In Bosnia and Herzegovina, each of the three constituent peoples (Bosniaks, Serbs, and Croats) has its own education program. There are multiple publishers on the market, and schools, or rather teachers, independently choose which textbooks to use. For an analysis of the Bosniak perspective on history, we selected textbooks published by Sarajevo Publishing. National (Bosniak) history is taught in textbooks from grades 6 to 9 in primary school and in textbooks for high schools, specifically from the 2nd to the 4th grade.
Middle Ages
Regarding the Middle Ages, the history of Europe, Byzantium, and the Arab world (the Umayyad and Abbasid dynasties) and the emergence of Islam are covered. The textbook with a historical reader for the second year of high school (authors Esad Kurtović and Samir Hajrulahović), in the lesson “The Slavs and their Civilizational Framework,” analyzes religion, language, and script. It is stated that South Slavic languages include Slovenian, Croatian, Serbian, Bosnian, Montenegrin, Macedonian, and Bulgarian.
“The oldest scripts are Glagolitic and Cyrillic…” The origins of these scripts are explained, and the first states of the South Slavs are listed.
“In Southeast Europe, among the South Slavs, Karantania (in the territory of Slovenia and Austria), Croatia during the Trpimirović dynasty, Serbia during the Nemanjić dynasty (particularly Dušan’s empire), Duklja (later Zeta), Samuil’s empire (Macedonia), the Bulgarian empire, and the Kingdom of Bosnia (notably during the reign of Tvrtko I Kotromanić) stand out.”
Kingdom of Bosnia
In the 7th-grade textbook, the Pacta Conventa (the agreement between Croats and Hungary) from 1102 and a text about Constantine VII Porphyrogenitus containing information about Croats are included. Two pages are dedicated to the Republic of Dubrovnik.
In the textbook for the 2nd grade of high school, medieval Bosnia is positioned between East and West.
“The religious landscape of medieval Bosnia was marked by the presence of Catholicism, Orthodoxy, and the Bosnian Church. Preserved written monuments indicate the presence of Glagolitic, Cyrillic (Bosančica), and Latin scripts, as well as the Bosnian and Latin languages in public and everyday administration.” A separate chapter focuses on the territorial-political development of medieval Bosnia.
“By the end of the 13th and the beginning of the 14th century, it was under strong influence from the Bribir princes (Šubić family), who exercised their authority in the Croatian region in conflicts with the Hungarian king, and with their decline, Bosnia experienced a rapid rise. During the reign of Ban Stjepan II Kotromanić (1322–1353), Bosnia expanded to the western part of Hum and Dalmatia, from the Cetina to Dubrovnik.”
Territorial Expansion of Bosnia
Pavao Šubić (1245–1312) was an uncrowned king of Croatia, “Ban of the Croats and Lord of Bosnia.” His brother Mladen I and son Mladen II were Bosnian bans from 1299 to 1320, and Mladen II was “Ban of the Croats and Bosnia” and “Lord of the entire Hum land.” Pavao Šubić’s granddaughter, Jelena Šubić Bribirska (1338–1378), was the wife of nobleman and Ban Stjepan Vladislav Kotromanić (1295–1354) and the mother of future King Tvrtko. None of this is mentioned in the textbooks.
The territorial expansion of Bosnia culminated with Ban and first King Stjepan Tvrtko I Kotromanić (1353–1391), while conquests in Croatia and Dalmatia were merely episodic.
“Part of the Primorje (Slansko Primorje in 1399) and Konavle (part in 1419 and the rest in 1426) were sold to the Dubrovnik citizens by Bosnian rulers and magnates.”
Stjepan Vukčić Kosača, one of the greatest noblemen of the Bosnian Kingdom, adopted the title “Duke of St. Sava” in 1448, giving Herzegovina its name.
In the lesson “Bosnia and its Neighbors during the Middle Ages,” it is noted how the Croatian state developed under the Trpimirović dynasty.
