1

Jelena Paunovic Stermenski MAAdministrative and Research Assistant,Student of Doctoral StudiesDepartment of History,Faculty of PhilosophyUniversity of Belgradejpaunovi@f.bg.ac.rs

Danko Leovac MA,Research AssistantStudent of Doctoral StudiesDepartment of History,Faculty of PhilosophyUniversity of Belgradedanko.leovac@f.bg.ac.rs

Approaching the Balkan Wars:

Serbian Society and the Ottoman Empire

1856–1912

Abstract: The aim of this paper is to analyze the shaping of the civil society in the Principality ofSerbia while liberating itself from the feudal influence of the Ottoman Empire. The paper is going toexamine the way the breakdown of the Ottoman Empire and the situation leading to Balkan Alliance andlater Balkan wars influenced Serbian society. The paper is also emphasizing the evolvement of theSerbian intellectual elite and outlining both the decrease of the Ottoman influence and the modernizationof the Serbian society.

The first chronological milestone of this work is the year 1856 when, after the end of the Crimeanwar, the Russian protectorate over Serbia was replaced with the guarantees of the Great Powers. The lastchronological milestone is 1912, when the negotiations about the Balkan Alliance were finalized and thefirst Balkan war began.

Key words: the elite, the army, the family

* * *

The aim of this paper is to represent the modernization of the Serbian society during the period

lasting from the end of the Crimean war and the Paris peace treaty in 1856 until the beginning of the first

Balkan war in 1912. The most prominent changes in the Serbian society will be explained: the creation of

the social and military elite, modification of the family relations and the formation of the middle class.

One of the classifications in the Serbian historiography separates the development of the Serbian

society and the social relations in three time periods:

1) A feudal society from 1788/1804 to 1835

2). A society of free peasants from 1835 to 1878

3) A Society of peasant – citizens from 1878 to 1918

2

The first period is characterized by: the creation of

the state, the adoption of the constitution and laws, the

abolition of feudalism and the beginning of the

suppression of Turkish heritage, cultural activities and

reforms of Vuk Karadzic.1 This period was represented by

two generations: rebellious and state – building, or

Karađorđe’s and Milos’s.

The second period is characterized by: dynastic

struggles, oligarchy and absolutist government, institution

building, development of a national program, the Civil

Code, and the formation of the people's national army, the

emergence of liberal ideas and development of the press,

youth movement, Romanticism, mintage and the

telegraph. Two generations belonging to this period were:

Constitutional and the Serbian youth generation.

The third period had well-established boundaries. It lasted until 1918 when the Serbian state

disappeared and the Serbian people were included in the state of Yugoslav people. This period was

marked with: the emergence of parties, parliamentary life, democracy, bumming of the press, building of

the railways, formation of the National Bank, the use of electricity, industrialization, the wars for

liberation and unification, establishment of the University, introduction of the regular Army. The same as

the previous period, Two generations present this one: the political party generation and unifying

generation.2

The beginning of the nineteenth century represents a turning point in the social development of

Serbian society. This was a time period when the foundations of the modern Serbian state were set. Urban

settlements in the Principality have undergone major changes. A large number of settlements, especially

1 Vuk Stefanovic Karadzic, Serbian Cyrillic: Вук Стефановић Караџић; (1787–1864) was a Serbian philologist andlinguist, the major reformer of the Serbian language, and deserves, perhaps, for his collections of songs, fairy tales,and riddles to be called the father of the study of Serbian folklore. He was the author of the first Serbian dictionary.2 Радош Љушић, “Политичке генерације у Србији”, Српске политичке генерације (1788–1918), Историјскиинститут САНУ, књига 15 (1998), 9–29; Радош Љушић, “Српска, великосрпска и југословенска државнаполитика Србије (1804–1918)”, Србија 19. века, изабрани радови, књига 3, Београд: Војноиздавачки завод,2005, 253–277.

Miloš Obrenović

Prince of Serbia (1815–1839, 1858–1860)

3

the cities, where most Muslims lived were destroyed during the military operations in the first Serbian

uprising (1804–1813). Urban population was almost completely destroyed or emigrated during the

Uprising. As a result of this trade and crafts were, almost completely destroyed in those areas. The

economic life in Serbia was renewed after the Uprising, when immigrant Christians, gradually pushing

the rest of the Muslim population out of cites, resumed trades and craftsmanship.3

This paper will refer to the second and the third classified period disregarding the first period of

the development of the Serbian society.

The Elite

The beginning of the national idea in Serbia is not

precisely historically determined. The opinion that the

Serbian nationalism and the nationalism of other south slave

nations formed later than the nationalism in other European

countries is accepted in the Serbian historiography. The

development of the national tendencies in Serbia could be

continually studied during the period lasting from 1790 to

1918.4

During this period Serbian national idea was formed

and the separate Serbian state was constituted. Many plans

existed for the realization of this idea. Still the territories that

the new Serbian states were expected to include were always

similar. The area would include Serbia, Bosnia,

Herzegovina, Montenegro and the “Northern Albania” (Old

Serbia), Southern Hungary, Croatia, Slavonia, Dalmatia and

Bulgaria.5

3 Further: Бојана Миљковић-Катић, Структура градског становништва Србије средином 19. века, Београд:Историјски институт: Службени гласник, 2002.4 See: Димитрије Ђорђевић, Националне револуције балканских народа 1804–1914, Београд: Службени листСРЈ, 1995.5 The two most famous plans for Serbian unification are Ilija Garasanin’s Nacertanije and the plan called The unitedstates of Serbia constructed by Konstantin Nikolajevic. For the additional details see Радош Љушић, Књига оНачертанију, Београд: Белетра, 2004, 114–125, 126–137.

Ilija Garašanin (1812–1874), wrote theNačertanije, a political document

encompassing the goals to liberate the SouthSlavs and unifying Serbian lands

4

One of the excepted interpretations of the development of the South Slav nationalism in the

Serbian historiography is that it could be separated in four periods: Time of belief (1790–1830), Time of

culture (1830–1860), Time of politics (1860–1903), Time of violence (1903–1918). Serbian nationalism

formed the Serbian elite. Educated elite formed further national ideas.6

Since Serbia aimed to become a modern state like

the European ideal it had to lay the foundation for the

whole governing system and the civilian institutions: the

administration, the military, the schools, the health system.

It had to built the communicational system, develop

economy and culture. For those reasons, depending on the

financial status of the state, a number of students were

chosen and sent abroad to study. After they finished

foreign universities – the law, military and economy

schools they returned to their country to work for the state

administration. As the Serbian society developed and

evolved the state founded fellaws (blagodejanci as they

were called at that time) were joined by the sons and

cousins of the rich trader and peasant families. They joined

state grantees abroad on their own will and funds.

