Culture spheres in Balkans

[DanubianCossak]

but you are either senile or ignorant

I may be senile and ignorant, but at least i can communicate politely with other people without resorting to calling them names. Nowhere did i use a single adjective or bad word directed at you or anyone else ad personam in this thread, so please have the common courtesy and return the favor.

The Serbs which converted to Islam are in my opinion Serbian Muslims as I stated it earlier but you are either senile or ignorant so you forget what you want to forget.

I didn't say the Bogumils were the only one who converted to Islam.And as you stated they LATER ON assumed Bosniak identity.Much after the medieval period.

My question which you replied to, was not directed at you, but at bosniandragon, whose post i actually quoted (you can see it on this very page), so im not sure why all this hostility or aggression.

If this forum had bans for going OT too much I think you would be the first one to get it.

By now we are all familiar with your criteria for what is off topic, and since youre not an admin or moderator of this forum, please refrain yourself from saying which moderating actions should be taken against individuals, or even cheer for this to happen - nobody here cares. As i already said, if i break any rules mods will do their job (andewt is reading this topic non stop) and there is no reason to cheer for this anymore.

 

[bosniandragon]

If Bosniaks are Bosnians (or Bogumils) who converted to Islam, then how is the majority of population of Novi Pazar (which is in Serbia), capital of region of Rascia (heart of Serbian medieval state), or as your people call it Sandzak, majority Bosniak? Did all of them come from Bosnia, or did local population (Serbs) convert to Islam and later on assumed Bosniak identity?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandzak

It's the same process which allowed Orthodox people from Croatia and Bosnia to be named as 'Serbs' after the nationalism spread in late 18th and during 19th century. Simple as that. People in Sandžak (Serbia) call themselves Bosniaks because their region (Sandžak) was once part of Bosnia (all the centuries during Ottoman rule), and to a large extent because they chose Islam as their religion. I have no proof that people of Sandžak are a relation to early medieval Bosnians, but that wasn't my claim anyway.

As we established earlier, people change, their identity changes as well, their culture changes under given circumstances. What once was, doesn't mean it stands today. People in Sandžak may have felt more connection to the Bosniaks than they felt to the Serbs of that time, and that is why they chose what they chose. The same goes for Serbs in Croatia and large portions of Western Bosnia... Once they were Bosnians, but with the arrival of national states, they were attracted by the call of Orthodox Serbia to name themselves differently. The reason for such decision in Slavic population is mostly because people here really were illiterate, and their understanding of culture was limited during most of the medieval age.

It was as easy to change their culture as it was easy to change their religion, which happened in this region A LOT... Just look at all South Slavs, converting from Pagans to Christians, only to change from Christians to Catholics and Orthodox after the schism, some of them even following Bogomilism... only to some of them to change to Islam, and later they even embraced Communism as a value, rejecting God altogether... All I'm saying, this region was very very unpredictable, and subjucted to influences from all sides. All the three peoples (Bosnians, Serbs and Croats) fluctuated in the number throughout the medieval age. Its cultures have been changed so much that the only possible solution for Paradox really is to place South Slavic culture and simply ignores these (I have to agree) not so big differences between Bosnians, Croats and Serbs.

On the other hand, leaving only Serb and Croat culture, and thus, minimizing Bosnian identity in this whole pot of cultures, I must say they're not doing the right thing. I know my country has very little influence in modern day (just as Croatia and Serbia today) but, as all of us agreed here, we're talking about medieval age, and in late 1300s/early 1400s, like it or not, Bosnia really was the most powerful kingdom in the western Balkans.

 

[Styrbiorn]

I like the thing that you asked a question so you'll get an answer
There was no Bosnian tribe but for the tribes that settled this area you have to understand that nothing is for sure.There are 4 , maybe more , theories only how the Croatians came to the Balkans.There was no Bosnian tribe.But the Serbs and Croats that settled this area were of the same culture(The English that colonised Canada and Boston were of the same culture for example).After that they adopted Christianity.Then after the Schism some of them were Orthodox and some Catholic.The Catholics were called Croats and the Orthodox Serbs.So the factor that made those two cultures was religion.Years after , Bogomilism spread and the Bogomils were neither Croatian(Catholic) nor Serbian(Orthodox).They were Bosnians.After the Ottomans conquered Bosnia most of the Bogomils converted to Islam because they were sick of the Christians and Orthodox that were trying to convert them by force.The South Slavs that converted to Islam were called Bosniaks.This is very simplified because I don't think anyone would read a 2 pages long post .

