Análisis interno

Li ke Ri ter, Lju de vit Gaj too was of Ger man ori gin, but he did not fi nish a Je su it high school, but rat her a Fran ci scan one in Var ždin and Kar lo vac. Apart from the se two Ger mans, un til the end of the 19th_{cen tury, the cre a tors of the con tem po rary Cro a tian}

“na ti o nal” won der all we re Ro man Cat ho lic pri ests. “Na mely, over a long pe riod of ti - me, the Hab sburgs and the Va ti can saw the Illyrian Mo ve ment as an in te gral fac tor, who se aim was to unify, and re li gi o usly and spa ti ally con nect the Bal kan hi sto ri cal lands (re gi ons) in to a who le. Thro ugh the Illyrian Mo ve ment, the Ro man re li gi o us ide - o logy was to be spread in the na me of ‘the apo sto lic Hab sburg Em pe ror’” (p. 97). As a mat ter of fact, Gaj’s po li ti cal go als we re highly tran spa rent, even at the be gin ning of his mis sion. As Ni ko la Žu tić emp ha si ses: “Gaj wo uld use the re-ac ti va tion of Ri ter’s Ro man Cat ho lic Gre a ter Cro a tian ide as, un der the mock ‘Illyrian’ na me, to op po se them to the ob jec ti ve dan ger of the strengthe ning of the Ser bian na ti o nal mo ve ment af ter the cre a tion of auto no mo us Ser bia in 1830” (p. 98). Thro ugh the ide o logy of the

Illyrian Mo ve ment, Gaj tried to re a li se Cro a tian na ti o nal in te gra tion, using the wi de Ser bian et hnic ba se and ac cep ting the Ser bian lan gu a ge as a li te rary one. “Gaj’s Pan- Cro a tian Illyrian mo ve ment, as well as Ri ter’s, ser ved the Austrian in te rests aga inst Hun ga rian aspi ra ti ons for in de pen den ce, and al so as a de fen ce from ‘the nort hern he - re tics’. On the ot her hand, it was in ten ded to draw Sla vic na ti ons and the ne ig hbo u ring Sla vic co un tri es clo se to Austria, sin ce they we re ex po sed to the in flu en ce of Ort ho - dox Rus sia and auto no mo us Ort ho dox Ser bia. From this stem med Gaj’s Pan-Sla vic com mit ment, which was ba sed on a con ce a led Austro-Sla vic fe a tu re and even mo re on con ce a led Ro man Cat ho lic ex pan si o nism. In or der to esta blish Pan-Cro a ti a nism in the so-cal led ‘Cro a tian lands’, the ide o lo gists of the Illyrian Mo ve ment in si sted on the Shto ka vian na ti ons in or der to as si mi la te (unify) the so-cal led ‘Cro a tian’ lan gu a ge of ‘three di a lects’ (Shto ka vian, Kaj ka vian, Cha ka vian). The di a lects of Cha ka vi ans and Kaj ka vi ans, that we re in the mi no rity, we re to be di smis sed, and the Ser bian Shto ka - vian was to be pre scri bed as the of fi cial di a lect of Cro a ti ans” (p. 102).

Sin ce the di stin gu is hed Sla vist Jer nej Ko pi tar in si sted on the fact that the Shto ka - vian di a lect be lon ged only to the Ser bian lan gu a ge, and Kaj ka vian to Slo ve nian, so the Cro a tian one co uld only be Cha ka vian, as Franc Mi klo šić cla i med as well; Bis hop Mak si mi li jan Vr ho vec as a gray emi nen ce of Gaj’s mo ve ment, de man ded that Kaj ka - vian sho uld be in clu ded as Shto ka vian, sin ce it had been ex po sed to its in flu en ce for a long ti me. It is par ti cu larly sig ni fi cant that the Illyrian Mo ve ment had mas si ve and ene- r ge tic sup port from the Ro man Cat ho lic clergy as long as it la sted. “Many front per - sons of the Illyrian Mo ve ment we re the Ro man Cat ho lic pri ests, for exam ple: Pa vao Štos, Fra Mar tin Ne dić and nu me ro us Bo snian Fran ci scans, the rec tor To maž Mi klo - u šić – a fo re run ner of the Illyrian Mo ve ment, etc. Bis hop Alek san dar Ala go vić (1760- 1837) re com men ded to the Ro man Cat ho lic clergy that they read Gaj’s No vi ne and