The students first started their schooling in the neighboring countries like the Hapsburg

Monarchy and culturally familiar Russia. But even from the first group of students7 a number of them

went to study in Paris, Berlin and Heidelberg. The Serbian planed elite studied in Austria–Hungary,

Russia, Germany, France, Switzerland, Belgium, Italy, Britain and Spain.8

The first generation of the Serbian planed elite finished their schooling in 1848, at the time of

European revolutions. Afraid of losing their state funding during the turbulent times in Europe, they came

back to the Serbian principality and brought new revolutionary and nationalistic ideas back to Serbia. Still

6 Милорад Екмечић, Стварање Југославије 1790–1918, књ. 1, Београд: Просвета, 1989.7 Many successful Serbian states man from the second part of the 19th century belonged to the mentioned group ofstudents like Filip Hristic (1819–1905) the prime minister of the first government of Prince Mihailo Obrenovic and along term Serbian emissary to the Ottoman Empire, Dimitrije Crnobarac (1819–1872) a lawyer, minister of justicein 1858 and 1868, Kosta Nikolajevic (1821–1877), Serbian politician and historian, Dimitrije Matic (1821–1884)who had PhD in philosophy, letter become minister of justice, education, and the president of the Society of SerbianLetters and others. See: Војислав Павловић, “Српски питомци у Паризу 1839–1856”, Историјски часопис 33(1986), 187–202; Unpublished manuscript by Filip Hristic, Моје детињство и прво школовање (My childhoodand first education), Рукописно одељење Народне библиотеке, P 373/1–7.8 Приватни живот код Срба у деветнаестом веку: од краја осамнаестог века до почетка Првог светскограта, приредили Ана Столић, Ненад Макуљевић, Београд: Clio, 2006, 483–484.

Vuk Stefanović Karadzić (1787–1864), Serbianphilologist and linguist, the major reformer of

the Serbian language

5

people in Serbia were not ready for those new interpretations and their ideas were misunderstood and

interpreted as conservative. Still they were given the state service and they could influence governing of

the state especially during the rule of Prince Michael Obrenovic.9

The state continued to fund education of the best students in Europe and state elite grow. In time

of the Great Eastern Crises 1875–187810 Serbia gained much smaller territorial expansion then was

hoped for but was declared independent. Serbia’s position immediately after the recognition of

independence in 1878 was not easy. 11 Still there were more Serbs living under Ottoman and Habsburg

rule, then in the Serbia proper. On the road to national unification, Serbia was faced with many obstacles

that far outnumbered her own strength. After a successful war of 1877, its territory included the area of

48.500 square km with 1.9 million inhabitants. By density, the Serbian Principality was ahead of

9 Mihailo Obrenović (Serbian: Михаило Обреновић ; September 16, 1823 – June 10, 1868) was Prince of Serbiafrom 1839–1842 and again from 1860–1868. His first reign ended when he was deposed in 1842 and his secondwhen he was assassinated in 1868.10 In 1875 Bosnia and Herzegovina rebelled against the Ottoman Empire. After the intervention of the Great PowersTurkey once again promised to reform its administration in 1876. The rebels did not believe the Porte and therebellion continued. Germany, Austro–Hungary and Russia delivered a Berlin Memorandum promising aninternational control over the introduction of the reforms in Turkey. But internal strife caused by the change of theSultans stopped the Porte from approving the memorandum. Ottoman treasury was empty, and Serbia, Montenegroand Bulgaria joined the rebellion (the so-called April uprising). Still, the Ottoman Empire managed to crush theinsurgents in August 1876. The result incommoded Russia, which had planned to take possession of variousOttoman territories in Southeastern Europe in the course of the conflict. But the rumors of the Ottoman mistreatmentof rebellious raya disturbed European public opinion. Russia declared war in April of 1877 after insuring Austrianneutrality with the agreement, under which Ottoman territories captured in the course of the war would bepartitioned between the Russian and Austria-Hungarian Empires, with the latter obtaining Bosnia and Herzegovina.The United Kingdom, did not involve herself in the conflict. However, when Russia threatened to secureConstantinople, British Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli urged Austria and Germany to ally with him against thistyrannical war aim. As a result, Russia sued for peace through the Treaty of San Stefano, which imposed harshterms: the Empire was to grant independence to Romania, Serbia, and Montenegro; to grant autonomy to Bulgaria;to institute reforms in Bosnia and Herzegovina; and to cede the Dobruja and parts of Armenia to Russia, whichwould also be paid an enormous indemnity. As Russia could dominate the newly independent states, her influence inSoutheastern Europe was greatly increased by the Treaty of San Stefano. Due to the insistence of the Great Powers(especially the United Kingdom), the treaty was heavily revised at the Congress of Berlin so as to reduce the greatadvantages acquired by Russia. The Treaty of Berlin adjusted the boundaries of the newly independent states in theOttoman Empire's favor. Bulgaria was divided into two separate states (Bulgaria and Eastern Rumelia) and Bosniaand Herzegovina (though still nominally within the Ottoman Empire) were transferred to Austrian control. TheOttoman island of Cyprus was secretly given to the United Kingdom. See: Србија 1878: документи, приредилиМихаило Војводић, Драгољуб Живојиновић, Андреј Митровић и Радован Самарџић, Београд: Српскакњижевна задруга, 1978, 103–118; Чедомир Попов, Источно питање и српска револуција 1804–1918,Београд: Српска књижевна задруга, 2008, 222–231.11See: Милош Јагодић, “Планови о политици Србије према Старој Србији и Македонији (1878 – 1885)”,Историјски часопис 60, (2011), 435 – 459.

6

Bulgaria, Greece and Turkey, but far behind Western Europe. Of the total 1329 km border, the border

with Turkey was 545 km, and with Austria-Hungary 385 km.12

On the 16th of June 1881 Prince Milan Obrenovic concluded the Austro-Hungarian secret

convention without the knowledge of the National Assembly or the State Council. Serbia was obliged not

to act against the Austro-Hungarian Empire towards Bosnia, Herzegovina and the Sanjak of Novi Pazar.

As compensation Austria Hungary pledged not to oppose the proclamation of the Kingdom of Serbia.

This was the way for the Prince to show that he still has more power than the governing elite. Still the

formation of the Serbian modern state continued and on the 22nd of February 1882 Serbia was proclaimed

a Kingdom and Prince Milan become the King Milan Obrenovic.

Situation in the Balkans created after the Congress of Berlin complicated the relations between

the nations that gained their independence from the Ottoman Empire.13 It was difficult to sustain

cooperation defending common interests. Unrealized idea about the Great Bulgaria prevented the further

creation of the Balkan alliances. Relations were especially difficult between Serbia and Bulgaria and

were complicated by the involvement of Montenegro. Tensions led to the war between Serbia and

Bulgaria in 1885. Bulgaria defeated Serbia. The peace was concluded with the intervention of Austria-

Hungary in 1886.14

The further development of the Serbian society and realization of the people’s rights led to the

deliverance of the constitution of 1889.15 During the 1880 Serbian elitist national thought evolved towards

an independent state existence. That kind of thinking was against official state dynastic policy.