I'm with up to the point when it comes to Bogomils and division of ethnicity by religion. What you are basicly saying, is that the original distinction is religion. This is not too unreasonable but it's problematic as there were many heretics from Serbia and Croatia who mgirated to Bosnia due to Kulin welcoming them and local persecution. Were they Serbs, Croats or Bosnians? Also, if religion is what makes it differ, why not just have that difference in the game (ie Bosnia is heretic)? Furthermore it is strongly doubtful that all Bogomils went Muslim, and not the rest, but that's another story entirely. The whole Yugoslav area today seems to suffer from chronic cultural schizophrenia (you all speak dialects of the same language, look the same and behave the same, for Christ's sake, and yet I haven't seen commercials from anywhere else trying to persuade you to choose one way or another in ethnical censuses), and I wonder if it didn't already during the Ottoman era...

 

[bosniandragon]

I'm with up to the point when it comes to Bogomils and division of ethnicity by religion. What you are basicly saying, is that the original distinction is religion. This is not too unreasonable but it's problematic as there were many heretics from Serbia and Croatia who mgirated to Bosnia due to Kulin welcoming them and local persecution. Were they Serbs, Croats or Bosnians? Also, if religion is what makes it differ, why not just have that difference in the game (ie Bosnia is heretic)? Furthermore it is strongly doubtful that all Bogomils went Muslim, and not the rest, but that's another story entirely. The whole Yugoslav area today seems to suffer from chronic cultural schizophrenia (you all speak dialects of the same language, look the same and behave the same, for Christ's sake, and yet I haven't seen commercials from anywhere else trying to persuade you to choose one way or another in ethnical censuses), and I wonder if it didn't already during the Ottoman era...

Your point of view is logical and understandable, because you come from Sweden. Every foreigner probably thinks the same. You'd have to live in these lands for a couple of months before you'd be able to really notice the difference. But, I will tell you one thing: This division by religion wasn't imposed by Bosnians, it was by others. I am not sure what exactly were you discussing with Craton there because I'm not reading every post fully (I'm afraid my free time is limited), but from what I can gather, the discussion was oriented at movement of peoples due to religious strifes.

Yes, you are right, the whole Balkans area is very very saturated with migrated people, and you'll be probably surprised to find out how one of my Bosnian friends received 'Tusen Takk' for welcoming a few Norwegian colleagues who came to visit here, they thought he was from Norway or some other Scandinavian country, based on his physical appearance. I know I digress, but all I'm saying, this region is probably the medieval prototype example of globalization.

 

[unmerged(143766)]

I'm with up to the point when it comes to Bogomils and division of ethnicity by religion. What you are basicly saying, is that the original distinction is religion. This is not too unreasonable but it's problematic as there were many heretics from Serbia and Croatia who mgirated to Bosnia due to Kulin welcoming them and local persecution. Were they Serbs, Croats or Bosnians? Also, if religion is what makes it differ, why not just have that difference in the game (ie Bosnia is heretic)? Furthermore it is strongly doubtful that all Bogomils went Muslim, and not the rest, but that's another story entirely. The whole Yugoslav area today seems to suffer from chronic cultural schizophrenia (you all speak dialects of the same language, look the same and behave the same, for Christ's sake, and yet I haven't seen commercials from anywhere else trying to persuade you to choose one way or another in ethnical censuses), and I wonder if it didn't already during the Ottoman era...

Well I also stated that it would be possible to represent us with only one culture but different religions but if you read some posts you'll see that there are problems for this solution too.How to name it is only one of them.Religion is the most important criteria in Ex-Yu countries.I don't say it's good but it is so sadly.If Orthodox people living in Bosnia were Serbs then Bogumil people living in Serbia were Bosnian.You all think that nationalism was the reason for the falling apart of Yugoslavia but the biggest problem was money.If we were a rich country like Sweden is now beliave me we woud be Yugoslavia untill today.Money is the thing that ruined us , you can see that in Spain too Catalunya always wanted independence but the seperatis movement was never as strong as this , why ? The economic crysis in Spain.Once Sweden gets in some economic problem you'll see how easily a nation can change from a cosmopolitan heaven to a radical government.Make us all as rich as the Swedes and beliave me you will never see nationalism in Ex-Yu again and I think every Ex-Yu citizen can agree on that.

 

[Teutonic_Thrash]

I believe the culture today known as "Bosniak" was largely associated with the Turkish conquest of the area and the prompt conversion to Islam of the Slavic people. Thus, the area should possibly start as Serbian/Croatian, but over time should change to "Bosniak" as provinces change from Orthodox (really should be agnostic) to Sunni.

