The Croatian historian Milan von Šufflay (1879-1931) was born in Llepogllav, southwest of Varahddin, and studied history and classical philology at the University of Zagreb. In 1904-1908 he worked for the National Museum in Budapest and from 1912 to 1918 he was a professor of medieval history in Zagreb. For political reasons, Šufflay was forced into early retirement in 1918 and then lived as a publisher in Zagreb. He was often in open political conflict with the new Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes and, in 1921, was sentenced to three and a half years in prison. In 1928, he was offered the Chair of Southeastern European History at the University of Budapest, but the government in Belgrade did not allow him to accept the position. He was killed by two Serbian police agents in 1931. Among Šufflay's publications of interest to Albanians, the following can be mentioned: History of Northern Albanians [History of the Northern Albanians], Belgrade 1924; Städte und Burgen Albaniens päätää während des Mittelalters [Cities and Castles of Albania, Mainly During the Middle Ages], Vienna 1924; and Srbi i Arbanasi: njuja symbioza u strednom vjeku [Serbs and Albanians: Their Symbiosis During the Middle Ages], Belgrade 1925; as well as numerous articles. Together with Ludwig von Thallóczy and Konstantin Jireček, he published the important two-volume collection of Albanian historical documents entitled Acta et diplomata res Albaniae mediae aetatis illustrantia [Diplomatic acts and issues that illustrate the Middle Ages in Albania], Vienna 1913, 1918, covering the years 344 to 1406 AD. This article was first published in a Vienna newspaper in November 1912, at a time when Serbian forces had conquered Kosovo and occupied most of Albania. In it Šufflay presents a picture of Albania in the Middle Ages, with the aim of showing that Serbia could have no historical claim to the country.
By: Milan von Šufflay[1]
Translated (from German) into English: Robert Elsie
Translated (from English) into Albanian: Agron Shala
To justify Serbian claims to Albania, in particular to the ports of Durazzo [Durrës] and Alessio [Lezha], Serbian politicians bring forward, first of all, historical arguments. According to Pašić and Gruić, Albania has no right to autonomy, the Albanian highlanders are actually Serbs, Albania belonged only to the Empire of Dušan, and Durrës, Lezha and San Giovanni di Medua [Shëngjini] were previously only Serbian ports. In short, all of Europe should be aware that the Serbs only want that part of Albania that they once had in exclusive possession.
It is not my intention here to examine the psychological reasons for the preferences towards history that South Slavic politicians seem to have, nor to analyze and criticize the strange justifications that South Slavs have invented for their historical claims. Nor do I want to enter into the question of the extent to which historical facts should be taken into account in the future partition of European Turkey. The purpose of these lines is to give an objective picture of Albania in the Middle Ages (before the arrival of the Turks), so that it becomes clear to everyone: 1) that the Serbs are not the only ones who can have historical claims on Albania, 2) that there have been moments in Albanian history that speak in favor of annexation and others that speak in favor of Albanian autonomy, 3) that Serbian politicians would have done better not to mention a historical claim on the main Albanian port of Durrës, which they intend to conquer.
Medieval and modern Albania cannot be defined in rigid geographical terms. Initially (until the 13th century), the word Albania was associated with a small territory around the fortress of Kruja. It gradually expanded to include Vlora and the Himara mountains in the south, and the cities of Antivari [Bar] and Cattaro [Kotor] in the north. In historical writings, Albania later became a conventional term to describe the mountainous quadrangular territory between Bar, Prizren, Ohrid and Valona [Vlora]. This is a region where the original ethnic layers (Illyrians, Thracians) were almost completely covered by new Greek, Roman and Slavic formations, just like ivy covering the granite monuments of a once great nation, the Illyrians.
The word Albania had been used to describe the center of this quadrangle since Illyrian times. The capital of these tribes was the city of Albanopolis (mentioned by Ptolemy), from where the term spread in the second half of the Middle Ages as a result of the widespread expansion of Albanian mountain shepherds - in scattered but ethnically homogeneous groups, to create modern Albania from the Arbanoni of the Byzantines, the Rabani of the Serbs, the Regnum Albaniae of the Angevins, and the Albania of the Dalmatians and Venetians. It was primarily an ethnographic term, although its southern boundary was difficult to define.
This region has always been a generation par excellence border, a dividing line between languages, religions and political powers. It was a product of East and West, a fusion of Latin and Greek ports, or a union of the Roman and Byzantine worlds that was in direct contact with the barbarians - the autochthonous Albanians and the advancing Slavs. Here we find Albanian tribal leaders who, side by side, held Byzantine titles such as protosevastos and sevasto, Latin titles like comes and miles, and Slavic titles like treasure chest and governor.
The Durrës region was the point of contact between the three medieval languages of administration and official documents: Latin, Greek and Slavic. Even today, in the Vilayet of Shkodra, one finds all kinds of Balkan costumes: Greek, Romanian-Bulgarian, Bosnian-Dalmatian and Serbo-Montenegrin. Catholicism here was in a permanent war with Orthodoxy. The Orthodox Metropolitan of Durrës participated in the synods of Constantinople, while his suffragan, the Bishop of Kruja, served in the interior of the country as a confidant of the Pope - during the uprising of the Albanian princes against the schismatic king of the Serbs (1319). The alliances of the Albanian dynasties often fluctuated between the two churches, and later between Catholicism and Islam.