Da ni ca (the Cro a tian daily new spa pers that Gaj star ted). Prof. Ni ko la Žic emp ha si sed

that Gaj pre ci sely in ‘the Cro a tian clergy fo und the most ex pe ri en ced and the most thril led fol lo wers and sup por ters for his work and suc cess’. Apart from ‘the do me stic pe o ple’, the Illyrian Mo ve ment was sup por ted by ‘the new co mers’, the Ro man Cat - ho lics from Hun gary and Slo va kia: Ban Vla šić (ot her wi se Hun ga rian), the Za greb clergyman Moj zes, Bis hop Alek san dar (Šan dor) Ala go vić (from Slo va kia), Bis hop- Car di nal Ha u lik. That the vi ews of the Illyri ans we re re ac ti o nary ‘was pro ved by the

Ma đa ro ni (pro-Hun ga rian ac ti vists) by the fact that the re we re a lot of mem bers of the

Church among them. An tun Ba rac sta tes that ‘the most bo i ste ro us of Gaj’s fol lo wers we re the Za greb se mi na ri ans and the ma jo rity of the lo wer pri ests” (p. 106). Sup por - ted by the church pre la tes, the Ro man Cat ho lic the o lo gi ans for med va ri o us pa tri o tic so ci e ti es in many pla ces. ‘The Cho ir of Re gu lar Bo snian Youth (a li te rary so ci ety) that was for med in Đa ko vo in 1855, and then mo ved to Ostro gon in 1876, bro ught up the edu ca ted Ro man Cat ho lic cle rics that un der to ok ‘the holy’ mis si o nary du ti es in Ort ho - dox-Mu slim Bo snia and Her ze go vi na, ca su ally no ting down the Ser bian folk songs that they pu blis hed as Cro a tian. Fri ar I. Ju kić espe ci ally ex cel led in tho se ac ti vi ti es” (p. 107-108). It was ob vi o us that, as one of its main go als, the Illyrian Mo ve ment in Cro - a tia and Sla vo nia had to de fend the Ro man Cat ho lic ex clu si vity of the se ter ri to ri es fa - ced with Ort ho dox and Pro te stant dan ger. That Po pe Pi us IX pin ned gre at ho pes on Za greb as a Cat ho lic cen tre te sti fi es the fact that in 1850, he ra i sed the Za greb di o ce - se to the rank of ar chdi o ce se, su bjec ting to it the Bo snian or Đa ko vač ka-Srem ska, Senj ska-Mo dru ška or Kr bav ska and Kri že vač ka di o ce se. “In the se cond half of the

19th_{cen tury, Austria and the Va ti can ac cep ted the Yugo slav (Pan-Sla vic) na me, apart}

from the Illyrian one, as a pos si ble me ans of spre a ding Ger ma nism and Ro man Cat - ho li cism in the na me of the apo sto lic Austrian Em pe ror and the Ro man Po pe” (p. 110). As early as 26 July 1843, Austria be ca me a for mal pro tec tor of the In sti tu te of Sa int Je ro me in Ro me as well, and in it, at the end of the 19th_{cen tury, the Yugo slav na me}

was be ing mo re fre qu ently used than the Illyrian one.