Exactly. A distinct Bosnian identity didn't appear until after the Slavs in the area of Bosnia converted to Islam. The only real reason the Croats and Serbs have separate identities is because of the split between the Catholic and Orthodox churches. Ethnolinguistically they (Serbs, Bosniaks and Croats) are all Serbo-Croatian, and are distinct but related to Macedonians, Bulgarians and Slovenes, all of whom are South Slavs.

 

[DanubianCossak]

Simple as that. People in Sandžak (Serbia) call themselves Bosniaks because their region (Sandžak) was once part of Bosnia (all the centuries during Ottoman rule), and to a large extent because they chose Islam as their religion. I have no proof that people of Sandžak are a relation to early medieval Bosnians, but that wasn't my claim anyway.

A small correction/question, Sandzak(Rascia) was part of Ottoman sanjak (where sanjak should be the Ottoman land subdivision/administrative unit within OE) of Bosnia (that encompassed a large area that included other parts of Serbia etc). As far as i know, what is Sandzak today and what it was historically (region between Serbia and MNE), was never part of any independent Bosnian state (if you have a map showing otherwise link me, the western parts of it maybe even during Kulin ban, but whole thing never, that i know of at least, specially Ras/Novi Pazar).

And yes although this wasnt your claim, this is what you said:

For instance, when I read Serbian wikipedia article about Bosniaks, it says how Bosniaks are actually Serbs who got converted to Islam, practically labeling Bosniaks as some 'Serb traitors' which is a total manipulation of historical facts. And yeah, they are teaching those things in schools, which is sad.

If Serbs in Sandzak did convert to Islam (which is the only thing that could have happened unless all of them arent Bosnians, and theres no evidence Bosnians migrated to Rascia, if not, where did those people come from?), then what is stated in Serbian wiki is, at least partially, correct. I would however agree that it is badly worded, and i would never write it like that myself.

But at the same time, what you went on to say about this article pretty much claiming that Bosniaks = Serbian traitors, is simply not true, its just your interpretation. Are there some (nationalist) individuals who use that as part of their hate rhetoric (Bosniaks = traitor Serbs which is the same as nazi "Jews - those who killed Jesus")? Sure. Is that what we all agree on, or something that we say every day or greet each other with? Nope. And specially the part where you claim that these historic manipulation is something that we teach our kids in school. I attended and finished state education facilities in this country, and never was i taught that Bosnians are traitor Serbs on any level, ever, and as far as i know (and since i do love history, i think i would) this kind of hate speech is not in our school books today (specially so since a Bosniak, Rasim Ljajić is a minister in Serbian government right now, and has been one for last 10 years).

 

[unmerged(143766)]

That is assuming cultures will be working the same way as in EU3, but a more refined system or different revolt risks for recently conquered would be far more superior. Instead of making something important what was not important in that time period.

Whether it is important or not is discussable.Untill we get more information about "how culture will work in EU IV" we will have to discuss on EU III gameplay facts.That's why I wanted to evade gameplay arguments but some people were literally insisting on them.

 

[bosniandragon]

Well I also stated that it would be possible to represent us with only one culture but different religions but if you read some posts you'll see that there are problems for this solution too.How to name it is only one of them.Religion is the most important criteria in Ex-Yu countries.I don't say it's good but it is so sadly.If Orthodox people living in Bosnia were Serbs then Bogumil people living in Serbia were Bosnian.You all think that nationalism was the reason for the falling apart of Yugoslavia but the biggest problem was money.If we were a rich country like Sweden is now beliave me we woud be Yugoslavia untill today.Money is the thing that ruined us , you can see that in Spain too Catalunya always wanted independence but the seperatis movement was never as strong as this , why ? The economic crysis in Spain.Once Sweden gets in some economic problem you'll see how easily a nation can change from a cosmopolitan heaven to a radical government.Make us all as rich as the Swedes and beliave me you will never see nationalism in Ex-Yu again and I think every Ex-Yu citizen can agree on that.

Hmm, Yugoslavia was somewhat prosperous during 60s and 70s, but still the minorities weren't happy. If you neglect a nation and someone's culture, you will get a rebellion eventually. It's only a matter of time.

 

[unmerged(143766)]

Exactly. A distinct Bosnian identity didn't appear until after the Slavs in the area of Bosnia converted to Islam. The only real reason the Croats and Serbs have separate identities is because of the split between the Catholic and Orthodox churches. Ethnolinguistically they (Serbs, Bosniaks and Croats) are all Serbo-Croatian, and are distinct but related to Macedonians, Bulgarians and Slovenes, all of whom are South Slavs.

