Search

The paper explores the history of the Serbian Progressive Party in the Kingdom of Serbia from 1887 to 1896. After the fall of the government of Milutin Garašanin in June 1887, the Serbian Progressive Party ended among the opposition parties. After the fall of the Progressive Party from power, the first coalition liberal-radical government was formed, headed by Jovan Ristić. The Progressive Party members and supporters were persecuted by the ruling People's Radical Party. The Progressive Party lost the voters and deputies in the National Assembly, which suggested that it would not be able to recover for an extended period. However, less than two years later, in May 1889, the Progressive Party managed to organize a General Assembly, attended by over 2,000 members, who adopted the party program and statute which did not differ substantially from the one from 1881. It was quite obvious that the party leadership wanted to show that the Progressive Party did not disappear from the political scene, but that it temporarily withdrew to reconsolidate and focus on gathering voters. Yet, due to the unrest that erupted in Belgrade during the party assembly, the Party leadership announced in June 1889 that the Progressive Party would temporarily suspend its activities. As the withdrawal from the political scene did not produce any results, the Party leaders decided to resume the Party's activities, hoping that the situation would eventually change in their favor. In the September 1890 elections, the Progressive Party won one parliamentary mandate, which went to the Party's leader, Milutin Garašanin. In the National Assembly, his political struggle against the ruling Radical Party government was hardly observable, but his articles published in the Progressive Party newpaper 'Videlo' (Daylight) had a much greater impact on the readers. During the minority liberal government of Jovan Avakumović, in 1892-1893, there were attempts to reach an agreement on a pre-election coalition between the Liberals and the Progressives against the Radicals, but these attempts failed. After the coup of 1st April 1893, when the Radicals regained power, it was quite clear to the Progressive Party leaders that they could not fight the Radicals on their own. The idea of forming a new political grouping of liberals and progressives was soon abandoned. After the 1888 Constitution had been repealed and the 1869 Constitution had been reinstated, King Alexander tried (with the assistance of rare non-partisan people) to avoid the intransigence of the Progressive Party leaders and the supremacy of the Radicals. After the period of several neutral governments headed by Đorđe Simić (January - April 1894), Svetomir Nikolajević (April - October 1894), and Nikola Hristić (October 1894 - July 1895), the Progressive Party government headed by Stojan Novaković (July 1895 - December 1896) was formed. This government initiated a change in the Constitution but the idea was not upheld by King Alexander, as the Liberals and the Radicals did not agree to instituting the constitutional reform under the administration of the weakest party in the country. In such circumstances, Novaković resigned on 29 December 1896. The next day, the Progressive Party was dissolved by the decision of the Party leadership.

At the end of the 19th century, diplomatic activity of the Kingdom of Serbia was reinforced. It had especially come to the fore when in 1886 Stojan Novaković was appointed as the deputy in Constantinople. He, as an experienced diplomat, realized the significance of the national idea spreading, and worked actively to that end. After the signing of consular convention, and opening of Serbian consulates in Osman's Empire, conditions for the opening of larger number of schools were created for which the permissions from Turkish authorities were to be acquired. As the number of Serbian pupils increased, and the numbers of schools as well, the issue of books supply was raised, which was not easy at all in that time. Turkish government issued the permission in 1890 that books for Serbian schools should be printed in Constantinople. All books which were to be printed had to pass the censorship of the Educational Committee. Thanks to the reinforced Serbian diplomatic activity in spreading the national idea, some shifts were made, which led representatives of Serbs in Osman's Empire to the idea of opening bookstores. Almost in the same time, bookstores in Priština, Prizren, and Thessaloniki were opened. The bookstore in Thessaloniki bore the official title the Serbian bookstore, and managed to work and survive despite the propaganda of Bulgarian exarchists which tried to thwart its existence frequently by associating with Turkish authorities. The business activity report was filed to the Consulate, which regulated its activities through contracts and measures.

У раду се анализира Позив и Упутство за купљење речи по народу за речник Српске краљевске академије (1898), документ од великог значаја за историју српске лексикографије. Даје се преглед околности у којима је настао овај документ, а затим се разматрају његове целине у контексту актуелних идеја с краја XIX века о речима и њиховој речничкој обради. In this paper we analyze the Call and Guidelines for Collecting Vernacular Lexis, a document published in 1898 by Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts. Given that this document has great significance for the history of Serbian lexicographical culture, we carry its analysis both from historical and linguistic viewpoint. From this analysis we draw conclusions about the impact of the Call and Guidelines on the history of Serbian lexicography and lexicology.

The main goal is to get a doctorate based on a number of archives and manifold literature, explore views Stojan Novakovic, one of the most significant Serbian politician and statesman, the Serbian society in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century. In the study Novakovics views of Serbian society, special emphasis will be placed on his attitude towards the question of Serbian statehood, the Serbian foreigh policy and relations between the major powers to the Serbian question in the Balkans, the constitutional issue, compared to the modern and traditional in Serbian society, attitudes towards culture and education in Serbia between two centuries.

