj) Vukic, Kuzman (sailor from Triblja) Vuljak, Antun (peasant from Djelkovac) Vuljak, Stjepan (peasant from Djelkovac) Vutuc, Rudolf (carpenter from Koprivnica) Zajec, Drago (truck-driver from Zagreb) Zalec, Djuro (peasant from Mokrice) Zarek, Jandre (peasant from Perusic) Zarek, Josip (harness-maker from Perusic) Zarek, Mile (peasant from Perusic) Zeleznik, Ivka (tailor from Zagreb) (woman) Zelnik, Ignac (from Nasice) Zignic, Ivan (tailor from Zabok) Zniderec, Mijo (mason from Cakovec)

One of the most blatant terrorist acts of the Belgrade regime in Croatia took place in Senj on May 9, 1937. Gendarmes killed and wounded several young people just for displaying the Croatian flag and singing patriotic songs. The killed were: Katica Tonkovic (girl), Marko Smolcic, Franjo Jelaca, Nikola Bevandic, Tomo Niksic, and Petar Frkovic, and the wounded: Jakov Milkovic, Ante Dosen, Branko Milinkovic, Zlatko Vlahinic, Vladimir Nizija, and Mile Biljan. The above picture was taken during the funeral mass of the killed at St. John's Church in Gospic.

The picture on the right is a photocopy of the bill received by the son of Ivan Varga to pay 13.15 dinars for the five bullets by which his father was killed on January 11, 1934.

Source:
http://www.croatianstudies.org/index.php?action=page&id=50

---> A. Čuvalo: Persecution of Croats in the First Yugoslavia and its Political Consequences

2004-09-25T08:48:00.000-07:00

Croatian Studies

An Introductory Evaluation
Ante Cuvalo

Also see the Appendix to this article

Also see: Letters of Protest

We [the Serbs] are masters of your [Croat] lives and your possessions. You have nothing but two choices: either to stay in this country and be obedient, or to move out of our state. We want to dominate. We want to rule. We want to control your body, your soul, and your possessions, because we are the guarantors and the foundation of this great Homeland of ours .1

High Hopes and Big Disappointments

Regardless of the social, economic, and political predicaments to be faced by individuals and peoples in Europe, the end of the First World War was greeted enthusiastically. It was seen as the beginning of a new and better future for the world. Peoples who lived under the oppressive and/or foreign rule of the collapsing empires were especially exhilarated: they thought that the bells of freedom were real. Their hopes and expectations were heightened by declarations such as those of the President of the United States, Woodrow Wilson, that the war was fought to make the world "safe for democracy" and by promises that national self-determination would be one of the guiding principles of peacemaking. Furthermore, important social and political changes were taking place. Revolutions were in the making; kaisers and tzars were gone; the newborn countries were promulgating democratic or what looked like democratic constitutions; peasants were becoming an organized political force; in older democracies, women were gaining the right to vote; and new laws promoting higher social justice, including the eight-hour workday, were being passed. These and similar positive changes were signs of a hopeful future.

The Croatian people, despite all the post-war economic hardships, also were caught up in the wave of enthusiasm. Woodrow Wilson's portrait hung on the walls of numerous homes in Croatia. He was the man of their hopes. They believed that on the ruins of the Habsburg Monarchy they, along with other nations, finally would be able to achieve their dream of national and personal freedom. Even the small minority of Croatian politicians who rushed to unite Croatia with Serbia and Montenegro thought that their decisions would secure freedom and democracy not only for the Croats but for all in the newly formed country. Unfortunately, Croats soon realized that the post-war exhilaration was baseless. The reality was cruel and bloody.

Soon after the war, grave disappointments began to be felt in Croatia and the rest of Europe. The war years had hatched two opposing totalitarian ideologies that threatened the entire continent. Many of those who doubted the virtues of liberal democracy looked to the extreme Left or Right for answers. The result was that out of twenty-seven countries in Europe that professed democracy during the immediate post-war era only ten were able to preserve even a modicum of democracy by the end of the 1930s. It became obvious that the Great War and the post-war peace treaties did not lay the foundation for a better future but for another cataclysmic cycle.

The Croatian people did not have to wait very long for the new state to show its true face. Persecutions began even before the official unification of the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes (known as Yugoslavia after 1929) took place on December 1, 1918. In some official Serbian documents, Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, and other former Habsburg regions united with Serbia were declared as "occupied lands" and the civilian population in these regions was subjected to Serbian military laws .2 Instead of a partnership an occupation began!

The persecution of the Croats in the period between the two World Wars has not been well- known or adequately researched. It was one of the taboo subjects in both monarchist and socialist Yugoslavia. Judicial, police, military, and other records in the country are still waiting for serious research on this important subject. This introductory survey and the partial list of persecutions that follow are based mainly on secondary sources and are intended to give the reader at least a taste of the bitter Croatian experience in monarchist Yugoslavia. However, for lack of available sources to the author, the survey is limited to persecutions from 1918 to 1936 only. We thought that a list and a short description of the main semi-official organizations involved in terrorizing all those who were considered enemies of the state would also be helpful; and, at the end, several political consequences of the persecutions will be mentioned.

Self-imposed Guardians of the State

The use of terror in monarchist Yugoslavia was applied against all those who were seen as enemies not only of the state but of the Serbian centralized and unitary regime. The real object of oppression, however, was not some aberrant individuals but an entire group, a political party, a whole people. In the old Byzantine tradition, the guardians of the state saw politics only as extremes: if one is not with us he must be against us. Politics of negotiations and compromises were not an option. For them that was seen as a defeat. Accordingly, there was no choice but to crush mercilessly all the "dark forces" in the country. Croats as a people were seen as the most dangerous state enemy, because they were not willing to give up their national identity and opposed the militant and Serbian-controlled state. It was necessary, therefore, to force the Croats into submission, to break their national will, to humiliate them, to prevent them from forming a unified, strong national political front, and to deprive their national struggle of sympathy support and legitimacy in the world.

The first anti-Croat terrorist acts were committed even before the official unification of the state took place. From October 29, when the Croatian Sabor (Parliament) severed Croatia's ties with the Habsburg Monarchy till December 1, 1918, when the common state was proclaimed, all leading Croatian political, cultural, and religious persons who were seen as political opponents to the union, were either arrested, physically threatened, and/or lost their jobs. The man who assumed all powers in Croatia was Svetozar Pribicevic, the leading Serb politician in the land, and under his command all those who opposed unification with Serbia had to be silenced or crushed.

Only five days after the unification, a peaceful march at Zagreb's main square was turned into a blood bath. Nine Croatian soldiers and five civilians were killed, and seventeen persons were wounded. A month later, the first post-war political trial in Zagreb was over and 23 Croats were sentenced from one and a half to ten years of prison. The harshest terror in the post-unification era, however, was exerted against the Croatian peasants, who made up the overwhelming majority of the people.

Towards the end and immediately after the war, the villages in Croatia, as in many other regions of Europe, were undergoing various political and social changes. The peasants had seen their sons sent off to the front from which many did not return. They were financially and physically exhaused by ever-increasing taxes and other war burdens, of war profiteering and the war itself. The Croatian peasants lost their traditional respect for state authority as well as monarchy. They became acutely aware of their precarious political, economic, social, and national position, and wanted change, some even a radical one.