a) Cro a ti a ni sa tion as the Es sen ce of Illyri a ni sa tion

The Yugo slav na ti o nal iden tity wit hin the Austro-Hun ga rian fra me work se e med li - ke a way of ef fi ci ent op po si tion to the Gre a ter Hun ga rian se pa ra tist aspi ra ti ons for a long ti me. With the encycli cal of Po pe Leo XI II from 1 August 1901, the In sti tu te of Sa int Je - ro me de fi ni ti vely got a Cro a tian at tri bu te in its na me. By so do ing, the Va ti can adop ted a pro ject in which all Cat ho lics who spo ke the Ser bian lan gu a ge we re of Cro a tian na ti - o na lity, en for cing a mo re ag gres si ve re a li sa tion of it. Alt ho ugh the Po pe re tur ned the Illyrian na me to this in sti tu te the fol lo wing year due to the pres su res of Dal ma tian and Bay-of-Ko tor Ser bian Cat ho lics, as well as Dal ma tian ‘pro-Ita li ans’, the ba sic pro ject of Cro a ti a ni sa tion was ne ver gi ven up. The Hun ga rian of fi ci als fi er cely op po sed the Va ti - can for ma tion of the new Cro a tian na tion, de mon stra ting that both the Yugo slav and the Cro a tian na me of this di stin gu is hed in sti tu te we re equ ally unac cep ta ble to them, tho ugh the in sti tu te ca me un der the aut ho rity of the Yugo slav de le ga tion in Ro me in 1924. “Fi - nally, af ter the vi sit of Yugo slav Pre si dent Jo sip Broz to the Va ti can in April 1971, at the ti me of the so-cal led ‘ma spok’ (the Cro a tian Spring, “mass mo ve ment” was a po li ti cal mo ve ment from the early 1970s that cal led for gre a ter rights for Cro a tia, which was then part of Yugo sla via), Po pe Pa vle VI ga ve the na me ‘the Cro a tian Pa pal In sti tu te of Sa int Je ro me’ to the Illyrian In sti tu te of Sa int Je ro me on 22 July 1971” (p. 119). Af ter the First Cro a tian Cat ho lic Con gress in Za greb in 1900, cle ri ca lism was gra du ally be co ming the ba sic Cro a tian po li ti cal op tion, espe ci ally af ter the de ath of Stje pan Ra dić, the last di stin - gu is hed an ti-cle ri cal. The cle ri cals we re syste ma ti cally ta king over the pri macy in all sphe res of so cial li fe of the Yugo slav Cat ho lics, ha ving as the ir prin ci pal aim the cre a tion of a Cro a tian Cat ho lic for tress, a sup port for a furt her Eastern pro selyti zing re na is san ce. “The cre a tion of a Uni ta rian Ro man Cat ho lic Cro a tia, espe ci ally du ring the 20th_{cen tury,}

was the im pe ra ti ve of the ti me for the Va ti can and the Ro man Cat ho lic Church, be ca u se it had an in va lu a ble sig ni fi can ce for the re a li sa tion of suc cessful mis si o nary and pro - selyti zing ac ti vity in the Bal kans. Over ti me, the con ver ted Ser bi ans (the con verts) and the Ro man Cat ho lic fo re ig ners (Ger mans, Czechs, Slo va ki ans, Slo ve ni ans, Ita li ans, Rut - he ni ans, Hun ga ri ans, etc.) of Cro a tia, Sla vo nia, Dal ma tia and the gre a ter part of the Bal - kans we re adop ting the Cro a tian na me and be co ming the pu rest, cho sen Cro a ti ans. Thus, Cro a tia was ac tu ally be co ming a gre at mo no na ti o nal cre a tion in an ever-gre a ter pro por - tion, wit ho ut na ti o nal mi no ri ti es” (p. 156). This was par ti cu larly no ti ce a ble in 1995, when the Cro a tian aut ho ri ti es, in ar med, bru tally ter ro rist ac ti ons ba nis hed en mass al - most all Ort ho dox Serbs from the Kra ji na.

11. The Ani mo sity of the Ro man