Schyłek imperiów i jego skutki na Półwyspie Bałkańskim

• Published in: Łódzkie studia etnograficzne Vol. 56; no. 1; pp. 11 - 26
• Main Author: Jezernik, Božidar
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English; Polish
• Published: Polish Ethnological Society 01-10-2017; Polskie Towarzystwo Ludoznawcze
• Subjects: Anthropology; Cultural history; Ethnohistory; History; Social Sciences; nationalism; the Ottoman Empire; nationality; Balkans
• ISSN: 0076-0382; 2450-5544
• DOI: 10.12775/LSE.2017.56.02

In the Ottoman Empire there was no visible dividing line between secular and religiouslaw. The Ottoman state divided its subjects according to their religion into millets or ‘communities’.Religion was the basis for these divisions; language and ethnological theories played merelya secondary part. The rationale for this state of affairs was the system of government. Ottoman lawwas a religious code, which could not be imposed on unbelievers, who could not be recruited intothe army.A new spirit of national consciousness awoke among the peoples of the millets with the attemptto create civil laws to replace religious ones. They had to reorganise themselves on national linesif they were hold their own at all in modern international politics because nationality was thecontemporary basis of Western states and, owing to the ascendancy of the West in the world, therelations of non-Western peoples to each other and to Western powers had to approximate to theforms which the Western world took for granted.During the nineteenth century, nationality became the leading concept and nationalism celebratedits universal victory. During the nineteenth century, nationalism won hearts and minds of the Balkanitesas ‘some kind of a social-emancipatory ideology’ (Moritsch 2002: 83), and ever morevoices could be heard, claiming the Balkans for the Balkanites. In the Ottoman Empire, however,the Spring of Nations did not come to the Ottoman nation, but such occurred among the peopleswho were under Ottoman rule. Nationalists of all Balkan nations jointly emphasised small differencesbetween them, both in the present as well as in the past. In the process, mythology replacedhistory; tolerance and multiculturalism were its first victims.