After the war with Bulgaria (1885) the foreign policy plans of the Serbian ruling elite changed

and reduced. Serbian territorial expansion was directed only to the south, toward Macedonia and Old

Serbia. This led yet again to the diplomatic conflict with Bulgaria that also had aspirations toward

Macedonia. This was a conflict of interests. Serbia expanded its influence in Macedonia and Old Serbia

12 Димитрије Ђорђевић, “Србија и српско друштво 1880-их година”, Историјски часопис 29–30 (1982–1983),413–426; Момир Стојковић, Балкански уговорни односи 1876–1996, књ. 1 (1876–1918), Београд: Службенилист СРЈ: Међународна политика, 1998, док. бр. 32; Момир Самарџић, Европа и обележавање границаСрбије 1878–1879, Нови Сад: Филозофски факултет, 2006, 40–53.13After the Congress of Berlin one of the solutions considered by the Balkan elite was the possibility of creatingBalkan autonomous states within the Ottoman Empire. This solution was reviewed as instrument of protection fromimperialistic plans of the great powers.14 Радош Љушић, Српска државност 19. века, Београд: Српска књижевна задруга, 2008, 250–252; СлободанЈовановић, Влада Милана Обреновића, књ. 3, Београд: Г. Кон, 1934, 219–313; Момир Самарџић, “Србија иБугарска 1879–1885”, Настава историје 7–13 (2011), 25–30.15 Serbian newspaper, number 282, volume LV, Belgrade Friday 23rd December 1888; Сузана Рајић, “Применапарламентаризма у Србији (1889-1894): проблеми и посебности политичког развитка”, Belgrade HistoricalReview 1 (2010), 137–166.

7

thorough the church and educational and cultural work. This influence lasted until the final liberation of

those arias from the Ottoman Empire in 1912.16

The formal organization of the Serbian political thought started with the formation of the political

parties. Radical and Progressive party were founded in January 1881. The Liberal party program was

delivered in October the same year. 17 The Political program of the Radical party promoted the defense of

economic and political aims of the country. They supported the Balkan alliances. The radical party

program supported the Balkan alliances because Serbia could not fight the Ottoman Empire alone. The

Progressive party program promoted the question of the Europeanization of the East. The program

envisioned a European Federal state in the East.18 Political program of the Liberal party also supported

Balkan alliances but it also accepted collaboration with the Russian Empire, which was part of the

Serbian cultural history and Slavonic heritage. The program of the Radical party did not exclude this

possibility.19

Contemporary Serbian historiography emphasizes that the understanding of the political parties in

Serbia during the 19 century was that the role of the constitutional monarch was to serve as a means for

fulfilling party wants and intentions.20

With the enlargement of the Serbian elite Serbia hoped to gain initial influence in the

international relations. Under the influence of Russia the Serbian global cooperation was suppose to begin

with the Balkan Peninsula, Bulgaria and Montenegro and other Slavonic nations.21 Serbian external

policy was directed toward emancipation from the Austria – Hungary. Serbia led more active policy in

solving the Eastern Question. That led to renewal of the policy Balkan to the Balkan and south Slav

nations which eventually led to the creation of Yugoslavia.

16 This change of policy was guided by Stojan Novakovic another long term Serbian emissary to Constantinople(1886–1891), the city which was a center for Balkan and European policy during the 19 th century.17 The first political organizing of liberals went through United Youth of Serbia in 1847 and was prohibited in 1851during the rule of Prince Alexander Karadjordjevic. Eventually this society contributed to the fall of Karadjordjevic.Jovan Ristic (1831 – 1899) one of the most famous Serbian politician and statesman, brother in law of Filip Hristicwas the member of United Youth of Serbia and one of the founders of the Liberal Party.18 Milan Pirocanac (1837 – 1897) the leader og the Progressive party was a Serbian lawyer and politician, the secondgeneration of state funded students finishing their studies in Paris. He was a Serbian prime minister in 1883. Hisgovernment introduced the political and economic modernization in Serbia.19 Василије Крестић, Радош Љушић, Програми и статути српских политичких странака до 1918. године,Београд: Књижевне новине, 1991, 103–126.20 Further: Сузана Рајић, Александар Обреновић. Владар на прелазу векова – сукобљени светови, Београд:Српска књижевна задруга, 2011.21 Милан Пироћанац, Међународни положај Србије, Београд: Државна штампарија, 1893, 3; СлавенкоТерзић, Србија и Грчка (1856–1903) – борба за Балкан, Београд: САНУ, Историјски институт, 1992, 341;Further: Димитрије Ђорђевић, Милован Миловановић, Београд: Просвета, 1962, 21–35.

8

During the 1890 towards the beginning of the 20th century the opinion of the Serbian elite was

that the future of Balkan relations was in reaching an understanding between the two Slovenian united

countries, Serbia and Bulgaria, against the Ottoman Empire. Public thought in Serbia was that the

solidarity of the Balkan states should be the bases of the destruction of the Ottoman Empire. The new

Balkan alliance was created and directed to the south toward Macedonia and Old Serbia. The western

direction was neglected until the formation of the Kingdom of Serbs, Croatians and Macedonians in

1918.22

One of the most influential persons that contributed to

solving the Serbian foreign policy issues was Stojan

Novakovic23 long term Serbian envoy to the Ottoman Empire.

This was one of the most sensitive positions of the Serbian

diplomatic service. He based his policy on establishment of

Serbian consulates in Skoplje and Solun and acknowledged that

the educational work and the policy combined and worked

together.

The Elite took the stand that “no one can hurt oneself

without hurting others” and that the agreement can be made

only by the balance of power between the Balkan nations. Only

this could lead to the Balkan federal state.24

The representatives of the next generation of the

Serbian elite came to an understanding that Serbia, after the

Berlin congress, was not the owner of any Serbian export roads. This generation of the Serbian elite

accepted again the western direction of the Serbian territorial expansion, toward Bosnia and Herzegovina.

This kind of attitude led to the even further distancing from the Austria–Hungary.25

22 Milovan Milovanovic (1863–1912) was the Serbian lawyer, one of the writers of the Serbian 1888 Constitution, apolitician and a diplomat. He was advocating for the agreements and demarcation in Macedonia between Serbia andBulgaria. His opinion was that the future of Balkan relations was in reaching an understanding between the twoSlovenian states Serbia and Bulgaria against the Ottoman Empire.23 Stojan Novakovic (1842–1915) was a Serbian politician, a diplomat, philologist, literary historian and a presidentof the Serbian Royal Academy of Arts and Sciences.24 Стојан Новаковић, Балканска питања, Београд: Завод за уџбенике и наставна средства, 2000, 38–384;Михило Војводић, Србија у међународним односима крајем XIX и почетком XX века, Београд: Српскаакадемија наука и уметности, 1988, 21–40.25 The representative of this generation was Jovan Cvijic (1865–1927) a Serbian scientist, a president of SerbianAcademy of Science, a first Serbian geopolitician. Like Cvijic other members of educated Balkan elite believed thatTurkey could never respect constitutional rule. The Constitution was introduced in 1908. Even after that it was clear

Stojan Novaković (1842–1915)

9

In 1911 Turkey was weakening and exhaust and the nations living inside its borders grow more

and more restless. Serbia and Bulgaria were working quickly together towards concluding an alliance.