It is therefore not surprising that in the Byzantine era, since this region was sensitive to both Eastern and Western plans, the Theme of Durrës [a former Byzantine province - ed. by T.] became a focal point for intrigues and military efforts undertaken against the Slavs in the Northeast and against Italy. Also, for this reason, medieval Albania almost always served as a base of operations for the Western powers in their attacks on Byzantium. The Normans and Neapolitans also concentrated their attacks here. When Europe, under Pope John XXII, was contemplating a crusade against Palestine, the Dominican Archbishop of Tibur, Guillelmus Adae - a visionary of Western thought - was drawing up political observations in Directorium ad passagium faciendum (1332), in which Albania was to have a not insignificant role.
Thus, over a hundred years before the memorable war of Skanderbeg against the Turks, the minds of many thinkers in Europe were occasionally drawn to the strategic importance of Albania. It was only in the time of Skanderbeg, whose uprising was followed with great interest throughout Europe and was even actively supported, that people became more generally aware of the importance of Albania. The country became famous because of its geographical position. The war of Skanderbeg was an epic of a frontier generation, the final songs of which are still sung.
But Albania is more than just a border strip. It is, in fact, the quintessence of the Balkans, a country that displays all its Latin, Greek, Roman, Byzantine, Italian and Slavic nuances. Here we can still encounter ancient features that reflect the early ethnic composition of the Balkan Peninsula and that gave rise to the common features of the Balkan languages and peoples in the Middle Ages.
Many of the aforementioned features of medieval Albania are still found in the country today - a border belt and a quintessence of the Balkans with ethnic and cultural traits that historically speak of the country's autonomy and independence.
The political history of pre-Turkish Albania also offers us a number of points that can be interpreted as the nucleus of an autonomous or independent state. First, the Byzantine Theme of Durrës in the 11th century, ruled by a Dux, was transformed by the Venetians (1204) into the Ducatus Dyrrhachii [Duchy of Durrës - s. i T.] and by the Angevins (around 1272) into a Regnum Albaniae [Kingdom of Albania - s. i T.]. Skanderbeg's War made the concept of an independent Albania known throughout Europe, while there are indications that the idea of a Regnum Albaniae was still present on Albanian soil in the XNUMXth century.
Secondly, in the 1200th century, an Albanian dynasty (Principality) emerged in and around Kruja (1250-XNUMX). It continued for several generations (Progon, Gjin, Dhimitër, Golem) and, although it succumbed (perhaps only for our eyes) to the pressure of foreign powers, it re-emerged immediately after the fall of the Serbian empire and took on new names (Topiajt, Dukagjint, etc.).
Although it must be said, in general, that historians never saw present-day Albania as a unified political state, it is also true that history simultaneously recognizes that it belonged to two or three larger unified states, so that, from a historical perspective, none of the modern powers can have an exclusive claim on Albania.
The fluctuation of the various spheres of power in medieval Albania can best be understood by following the political rise and fall of individual Albanian cities. It would probably require a lot of data to create a detailed graph of such developments. It is sufficient to note here that Northern Albania, with the city of Scutari [Shkodra], was under Serbian rule, as was its much-visited port of Saint Sergius, S. Serzi [Shirq] at the mouth of the Boyana [Buna], as well as the settlements of Antivari, Dulcigno [Ulqin], Svaq, and Drivast [Drisht] - from the 11th to the 15th century, in one form or another as the Regnum Diocliae [Kingdom of Dukla - s. i. T.], as part of the kingdom of the new kings (junior kings) and as the possession of the king's wife and later under the Montenegrin Balšić family [Balshajt - T.'s note].
At the same time, central Albania around Durrës (in 1040 the city was temporarily in Bulgarian hands) and southern Albania around Vlorë were first under Byzantine rule, then for a short time (1204 -1213) under Venice, and then under the Despotate of Epirus which, in 1258, gave these cities as a dowry to Manfred of Sicily - until in 1272 they came under the rule of the Angevin kings of Naples. Dushan, the king of Serbia, managed to conquer the entire interior of Albania and the city of Kruja in 1343, as well as Vlorë and Ioannina in the south, but Durrës itself remained in Angevin hands (at that time Durrës was under the nominal rule of King Louis of Hungary). In 1368, Durrës fell, but not to the Serbs, but to the Albanian dynasty of Karl Topia. Later, although only for a short period, Durrës was in the possession of the enemies of the Topiajs - the Balshaj family, and, in 1385, Balsha II held the title of Duke of Durrës. However, in 1392, Durrës was surrendered to Venice not by Balsha, but by Gjergj Topia. In 1396, the Balshaj dynasty offered Venice the cities of Shkodra and Drishti. The Republic considered for a while whether accepting these cities would violate its peace agreement with Hungary (as intromittendo dicta loca contrafaceremus paci Hungariae).
Lezha, of whose early fate we know little, fluctuated in the second half of the 14th century between Serbian and Albanian rule, but then fell, like Durrës, into the hands of Venice, not from the hands of the Serbs, but from the Albanian Dukagjini dynasty. Later, it was in the possession of the Kastriots who were not at all Serbian in origin and customs.
The only city that fell to the Turks (1417) directly from the Serbs, as a relic from the time of Dushan, was Vlora (Medua is mentioned little in the sources before the time of Skanderbeg, as it was not used much as a port in the Middle Ages). The only city that never really belonged to the Serbs was Durrës, whose port is now claimed by the Serbs for historical reasons! /Telegraph/