BOSNIA AND MUSLIMS IN THE EYE OF AN OBSERVER FROM THE MID-19TH CENTURY

Ibrahim Kemura

(In Glasnik of the Islamic Community of 1969, a text by Ibrahim Kemura entitled “Bosna i muslimani u očima jednog posmatrača iz sredine XIX stoljeća” (Bosnia and Muslims in the Eye of a Beholder from the mid-19th Century) was published. In the text he presented both his comments and the translation of observations of a French traveler through Bosnia. The following section consists of Kemura's introductory remarks and parts of the translation of the report. The subheadings have been included by the editor of this selection.)

- The geopolitical and strategic position of Bosnia and its role of the advance guard and the most protruding part of the Ottoman Empire toward the Western countries has conditioned and imposed an increased interest by other neighboring countries, particularly of great powers, in this province, which has been monitored very carefully and attentively with every happening and sentiment of its people being recorded. For a careful observer, the materials have abounded - since the religious and ethnic division of population and inequal position of some compared to others has always provided an opportunity to foreign powers to use the disguise of the protection of Christians and their interest to interfere in the interior affairs both of this province and of the Turkish empire. This care for and protection of the non-Muslim part of population has mostly been skillfully cloaked in religious robe concealing, under it, political goals and interests, which could be achieved only camouflaged in this way.

Many data on the position of population, their emotions and sentiment have been preserved by observers and travelers who visited Bosnia, whether only as passers-by or who came here with the only intention to examine the conditions and get accurate information on all the issues. Writings and reports of these observers, particularly in the 19th century, when the issue of the survival of Turks aroused a renewed interest, are numerous and originate from different sources – French, Austrian, Russian – and are typically published and well-known.

In this series of travel writers, politicians, agents and others who, guided by different reasons, stayed in Bosnia and left precious data on it, one is insufficiently noted and rarely used, though not less valuable, is the report by Frenchman Henri Massiau de Clerval, who visited Franciscans in Bosnia in 1855 and submitted a comprehensive report to French government about local circumstances and conditions during the Crimean War.[1]

We will here deal only with the part of the report, which has not been translated and published here, and which discusses Muslims, their origin and position, and in doing so provides precious data on the state of national awareness and inter-ethnic relations in Bosnia at the time. These parts of Clerval's report simply astound readers, both by the author's thoughtfulness and by his excellent knowledge and keen observation. We cannot help admiring the shrewd conclusions which de Clerval drew in a relatively short time, as well as the objectivity he approached them with and presented them. (....)

There is only one race in Bosnia, perfectly homogenous

De Clerval writes: „In Bosnia, same as in other provinces of the Ottoman Empire, there are no several races who are deeply divided by language and customs, hostile by nature and irreconcilable, and who coexist in the same territory without any possible merging. In this country there is only one race, perfectly homogenous, who is divided only by religion. If there was a trigger for this Slavic Bosnian race stronger than religious dissentions, its unification would immediately take place. This unification is very well prepared here because different religions are not positioned in this or that part of the territory but are rather intermingled in all respects. In all honesty, it can be observed that Muslims mostly live in cities; that Greeks[2] prevail in the east of the province, in Rascia, and in the highlands; however, these observations have nothing absolute; we often encounter mixed villages where Greeks, Muslims and Catholics live ones beside others, often in a very good harmony when taunting from outside does not arouse fanatism and the issue of religious honor. The common awareness which can unite these people already exists and needs only to be developed; its inklings can be discerned. the Muslim, the Catholic and the Greek feel love for their native soil alike; they are equally proud of their name, a Bosnian. This name reminds Muslims of their services for the Empire, of the privileges granted by sultans, of famous people who originated from this province. The Muslim became a Turk without ceasing to be a Bosnian. The Catholic feels a need to search for his national ideals further in the past, though he is a Bosnian in the strictest sense of the word. Unlike the other two, the Greek might relate to the ethnicity broader than Bosnian, but he also has the local patriotism, which is a fact among all South Slavs, particularly among highlanders. I have met Greek Bosnians (Bosnian Serbs) even in Serbia, who proudly refer to their origin. Among Bosnians and Serbs there are some contemptuous proverbs, which are common to inhabitants of neighboring provinces: “It takes forty Bosnians to make a man”. – “Not even forty Serbs would make a Bosnian”.

Bosnia, Illyric Switzerland

(...) “Who knows whether Muslim Slavs have (must) another role to play in the world? Would this population, who is still the owner of almost the whole country, be so lost by the disappearance of their privileges that they could not do great services to some authorities who would set a goal useful for its activity and its ambition? Couldn't this energy, which has experienced horrible evidence, still be put in the service of a great interest? Thus, Bosnia, which has rightly been named the Illyric Switzerland, would still be the most robust bulwark of Turkey. The latter would certainly threaten Austria with Muslim invasion, like in the 17th century, but would set an unsurmountable obstacle if needed. Need I say what risks from the East it would avoid? Has all the value of this element, which has been inserted between Serbian Illyrians and Austrian Illyrians, between two parts of the Slavic world been calculated? Would Turkey and its allies have some resources for acting upon the entire race?”