Italy attacked the Ottoman Empire in Northern Africa in the same year. This represented the beginning of

the final solution of the Eastern Question. Willingness for war developed fast in Serbia and Bulgaria. The

idea of an agreement won over Serb – Bulgarian territorial disputes. The alliance was concluded between

the Serbian and Bulgarian Government. The goal was to free Old Serbia and Macedonia from the

Ottoman rule. The division of the territory was postponed for latter.26

The alliance treaty was finally signed on the 13th of March 1912. It represented an offensive

weapon aimed against Turkey and defensive weapon against Austria – Hungary and Rumania.

Montenegro and Greece joined the alliance. Still Serb – Bulgarian treaty presented a back bone of the

Balkan Alliance.27

The Balkan ruling class hoped that by creating new cultural and economically developed arias,

previously devastated by Turkish rule, they would calm turmoil in Europe. Balkan states tried to prevent

involvement of the great powers in their disputes. And they seceded in 1912. They hoped that a new part

of Europe would become open to free trade and prosperity.28

The Army as a Social Class

Prince Milos Obrenovic formed the special military body – the Department for Army and the

Police management in 1837. First and principal military law in the Principality was delivered in 1839. In

the period from 1835 to 1862 Serbia did not have a Ministry of the Military. Army command was

separated from State Council in 1838 and became independent. The Head of the Department had a few

military aids and an adjutant. The Department was responsible for supplying the military with arms, food

and clothes, building army buildings, army education and training. The first military school in Serbia was

founded in 1850 Artillery School, later it become the Military Academy. The second military law was

introduced in the Principality in 1845 during the rule of Prince Aleksandar Karadjordjevic. Army

administration was separated from the police in 1859. In 1860 Prince Milos Obrenovic passed a new law

about military structure.29

that Ottoman Empire was an ecclesiastical state that only obeyed the laws of the Koran so Christians would never betreated as equal.26Димитрије Ђорђевић, Милован Миловановић, Београд: Просвета, 1962, 253–256.27 Ibid. 264–265.28 Јован Цвијић, “Балкански рат и Србија”, Српски књижевни гласник 29 (1912), 651–664.29 Љуба Поповић, Милић Милићевић, Министри војни Кнежевине и Краљевине Србије 1862–1918, Београд:Војноиздавачки завод, 1997, 9–16; Радосав Марковић, Војска и наоружање Србије кнеза Милоша, Београд:Научно дело, 1957, 11–128.

10

The formation of the military as an elite class of the

society started during the rule of Michael Obrenovic.

Intending to liberate neighboring provinces from the

Turkish rule young Prince needed the formation of

the military elite which would command the new

national army. That was why in 1861 the law

regulating the marriage of military officers was

passed. The law proclaimed that military officers

could marry only if they and their prospective brides

had more than 500 ducats worth of property.

According to this law, officers could marry with

wives from higher classes of society, since they

almost never had agricultural land or any other

holdings. Military officers and their families

presented special kind of state officials. Like the

families of teachers, they were small in numbers.

Officers had special social status. The state tried to

provide for them material security and elite position

in the society. The main goal of Prince Michael Obrenovic was to achieve Serbian independence from

Ottoman Empire. To accomplish this Prince needed a strong army. In August 1861 the Prince founded,

beside the existing regular military, a national army. The national army was organized under the

regulations valid for the regular army forces. Taking part in the national army was a right and an

obligation of every Serbian age from twenty to fifty. That way Serbia gained military force amounting to

100.000 to 150.000 men. The Ministry of Military was finally organized in 1862.30

The conflict near the Chukur cesma (drinking fountain) in Belgrade,31 between the Serbs and

Turks, which lead to the bombardment of Belgrade in 1862, was a military test for the new national army.

30 Further: Живота Ђорђевић, Српска народна војска 1861–1864, Београд: Народна књига, 1984.31 On the 15th of June (old calendar style June 3rd), there was an incident at the fountain Chukur between Serbianboy and Turkish soldiers (nisams) over who will be the first to fill up the jug with water. The problem was that thewater flaw was law and filling up a jug took a long time. The conflict ended with a Serbian boy, an apprentice Sava(Sava Petkovic), seriously injured. The Serbian gendarmerie came quickly to help but so did the Turkish forces.The main clash took place on the market and took several lives. Serbs took over the Varosh gate, the Sava gate andthe Stambol gate. After the intervention of foreign consuls, an armistice was concluded. On the next day, on the 5th /17th of June, the day of the funeral, Turkish garrison bombarded the city from the Kalemegdan Fortress. The

Mihailo Obrenović

Prince of Serbia (1839–1842, 1860–1868)

11

This incident led to the foundation of the Invalidity Fond meat for the families of the killed and injured

soldiers. The new Military law regulative from 1864 extended the authority of the Minister of Military.

He was made an army commander in the name of the Prince.32

After the assassination of the Prince Michael in 1868 Governorship33 that ruled instead of

underage Prince Milan Obrenovic slawed down military preparations but increased the budget of the

Military Ministry.

Military and political alliances concluded during the rule of Prince Michael Obrenovic feel apart

by the time of the Great Eastern Crisis. Serbian military was lacking guns, ammunition, sanitary and

engineering resources. Since the time of Serbian revolution34 two armies, regular and national, existed

side by side. Although their goal, created by Prince Michael was the same – the Serbian independence,

their organization deferred. In 1883 the dilemma whether the state would organize Serbian people for war