In a number of places in Croatia the countryside was controlled by the "Green Cadres," the rebellious bands of soldiers who had deserted and who were joined by various other social elements. Most of these were sons of peasants; and, it is estimated that the rebels' numbers reached 200,000 at one point. The peasant population was, willingly or unwillingly, their main ally. This meant that many villages in Croatia were in near chaos toward the end of the war. Furthermore, the echoes of the revolutions in Russia and in neighboring Hungary were felt in Croatian villages too. Then, at the end of the war, they were pushed into a new state without being asked what they wanted. This new political arrangement did not ease the political, economic, and social tension in the villages. On the contrary, the new rulers and their harsh methods inflamed Croatian villages to the breaking point.

The peasants became well aware of political and social ideals, like personal and national freedoms, equality under the law, and social justice, but instead of getting closer to achieving such goals after 1918, they saw their situation in the new state getting worse. For example, Croatian peasants had to pay more kinds of taxes at higher rates than under the Habsburgs. Some taxes increased as much as eight hundred percent in comparison to the pre-1918 period. For example, the peasant had to pay tax on his home-made wine regardless if he sold it or had it only of his own use. The control over the tobacco production was so strict that persons had to pay fines, endure beatings, and even jail terms for smoking their own home- grown tobacco. Taxation easily turned into a national issue because a peasant in Croatia paid four times higher taxes than a peasant in Serbia. Even his vote was worth less than that of a citizen in Serbia. For example, the number of voters needed to elect a parliamentary representative were: Vojvodina 3,221; Montenegro 4,350; Serbia and Macedonia 5,657; Croatia and Slavonia 6,840; Bosnia and Herzegovina 7,478, and in Dalmatia (southern Croatia) 8,106 3 The peasant was especially offended by registration, stamping, and military mobilization of all large domestic animals (horses, mules, oxen). Most of the time, such animals and their owners were forced to participate in military maneuvers for long periods of time and quite often during planting or harvest seasons. These and similar pressures resulted in numerous peasant rebellions against the new regime in several parts of Croatia. Some independent peasant republics were proclaimed shortly after the new state was formed.

Among the most sensitive issues for the peasants in the immediate post-war era was the recruitment of their sons into military service. In many Croatian villages these efforts were marked by bloodshed. Everyone was weary and wary of war and militarism, especially the Croatian peasant who now had to serve a new state which behaved as a foreign power and oppressor from the outset. The problem of recruitment was also complicated by implementation of a Serbian law by which the village "zadrugas" (communes) and their leaders were responsible for bringing in the new recruits. But such village "zadrugas" did not exist in Croatia for very long. This resulted in military and gendarme expeditions into Croatian villages that apprehended, beat, and otherwise mistreated the recruits or, if they could not find them, their immediate family members, including mothers and sisters. Such raids would often result in killing, major destruction of property, and threats and insults of a national and religious nature. The relatives were kept in jail and most often maltreated till their sons or brothers surrendered to the military authorities.

Terror became the main means to pacify Croatia. In response, the peasants at first turned to rebellions and then accepted the political program of the brothers Antun and Stjepan Radic, who advocated a peaceful struggle for personal, national, and peasant rights. By embracing the program of the Croatian Republican Peasant Party, the peasantry became the backbone of the Croatian resistance during the 1920s. But peaceful politics did not bring desired results. On the contrary, the plan "to level off [Croatia] by the Serbian opanak [peasant footwear]" 4 continued. This culminated with the assassination of Stjepan Radic and his friends in Belgrade's Parliament in 1928 and the King's proclamation of a personal dictatorship a few months later. From that point on, more radical political forces in Croatia turned to violence as the only means of freeing themselves not only from the regime but from the Yugoslav state itself.

Statistical Indicators

Statistical data give a clear picture of the officially sanctioned bloodshed and oppression suffered by the Croats living in monarchist Yugoslavia. One source states that in the five years of 1929 to 1934, that is, from King Aleksandar's assumption of dictatorial powers until his assassination in Marseilles, the following court sentences were imposed on the Croats for political "crimes" 5:

19 were condemned to death by hanging

16 were killed while serving a prison term

30 death sentences were commuted to life imprisonment

85 condemned to death but fled the country

146 were condemned to 20 years of hard labor

484 received penalties from 10 to 20 years jail terms

962 were condemned from 5 to 10 years

2,035 condemned from 1 to 5 years

15,000 condemned from one month to one year of prison

The evidence presented in the Appendix to this article, although partial and collected from secondary sources, strongly indicates the nature of the Yugoslav state and its predisposition toward the Croatian people. It includes over 4,700 cases that can be summarized in the following way.

Killings and imprisonments

231 killed by gendarmes and/or military forces

102 wounded

3,715 arrested

49 killed while in jail

40 condemned to death - out of that 22 executed

16 sentenced to life imprisonment

250 tried for verbal insult of the King's name

14 condemned in absence

Beatings

642 beaten and maltreated - out of which 27 children 48 groups of people maltreated and beaten (individual names not known)

Other persecutions

493 lost jobs or forced to retire 26 newspapers and organizations banned

Women

7 killed

42 arrested

48 beaten and maltreated

Social and/or professional categories (if known)

1,445 peasants either jailed, tried and/or maltreated

472 students

450 workers

153 professionals

117 craftsmen and small business owners

68 state office holders

39 soldiers or policemen

According to regions (if known)

3,176 Northern Croatia

791 Dalmatia

355 Lika and the Littoral

203 Slavonija and Srijem

169 Bosnia and Herzegovina (the primary focus of this study was the Republic of Croatia and not Bosnia and Herzegovina)

Number of Cases according to years

1918 - 155

1919 - 36

1920 - 92

1921 - 209

1922 - 5

1923 - 60

1924 - 5

1925 - 705

1926 - 1

1927 - 8

1928 - 60

1929 - 110

1930 - 107

1931 - 205

1932 - 671

1933 - 1,529

1934 - 312

1935 - 466

The above numbers and categories clearly indicate that the harshness of the persecutions was directed against Croats, regardless of profession, age, gender, or place, and that the intensity of the persecutions reflects the political "moods" in the country at the time.

The Art of Torturing

Because the guardians of the state were guided by their hatred of real or imaginary enemies, they implemented a vast variety of tortures against their victims. The purposes of torture were not only to break the spirit of the victims and to send a message to others, but in many cases to show by sadistic measures, their absolute disdain for the "enemy."

A common practice for gendarmes was to burst into a village and for a minor incident, or even for no reason at all, beat anyone they encountered, destroy property, and jail people without any legal stipulations. In order to humiliate a Croatian peasant, gendarmes would often force him to genuflect three times in reverence for the Serbian traditional military cap (sajkaca) and impel him to acknowledge that "the Serb was his master and god." It was also a common practice for the police to beat or even execute their victims in broad daylight on a city street. Verbal insults, swearing vulgarities, and blaspheming everything holy to the Croatians were a common practice. The gun-butt was a favorite weapon in beating the common people. Its use was so prevalent that one of the Ministers of the Interior was nicknamed "Kundak" (gun-butt).