Ethnolinguistically they (Serbs, Bosniaks and Croats) are all Serbo-Croatian? Can you understand the irony here ? Serbs, BOSNIAKS and Croats are all Serbo-Croatian How about Serbo-Croatian-Bosniak to make it fair ?
That stands for Bosniaks but of which nationality were South Slavic Bogumils then if religion is one of the most important criterio for nationality in Ex-Yu ?Not the Bosnian identity appeared after the Slavic conversion to Islam but the Bosniak did.

 

[unmerged(143766)]

A small correction/question, Sandzak(Rascia) was part of Ottoman sanjak (where sanjak should be the Ottoman land subdivision/administrative unit within OE) of Bosnia (that encompassed a large area that included other parts of Serbia etc). As far as i know, what is Sandzak today and what it was historically (region between Serbia and MNE), was never part of any independent Bosnian state (if you have a map showing otherwise link me, the western parts of it maybe even during Kulin ban, but whole thing never, that i know of at least, specially Ras/Novi Pazar).

And yes although this wasnt your claim, this is what you said:



If Serbs in Sandzak did convert to Islam (which is the only thing that could have happened unless all of them arent Bosnians, and theres no evidence Bosnians migrated to Rascia, if not, where did those people come from?), then what is stated in Serbian wiki is, at least partially, correct. I would however agree that it is badly worded, and i would never write it like that myself.

But at the same time, what you went on to say about this article pretty much claiming that Bosniaks = Serbian traitors, is simply not true, its just your interpretation. Are there some (nationalist) individuals who use that as part of their hate rhetoric (Bosniaks = traitor Serbs which is the same as nazi "Jews - those who killed Jesus")? Sure. Is that what we all agree on, or something that we say every day or greet each other with? Nope. And specially the part where you claim that these historic manipulation is something that we teach our kids in school. I attended and finished state education facilities in this country, and never was i taught that Bosnians are traitor Serbs on any level, ever, and as far as i know (and since i do love history, i think i would) this kind of hate speech is not in our school books today (specially so since a Bosniak, Rasim Ljajić is a minister in Serbian government right now, and has been one for last 10 years).

If you claim that Bosniaks are Serbs which converted to Islam then what are Croats which converted to Islam ? It would be correct to say South Slavic people which converted to Islam, but it's not really important for medieval Bosnian culture.

 

[unmerged(143766)]

Hmm, Yugoslavia was somewhat prosperous during 60s and 70s, but still the minorities weren't happy. If you neglect a nation and someone's culture, you will get a rebellion eventually. It's only a matter of time.

It was prosperous during the 60s and 70s and that's why it didn't fall apart during the 60s and 70s but the 90s in which it was in a big economic crysis.You will get the rebellion eventually but only after the economic euphoria calms down.

 

[Sarmatian]

Wow, this thread just doesn't want to die. I don't want to talk about Bosnian culture, just want to point out one thing, probably the most important thing - how Balkan cultures translate into Ottoman conquest. By mid XV century, conquest of the Balkans was a foregone conclusion. Hungary was a single country that could have stopped the Ottomans with much luck, but even then it is highly unlikely that they would have been able to throw Ottomans back to Asia.

Another important fact - contrary to what Balkan people learn in school, we weren't a shield of Europe, we didn't cause a lot of problems for the Ottomans, we were at best a speed bump. Even though we tend to celebrate every little rebellion, those rebellions were minor and often about a specific concession, not outright independence until much, much later (we're talking Vicky 2 timeframe here), especially when compared to other rebellion Ottomans had to deal with.

So, it should be easy for the Ottomans the Balkans.

Ethnolinguistically they (Serbs, Bosniaks and Croats) are all Serbo-Croatian? Can you understand the irony here ? Serbs, BOSNIAKS and Croats are all Serbo-Croatian How about Serbo-Croatian-Bosnian to make it fair ?
That stands for Bosniaks but of which nationality were South Slavic Bogumils then if religion is one of the most important criterio for nationality in Ex-Yu ?Not a Bosnian identity appeared after the Slavic conversion to Islam but the Bosniak did.

It's just the name of the language, it doesn't have anything to do with nationality. Austrian speak German but are not of German nationality. Part of Switzerland also. It's the same with UK-USA, Spain-Latin America etc...