bombardment lasted for fife hours. The bombardment lasted for five hours from 56 guns of the fortress. There were50 injured and 20 killed. About 380 houses were destroyed and damaged. Prince Michael declared a state of war inBelgrade. During the next day 15000 soldiers assembled in the city. The entire country was in the state of greatagitation. Intervention of the Great Powers prevented the armed conflict. An international conference was held inJuly 1862 near Istanbul in Kanlidži, in order to solve the Serbian-Turkish dispute. After long negotiations, theConference decided: to evict the Turks from Serbia, except from Belgrade, Sabac, Smederevo and Kladovo; todemolish fortified towns Soko and Užice. The Serbian government was to pay compensation to the Turks whoabandoned their property in Serbia. Based on this decision Turks emigrated from Serbia by the end of 1863 exceptfrom Mali Zvornik and Sakar on the Drina River. Several years later in 1867 the Turks left the last four fortifiedcities in Serbia: Belgrade, Smederevo, Sabac and Kladovo, and Soko and Uzice were destroyed earlier. Sultan'sedict (hatisherif) was read on the 6th of April 1867. and Riza Pasha of Belgrade handed over the keys of the fortressto Prince Mihailo and the last Turkish troops left Belgrade. See: Гргур Јакшић, Војислав Ј. Вучковић, Спољнаполитика Србије за владе Кнеза Михаила: (први балкански завез), Београд : Историјски институт, 1963, 108–109, 111–122, 140–155, 182, 184, 199.32 Поповић, Милићевић, Министри војни, 18.33 Governorship was established in 1868 after the assassination of Prince Mihailo Obrenovic in Kosutnjak. TheMinister of Military Milivoj Blaznavc named for a new successor Prince Milan Obrenovic, then fourteen. Atelection time, since he was underage, instead ruled appointed Governorship: Milivoje Petrovic Blaznavac 1824 –1873 Serbian general and politician, Jovan Ristic, Serbian Politian, statement and a historian and Jovan Gavrilovic),until 1872.34 The term Serbian revolution refers to the period of Serbian history from 1804 to 1835 and it was first used byLeopold Ranke in his book Die Serbische Revolution. From him it was later accepted by Vuk Stefanovic Karadzic.The period to which the term applies includes: the First Serbian Uprising (1804–1813), led by Karadjordje, HadziProdan Revolt in 1814, the Second Serbian Uprising in 1815 led by Milos Obrenovic and his first reigning perioduntil the adoption of the constitution Sretenjski ustav in 1835.As a consequence of these events was the liberation ofSerbia from the Turkish authorities, and the revival of Serbian society. See: Радош Љушић, “Ранкеова и Вукова“Српска револуција”“, Србија 19. века, изабрани радови, књига 3, Београд: Војноиздавачки завод, 2005, 215–229.

12

or the people would organize their state for war was solved. Regular army was finally instituted in Serbia

and the process of creating disciplined Serbian soldier started. 35

The third Serbian law regulating army organization was introduced in 1886. By that law the king

was declared the superior commander of the army and the military minister was in command of the army.

The fundamental reform of the army

started at the end of 1897 and at the beginning

of 1898, after the return of King Milan

Obrenovic to Serbia. The king who became the

general was at the head of the renewed military

institution. When ex king Milan finally left

Serbia in 1900, the Ministry of Military took

over the command of the army. 36

The greatest demand and at the same

time the biggest achievement of the reform was

the enlargement of the military commanding

personnel. Lack of the commanding personnel

was one of the biggest problems in the history

of the Serbian army during the 19th century. By

1887 Serbia had 187 military officers. Still by

the end of the century the number of high

ranking officials in the military was raised four

times. In 1899 the military Academy lasted two

years. The officers in the lower school had 32

school subjects and four languages – French, German, Russian and Turkish. In the Academy they had

only 15 subjects. Learning the Turkish language represented one of the biggest problems for the military

personnel. At beginning of 1897, 13 military officials were educated abroad. Three years later that

number increased. At the beginning of the 20th century, Serbia had nearly forty officers trained in schools

and troupes of seven European countries. Military personnel were not peasant in origin.

The officers became the reformers, the diplomats, the members of the governorship, the prime

ministers, the military ministers, the ministers of the transport and the construction, the presidents and the

35 Славица Ратковић-Костић, “Реорганизација Министарства војног краљевско-српске војске 1883. године”,Војноисторијски гласник 1–2 (2004), 100–108; Поповић, Милићевић, Министри војни, 21.36 Further: Милић Милићевић, Реформа војске Србије (1897–1900), Београд: Војноиздавачки завод, 2002.

Milan Obrenović

Prince (1868–1882) and King (1882–1889) of Serbia

13

members of the State Council, the presidents and members of the scientific institutions and associations.

Military elite was forming like any other social elite in the Serbian society. Existence of the social elites

in Serbia – political, economic, military, scientific, artistic was a sign of the society modernization. 37

The future King Alexander Obrenovic38 trying

to reestablish the control over the army introduced the

new military institution the main inspection of the

whole military. He was the head of this military

institution.

With the support, commitment and obedience

of the regular army King Milan and partially King

Alexander ensured them selves the full power in the

Principality. This fact influenced the whole political life

of the country. The army supported the dynasty. With

the help of the military, king Alexander performed the

state coup, proclaimed him self of legal age, before

time. He overthrew the Governorship and changed the

Government.

The military industry started to develop during

the last two decades of the 19 century. The military was

a great spender of the state budget. At the same time the state dedicated one forth or even one third of the

budget to the Military ministry. Army industry became the first modern industry in Serbia. The

development of the transport network and the telegraph was strategically significant for the Military. At

the end of the 19th century Serbia did not have many roads. The best maintained road was a road to

Constantinople, from Belgrade to Nis to the Turkish border. The railway was built after the 1880s.39

Political situation in Serbia before and after the killings of King Aleksandar Obrenovic and his

wife queen Draga in 1903, Austro-Hungarian annexing of Bosnia and Hercegovina in 1908 and making of

37 Славица Ратковић–Костић, “Утицај европеизације српске војске на модернизацијске процесе у држави идруштву крајем 19. века”, Војноисторијски гласник 2 (2008), 17–35.38 Alexander I or Aleksandar Obrenović (Cyrillic: Александар Обреновић; August 14, 1876 – June 11, 1903) wasking of Serbia from 1889 to 1903 when he and his wife, Queen Draga, were assassinated by a group of Armyofficers,led by Colonel Dragutin Dimitrijević. The opinion of the present Serbian historiography is that the politicalparties during the 19th century and at the beginning of the 20 century in Serbia considered the role of theconstitutional ruler as means to fulfill their own political goals. Сузана Рајић, Александар Обреновић, 452–528.39 Ратковић–Костић, “Утицај европеизације српске војске”, 17–35; Милић Милићевић, “Наоружавање војскеСрбије крајем XIX века”, Гласник 35 (2001), 57–69.

Aleksandar Obrenović

King of Serbia (1889–1903)

14

Balkan alliances led to internal divisions with in the army. Even though it was internally divided the army

still represented a great political power that could threaten civilian authorities and the power of the ruler

and the dynasty.40

Still military was also a promoter of many social and cultural activities in the society like sports,

balls and celebrations.

Cadets of the Military Academy (the end of the 19th century)

The military organizational problems were solved in the period lasting from 1883 to 1902. After

that the central problems became military political and war like in nature. The success in the wars 1912–

1913 raised the dignity and the self-esteem of the military circles.41

The Serbian Family

The Breakdown of the Ottoman Empire led to the changes in the Serbian family values. During

the Ottoman rule in the Principality of Serbia the agricultural cooperative had much bigger importance

then during the latter part of the 19th century. The family in Serbia and in other parts of the Balkan

40 Поповић, Милићевић, Министри војни, 26–27.41 Ibid. 28–29.