Those who ended up in prison endured all sorts of humiliations and tortures, from being cursed to being tortured to death. The following were some of the more common means of torturing political prisoners: merciless beatings over the entire body especially the kidney area; pounding the soles till they crack; knocking out teeth, breaking ribs, finger joints, and other bones of the body; jumping on the stomach and groin; sticking needles under nails; crushing testes; tying one's hands to hooks on the walls, so he could not sit down and then hanging bricks on the testes; sleep deprivation for a week at a time; and even placing live coals in the armpits and then tying the arms to the body until the coals cooled. Numerous prisoners were tortured to death and some were simply shot. The official explanations were that they committed suicide or were shot while trying to escape.

Those working in prisons were proud of their inventiveness in torturing inmates. One such ill-famed tormentor was Dragomir (Dragi) Jovanovic in Belgrade's prison. He even received a state patent for "inventing" new and more horrific means of torture. One of his "inventions" was driving wooden pegs soaked in gasoline under the nails of an inmate and then setting the pegs on fire. (This same Jovanovic was one of the chief officials and executioners in Belgrade during the Second World War.) The Belgrade jail, Glavnjaca, became a symbol of the Karadjordjevic regime and of the Yugoslav state. (An emigrant paper named Protiv Glavanjace/Against the Glavnjaca was published in Belgium at that time.) The persecutions and humiliations went so far that the families of the victims would receive a bill to pay for the bullets by which their close relatives were shot.

Besides using visible means of torture all oppressive regimes have other ways to persecute their opponents. These are more silent and perfidious. For example, losing or fear of losing one's job is often used as a major instrument of political punishment. The insecurity of one's own and/or his family's material existence can often be harder than physical punishment. This type of persecution was overwhelmingly used by the Yugoslav regime and it is hard to measure its impact on society, and on the Croatian national life in particular. State Watchdogs

The official guardians of the state and the main instruments of the Belgrade regime were the armed forces, gendarmes, police, and the state revenue police. Among them, the gendarmes were the main "sword of the regime." This semi-military force was formed in January of 1919 to impose "order" in the country. But "order" was never achieved and the number of gendarmes increased from 10,000 to 60,000 by the early 1930s. The gendarmes were also often augmented by military forces on raiding missions. Besides the above mentioned forces, there were 15.000 secret police agents, plus military intelligence, and king's "special agents."6 In addition to the above official guardians, there were a number of semi-official watchdogs of the state who were more than eager to help the regime to crash, what they labeled, the "anti-state elements," "dark forces," and "defeatists"! The following were the best known such organizations.

Unification or Death ( The Black Hand)

This terrorist organization was officially established in 1911, with help and under the protection of Serbian miliary forces, but its real beginnings go back to 1903. A group of officers belonging to this organization assassinated King Aleksandar Obrenovic of Serbia and his wife Dara and secured the royal throne to the Karadjordjevic dynasty in 1903. It also attempted to assassinate King Nikola of Montenegro and his family in 1907. The Black Hand became the "unseen government" of Serbia. The organization modeled itself after the Italian Mafia, and the use of terror was the primary means to achieve its goal of Greater Serbia which, according to the Constitution of the organization consisted (besides of the Kingdom of Serbia) of Bosnia-Herzegovina, Montenegro, Old Serbia and Macedonia, Croatia, Srijem, Vojvodina, and the Sea-coast. By 1914 the Black Hand had close to 150,000 members according to some estimates. Although the Black Hand was officially eliminated during World War I (1917), because King Aleksandar out of fear and/or personal revenge turned against the organization, its sympathizers, goals, and methods were still very much alive during the inter-war period.

The White Hand

It is believed that because Prince Aleksandar was prevented from taking full charge of the Black Hand, he founded his own conspiracy organization within the Serbian military forces and named it the White Hand. Lieutenant-Colonel Petar Zivkovic, who became Prime Minister and the symbol of royalist oppression in the early 1930s, became head of the new organization. The White Hand was an army within the army. Its purpose was to eliminate the Black Hand and to be a semi-official protector of the state and Karadjordjevic's regime. Most of the political, judicial, economic, as well as military state decisions were made by such shadow forces in the country, first the Black Hand and then the White Hand.

The Chetniks (cheta means a cohort or a group)

The first written rules of Chetnik guerrilla type warfare were a translation of a Polish manual published in Belgrade in 1848.7 But the real beginning of the present-day Chetnik movement dates from 1903, when Serbian military officers organized a special training "school" for volunteers for the purpose of undertaking terrorist actions in Macedonia. At the time, Macedonia was a part of the ailing Ottoman empire and the main target of Serbian expansionism. The Chetniks became a useful instrument in executing special assignments (ethnic cleansing) of all who were not either Serbs nor ready to become Serbs in the regions that Serbia wanted to acquire. The Chetnik played a similar role during the two Balkan Wars and World War I, when they "cleared the land" of Turks, Albanians, Bulgarians, Macedonians and, toward the end of World War I, of Muslims in Sandzak and Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Between the two world wars, although the Chetniks were split among themselves, they were united in guarding the state and in the struggle against "dark forces." The Union of Chetniks for Freedom and Dignity of the Homeland became close to the Serbian Democratic Party, which was seen by many as not tough enough on the enemies of the state. This resulted into a split in 1924, when the Union of Serbian Chetniks - For the King and the Homeland was founded. This group became the tool of the Serbian Radical Party; the leader of this Chetnik faction, Punisa Racic, assassinated two and wounded three members of the Croatian political leadership in Belgrade's Parliament in 1928. The regime rewarded the Chetniks by giving them arms and permission to use them, land grants, and money: in fact, they were not required to obey many state laws. Also in 1924, the Union of Serbian Chetniks - Petar Mrkonjic (Named after king Peter) was formed in Sarajevo. The last two Chetnik organizations were especially aggressive in establishing their chapters in Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina, with an openly expressed goal of establishing a Greater Serbia.

Organization of Yugoslav Nationalists (Organizacija Jugoslavenskih Nacionalista/ORJUNA)

The ORJUNA was formed in Split by the royal regional administrator in Croatia in 1921. Its roots are in an organization named Yugoslav Progressive Nationalist Youth (Jugoslavenska Napredna Nacionalisticka Omladina/JNNO). Its "heroic" baptism of fire came when its members burnt the first issue of a newly founded Croatian newspaper in Split, "Hrvatski List" (Croatian Gazette). The ORJUNA was under the patronage of the Serb Democratic Party in Croatia. It gathered militant youth who supported the unitary Yugoslav state. Its chapters were formed first in Dalmatia, then in other parts of former Habsburg regions. The real reason for its formation was to have a terrorist organization for "special assignments." As such ORJUNA became the leading instrument of terror against Croatian "separatists," "communists," "defeatists," and all other "dark elements" in the country.