We're talking about linguistics here. Officially, Serbs speak Serbian, Croats Croatian, Bosniaks Bosnian, Montenegrins Montenegrin but linguistically it's still the same language. It's just shows how petty and pathetic we are.

 

[bosniandragon]

A small correction/question, Sandzak(Rascia) was part of Ottoman sanjak (where sanjak should be the Ottoman land subdivision/administrative unit within OE) of Bosnia (that encompassed a large area that included other parts of Serbia etc). As far as i know, what is Sandzak today and what it was historically (region between Serbia and MNE), was never part of any independent Bosnian state (if you have a map showing otherwise link me, the western parts of it maybe even during Kulin ban, but whole thing never, that i know of at least, specially Ras/Novi Pazar).

View attachment 68519

I was referring to the Ottoman sanjak of Bosnia, yes. During that time, an important part of Serbia was included in Bosnian sanjak, and many Serbs probably named themselves as Bosniaks in that region, but the name 'Bosniak' surely had to come from somewhere else, and not from Serbia. The name itself was used for all inhabitants of Bosnia by the Ottomans, regardless of their religion. What is the exact reason of people of Sandžak (it's modern name) to change their name to Bosniaks, I am not sure. But, as I said, nationalization is a process, and I told you before, not all Serbs of today were Serbs in medieval age either. Some of them may even be Greeks, Hungarians.. or even Turks.. we can't know that unless we make DNA tests or something. The main core of Serb people is probably authentically of Serbian origin, but no one can claim that their people are 100% indigenous or that they were indigenous throughout 1000 years. (I'm not saying you're claiming it, I'm saying it for the record so others can read/comment)

Anyway, what I'm saying is that Bosnians/Serbs/Croats really share common ancestry, dating to early medieval age when South Slavs came to this region, but again, I'll say, during centuries of cultural mixing with various other indigenous peoples that lived in the Balkans prior to arrival of Slavs, these Slavic settlements have formed their distinct identities, based on where they were formed.

But at the same time, what you went on to say about this article pretty much claiming that Bosniaks = Serbian traitors, is simply not true, its just your interpretation. Are there some (nationalist) individuals who use that as part of their hate rhetoric (Bosniaks = traitor Serbs which is the same as nazi "Jews - those who killed Jesus")? Sure. Is that what we all agree on, or something that we say every day or greet each other with? Nope. And specially the part where you claim that these historic manipulation is something that we teach our kids in school. I attended and finished state education facilities in this country, and never was i taught that Bosnians are traitor Serbs on any level, ever, and as far as i know (and since i do love history, i think i would) this kind of hate speech is not in our school books today (specially so since a Bosniak, Rasim Ljajić is a minister in Serbian government right now, and has been one for last 10 years).

That is what I, as a modern Bosnian, am experiencing when I read such articles. Sorry, you can blame my views as much as you can, but I still have very fresh memories about recent events, and my survival skills taught me that one can never be too cautious. I am not trying to retrospectively apply history here, nor am I speaking about my feelings to soften Paradox, lol, I am simply saying what I honestly feel when I read such texts.

And another thing, Bosniaks didn't live only in Sandžak, but their name originates from Bosnia, where Bosnians lived prior to Ottoman invasion. The name Bosniak really did come from Bosnian, and as I explained earlier, it is a derived title in Turkish language, which got accepted over time because we lived under Turkish rule for more than 400 years.

 

[DanubianCossak]

If you claim that Bosniaks are Serbs which converted to Islam then what are Croats which converted to Islam ? It would be correct to say South Slavic people which converted to Islam, but it's not really important for medieval Bosnian culture.

I was not stating my opinion, but that i think that wiki article (which bosniandragon mentioned) was written by someone from Serbia with our Bosniaks (meaning people in Rascia, where they are majority of population) in perspective (might come as a shock to you, but we dont really think about Bosnia too much in our every day lives, nor is it as relevant as a whole as Rascia and its people are). Personally i dont think Bosniaks (in Bosnia) are just Serbs, or Croats and Serbs, but a mix of all people who lived there (Serbs and Croats obviously being a part of that mix) and those who arrived and settled there during Ottoman occupation. Even the Bosniaks in Novi Pazar arent 100% certain about these things, as they have both Islamic Community (i dont know the exact English translation, sorry "Islamska zajednica") that recognizes the one in Sarajevo (so they see themselves as Bosniaks in Federation) and there are those who belong to Islamic Community of Serbia (another organization with seat in Belgrade) and theres like a mini war between the 2 who has the authority etc.