15

Peninsula was the basic unit of the society, the guardian of the folk customs and the kipper of the

tradition.

The extended family with more than four members existed in the Balkans more often than in the

rest of Europe.42

In the middle of the 19th century the

ability and influence of the head of the family,

commendable way of life and financial stability

decided the place of the family in the society. Still

at that time the class differences were not yet fully

developed. The position in the society was very

important at the moment of marriage. Only

persons of similar financial standing decided to

make a marriage commitment.43

Based on the census held in the Serbian

Principality in 1863, during the rule of Prince

Michael Obrenovic, it can be concluded that the

population progressed numerically along the male family lines. In the family, the sons sometimes, even

after their marriage, stayed in the commune with the fathers or brothers. It was not the same with female

children. Daughters left the paternal home and joined their husband’s families. The average life span in

the middle of 19th century was 60 years.44

From the middle of 19th century peasant families became poor mostly because of acquiring a lone.

Peasants took loans for starting their own commercial businesses. After the disintegration of agricultural

commune the need for money in the peasant population became more evident. The peasants came in

contact with the city way of life.

Serbian peasants were described by their educated contemporaries from the cities as lazy. Serbian

farming households were not well maintained and the cattle were not well cared for. The statistical data

42 Александра Вулетић, Породица у Србији средином 19. века, Београд: Историјски институт: Службенигласник, 2002, 12–24.43 Вулетић, Породица, 52; Милић Милићевић, “Социјално порекло официрског кадра школованог у Србијиод 1850. до 1901. године”, Годишњак за друштвену историју 2 (1995), 194–201.44 Вулетић, Породица, 62.

Serbian society (19th century)

16

supports this description. European peasants cultivated three times more land then the farmers in Serbian

Principality.45

At the beginning of the 19th century the Serbian cities were not in a good state. Disorder,

dirtiness, lack of sewerage system and poverty were main characteristics of the Serbian town settlements.

Disintegration of the Ottoman rule was very evident in the cities because they were the centers of the

Turkish administration in the Principality. When the Turks started to leave Serbia their houses with nicely

arranged gardens started to decay. The Serbian Principality inherited urban settlements of law material

value.

In 1866 the city law was proclaimed classifying city settlements. Aleksinac, Belgrade, Valjevo,

Gornji Milanovac, Zajecar, Jagodina, Knjazevac, Kragujevac, Krusevac, Loznica, Negotin, Pozarevac,

Smederevo, Uzice, Cacak, Cuprija and Sabasc were affirmed as the cities. There were also 22 small towns

in Serbia, everything else were the villages.46

The withdrawal of the Turkish civil population after the bombardment of Belgrade in 1862 and

Turkish solders in 1867 made possible for Belgrade to develop under European architectural influences.

The ottoman way of dressing was replaced with the European style. Other cities in Serbia underwent the

same kind of change. Cities nearer to Habsburg Monarchy reformed faster. Western way of life was first

adopted at the court of Prince Michael and then later in the houses of the administrative officers and the

wealthy traders.47

Younger peasants left the villages

and moved to the cities. The reason for this

movement was economic ruin of the

farming households so the Serbian nationals

populated the cities instead of Turks, Jews

and Greeks.48

The population in the cities was

three times richer than in the villages. The

property of the citizens amounted to about

41 ducats and peasant’s property was worth

45 Вулетић, Породица, 67–69; Мајкл Паларе, Балканске привреде око 1800. до 1914. године: еволуција безразвоја, Београд: Службени гласник, 2010, 107–156.46 Вулетић, Породица, 104; Љушић, Српска државност, 39–42.47 Ibid. 107–109.48 Мари–Жанин Чалић, Социјална историја Србије 1815–1941, Београд: Clio, 2004, 35–107; Вулетић,Породица, 110.

Belgrade Centre (the end of the 19th century)

17

only 15 ducats. Many traders, craftsman and artisans lived in the cities with their families. Merchant’s

families were the richest. The families of the government official and the merchants were the most

prominent families in the society. These families were carriers of the modernization processes in the

Serbian society.49

In the second half of the 19th century influential and well established Serbian families started to

educate their daughters as well as their sons. The first schools for women were opened in 1840 – ties. The

girls were taught the Christian Science, the Serbian language, history, foreign languages, but also knitting,

playing the musical instruments, writing and dancing. Many of those women became teachers.

Clergyman also presented a special society group. The material status of the priests was better

than that of officers and teachers especially among peasants.50

The Principality of Serbia had during the 19th century the highest rate of marriages in Europe.

According to latest researches in marital relations in Serbia, the marriages in the Principality in period

lasting from 1830th to 1882nd

were very much under the

influence of state policy. This

policy was created during the

first three decades of the 19th

century.51

The marriage and the

family were two main

foundations for the Serbian

society organization in the 19th

century. The marriage policy

was one of the most important

segments of the interior policy

of Serbia. During the first rule

of Prince Milosh Obrenovic

state institutions established complete control over marital relations because the church organization was

powerless to implement a moral code for the family relations. The Marital relations came under church

49 Вулетић, Породица, 114–134; Б. Миљковић-Катић, Привреда Кнежевине Србије у доба уставобранитеља(1839–1858), докторска дисертација у рукопису, Београд 2005.50 Вулетић, 136–139.51 Александра Вулетић, Брак у Кнежевини Србији, Београд: Завод за уџбенике, 2008, 7–15.

Higher girl’s school of Queen Draga Obrenović (the end of the 19th century)

18

control after 1830th but the state administration as more powerful than clerical organization in the

Principality kept the main role in establishing the bases for marriage policy.52

Marital policy was implemented for two reasons: for the legal regulation of the marriage from its

beginning to the end and control of the family disputes.

The life in the country was still more difficult than the life in the city. When king Milan visited

the interior of Serbia in 1882 farmers intentionally greeted him in tatters and rugs, to demonstrate their

poverty. The big problem was illiteracy. In the cities, the writing was 47.7% and 6.4% in the villages.

Illiteracy of the women was even bigger, 87.6% in cities and 99.7% in villages. Secondary schools

existed only in the cities. The 1879 there were 22 high schools in Serbia, but only three (Belgrade,

Kragujevac and Nis) were Gymnasiums. The Budgets for the education abroad in 1879 was 119.000

dinars and was higher than the budget intended for the National Assembly. The political journalism

especially developed in the period lasting from 1880 to 1905.53

At the end of the 19th century the Serbian society slawly abandoned oriental forms and habits and

accepted the European social values. The cities developed because of the raise of the city economy and

the influx of the working class from the countryside. The fastest developing city was Belgrade with over

70.000 inhabitants. Most of the streets were paved over, the buildings were built in European architectural

style, and water system and electricity were introduced.54

The development of the Serbian culture was influenced by the political changes and the liberation

from the Ottoman rule. Emigration from the Austria – Hungary and the Ottoman Empire after the

proclamation of the Serbian independence in 1878 influenced the Serbian national heritage. Special forms

of domestic Serbian culture were the combined experience of the Serbian and Ottoman middle class.