“During the early Middle Ages, Bosnia was occasionally part of the Croatian state. In its development, Bosnia expanded southwestward and northwestward into areas that were part of the Croatian state. Overall, Croatia, as Bosnia’s western neighbor in the Middle Ages, developed and transferred to Bosnia, in addition to its own achievements, the broader accomplishments of Western European, Mediterranean, and medieval culture infused with Catholicism.”
Dubrovnik and Bosnian Church
A significant portion is dedicated to Dubrovnik’s development, with a photograph of the city included. A description of Dubrovnik’s political structure, as written by Filip de Diversis, is also provided.
However, Bosniak (Muslim) textbooks in Bosnia and Herzegovina focus heavily on one Christian church—the Bosnian Church. The intent is to establish that today’s Bosniak Muslims are descendants of Bosnian Church members.
Authors across all Bosniak (Muslim) textbooks promote the thesis that the “Krstjani” accepted Islam willingly. There is no mention of Islam being imposed by fire and sword.
In the textbook for the 2nd year of high school (authors Esad Kurtović and Samir Hajrulahović), the Bosnian Church is defined as favored by nobles and Bosnian rulers.
“Among public authorities in Bosnia, particularly the ruling feudal lords and rulers, the Bosnian Church was privileged as a protector of the order.”
The basis for this statement remains unclear. The textbook is filled with contradictions.
The textbook also examines the crisis of the Catholic Church in Bosnia, the failure of Dominican missionaries, and the success of Franciscans.
“In Bosnia, Franciscans achieved better positions for Catholicism than the Bosnian bishopric from Đakovo. With Franciscan presence and action, the Bosnian Church gained a strong competitor. Catholicism eventually assumed the dominant position in Bosnia once held by the Bosnian Church.”
Thus, it is concluded that it was not the Bosnian Church but Catholicism that was privileged as the protector of the order. Didn’t Ban Kulin declare his Catholicism and orthodoxy publicly at Bilino Polje in the presence of Pope Innocent III’s legate John de Casamaris? Yet, the authors, in creating a new narrative of Bosnian history, reinterpret the assembly at Bilino Polje differently.
Bosnian Queen Katarina
The story of the last Bosnian queen, Katarina, is told over three pages in the textbook.
Katarina, the daughter of Stjepan Vukčić Kosača and Jelena Balšić, married King Stjepan Tomaš (1443–1461).
“The Ottoman advance into Bosnia in 1463 led to Katarina seeking refuge in Dubrovnik, as well as the capture of her children.”
The authors neglect to state that the queen did not “seek refuge” but rather fled for her life. In the ensuing chaos, her children were captured and taken to Istanbul, where they were forcibly converted to Islam.
Despite the persistent claim of religious tolerance in the Ottoman Empire, it is reluctantly acknowledged that Catholics in Bosnia under the Ottomans did not fare very well.
“With the issuance of the Ahdnama in 1463, the Catholic Church came under the control of Bosnian Franciscans. As Ottoman rule expanded in Europe, the influence and boundaries of the Franciscan province of Bosnia Srebrena also expanded. Regardless of the tolerant attitude of the Ottoman authorities towards Franciscans, the position of the Catholic Church was more challenging than that of the Orthodox Church because the Ottomans were at war with Catholic states and more suspicious of Catholics and their clergy, suspecting them of espionage and anti-state activities.”
The Ahdnama, in fact, is preserved in the Fojnica monastery. Sultan Mehmed II granted this document to allow the Bosnian Franciscans to continue their work. It was handed over to the then-guardian Fra Anđelo Zvizdović.
The fall of Bosnia is also covered in the textbook for the seventh grade of elementary school. The collapse after the fall of the medieval kingdom resulted in “Catholics emigrating under Ottoman attacks…”
“During the conquests, church buildings were destroyed, some were abandoned and converted into mosques…” and “Catholics were classified as raya.”
This elementary school curriculum also teaches about the Ahdnama, which, however, was essentially a dead letter, especially during times of war.