In that spirit ORJUNA gave instructions to its members in Croatia (August 1921) that "in these days of our activities, develop as much energy and action as possible. Our organization has to be firm and disciplined and stand firmly and resolutely against the separatists. After the assassination of Minister Draskovic [July 21, 1921], there is a need to start a struggle till the elimination not only of the communists, but of all those who are sowing hate against unitarism, the state, and Yugoslavism." 8

ORJUNA terrorist activities were committed quite openly and often with great pride. Its leadership emphasized that "its terrorist actions contributed more than anything else to its own legitimization in the entire country....In practice, ORJUNA will propagate its goals by all possible means. It does not renounce the use of force. On the contrary it emphasizes the need for such type of actions."9

ORJUNA had special units known as Action Groups, which were organized in military fashion. According to one estimate, by 1925 the Action Groups had about 10.000 members.10 They had military style maneuvers on a regular basis, used military equipment, and usually the leading Chetnik figures were heading such Action Groups. Their holy principle "Victory or Death" was accompanied by yet another sacred declaration: "Whoever is not with us, is against us!" 11

Serbian National Youth (Srpska Nacionalna Omladina/SRNAO)

The SRNAO was formed in 1922 at Belgrade University as the antitheses of ORJUNA, which was seen as too much Yugoslav-oriented and as such was polluting the true Serbian spirit and watering down their political goals. The ideology and political program of the SRNAO was formulated in a slogan: "All the Serbs to Serbia, Serbia to all the Serbs!" The goals of its existence, therefore, were "guarding of the Homeland and the king, the spread of [Serbian] nationalism, and defense of Serbian accomplishments to the extermination of all anti-state and anti-national elements."12

The SRNAO was very close to the royal regime, to the Radical Party, to Punisa Racic's Chetniks and to the Union of Serbian Chetniks "Petar Mrkonjic" in Bosnia and Herzegovina. For example, on the occasion of the consecration of the SRNAO flag in Sarajevo, there was a personal delegate of the king, the government representatives, and a Serbian Church delegation. Leading men from all centers of power in Serbia were members of SRNAO. Nikola Pasic, the prime mover of Greater Serbian policies and the symbol of Serbian unitarism, was SRNAO's honorary president and its main financial supporter .13 The biggest obstacle to SRNAO's expansion in Croatia was the split between Svetozar Pribicevic, the main Serb politician in Croatia, and his former allies in Belgrade. Real confusion entered the SRNAO ranks, however, when Stjepan Radic, the leading Croat politician, made a deal with Pasic and entered the Belgrade government in 1925. The SRNAO did recover to some extent after the assassination of Radic(1928). After the King assumed all the power in the country and proclaimed Yugoslavism as the state national ideology (1929), SRNAO continued to work for its well defined goals but now under the Yugoslav name.

Some other semi-official terrorist organizations Organization of the Reserve Officers and War Veterans - It emphasized its "readiness and availability" to defend the state and vowed to fight "against all anti-state elements." 14

The Alliance of Volunteers - It constantly reminded the public that the state was not secure, its foundations were not firm, and that it was threatened by outside and inside enemies. It expressed readiness to continue the struggle for the security and stability of the state .15

Organized Youth - Its main mission was to destroy the Montenegrin Federalists and the followers of the exiled King Nikola of Montenegro.

People's Defense - Its main purpose was "to defend the newly established state by organized actions" against all external and internal "anti-state destructive activities and defeatist elements." 16

People's Guard - It was organized in April of 1920. Its members proved themselves to be worthy of the regime's support during the violent suppression of the railroad workers' and miners' strikes in 1920. The Guard members served as shock troopers against the workers and their families. After the proclamation of the ill-famed "Obznana" banning the Communist party (December 29, 1920), the Guard numbers increased rapidly. They put themselves in the "service of the state" in order to eliminate the "destructive elements which in these days [1920s] were ready to attack the state." 17 These formations were armed by the military authorities and were tools in the hands of the regime to do its "dirty work."

Patriotic Youth Front - This was a terrorist organization of the Bogoljub Jeftic's fascist party.

Young Yugoslavia - This was an ORJUNA militant organization for secondary school students who because of their age could not become full members of political parties.

All of the above groups followed the fascist model of organization, or at least they tried to. Fascists in Italy and Germany were hailed for their zeal and organizing capabilities. Such admiration is expressed, for example, by "Jugoslovenska straza" (Yugoslav Guard) (June 23, 1935): "...[While] the fascist Italy is able to mobilize so many fascist formations and while Hitler's Germany resounds by the marches of the German youth, the Yugoslav youth can and must steel its soul and its muscles by joining the Chetnik organizations, where it will prepare itself for tomorrow's obligations that it must accept."

But these groups admired not only the fascist organizational model, they admired also Hitler for his anti-Semitism. The paper "Jugoslovenska straza" (Yugoslav Guard) clearly expresses such feelings when on October 6, 1935 wrote: "Hitler was right when he went so far as to banish all of those who had even the smallest amount of Hebrew blood in their veins. Hitler was right when he pushed out such a vile sect from Germany."

Propaganda

The Yugoslav regime and its official and unofficial guardians always looked at their opponents as mortal enemies that had to be no less than totally obliterated. Not only did they themselves believe this, they were also very active in promoting public acceptance of this malevolent belief and the means of implementing it. It is sufficient to quote just a few examples of Serbian national propaganda that express this fanatical hatred.

After a Communist sympathizer assassinated interior Minister Milorad Draskovic on July 21, 1921 (believed to be a setup by the regime), use of terror was legitimized by the Belgrade Parliament a few days later. A new wave of persecutions began. The Serb paper "Straza" (The Guard) (July 23, 1921) in the Croatian city of Osijek exhorted its readers: "Let us learn from the ill-reputed Horthy! [Miklos Horthy, the last commander of the Habsburg navy and the man who crushed in blood the Communist regime in post-World War I Hungary.] Under the knife all those who think Bolshevik thoughts! Under the knife even women and children so that even their names do not remain! The final encounter with the anti-state elements must start right now. Serb villages and all who are nationally aware must be constantly ready. In order to stop the Bolsheviks, we must organize National Guards everywhere. An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth. We all must get ready in order to settle the score with them [Bolsheviks] once and for all. Anyone who is not with us, is their ally, and he should be dealt with accordingly. Let us sharpen our knives, load our guns, the enemy has declared war against us. Either we or they [must perish]."

This total struggle not only was meant to be waged against the Communists but also against all who were perceived as enemies. The paper "Pobeda" (Victory), the voice of ORJUNA urged on August 4, 1921 that "a struggle must be undertaken till the total elimination not only of the Communists, but also of all those who are sowing hatred against unitarism, the state, and Yugoslavism." An ORJUNA leader in Vojvodina was even more explicit: "Communists, those who advocate the republic, and the Habsburg black sympathizers [Croatians], have found themselves at the same camp. Those heterogenous elements are united by the abominable hatred of our state" and therefore have to be eliminated.18 On December 14, 1924, the newspaper "Srbadija" expressed the deeply held, uncompromising principle of either we or they: "If we [Serbs] want to preserve ourselves we must struggle using all available means in order to crash and destroy every opponent because the Croat Bolsheviks, Magyars, Germans, and Turks will destroy us if we re not quicker than they. Forget the stupidity that we are one people with three names. Scorn the 'brothers' who are after our existence and our head. Deal with them quickly and decisively."