British traveler Andry Archibald Payton remarked that in Serbia oriental and western cultural forms,

separated like people, existed together.55 Autonomous and domestic administration of the Serbian

province, freedom of religious belief, language and education of the Serbian people until then living in the

Ottoman Empire, made the Serbian culture.56

52 Ibid. 19.53 Further: Арсен Ђуровић, Космолошко трагање за новом школом: модернизацијски изазови у системусредњошколског образовања у Београду 1880–1905, Београд: Београдски издавачко-графички завод, 1999.54 Ратковић–Костић, “Утицај европеизације српске војске”, 17–35.55 For example: United Kingdom and United States of America today.56 Приватни живот код Срба у 19. веку, 38–39.

19

A Brief Conclusion

With the dynastical change after the killings of Alexander and Draga Obrenovic in 1903, Serbia

again draw closer to Russia. Austria–Hungary supported the formation of the Great Albania. This was

confronting with the Serbian national way of expansion toward Macedonia and Old Serbia. Trying to

outrun Austro–Hungarian foreign policy tendencies and create a big Christian state in the Balkans, Serbia,

Bulgaria, Greece and Montenegro were getting closer and closer toward the mutual understanding. This

was the way that the new formed, state planed Balkan elite made an agreement in 1912. They solved their

differences and went to war against decaying Ottoman Empire.

Bibliography

Балкански уговорни односи 1876–1996, књ. 1 (1876–1918), приредио Момир Стојковић, Београд:

Службени лист СРЈ: Међународна политика, 1998. (Balkanski ugovorni odnosi 1876–1996, knj. 1

(1876–1918), ed. Momir Stojkovic [Balkan contractual relations 1876–1996])

Јован Цвијић, “Балкански рат и Србија”, Српски књижевни гласник 29 (1912), 651–664. (Jovan

Cvijic, Balkanski rat i Srbija [The Balkan war and Serbia])

Димитрије Ђорђевић, Милован Миловановић, Београд: Просвета, 1962. (Dimitrije Djordjevic,

Milovan Milovanovic [Milovan Milovanovic])

Димитрије Ђорђевић, Националне револуције балканских народа 1804–1914, Београд: Службени

лист СРЈ, 1995. (Dimitrije Djordjevic, Nacionalne revolucije balkanskih naroda 1804–1914 [National

Revolutions of the Balkans nations1804–1914])

Димитрије Ђорђевић, “Србија и српско друштво 1880-их година”, Историјски часопис 29–30

(1982–1983), 413–426. (Dimitrije Djordjevic, Srbija I srpsko drustvo 1880-ih godina [Serbia and the

Serbian Society at the 1880es])

Живота Ђорђевић, Српска народна војска 1861–1864, Београд: Народна књига, 1984. (Zivota

Djordjevic, Srpska narodna vojska 1861–1864 [Serbian National Army 1861–1864])

Арсен Ђуровић, Космолошко трагање за новом школом: модернизацијски изазови у систему

средњошколског образовања у Београду 1880–1905, Београд: Београдски издавачко-графички

завод, 1999. (Arsen Djurovic, Kosmolosko traganje za novom skolom: modernizacijski izazovi u sistemu

20

srednjoskolskog obrazovanja u Beogradu 1880–1905 [Cosmological quest for a new school: Challenges

in modernizing the system of secondary education in Belgrade 1880–1905])

Милорад Екмечић, Стварање Југославије 1790–1918, књ. 1, Београд: Просвета, 1989. (Milorad

Ekmecic, Stvaranje Jugoslavije 1790–1918 [Creation of the Yugoslavia 1790–1918])

Милош Јагодић, “Планови о политици Србије према Старој Србији и Македонији (1878 – 1885)”,

Историјски часопис 60 (2011), 435–459 (Milos Jagodic, Planovi o politici Srbije prema Staroj Srbiji i

Makedoniji (1878 – 1885) [The Political Plans of Serbia towards Old Serbia and Macedonia]

Гргур Јакшић, Војислав Ј. Вучковић, Спољна политика Србије за владе Кнеза Михаила: (први

балкански завез), Београд: Историјски институт, 1963. (Grgur Jaksic, Vojislav J. Vuckovic, Spoljna

politika Srbije za vlade kneza Mihaila (prvi balkanski savez) [The foreign policy of Serbia during the

government of Prince Michael: (first Balkan alliance)])

Слободан Јовановић, Влада Милана Обреновића, књ. 3, Београд: Г. Кон, 1934. (Slobodan Jovanovic,

Vlada Milana Obrenovica [The government of Milan Obrenovic])

Василије Крестић, Радош Љушић, Програми и статути српских политичких странака до 1918.

године, Београд: Књижевне новине, 1991. (Vasilije Krestic, Rados Ljusic, Programi I statute srpskih

politickih stranaka do 1918. godine [Programs and statutes of Serbian political parties until the 1918])

Радош Љушић, Књига о Начертанију, Београд: Белетра, 2004. (Rados Ljusic, Knjiga o Nacertaniju

[The book of Nacertanije’s])

Радош Љушић, “Политичке генерације у Србији”, Српске политичке генерације (1788–1918),

Историјски институт САНУ, књ. 15 (1998), 9–29. (Rados Ljusic, “Politicke generacije u Srbiji”, Srpske

politicke generacije (1788–1918) [“Political generations in Serbia”, Serbian political generations (1788–

1918)])

Радош Љушић, “Српска, великосрпска и југословенска државна политика Србије (1804–1918)”,

Србија 19. века, изабрани радови, књига 3, Београд: Војноиздавачки завод, 2005, 253–277. (Rados

Ljusic, “Srpska, velikosrpska I jugoslovenska drzavna politika Srbije (1804–1918)” [Serbian, Greater

Serbian and Yugoslav state policy of Serbia (1804-1918)])

Радош Љушић, “Ранкеова и Вукова “Српска револуција”“, Србија 19. века, изабрани радови,

књига 3, Београд: Војноиздавачки завод, 2005, 215–229. (Rados Ljusic, “Rankeova I Vukova “Srpska

revolucija”” [Ranke’s and Vuk’s “Serbian Revolution”])

Радош Љушић, Српска државност 19. века, Београд: Српска књижевна задруга, 2008. (Rados

Ljusic, Srpska drzavnost 19. veka [Serbian statehood in the 19th century])

21

Радосав Марковић, Војска и наоружање Србије кнеза Милоша, Београд: Научно дело, 1957.

(Radosav Markovic, Vojska I naourzanje Srbije za kneza Milosa [The Army and the weapons of Serbia

during the rule of Prince Milos])

Милић Милићевић, Реформа војске Србије (1897–1900), Београд: Војноиздавачки завод, 2002.