“From the 17th century, Franciscans were politically controlled, as authorities interfered in the election of provincials. Deviations from the Ahdnama were more frequent during wars between the Ottoman Empire and European countries, and financial burdens were higher. They paid extraordinary taxes, fees for exemption from accusations. The heaviest tax was the julus, paid upon a change on the throne. By the late 17th and 18th centuries, the Bosnian vizier appropriated the julus for himself,” states the seventh-grade textbook.
In the first stage of Ottoman rule (from the fall of Bosnia to the end of the 16th century), as noted in the high school textbook (third year), Bosnian Muslims integrated into the Ottoman feudal system and gradually converted to Islam.
A Considerable Focus on Croatia
“In the second stage in the 17th and 18th centuries, they were an important factor in defending the western borders… Bosniaks were granted several privileges that influenced relations with the central authority. They had the right to send children to the acemi oğlan, the right to be the sole recipients of estates in the Bosnian Sanjak, and by the end of the 16th century, the right to inherit estates under the odžakluk timar system…”
Such claims are at the very least contradictory, as acemi oğlan (Turkish: acemi oğlan: foreign boy) means a physically and mentally gifted Christian boy taken at a young age through the devşirme (blood tax) system to fill the ranks of the Janissary corps. It was not a privilege but a compulsion imposed on Christians by Sultan Murad II (1404–1451). The first law on devşirme was passed in 1430. That Bosnian Muslims voluntarily sent their children is a different issue. In any case, Ottoman conquests led to migrations and demographic changes.
“Serbs settled in areas where they had not lived before or were a small minority (Croatia, Dalmatia, Slavonia, Bosnia and Herzegovina)… The Croatian ethnic center shifted to the north,” states the textbook.
Due to historical interconnections, considerable focus is placed on Croatia and Croats in the textbook. Thus, in the chapter “Life in Two Worlds” in the third-year high school textbook, it states: “Ottoman conquests in Croatia continued in the 16th century. Slavonia, Dalmatia, Lika, and Krbava were significant to the Ottomans. Due to the endangerment of these areas, Croats migrated northwest. Serbs fleeing Ottoman attacks settled in the abandoned areas… In the second half of the 16th century, battles were fought in the Ban’s Frontier, a narrow area between the Kupa and Una rivers. The Battle of Sisak halted the Ottoman advance in Croatian lands…”
The halting of Ottoman advances strengthened Habsburg absolutism, leading to a conspiracy by Croatian and Hungarian nobles.
“The conspiracy was led by Croatian nobles Petar Zrinski and Krsto Frankopan between 1663 and 1670… The leaders of the conspiracy sought support from France, Venice, Poland, and the Ottoman Empire but failed. The Viennese court learned of the conspiracy; its leaders were arrested and executed in 1671.”
The textbook includes an illustration of Zrinski and Frankopan. It does not mention that they rebelled due to the Treaty of Vasvár. Although the imperial army had defeated the Ottomans, Leopold I signed an unfavorable treaty with the Ottomans, which Croatia and Hungary did not recognize, especially since the Ottomans destroyed Novi Zrin in that war.
Venetian rule in Dalmatia and their support for the Uskoks are particularly covered.
Border guards on both sides of the frontier (the Military Frontier in Croatia and the Bosnian Frontier on the Ottoman side) closely monitored each other. Among other things, the Krbava Battle is described.
High school students learn about the wars of Bosnian Sanjak-beys and their advances and conquests of Croatian towns. Such Ottoman pressure created a new demographic picture in both conquered and unconquered areas.
The Spread of Islam and Islamization of Bosnia
“Due to the emigration of some Catholics or their conversion to Islam, some of their settlements in Bosnia took on Islamic characteristics. In rural areas of western and southwestern Bosnia, Orthodox Christians settled. They moved in parallel with the expansion of Ottoman borders into Croatia and Dalmatia.”
The spread of Islam and the Islamization of Bosnia, it seems, is a central issue according to the Bosniak history curriculum. The process of conversion to Islam began in the mid-15th century and peaked in the 16th century. In the process of Islamization, the importance of the Bosnian Church is repeatedly emphasized.