Stjepan Radic, the leading Croat politician at the time, was a constant target of Serbian nationalist forces. A day after he was arrested in Zagreb and a month before national elections, the SRNAO voice in Novi Sad, "Srbadija"(January 7, 1925) stated: "The gallows must crackle under the weight of the infamy of Stjepan Radic. Mehmed Spaho [leading Bosnian Muslim politician] must be forced to feel the pains of a man impaled alive on the stake... The moment has to be utilized to finish up all important chores before the elections, so that afterwards it can be crystal clear who we are, what we are, what is our name, and who is the master in this Serbia of ours." According to the Serbian nationalists "one can only master over people like Croats, but never cooperate and work with them in a common effort." 19

Political consequences

Persecutions of Croats in the newly formed South Slavic state had the opposite effect from what the guardians of the state and of the regime intended. Instead of preserving the state, it undermined its very existence. The fact is that most of the Croats could not identify with the Yugoslav state from its beginning because the state itself and the Serbian centralist regime was imposed upon them. The persecutions that followed simply alienated them even further from the Serbs and the state. Those Croats (and even some Serbs from Croatia) who once worked for the unification of the South Slavs became quicky disillusioned with the state and joined the anti-centralists and even anti-Yugoslav elements. Influential individuals outside the country who promoted unification of the South Slavs before and during the First World War and used to raise their voices against mistreatment of the Serbs and others in the Habsburg empire suddenly fell silent. Instead of condemning the use of terror and pressuring the regime to reform the country, they often blamed the victims. As a result, Croats increasingly felt more isolated in their desperate need for human and national rights.

The persecutions also helped to politicize and homogenize the Croatian nation, especially the rural population. Terror became a catalyst in crystalizing Croatian goals for nationhood. If there was confusion toward the end of World War I about which road to take, it became clear that Yugoslavia was not the answer. Elections clearly indicated that the Croats wanted a federalist republic as a minimum and an independent state of their own as maximum. As the terror against Croats increased, so did their demands escalate along with increasingly radical means to achieve them.

Another important consequence of the terror was a break with Croatian political traditions and pluralism. The old institutions of Sabor (parliament) and Ban (viceroy) were abolished. The traditions of personal liberties, rule of law, and tolerance of religious and ethnic differences were greatly undermined. Reserves of national energy were used up in inevitably resisting the attempts at Serbianization. According to Serb expansionists, their need to crush any move toward Croatian national identity was necessary because Croats did not have a history or culture of their own, besides being of a servile nature meant to be obedient to others.

Croatians are usually depicted as the destroyers of both Yugoslavias. As a result, historians who would like to believe that Yugoslavia was a natural and positive historical development and the Serbs its true makers and defenders, ignore the persecutions of Croats and others,20 which in reality sealed the fate of the country from its very beginning. It is Serbian centralism, messianism, expansionism, and terrorism that eliminated even the possibility of a successful unification of the South Slavs.

The Yugoslav experiment tragically interrupted the historical continuity of the Croatian people. Experiences in that state had major negative effects on Croat political, economic, social, and cultural developments. The 1918-1990 period was another long and often bloody intermission in the centuries-long history of Croatia. However, the gap is bridged now, and the future of the Croats is in their own hands. It is up to them not to dwell in the past but to live up to the challenges of the present and the future.

NOTES

1 Srbadija. The official organ of the Novi Sad Regional Committee of the SRNAO. February 7, 1925.

2 Narodne Novine. April 28, 1919. See also Rudolf Horvat, Hrvatska na mucilistu. Zagreb: Kulturno-Historijsko Drustvo "Hrvatski Rodoljub," 1942, 81.

3 Vladimir Radic, Zlocin od 20. Lipnja i Medjunarodna Stampa. Paris: n.p., 1931, 22.

4 Dragoljub Jovanovic, Ljudi. Ljudi... Medaljoni 46 umrlih savremenika. Belgrade: D. Jovanovic, 1975, 65.

5 John I. Pintar, Four Years in Tito's Hell. Buenos Aires: H.P.K.: 1954, 17.

6 Struggle. Translated by Louis Adamic with a Preface by the Translator. Los Angeles: Arthur Whipple, 1934,7.

7 Pravilo o cetnickoj vojni. Protolmacio iz' pol'skoj sa n'kim prom'nama, izmetcima i dodasima Matija Ban. Belgrade, 1848.

8 Pobeda. August 4, 1921.

9 Vidovdan. May 30, 1925.

10 Politika. June 3, 1925.

11 Dobroslav Jevdjevic, Izabrani clanci. Novi Sad: Jovanovic & Bogdanov, 1925, 5.

12 Srpska rijec. December 13, 1924.

13 See Nusret Sehic, Cetnistvo u Bosni i Hercegovini (1918-1941). Sarajevo: ANUBiH, 1971, 68.

14 Ratnicki glasnik. 1922, 69. As in Berislav Gligorijevic, "Organizacija jugoslovenskih nacionalista (Orjuna)." Istorija XX veka. Vol. 5. Belgrade: Institute drustvenih nauka, 1963, 318.

15 Jugoslavija (Almanac of the Veterans' Alliance). 1922, 153.

16 Narodna obrana. 1926, 10; Gligorijevic, Orjuna, 318.

17 T. Kazlerovic, Obznana. Beograd, 1952, 13; Statist. Beleske Ust. Skupstine, 1920-1921, I, 20; Gligorijevic, Orjuna, 320.

18 Jevdjevic, Izabrani clanci, 42.

19 Balkan. March 28, 1922.

20 See, for example, Alex N. Dragnich, The First Yugoslavia, Search for a Viable Political System. Stanford: Hoover Institution Press, 1983.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Banac, Ivo. "'Emperor Karl has become a Comitadji': The Croatian Disturbances of Autumn 1918." Slavic and East European Review 70:2 (1992) 284-305.

Delic, St. D. "Pitanje nase unutrasnje politike. Oko 'Hrvatskog pitanja'." Nova Evropa 29:1 (1936) 9-12.

Evolucija . Zagreb. Vol. 1, 1936.

Gligorijevic, Branislav. "Srpska nacionalna omladina (SRNAO)." Istorijski glasnik 2-3 (1964) 3-38.

. "Organizacija jugoslovenskih nacionalista (Orjuna)." Istorija XX veka . Vol. V. Belgrade: Institute drustvenih nauka, 1963, 315-393. Glojnaric, Mirko. Borba Hrvata . Zagreb: Antun Velzek, 1940.

Horvat, Rudolf. Hrvatska na Mucilistu . Zagreb: Kulturno historijsko drustvo "Hrvatski Rodoljub," 1942.

Hrvatinic, Matijas. Srpska nacionalna i vjerska nastranost . Buenos Aires, 1973.

Janjatovic, Bosiljka. "Represija spram hrvatskih seljaka 1918-1921." Casopis za suvremenu povijest 25:1 (1993) 25-43.