(Milic Milicevic, Reforma vojske Srbije (1897–1900) [Reform of the Serbian Army (1897–1900)])

Милић Милићевић, “Социјално порекло официрског кадра школованог у Србији од 1850. до 1901.

године”, Годишњак за друштвену историју 2 (1995), 194–201. (Milic Milicevic, “Socijalno poreklo

oficirskog kadra skolovanog u Srbiji od 1850. do 1901. godine” [“The social origins of the officer corps

trained in Serbia since the 1850 to the1901”])

Бојана Миљковић-Катић, Структура градског становништва Србије средином 19. века, Београд:

Историјски институт: Службени гласник, 2002. (Bojana Miljkovic-Katic, Struktura gradskog

stanovnistva Srbije sredinom 19. veka [The structure of the urban population of Serbia in the mid 19th

century])

Бојана Миљковић-Катић, Привреда Кнежевине Србије у доба уставобранитеља (1839–1858),

докторска дисертација у рукопису, Београд 2005. (Bojana Miljkovic-Katic, Privreda Knezevine Srbije

u doba ustavobranitelja (1839–1858) [The economy of the Principality of Serbia at the time of

Constitutionalists (1839–1858), unpublished doctoral disertation])

Стојан Новаковић, Балканска питања, Београд: Завод за уџбенике и наставна средства, 2000.

(Stojan Novakovic, Balkanska pitanja [The Balkan issues])

Мајкл Паларе, Балканске привреде око 1800. до 1914. године: еволуција без развоја, Београд:

Службени гласник, 2010. (Majkl Palare, Balkanske privrede oko 1800. do 1914. godine: evolucija bez

razvoja [Balkan economies around 1800. to 1914: the evolution without development])

Милан Пироћанац, Међународни положај Србије, Београд: Државна штампарија, 1893. (Milan

Pirocanac, Medjunarodni polozaj Srbije [The international position of Serbia])

Чедомир Попов, Источно питање и српска револуција 1804–1918, Београд: Српска књижевна

задруга, 2008. (Cedomir Popov, Istocno pitanje I srpska revolucija 1804–1918 [The Eastern Question

and the Serbian revolution 1804–1918])

Љуба Поповић, Милић Милићевић, Министри војни Кнежевине и Краљевине Србије 1862–1918,

Београд: Војноиздавачки завод, 1997. (Ljuba Popovic, Milic Milicevic, Ministri vojni Knezevine I

Kraljevine Srbije 1862–1918 [Military ministry in the Principality and the Kingdom of Serbia 1862–

1918])

22

Приватни живот код Срба у деветнаестом веку: од краја осамнаестог века до почетка Првог

светског рата, приредили Ана Столић, Ненад Макуљевић, Београд: Clio, 2006. (Privatni zivot kod

Srba u devetnaestom veku: od kraja osamnaestog veka do pocetka Prvog svetskog rata, ed. Ana Stolic,

Nenad Makuljevic [The Serbian Private life during the 19th century: from the late eighteenth century to

the beginning of World War I])

Сузана Рајић, Александар Обреновић. Владар на прелазу векова – сукобљени светови, Београд:

Српска књижевна задруга, 2011. (Suzana Rajic, Aleksandar Obrenovic. Vladar na prelazu vekova –

sukobljeni svetovi [Aleksandar Obrenovic. The ruler at the turn of centuries – the conflicting worlds])

Сузана Рајић, “Примена парламентаризма у Србији (1889–1894): проблеми и посебности

политичког развитка”, Belgrade Historical Review 1 (2010), 137–166. (Suzana Rajic, “Primena

parlamentarizma u Srbiji (1889–1894): problemi I osobenosti politickog razivtka” [Application of

parliamentarism in Serbia (1889–1894): problems and peculiarities of the political development])

Славица Ратковић–Костић, “Утицај европеизације српске војске на модернизацијске процесе у

држави и друштву крајем 19. века”, Војноисторијски гласник 2 (2008), 17–35. (Slavica Ratkovic-

Kostic, “Uticaj evropeizacije srpske vojske na modernizacijske procese u drzavi I drustvu krajem 19.

veka” [Impact of Europeanization on the Serbian army modernization process in the state and society in

the late 19th century])

Славица Ратковић–Костић, “Реорганизација Министарства војног краљевско-српске војске 1883.

године”, Војноисторијски гласник 1–2 (2004), 100–108. (Slavica Ratkovic-Kostic, “Reorganizacija

Ministarstva vojnog kraljevsko-srpske vojske 1883. godine” [Restructuring of the Military Ministry of the

Serbian Kingdom’s Army in 1883])

Момир Самарџић, Европа и обележавање граница Србије 1878–1879, Нови Сад: Филозофски

факултет, 2006. (Momir Samardzic, Evropa I obelezavanje granica Srbije 1878–1879 [Europe and

marking the borders of Serbia 1878–1879])

Момир Самарџић, “Србија и Бугарска 1879–1885”, Настава историје 7–13 (2011), 14–30. (Momir

Samardzic, “Srbija I Bugarska 1879–1885” [Serbia and Bulgaria 1879–1885])

Славенко Терзић, Србија и Грчка (1856–1903) – борба за Балкан, Београд: САНУ, Историјски

институт, 1992. (Slavenko Terzic, Srbija I Grcka (1856–1903) – borba za Balkan [Serbia and Greece

(1856–1903) – Fight for the Balkans])

Србија 1878: документи, приредили Михаило Војводић, Драгољуб Живојиновић, Андреј

Митровић и Радован Самарџић, Београд: Српска књижевна задруга, 1978. (Srbija 1878: dokumenti,

23

ed. Mihailo Vojvodic, Dragoljub Zivojinovic, Andrej Mitrovic, Radovan Samardzic [Serbia 1878:

documents])

Александра Вулетић, Породица у Србији средином 19. века, Београд: Историјски институт:

Службени гласник, 2002. (Aleksandra Vuletic, Porodica u Srbiji sredinom 19. veka [The Serbian

Family at the Mid – 19th century])

Александра Вулетић, Брак у Кнежевини Србији, Београд: Завод за уџбенике, 2008. (Aleksandra

Vuletic, Brak u Knezevini Srbiji [The Marriage in the Principality of Serbia])

Михило Војводић, Србија у међународним односима крајем XIX и почетком XX века, Београд:

Српска академија наука и уметности, 1988. (Mihailo Vojvodic, Srbija u medjunarodnim odnosima

krajem XIX I pocetkom XX veka [Serbia in the international relations in the late nineteenth and early

twentieth century])

Мари–Жанин Чалић, Социјална историја Србије 1815–1941, Београд: Clio, 2004. (Mari Zanin Calic,

Socijalna istorija Srbije 1815–1941 [Social History of Serbia 1815–1941])