“In Herzegovina and eastern Bosnia, all three churches vied for converts, while in most of Bosnia, the Catholic Church and the Bosnian Church were more active. None of the churches had territorial organization into parishes nor supported the policies of medieval Bosnia. The Bosnian Church was somewhat of an exception… The rural population was far from constant church influence. Hence, members of all three churches were exposed to the process of conversion to Islam.”
“The Ottoman Empire,” the textbook claims, “did not pursue a policy of forced Islamization.”
However, after making this claim, the authors list reasons for conversion to Islam: economic improvement, social reasons like building a military career (possible only for Muslims), and even the main reasons.
“The second reason (for conversion) was the privileged position of Muslims in the state, as certain restrictions were imposed on non-Muslims under the Law on Raya… The third reason was slavery. As the Ottomans captured many people in wars, they turned them into slaves. By converting to Islam, slaves could seek freedom from their servile status. Freed slaves usually settled in towns… Apart from often worldly reasons, spiritual reasons should not be overlooked – the attractive power of Islam as a religion and way of life in general… The fact that Islam lacks intermediaries between the believer and God, that there is no compulsion in faith…”
The authors, however, neglect to state that a captive (slave), if they wished to stay alive, had no choice and could not decide whether to convert to Islam or not. This is why the thesis that members of the Bosnian Church voluntarily converted to Islam is promoted, which is, of course, an assumption rather than a fact.
“Due to the increase in the number of Muslims and its disappearance (the Bosnian Church), it is assumed that the majority of its members converted to Islam,” states the high school textbook.
Bosniak elementary school students (seventh grade) learn something similar, as it is written that conversion to Islam in Bosnia was far more widespread than in other provinces.
“This was influenced by several factors: the absence of a strong church organization and persecution of members of the Bosnian Church. Islam was adopted by members of all three confessions existing in Bosnia before the arrival of the Ottomans – the Bosnian Church, Catholic, and Orthodox Churches. Members of the Bosnian Church in Bosnia were completely replaced by Muslims, thereby forming the current Bosnian religious triangle.”
The authors of the high school textbook (third year) devote considerable space to the idea that the Ottoman Empire in the past was depicted as the source of evil, a tyrannical and despotic state, and intolerant towards non-Muslims. They object to the portrayal of the process of conversion to Islam as organized and extremely brutal. According to the authors, biased Serbian and Croatian historiographers are responsible for these depictions, as they sought to assert their claims over Bosnia.
The textbook contains a special chapter on “Ottoman Confessionalism.” It claims that Croats and Serbs in Bosnia and Herzegovina did not exist until the second half of the 20th century.
“With the strengthening of church-school municipalities and under the influence of national movements from neighboring states, the process of identification of certain members of religious communities with neighboring nations began. This process became more pronounced from the mid-19th century, when in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Orthodoxy became identified with Serbdom, and Catholicism with Croatdom.”
The authors then return to their longstanding thesis in a special lesson titled “Critical Illumination of Three Nationalistic Ethnogeneses” and conclude: “The existence of the independent Bosnian Church is being minimized or denied, with the aim of reducing the medieval Bosnian population to either Catholic or Orthodox faith, and thus identifying its inhabitants as Croats or Serbs…”
In recent times, according to the authors of the textbook, there has been an increasing tendency among Muslims to assert that the teachings of the Bosnian Church were similar to Islamic religious dogmas and rituals. The Bosnian population, alongside the Bosnian Church, was also connected, the authors of the third-year high school textbook argue, by language.
“In addition to other names, many old writers most often referred to it as Bosnian. This linguistic substratum, recognized in the 18th century as the best, served as the foundation for the formation of Croatian and Serbian languages in the following century.”
The authors conclude that “the most detrimental impact on breaking the political and national integration of the population of Bosnia and Herzegovina and forming a lasting and firm sense of loyalty to Bosnia and Herzegovina was exerted by the Serbian and Croatian grand-state ideas.”