. "Izborni teror u Hrvatskoj 1923.-1927. godine." Casopis za suvremenu povijest 28:1-2 (1996) 45-71.

Jevdjevic, Dobroslav. Izabrani clanci . Novi Sad: Jovanovic & Bogdanov, 1925.

L. & M. "Seljacka buna u Hrvatskoj." Nova Evropa 1:2 (1920) 80-88.

Lupis-Vukic, I. F. "Nas drzavni (srpsko-hrvatski) problem." Nova Evropa 29:2 (1936) 43-50.

Matesic, Joso. "Seljak o Hrvatskom Pitanju." Nova Evropa 29:3 (1936) 71-73.

Novoselovic, Milan. Beogradska sablast . Zagreb: Vlastita naklada, 1928.

Popovic, A. "Organizacija 'Ujedinjenje ili Smrt'. ('Crna Ruka')" Nova Evropa 15:10-11 (1927) 396-405.

. "Rad organizacije 'Ujedinjenje ili Smrt'." Nova Evropa 16:10-11 308-329.

Radic, Stjepan. "Autobiography of Stephen Raditch. With an Introduction by Charles A. Beard." Current History 29 (Oct. 1928) 82-106.

Radic, Vladimir. Zlocin od 20. lipnja i medjunarodna stampa . Paris, 1931.

Ribar, Ivan. Stara Jugoslavija i komunizam. Zakoni, sudovi, zatvori i logori u staroj Jugoslaviji protiv komunista . Zagreb: Stvarsnot, 1967.

Rojc, M. "Prilike u Hrvatskoj." Nova Evropa 2:2 (1921) 46-71.

Sadkovich, James J. "Terrorism in Croatia, 1929-1934." East European Quarterly 22:1 (1988) 55-79.

Sehic, Nusret. Cetnistvo u Bosni i Hercegovini (1918-1941). Sarajevo: ANUBiH, 1971.

Struggle . Translated by Louis Adamic with a Preface by the Translator. Los Angeles: Arthur Whipple, 1934.

Source:
http://www.croatianstudies.org/index.php?action=page&id=50

---> B. Zelic-Bucan: What Was the Name of the Glagolitic Seminary in Priko?

2004-09-25T08:34:00.000-07:00

Croatian Studies

*The original reads "Kako se zvalo glagoljasko sjemeniste u Priku?" and first appeared in Marulic, 3, no. 3 (Zagreb, 1970), 17-21. It was later included in Benedikta Zelic-Bucan, Jezik i pisma Hrvata. Rasprave i clanci (Split: Matica hrvatska, 1997), 19-24. The translator thanks the author for clarifying certain parts of the essay; Dr. Vinko Grubisic of the University of Waterloo for his assistance during the translation process; and Matthew Pavelich for reading the manuscript and providing his editorial comments.

What Was the Name of the Glagolitic Seminary in Priko?

Benedikta Zelic-Bucan

According to information dealing with Glagolitic clergy in Chapter 24 of the constitution of the Split diocesan synod of 1688, there were thirty-six outlying parishes in the diocese. Of these thirty-six parishes, only eight held services in Latin, while the remainder were "Croatian parishes" ("kuratije arvaske").1 According to records collected from 1688 to 1700 by Ivan Pastric, forty-two parishes were cited in the Split diocese, seventeen of which were located on the territory of Poljica. The Poljica parishes were: Podstrana, Jesenice, Duce, Zakucac, Kucice, Gornje Polje, Donje Polje, Tugare, Kosatanje, Zvecanje, Ostrvica, Gata, Dubrava, Trnbusi, Srijane, Srinjine and Sitno.2 All of these were Glagolitic parishes; however, the number of Poljica clergy greatly exceeded the actual number of parishes they served in. The Glagolites from Poljica served as parish priests throughout the entire diocese. There were also many who were without their own parish and lived with their families. In his 1713 report to Rome, Archbishop Stefano Cupilli indicated that the urban clergy numbered sixty priests and fifteen seminarians, while priests from outlying areas numbered around 125 .3

The archbishops or vicars general exercised authority over these priests through the outer vicar, whom they appointed from nominations submitted by the Glagolites themselves.4 The outer vicar held ecclesiastic authority over the territories of Poljica, Radobilje, the outskirts and districts of Split, and the regions of Omis and Klis.5 While Gian Battista Laghi served as archbishop, a confraternity for Glagolitic priests was founded and ratified. Members of the confraternity were to pray and celebrate requiem masses for the repose of their deceased brethren .6

Right up to the mid-18th century, there were neither colleges nor seminaries where these Glagolites could receive a basic education or instruction in the Old Church Slavic language. Rather, individual pastors provided personal training to seminarians according to the apprenticeship system. Individual parish priests recruited gifted youngsters who served as their attendants and students. Through this process, they taught these young men what they themselves knew. However, these novices would often change teachers, especially if the priest was strict. This situation prompted Archbishop Stefano Cosmi to write to the outer vicar on 20 October 1703. In the letter, he made it clear that novices were not to move from teacher to teacher, but were to dutifully and obediently remain with the initial priest; otherwise, they would not be permitted to take their exams .7

As far as the training of Glagolitic priests was concerned, not only were there no cultivated colleges for them, but they did not even have the necessary books for their language, which was the only one they understood. For this reason, Bishop Antun Kadcic's initiative to write the work Moral theology (Bogoslovje diloredno) represented a significant step in their education. In 1714, Archbishop Stefano Cupilli began to build a seminary for them beside the church of St. Peter on Lucac in Split; however, he passed away before the project was completed. His objective was only realized by Archbishop Pacific Bizza in 1750, when he established a seminary in the former Franciscan hospice beside the old Croatian church of St. Peter in Priko, near Omis. This seminary lacked a prebend (stipend) or a steady source of revenue and the seminarians were required to support themselves and their instructors, while the upkeep and maintenance of the church and seminary building was left to providence and the charity of the faithful .8

During Venetian rule (1699-1797), numerous attempts were made to obtain government support to provide a modest salary for the instructors; however, this never succeeded. Only in 1803, during the first Austrian rule (1797-1805), did the government set a monthly salary of twenty florins for the director of the seminary and fifteen florins for instructors at the seminary.9 However, even this minimal pay was discontinued during French rule (1805- 1813), when the seminary was closed for a time. During the second period of Austrian rule (1813-1918), the government again introduced the salary, but only for a brief time. Already in 1821, the seminary was closed and a central seminary established in Zadar for the entire province of Dalmatia. In this new seminary, the Glagolitic alphabet and the Old Church Slavic language were taught from the outset. However, in 1827, even this central Croatian seminary was closed and a new central Latin seminary established in its place, again in Zadar .10

When the seminary in Priko first opened, there was one lone instructor. Later, when the number of seminarians began to rise, there were three. One of them was called the director (vladavac), the second the instructor (mestar) and the third the prefect (izvrsitelj). However, all three lectured and instructed the seminarians. The first director of the seminary was Rev. Stjepan Pivcevic, the second Rev. Ivan Bozic and the third and last one Rev. Petar Kruzicevic .11