У раду се приказује неколико аспеката односа Стојана Новаковића и Слободана Јовановића, пре свега у вези са радом у Министарству иностраних дела и Новаковићевој влади, и приватном преписком у којој су основна тема били њихови научни радови. Указује се и на оцене које је Слободан Јовановић оставио о Новаковићевој политичкој делатности, поједининим објављеним делима, карактеру и етичким схватањима. Кориштена је архивска грађа из Архива Србије и Архива Српске академије наука и уметности, текстови које је Слободан Јовановић објавио, као и радови из његове заоставштине који су касније објављени. The work shows several aspects of relation between Stojan Novaković and Slobodan Jovanović, mainly regarding Jovanović’s work in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Novaković’s government and their private correspondence whose main topic were their scholarly works. Evaluations which Slobodan Jovanović left regarding Novaković’s political activities, some of his works, his character and ethical views are also included in the work. Archive materials from Archive of Serbia and SASA Archives were used, as well as articles which Slobodan Jovanović published, and works from his legacy which were published later. Научни скупови / Српска академија наука и уметности ; књ. 172. Председништво ; књ. 11

Рад је посвећен је доприносу Стојана Новаковића србистици и лингвистици. Одређује се његово место у српској лингвистици, описује се његов однос према учитељу Ђури Даничићу и ученицима и наследницима Љубомиру Стојановићу и Александру Белићу, скреће се пажња на његова најзначајнија дела и иницијативе, износи се неколико оцена Александра Белића о њему, упућује се на нека граматичка решења другачија од данас општеприхваћених и на терминологију коју је користио. The work is dedicated to Stojan Novaković’s contribution to serbistics and linguistics. His place in Serbian linguistics is determined, his relation towards his teacher Đura Daničić and towards students and successors Ljubomir Stojanović and Aleksandar Belić is described, attention is drawn to his most important works and initiatives, few Aleksandar Belić’s evaluations of him are stated, some of grammatical solutions which are different than the ones which are widely accepted today are pointed to, as well as the terminology he used. Научни скупови / Српска академија наука и уметности ; књ. 172. Председништво ; књ. 11

У раду се даје преглед и оцена рада Стојана Новаковића на проучавању српске средњовековне историје. Новаковић се у својим радовима бавио најразноврснијим питањима српског средњег века – политичком, економском, друштвеном, културном, правном, војном историјом, историјском географијом, хералдиком, археографијом, народном традицијом, објављивањем извора, књижевношћу... Значај Стојана Новаковића не огледа се само у резултатима до којих је дошао и бројним радовима које је објавио. Можда је значајније то што су његови чланци и размишљања покренули даља истраживања. Ради се о једном од најзначајнијих истраживача српског средњовековља Stojan Novaković was one of the most important researchers of Serbian medieval history. There are not many historians who approached, or at least tried to approach, research of our history in such a planned and systematic manner. Novaković was unique in many ways in this area. In his works, he dealt with various topics of Serbian medieval period – political, economical, social, cultural, legal and military history, historical geography, heraldics, archeography, folk tradition, publication of historical sources, literature... Historiographical work of Stojan Novaković was in part connected to his political activities. Influence of his political beliefs and thoughts is also visible in his works dedicated to Serbian medieval period. Stojan Novaković started writing historical discussions in the middle of the 1870s. He published his first historical work, covering topic related to numismatics, in 1875, although we can say that his real work on studying of Serbian medieval history started with his works in the field of historical geography. When we talk about Stojan Novaković’s contribution in research of Serbian medieval period, we must not forget numerous limitations which were hampering his work. On one side, there was the unavailability of historical sources which was preventing him to get deeper insight in numerous issues he was researching, which today makes some of his results and claims outdated. On the other side, it was also about Novaković’s personality itself, because it seems that he wrote some of his works in a hurry, without entering into the topic he was covering as deeply as he could have, so those works give impression that he wanted to publish them as soon as possible. As many of his works were intended to be parts of a bigger whole, they look as if they were unfinished or as if they were drafts, and not finished works. Stojan Novaković holds an important place among researchers of Serbian medieval period. Objections which we have today to his work and results he achieved, by no means his pioneering work in research of Serbian medieval history. Novaković was a pioneer in many things. He entered many unexplored and untouched areas and made significant thematical breakthroughs. His importance is not only in the results of his research, nor in numerous works he wrote. Maybe even more important is the fact that his works and thoughts initiated further research

