Talk:Ban of Croatia

list vs. prose

The list needs to be integrated into the prose sections, because the nature and quality of the title surely shifted over the centuries, each state has its own context and the single huge list isn't really proper. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 14:10, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ban of Croatia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://ia360925.us.archive.org/GnuBook/GnuBookImages.php?zip=%2F2%2Fitems%2Fearlyhistoryofsl00consrich%2Fearlyhistoryofsl00consrich_jp2.zip&file=earlyhistoryofsl00consrich_jp2%2Fearlyhistoryofsl00consrich_0025.jp2&scale=2
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160303212837/http://arhinet.arhiv.hr/_DigitalniArhiv/Monumenta/HR-HDA-876-5.htm to http://arhinet.arhiv.hr/_DigitalniArhiv/Monumenta/HR-HDA-876-5.htm
• Added {{dead link}} tag to https://enciklopedija.carnet.hr/natuknica.aspx?ID=47188&tip=n

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:08, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

What J.V.A. Fine say in "When ethnicity...". "Bani Croatorum" or "Croatieque regius viceregens"

What J.V.A. Fine say in "When ethnicity..." on Vukčić: "Bani Croatorum" or "Croatieque regius viceregens"?

Here's an example of Croatian ban title in charters in Latin:

• "Paulus banus Crovatorum et dominus Bosnae",
• "Pauli bani Croatorum nec non Georgii et Maldini fratrum, comitum civitatum Dalmatiæ";
  

now here's Hrvoje Vukčić's title in Latin:

• "Dux Spaleti, Dalmatie Croatieque regius viceregens ac Bosne supremus vojvoda" (most importantly, this one is used on money minted and charters issued in Split, 'after being appointed as "viceroy" by Ladislaus);

when quoting Gordan Ravančić, deputy head of "Croatian Institute of History" than:

• "Grand Duke of Bosnia, Knyaz of Donji Kraji, Duke of Split"

From Fine's seminal book "A Study of Identity in Pre-Nationalist Croatia, Dalmatia, and Slavonia in the Medieval and Early-Modern Periods", starting with the "Index":

Hrvatinić, Hrvoje Vukčić (Bosnian nobleman), 127–28, 288, 302

-- pp.636

Further evidence that the term “Croat” was not used as commonly as is sometimes thought, even in parts of the northern coastal area, comes from documents regarding Hrvoje Vukčić Hrvatinić. In the 1390s, after involving himself in a civil war over the Hungarian throne, this great Bosnian nobleman and lord of the Donji kraji took for himself a great chunk of Dalmatia stretching from Omiš and Split up to Zadar. His subjects were referred to by their individual city names and as “Dalmatians.” Out of the thirtytwo documents issued by or to Hrvoje that Stojanović published, if we exclude a reference to the Hungarian Ban of Croatia and another to some Croatians serving under the ban - which, of course, did not pertain to Hrvoje’s extensive Dalmatian holdings - we have only one reference to anything Croatian regarding Hrvoje’s lands and subjects. That reference comes in a letter to Hrvoje from Dubrovnik of 22 October 1406 and simply refers to “your [Hrvoje’s] Croatian towns.” In this case, the term “Croatian” is clearly referring to a territory or geographical region, separating these towns from those lying in his Bosnian (or Donji kraji) lands. Ladislav of Naples, who in the first years of the fifteenth century laid claim to the Hungarian throne, made Hrvoje his deputy for this Dalmatian territory, calling him his Vicar General for the regions of Slavonia (in partibus Sclavonie). Thus, like Venice, the Neapolitans still considered the region simply “Slavonia,” and Hrvoje seems to have had no objections to the nomenclature.

-- pp. 127

In “Danica,” Palmotić refers to Hrvoje as Ban of the Croats (Od Hrvata ban Hrvoje) and to him ruling the Croatian lands; the real Hrvoje Vukčić was never Ban of Croatia. ...

Palmotić, it may be noted, chose Bosnian (a variant of the Štokavian spoken in his native Dubrovnik) as the purest Slavic dialect. ...

Also considering Bosnian as the purest Slavic dialect was Palmotić’s contemporary, the Italian Jesuit from Apulia (almost certainly from a family of refugees from Dalmatia) and linguist Jacob Mikalja (Micalia, Micaglia, ca.1600–1654). Having spent much time as a missionary in and around Dubrovnik, he called Bosnian the most beautiful of all the Illyrian dialects. He was one of the first to state explicitly that the languages (dialects) of Bosnia and Dubrovnik were for all practical purposes the same language.

-- pp. 302

Gordan Ravančić, deputy head of "Croatian Institute of History", together with Neven Budak, is probably one of the most influential Croatian medievalist, and is expected to be taken seriously by English wikipedia community. Meanwhile, being serious scholar of international reputation, not a charlatan, Fine refers to Hrvoje Vukčić in this manner in all of his books and research, starting with his two-volume magnum opus, The Early Medieval Balkans and The Late Medieval Balkans. These couple of passages from this seminal work on ethnicity are really illustrative of misuse of historical sciences in the Balkans, which reflects in wikipedia to unbearable degree, unfortunately.--౪ Santa ౪^99° 13:32, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Neven Budak criticized Fine to a large extent: https://hrcak.srce.hr/49246 His books are often littered with numerous errors of either linguistic (grammatical cases and mistranslations), geographic (e .g referring to Turopolje as a town), historiographical basis (e.g mentioning Austria-Hungary in the 17th century). Extreme leftist typically worship him because he laces his works with Yugonostalgia and pro-Yugoslav sentiment. 188.252.196.25 (talk) 16:19, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

I don't understand the point of this? Hrvoje Vukčić Hrvatinić could not have been the "real" Ban of Croatia and Dalmatia at the time, as Ladislaus of Naples was only a claimant to the throne. Paul Šubić is not a good example because only he and his son had the title "banus Croatorum". Tezwoo (talk) 19:49, 12 June 2020 (UTC)