In the archival section of the Archaeological Museum of Split, there is kept a bundle of forty-eight documents labelled "Poljica Documents" (signature 49 h 6/I). Some of these documents were published without any accompanying notes at the beginning of the 20th century in the Split journal Bullettino di archeologia e storia dalmata.12 Among this group of documents, twenty-two reports dealt with the Glagolitic seminary in Priko for the period from 1760 to 1821.13 Included are the minutes of Archbishop Nikola Dinaricic's 1760 visit to the seminary; two letters of Archbishop Lelio Cipico from 1793; and two letters from Venetian governors Francesco Falier and Alvise Marin, from 1784 and 1794, respectively. Most of the documents are from the 19th century. These include the correspondence of the last director of the seminary, Rev. Petar Kruzicevic, to the vicars general and Split canons: Oracijo Bergelic, Nikola Didos, Josip Koic and Nikola Koic. Also included are his letters to Makarska Bishop Fabijan Blaskovic. The majority of these letters originated during the last few years of the seminary, when its closure was imminent, and the closure was even discussed in some of them; therefore, these letters represent a significant source for the history of this important Croatian college .14

Besides providing significant material on the seminary, this small collection of documents also offers important information for the history of the Croatian language. In these documents, we encounter the old Croatian national name (hrvatski) for the language along with the more recent bookish term Slavonic (slovinski), as well as the Italian term Illyrian (illirico). More specifically, in Italian texts, the term Illyrian (illirico) was always used, while in Croatian texts the alternate use of the terms Croatian (hrvatski) and Slavonic (slovinski) appeared, sometimes even with the same author. Thus, the Split vicars and canons regularly addressed Rev. Petar Kruzicevic as the instructor or director of the Slavonic seminary, 15 while in the text of the letters both Croatian and Slavonic are used. For example, in a letter from 16 January 1815, Split Canon Nikola Didos explains that it is the intention of the future central seminary in Zadar to offer education to the "Slavonic clergy of Priko" ("crikovnakom slovinskim od Prika").16 In a letter from 23 August 1816, the bishop's secretary, Josip Koic, wrote that following an outbreak of the plague, there were now: "Latin and Croatian priests...in total, thirty-six" ("latinski misnika i Arvatah...usve trideset i sest").17 Makarska Bishop Fabijan Blaskovic used two terms for the seminary. In the address of a letter from 28 December 1816, Bishop Blaskovic called Rev. Petar Kruzicevic the "main educator of the Croatian seminary" ("mestar od semenaria arvaskoga") 18 and the "main educator of the Slavonic seminary" ("mestar od seminarija slovinskoga") in a letter from 15 July 1818 .19

In documents that were written by Poljica or other Glagolitic priests, I have never come across the expression Slavonic for their language. They always called their language Croatian and when translating from Italian texts, the term Illyrian (illirco) was translated into Croatian (hrvatski). Thus, in the Croatian translation of Archbishop Lelio Cipico's letter of 26 June 1793 to Omis church administrator Rev. Jakov Ognjutovic the term "chierizi illirici" is translated into "Croatian priests" ("zakni arvacki") .20

The above examples show that by the beginning of the 19th century, the use of the term Slavonic (slovinski) for the Croatian language and institutions of the Croatian language was still inconsistently applied, even among learned individuals. Here and there, these learned individuals continued to use the original Croatian national name alongside this "learned" expression.

Not only did the Glagolitic clergy of Poljica call their language Croatian, but they also went out of their way to set themselves apart from their Latin colleagues who used the Latin liturgical language.21 They did this by appending to their names the term Harvacanin. In Split baptismal and marriage registries from the 17th and 18th century, which were usually completed in the administrative Italian language, there are close to 200 notes entered by Poljica Glagolites in the vernacular language. These notes were entered when they performed christenings and marriages in Split. The majority of these entries were completed in old Croatian Cyrillic (bosancica). Four of these Glagolitic priests (Mihovil Dagelic, Jakov Suturcic, Stipan Jurevic, Barisa Krcatovic) often added the attribute Harvacanin to their surnames or only to their given names when they added their entries. In using this attribute, they wished to emphasize that they were priests of the Croatian language as opposed to Latin clergy, whose liturgical language was Latin and whose language of public communication was Italian.

In the same manner, the Croatian version of Chapter 24 of the constitution of the diocesan synod of Split from 1688, distinguishes Glagolitic clergy ("harvaski kler") and Glagolitic parishes ("kuratije arvaske") from the clergy and parishes using the Latin liturgy.22 In the Latin version of that chapter of the constitution, Croatian clergy are called "clerus illyricus" and Croatian parishes "parochiae Illyricorum".23 In Article XII of the same chapter, it is specified that educated priests are to teach the seminarians the Croatian pronunciation in which their missals and breviaries are written; otherwise, the seminarians will not be ordained. In the Latin version of the constitution, the term Illyrian (illyricum) is used for the Croatian language and script.24 It is interesting to note that two years after this synod on Glagolitic clergy was held, Makarska Bishop Nikola Bjankovic translated and printed the constitution in Croatian. However, already in the very title of his version, he stated that the decisions "were translated in the Slavonic language".25 As we can see, when writing in the Italian and Latin languages, the term Illyrian (illyricus, illirico) was used for the Croatian language, while learned Croats used the expression Slavonic (slovinski), and the simple commoner Glagolites spoke and wrote in the "Croatian" language (jezik "arvacki"), just as the people.

The Glagolites could not even acquire the habit of using the "learned" terms for the Croatian language (Illyrian and Slavonic) because they not only lacked Croatian books, but some of them did not even know how to read all that well. This can be concluded from the previously mentioned Article XII of Chapter 24 of the synodal constitution. It should also be remembered that they did not even understand Latin or Italian. I have come across two instances in the documents of the Makarska diocese from 1769, in which parish priests expressly state that they do not understand Italian or Latin, and request their bishop to write to them in Croatian so that they can understand him .26

As we can see from preserved documents written in Croatian Cyrillic ("arvacki"), right up to the end of the 17th century, only the Croatian national name served as the name of the Croatian language for commoners and their Glagolitic pastors. At that time, the Glagolites were the closest intelligentsia to everyday folk. The use of the term "Slavonic" ("slovinski") as a "learned" name, as was previously characterized by Vatroslav Jagic,27 only began to penetrate later, at the turn of the 18th to 19th century. In part under the sway of learned books and foreign influences, this understanding spread widely in the first half of the 19th century. For this reason, those in Dalmatia who were followers of the Croatian National Revival under the leadership of Mihovil Pavlinovic struggled not only for the affirmation of the Croatian language in public life, but also for the affirmation of its national name among the alienated native intelligentsia and middle class.

Taking all of this into account, it would seem necessary to return the original name to the old Croatian seminary in Priko. When writing and discussing this seminary, we should identify it in the way in which its former students and teachers identified it; that is, the Croatian Seminary (Sjemeniste hrvatsko). To continue using the old term Illyrian (ilirisko), which was used in documents of the Italian and Latin languages, as well as the vague term Slavonic (slovinski) from Croatian documents of the learned class of past centuries, would only show that to this very day we have not overcome the biased belief that everything foreign is better and more learned than our Croatian national name. To continue to support these non-national and inadequate terms (Illyrian and Slavonic) would signify in our time not learnedness, but a petite bourgeoise mentality.