 

[unmerged(143766)]

Wow, this thread just doesn't want to die. I don't want to talk about Bosnian culture, just want to point out one thing, probably the most important thing - how Balkan cultures translate into Ottoman conquest. By mid XV century, conquest of the Balkans was a foregone conclusion. Hungary was a single country that could have stopped the Ottomans with much luck, but even then it is highly unlikely that they would have been able to throw Ottomans back to Asia.

Another important fact - contrary to what Balkan people learn in school, we weren't a shield of Europe, we didn't cause a lot of problems for the Ottomans, we were at best a speed bump. Even though we tend to celebrate every little rebellion, those rebellions were minor and often about a specific concession, not outright independence until much, much later (we're talking Vicky 2 timeframe here), especially when compared to other rebellion Ottomans had to deal with.

So, it should be easy for the Ottomans the Balkans.



It's just the name of the language, it doesn't have anything to do with nationality. Austrian speak German but are not of German nationality. Part of Switzerland also. It's the same with UK-USA, Spain-Latin America etc...

We're talking about linguistics here. Officially, Serbs speak Serbian, Croats Croatian, Bosniaks Bosnian, Montenegrins Montenegrin but linguistically it's still the same language. It's just shows how petty and pathetic we are.

I know it's just a name so it won't change anything if we change the name.It won't change the language it will just make a lot of people happy We weren'ta shield to Europe but we cause a lot of problems to the Ottomans.We were a speed bump , but we were a speed bump without which the Ottomans would have maybe reached much further then Vienna.The thing with the Ottomans is that in that time they were pretty advanced , but that was their height.While the other European nationas advanced in every way the Ottoman Empire had a stagnation and that's the reason why every year the Ottomans lost fighting in our lands is very valuable

 

[unmerged(143766)]

I was not stating my opinion, but that i think that wiki article (which bosniandragon mentioned) was written by someone from Serbia with our Bosniaks (meaning people in Rascia, where they are majority of population) in perspective (might come as a shock to you, but we dont really think about Bosnia too much in our every day lives, nor is it as relevant as a whole as Rascia and its people are). Personally i dont think Bosniaks (in Bosnia) are just Serbs, or Croats and Serbs, but a mix of all people who lived there (Serbs and Croats obviously being a part of that mix) and those who arrived and settled there during Ottoman occupation. Even the Bosniaks in Novi Pazar arent 100% certain about these things, as they have both Islamic Community (i dont know the exact English translation, sorry "Islamska zajednica") that recognizes the one in Sarajevo (so they see themselves as Bosniaks in Federation) and there are those who belong to Islamic Community of Serbia (another organization with seat in Belgrade) and theres like a mini war between the 2 who has the authority etc.

Beliave me it isn't a shock for me at all.The people that think about other nations in their everyday lifes are very rare.The same thing is with the Bosnian Orthodox people.A lot of them loves Bosnia and claim to be Bosnian ( The same goes for Croats ) but of course there are a lot of them who say they are Serbs.But as I stated earlier there are no Serbian Bosniaks nor Bosnian Serbs.There are Serbian Muslims and Bosnian Orthodox , we have to seperate religion from nationality.We haven't done it in the past , that's the reason why I think there is a medieval Bosnian culture , and you see what happened because of that mistake...

 

[Teutonic_Thrash]

Ethnolinguistically they (Serbs, Bosniaks and Croats) are all Serbo-Croatian? Can you understand the irony here ? Serbs, BOSNIAKS and Croats are all Serbo-Croatian How about Serbo-Croatian-Bosniak to make it fair ?
That stands for Bosniaks but of which nationality were South Slavic Bogumils then if religion is one of the most important criterio for nationality in Ex-Yu ?Not the Bosnian identity appeared after the Slavic conversion to Islam but the Bosniak did.

Serbo-Croatian is the official name, it might not be ideal or representative, but that's the official name.

 

[bosniandragon]

Exactly. A distinct Bosnian identity didn't appear until after the Slavs in the area of Bosnia converted to Islam. The only real reason the Croats and Serbs have separate identities is because of the split between the Catholic and Orthodox churches. Ethnolinguistically they (Serbs, Bosniaks and Croats) are all Serbo-Croatian, and are distinct but related to Macedonians, Bulgarians and Slovenes, all of whom are South Slavs.

I'll pretend to be an outsider who has no clue about history of the Balkans, and here I am asking, based on what facts have you concluded that Bosnian identity didn't emerge prior to the conversions to Islam?

 

[Thracian]

just name these nations as yugoslavs in the game and be done with it