After the Treaty of Karlowitz in 1699
After the Treaty of Karlowitz in 1699, the Ottomans lost large territories in Croatia and Hungary. Here is how the losses of the Ottomans are described in the high school textbook:
“With the loss of Hungary and Slavonia, many Bosnian spahis lost their estates and property in those areas. Numerous waqfs in the Bosnian Eyalet were left without funds for maintenance. Refugee Muslims arrived in Bosnia, and those who did not were either killed or forcibly converted to Christianity. A similar fate befell the areas under Venetian rule and the Military Frontier…”
It is then concluded that from the Great Turkish War in the 18th century onward, the primary goal of Christian powers was the expulsion and eradication of Islam in Europe.
Following the raid of Eugene of Savoy into Bosnia in 1697, who retreated to Slavonia fearing the winter, Croats (referred to as Catholics in Bosniak textbooks) migrated to territories under the Habsburg Monarchy and the Venetian Republic, fearing retribution from Bosnian Muslims. Due to this emigration, Croats, as Catholics, became the third-largest population group in Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Revolutions and the Croatian National Movement
The textbook for the seventh grade of elementary school also tracks the development of the revolution in the Habsburg Monarchy, particularly the 1848 revolution in Hungary, led by Lajos Kossuth. A large excerpt is dedicated to the Croatian Ban Josip Jelačić, his proclamation of the abolition of serfdom in Croatia, Slavonia, and Dalmatia, and his confrontation with the Hungarians. The same textbook dedicates two pages to the Croatian national movement, with a portrait of Ljudevit Gaj.
The 20th Century and Distancing from the NDH
When it comes to the 20th century, we analyzed the textbook with a historical reader for the fourth year of high school (authors Zijad Šehić, Aida Kovačević, and Alma Leka). The authors particularly focus on the Cvetković-Maček Agreement of August 26, 1939, which, besides the Serbs, also displeased the president of the Yugoslav Muslim Organization, Mehmed Spaho.
“The key to the Croatian question was found in the division of power at the expense of the territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina, which prompted Spaho to protest directly to Prince Paul.”
In the high school textbook for the fourth year, today’s Bosniak distancing from the Independent State of Croatia (NDH) is strongly emphasized, despite the fact that Muslims in Bosnia and Herzegovina supported Pavelić’s regime in large numbers. Many Muslims (today’s Bosniaks) committed crimes in the name of the NDH, but all responsibility is shifted onto the Croats.
“Immediately after the proclamation of the NDH, a part of the Muslim citizens sided with the newly created state, while another part remained in opposition to the NDH. The majority (business circles, intellectuals, and clergy) openly distanced themselves from the NDH in the autumn of 1941 from the Ustaša policy of mass persecution and extermination of Serbs and Jews…”
The authors reference Muslim resolutions but do not cite them.
When it comes to the National Liberation Movement (NLM) in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the textbook states:
“The first battles began at the call of the Communist Party of Yugoslavia on July 27 in the area of Drvar, Oštrelj, and Bosansko Grahovo… The majority of the Partisan units consisted of Serbs, while the leaders, especially the organizers of the uprising, came from the ranks of Muslims, Croats, and Jews.”
Among other topics, the textbook covers AVNOJ, ZAVNOBiH, the six enemy offensives, and so on. Surprisingly, unlike other textbooks, there are very few photographs of Tito in the Bosniak high school textbooks.
The Dissolution of Yugoslavia and the War in Bosnia and Herzegovina
The dissolution of Yugoslavia is analyzed on just two pages. Students learn about the causes of the dissolution and the proclamation of Bosnia and Herzegovina as a sovereign state after the referendum. There is not a single sentence about the most recent war in the high school textbook published by Sarajevo Publishing.
However, the war and post-war period in Bosnia and Herzegovina (1992–2000) are covered in the textbook for the ninth grade of elementary school (authors Izet Šabotić and Mirza Čehajić).