Translated by Stan Granic

NOTES

1 Vladimir Mosin, "Poljicke konstitucije iz 1620. i 1688. godine,"Radovi staroslavenskog instituta, 1 (Zagreb, 1952), 194.

2 Fontes historici liturgiae glagolito-romanae a XIII ad XIX saeculum, ed. Luka Jelic (Veglae [Krk]: Sumptibus Academiae Palaeoslavicae Veglensis, 1906), XVII, 61-63.

3 Fontes, XVIII, 9.

4 M...c, "Njekoji prilozi o glagoljici," Narod, no. 10 (Split, 1894).

5 Fontes, XIX, 75.

6 M...c, "Njekoji," Narod, no. 6. In the Historical Archives of Split (Historijski arhiv u Splitu HAS), in a small collection entitled "Poljica Documents" ("Poljicki spomenici"), there is a document that lists all the requiem masses said for members of this confraternity from 1790 to 1820 (signature 3KA/PS-15). From the list one can see that membership in the confraternity was composed of Glagolites of the archdiocese, many respected members of the higher urban clergy and even some eminent laymen.

7 Miroslav Vulic, "Pravila glagoljaskog sjemenista u Priku," Croatia sacra, 15-16 (Zagreb, 1938), 74.

8 Ivan Pivcevic, "Sjemeniste u Priku," in Program c. k. Velike gimnazije u Splitu za sk. god. 1911-12, 47 (Split, 1912), 7.

9 Pivcevic, p. 9.

10 Pivcevic, p. 11.

11 Pivcevic, p. 8.

12 See the supplemental sections in: Bullettino di archeologia e storia dalmata, 22 (Split, 1900) and 24 (Split, 1901).

13 Having worked on these documents some ten years ago while preparing my work Bosancica u srednjoj Dalmaciji, Prilog 3. svesku Izdanja Historijskiog arhiva - Split (Split: Historijskog arhiva, 1961), I classified these Poljica documents according to contents. With the approval of the administration of the Museum, I classified them into series I to III, with each individual document assigned a number. Documents dealing with the seminary in Priko were arranged in the first series and marked with numbers 1-20, plus 1a, 2a and 3a. Documents I/1-20 formed part of the archives of the actual seminary, while document I/2a is the Croatian transcription of document I/2 and documents I/1a and I/3a were subsequently taken from series II ("Pisma providura i drugi spisi koji se odnose na polji ku republiku") because their contents dealt with the seminary in Priko.

14 As far as I could ascertain, to date these documents on the Croatian seminary in Priko, which are housed in the Archeological Museum of Split, have never been published. Concise information on the contents of these letters are provided in my article: "Upotreba bosancice u Splitu i okolici," Mogucnosti, 3, no. 11 (Split, 1956), 869-875.

15 Archaeological Museum of Split (hereafter AMS), "Poljicke isprave," signature 49 h 6/I, documents 6, 7, 8, 11, 12 and 13.

16 AMS, "Poljicke isprave," sign. 49 h 6/I, document 7.

17 AMS, "Poljicke isprave," sign. 49 h 6/I, document 13.

18 AMS, "Poljicke isprave," sign. 49 h 6/I, document 12.

19 AMS, "Poljicke isprave," sign. 49 h 6/I, document 13.

20 AMS, "Poljicke isprave," sign. 49 h 6/I, document 2a.

21 The language of Croatian Glagolitic religious books to the 17th century was completely under the influence of the vernacular speech. For this reason, Modrus Bishop Simun Kozicic could legitimately title his missal, which was printed in Rijeka in 1531, the Croatian Missal (Misal hruacki). The Poljica Glagolites who largely lived as peasants, had a very difficult time in obtaining church books. This is testified to in Chapter 24 (Article XII) of the constitution of the Split synod from 1688 and in articles LX and CIX of Archbishop Sforza Ponzon's ruling from 1620. It is also likely that they could not have immediately obtained the new missal prepared by friar Rafael Levakovic (Rome, 1631) which had been completely russified. To deal with the shortage of books, Archbishop Dinaricic was still advising the clergy of the seminary at Priko, in the latter half of the 18th century, to transcribe from old books and manuscripts in their possession. Based on this, it can be presumed that their liturgical language differed very little from the existing Croatian vernacular. For this reason, it is understandable that they called themselves Croatian clergy and used Harvacanin to identify themselves.

22 Mosin, p. 194.

23 Mosin, p. 194.

24 "Zasto osobito s(veta) m(ater) c(rkva) dopusti ovoj ruci privilej harvackoga izgovora u misi, zato ima se nastojati da se dobro uce i nauce razumiti slovi...kako u knjigah uzdarze. Zakni imaju se nauciti bukvicu i juciniti se nauciti se od redovnikov naucni izgovor arvacki slovi nasi, kako izgovara misal i barvija; inako nece biti urdinani buduci tako zapovijeno, i kako nasi po knjizi imaju govoriti se... razumiti tako harvaski na nihov zakon barvarija."/"Quoniam peculiari, et speciosissimo Sanctae Matris Ecclesiae privilegio in idiomate Illyrico sacra habetur liturgia, maxima habenda est ratio eiusdem idiomatis probe ediscendi, et dicendi. Clerici noverint azbuquidarium, atque a pertis Sacerdotibus erudiantur, qui in eam precipue curam, incubeant, ut illyricum literale, quo Missale et Breviarium conscripta sunt, perfecte calleant alioquin sciant, se ad Ordines non promovendos, cum apud Illyricos eadem sit ratio illyrici idiomatis litdteralis, quae apud nostros Latini. Mosin, p. 196. [In English it would read: "Since the Holy Mother Church especially allows to this hand the privilege of using the Croatian language in the mass, they must endeavor to learn well and master the script...which is contained in the books. The priests must learn the alphabet and be instructed by the monks on the correct pronunciation of our Croatian letters as they are contained in our missals and breviaries. Otherwise, as it is proclaimed, they shall not be ordained. It was ordered so and now our priests must conform themselves to our books...to understand Croatian in order to follow their duties according to their breviaries." trans.]

25 Mosin, p. 178.

26 Archives of the Diocese of Makarska, volume 74. Letter of Rev. Jakov Piunovic, pastor of Rascani, 22 September 1769 and letter of Rev. Pavao Ursic, pastor of Brela, 23 October 1769. Fascicle 74 contains the correspondence of Bishop Stjepan Blaskovic to his parish priests from 1768 to 1769. There are 376 letters in total. Of these, three are written in the Croatian language using the Roman script, one in the Italian language and the remainder were written in the Croatian language using the Croatian Cyrillic script.

27 Vatroslav Jagic, Historija knjizevnosti naroda hrvatskoga i srpskoga (Zagreb: Vatroslav Jagic, 1867), p. 3.

http://www.croatianstudies.org/index.php?action=page&id=52