A great misfortune of Bosniaks is that they are unknown

(...)“A great misfortune of that part of the Slavic people is that it is unknown, or known only from the relationship with their enemies. Do not ask Christians about Muslims. Among Greek and Catholic fellow countrymen, who treat them as turncoats, and among Ottomans, who consider them only incomplete (imperfect) Turks, these afflicted Muslims live in ominous isolation. The young Turk from Constantinople considers them barbarians because they have not yet assumed the icing of the civilization he is proud of; the old Ottoman from Asia mocks these Turks who cannot speak Turkish, mocks these true believers who funnily pronounce Arabic words in their prayers. Slavophiles tend to depict them as monsters, not realizing that it harms themselves. One and only Serbian writer, famous Vuk Stevanović, spoke about them without prejudice, with a bias surprising for a Greek Slav, which his fellow countrymen considered as blasphemy. He depicts spahis as fairly good-natured (bearable) landowners and claims that many sharecroppers in Europe could wish for the life of their vassals. The truth is that these Muslim Slavs in Bosnia proved to be far more fanatic than true Ottomans, and it is due to this fanatism that they sometimes committed unheard-of atrocities; what does it prove against them? These Slavs introduced to Islam the fervor which people of their blood introduce into their religious feelings and it is not necessary to go to Bosnia to see that it is between fellow countrymen that religious hatred has always produced their horrific consequences.”

They are aristocrats in the true sense of the word

(...) “I will not emulate travelers who judge a people based on their conversations with a certain number of postiljons[1], inn-keepers and policemen; I will only say that the few Muslim people that I saw in Bosnia allow me to have a very favorable opinion about them. I did not come in tough with indigenous aristocracy; it was only in inns and on the roads that I met aristocrats who were going to visit their estates. They are aristocrats in the true sense of the word. Some draw origin from a line of ancient kings, and their elegant and proud manner, underscored by the beauty of their clothes, could procure them a place in the elite of European society. I also came across people of lower classes, quite honorable, friendly though dignified, often kind. It happened once or twice that I was suspicious because I was a foreigner, or that I heard some words which sounded quite bad; but, as a Frenchman, I also encountered signs resembling affection; unfortunately, I must say that I often saw quite opposite attitudes among Christians. The only fault which I might attribute to Muslims, and which anyway seem to be pretty common among (all) the Bosnians, is great carefreeness, propensity to live joyfully and be satisfied with little. As for the ignorance they wallow in, who can blame them? What can they learn besides religious education, which they receive in maktabs and madrasas? What has been done so far to change things? Greeks, as well as Catholics, founded schools encouraged by Christian powers; Slavic provinces of Austria provide them with teachers who deliver European education in their own language. Has anything siilar been done for Muslims? I saw a government-owned school in Sarajevo; I got to know its principal, Mustafa effendi, quite well, so I could assess his character and education. He learned French in Paris and he likes France. It is sad to see how a man of his value languishes in such a sinecure. He has no more than ten pupils. What realistic need does his school actually satisfy? What is taught in it? Oriental languages and literature. If Bosnians are taught the official language of the empire, who would dare complain? However, does it make sense that young people who speak one European language can, because they are Muslim, acquire the knowledge of Europe only through Turkish and Arabic, which they do not learn even in ten years? Is it not a means to keep Muslims in intellectual inferiority, which can increasingly be observed compared to their fellow countrymen of another religion? They openly fear that these Bosnians, still fanatic, might become too European. Is this concern serious (justified)? I admit that the idea of transforming Bosnians into Turks of the race and language does not seem more practical than the idea of Hungarians, who want to force Croats to speak Hungarian. Is it not obvious that it achieves quite the opposite result from the one they want to reach? The Bosnian element is annulled, and by showing that they are enemies of their language and their religion Christians are irreversibly alienated. It is done in favor of Pan-slavism, which was supposed to be suppressed. By founding Slavic schools for Muslims, or even better by establishing high schools which would be intended for all locals in their own language, Turkish government would really take credit for civilization; (besides) it could affect the intellectual movement of South Slavs and thus, at the cost of Western ideas, got the weapons which Russia itself could use so.”

Their villages are still purely Slavic

(...)“Even though their cities have Turkish physiognomy, their villages are still purely Slavic. One can claim that the effect of (Turkish) conquests were more exterior than deep, even on Bosnian Muslims. They borrowed from Turks their weapons, their furniture and their clothes without assuming their character and any of their Asian customs. The freedom they give their women before marriage, their love for their national poison, plum brandy, would indicate the most superficial differences between them and true Ottomans.”

Most old aristocrats freely converted to Islam

(...) “Bosnian Muslims are very loyal to their religion, but Muslim education based on the knowledge of Arabic has only weak influence on the people who have so little affinity to Semitic races. It can be claimed that, under certain conditions, Turkish domination had an extremely conservative influence on the enslaved people. Indeed, it both allowed civil and religious customs of the part of population that remained loyal to their old cult, like in other provinces, and, moreover, in Bosnia it confirmed political privileges of most old aristocrats who freely converted to Islam. It is the origin of te feudal aristocracy of beys, spahis, captains' successors, which has now been abolished by the reforms of Ottoman government and definitely defeated by Omer Pasha. Bogo­mils, who used to be so powerful in Bosnia for three centuries, ultimately converted to Islam, and their descendants make up the most part of Muslim population of the province. What many writers wrote about Ottomans who live in cities and who speak Turkish is a mistake. Turks who stay in Bosnia learn the language of the country and mingle with indigenous Muslim population. High-ranked officials, regular army (nizam) and several batmen form a population who is truly Turkish by race and by language.”

[1] Rapport adresse a son Ехеllenсе Monsieur le Ministre de l'instruction publique sur une mission en Bosnie, accomplie en 1855, par M. Massieu de Clerval. Archives des missions scientifiques et littereires Tom V. Paris MDCCCLVI.

[2] The usual name for members of Greek Orthodox religion, in this case Serbs.

[3] Coach-driver, a postboy.

Source: 

• Ibrahim Kemura, „Bosna i muslimani u očima jednog posmatrača iz sredine XIX stoljeća“, Glasnik XXXII/1969, no. 9 -10, pp. 418 - 424.