This textbook describes the beginning of the aggression against Bosnia and Herzegovina on April 6, the day Bosnia and Herzegovina was internationally recognized and the day the Yugoslav People’s Army (JNA) and forces of Radovan Karadžić attacked the capital Sarajevo.
The attack by the JNA and reservists on October 1, 1991, on the Croatian village of Ravno in eastern Herzegovina is not treated as the start of the war in the Bosniak textbooks. This event is deemed irrelevant to the Bosniaks because it was a Croatian village, as stated in the ninth-grade textbook, destroyed “for the purpose of conquering Dubrovnik.”
“The Republican Presidency formed the first state formation under the name Territorial Defense on April 8. It represented the precursor to the later Army of Bosnia and Herzegovina, which incorporated units of the Territorial Defense, the Patriots’ League, the Green Berets, the BiH Ministry of Interior, and various other volunteer formations… Simultaneously, with the formation of the Territorial Defense, the Croatian political leadership in BiH, led by the Croatian Democratic Union (HDZ), formed the Croatian Defense Council (HVO)…”
Such claims suggest that the “state” created the Army of Bosnia and Herzegovina, while the HVO was created by a political party, HDZ. This raises the question of who defended many cities and places (like Mostar) in 1992 and liberated large parts of Bosnia and Herzegovina in 1994 and 1995?! For example, the decision to entrust the defense of Mostar to the HVO was personally signed by Alija Izetbegović.
In the lessons on the war, alongside Serbian crimes, camps, and the genocide in Srebrenica, the Heliodrom and Dretelj camps are also mentioned.
“Camps for Bosniaks were formed during the conflict between the Army of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina (ARBiH) and the HVO, such as Heliodrom near Mostar and Dretelj near Čapljina.”
Camps for Croats in Bugojno, Jablanica, and elsewhere during the same conflict are not mentioned.
“Through the mediation of the US government, on March 18, 1994, an agreement was signed in Washington between the BiH government and the self-proclaimed Croatian Republic of Herzeg-Bosnia, establishing the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, which was divided into cantons…”
In July 1995, the massacre committed by Bosnian Serb forces against Bosniaks in Srebrenica and other UN-protected zones followed.
“All this prompted,” as stated in the ninth-grade textbook, “the Western powers to launch airstrikes on Serbian positions in early September 1995. Meanwhile, the ARBiH and HVO, in joint actions, captured 5,000 square kilometers of BiH territory, advancing toward Banja Luka…”
The role of the Croatian Army (HV), along with the HVO, in liberating large parts of Bosnia and Herzegovina is not mentioned. The Croatian Army, thanks to the Split Agreement between Tuđman and Izetbegović on July 22, 1995, carried out several operations (e.g., Maestral, Southern Move), reaching Banja Luka. However, Bosniak children learn nothing about this. Operation Storm, as a key operation, is not mentioned in the broader context either.
“This was followed by negotiations between the warring parties in Dayton, USA, where on November 21, 1995, the Dayton Peace Agreement was signed, ending the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina.”
Interestingly, on page 188 of the ninth-grade textbook, a photo of Izetbegović, Tuđman, and Milošević after signing the agreement in Dayton is published. The caption under the photo reads: “Pay attention to their faces. Who is satisfied with this agreement, and who is not? Why? Compare this photo with the one of Dragiša Cvetković and Vladko Maček on page 144.”
On the photo on page 144, Maček and Cvetković are smiling after signing, while in the Dayton photo, it is suggested that Tuđman and Milošević are smiling, while Izetbegović smiles reluctantly.
These photos are used as “proof” of the Serbian-Croatian continuity in the division of Bosnia and Herzegovina.
These photos serve as “proof” of a supposed Serbian-Croatian continuity in dividing Bosnia and Herzegovina, as implied by the textbook.
The authors of these textbooks provide a selective interpretation of history, often omitting critical details or alternative perspectives that would offer a more balanced understanding. This approach not only shapes students’ perceptions of historical events but also reinforces a specific national narrative.