Однос Стојана Новаковића са Српским ученим друштвом и Српском краљевском академијом трајао је пуних пет деценија, од 1865. до 1915. године. Током година проведених на месту секретара Српског ученог друштва био је укључен у све најважније послове, радио на српској библиографији и објавио десетине радова. Због уласка у политику и става о искључиво научним циљевима Друштва прекинуо је сарадњу са њим. Настанак Српске краљевске академије поклопио се са почетком Новаковићеве дипломатске каријере али је он ипак живо учествовао у њеном раду. Трудио се да свој дипломатски положај искористи и за научни рад а од свега тога да користи имају Академија, академици и српска наука уопште. Именовање за председника било је круна његовог односа са Академијом. Године његовог председниковања биле су најплодније у дотадашњој историји Академије. У њима је започета изградња дома Академије и направљен помак на пољу међуакадемијске сарадње. Тај полет прекинуо је почетак Првог светског рата Stojan Novaković’s relation with The Serbian Learned Society and The Royal-Serbian Academy lasted for five decades, from 1865 till 1915. During the years he spent in the position of secretary of the Serbian Learned Society, he was involved in all the major tasks, he worked on Serbian bibliography and he published dozens of works. He stopped his cooperation with the Society because of his entering into politics, and because of the fact that the Society’s goals were purely scientific. The founding of the Royal-Serbian Academy coincided with the beginning of Novaković’s diplomatic career, but he was still very actively participating in its work. He was trying to use his diplomatic position for scholarly work as well, to the benefit of the Academy, academicians and Serbian science in general. His appointment as the president of the Academy was the crown of his relations with the Academy. The years of his presidency were the most fruitful years in the Academy’s history until then. During those years, building of the Academy’s home started, and there were improvements in the area of inter-academic cooperation. This positive development was stopped by the break-out of the World War I Научни скупови / Српска академија наука и уметности ; књ. 172. Председништво ; књ. 11

се анализирају промене у схватању српског идентитета Стојана Новаковића, како су се испољавале у делима посвећеним српској књижевности, језику и култури: од првог издања Историје српске књижевности (1867) до тестаментарне расправе Неко- лика тежа питања српске историје. Поводом књиге Geschichte der Serben von Konstantin Jireček. Gotha 1911 (1912/13). Оне су описане праћењем променљивих односа пансрпског, српског и југословенског гледишта, с једне, и супстанцијалистичког, етно-симболичког и модернистичког схватања нације, с друге стране, у погледима Стојана Новаковића на српску нацију. The paper analyzes changes in Stojan Novaković’s understanding of Serbian identity, as they were shown in his works devoted to the Serbian literature, language and culture: from the first edition of Istorija srpske književnosti (The History of Serbian Literature, 1867) to his testamentary study “Nekolika teža pitanja srpske istorije. Povodom knjige Geschichte der Serben von Konstantin Jireček. Gotha 1911” (“A Few difficult questions regarding Serbian history. On the occasion of the book Geschichte der Serben von Konstantin Jireček. Gotha 1911”, 1912/13). Those changes are depicted by observing how in Stojan Novaković’s views on Serbian nation pan-Serbian, Serbian and Yugoslavian standpoint, on one hand, and perennialism, modernism and ethno-symbolism in understanding the nation, on the other hand, were varied. Научни скупови / Српска академија наука и уметности ; књ. 172. Председништво ; књ. 11

Стојан Новаковић је био један од најугледнијих српских државника, ди пломата и научника на размеђу 19. и 20. века. У четири наврата је обављао дужност министра просвете и црквених дела Кнежевине, односно Краљевине Србије када су извршене највеће реформе српског образовања и отпочета модернизација просвете. Његовом иницијативом и заслугом, између осталог, уведена је општа, обавезна, шесторазредна основна школа за децу која не иду у гимназије или стручне школе, извршена реформа наставног плана, то јест донети нови наставни планови за ниже и више основне школе, за Вишу женску школу, гимназије, полугимназије, реалке, и учитељске школе, повећане плате учитеља и професора. Новаковић је дао значајан допринос и развоју Велике школе, чији је професор био. Његов идеал је био мо дерни Универзитет изграђен по угледу на европске. Као министар просвете био је творац два десет три просветна закона који су усвојени између 1873. и 1883. године. Неки од најважнијих закона су били: Закон о основним школама, Предлог Закона о модернизацији школа, Измене и допуне у Закону о устројству гимназија, Измене и допуне Закона о устројству Велике школе. Његовим залагањем донето је и 38 просветних расписа, девет наредби, 12 правила, а усвојено је и шест нових наставних планова. Stojan Novaković was one of the most respectable Serbian statesmen, diplomats and scholars at the turn of the 20th century. He was performing duty of Minister of Education and Ecclesiastical Affairs of Princedom (and later of Kingdom) on four occasions, when the biggest reforms of Serbian education system were made and when modernization of education in Serbia began. Upon his initiative and thanks to his efforts, compulsory 6-grade general elementary school was introduced for children who were not attending gymnasium or trade schools, reform of curriculum was made, i.e. new curriculums were made for junior and high elementary schools, for High school for girls, gymnasiums, semi gymnasiums, so-called real schools and teacher schools, and teachers’ and professors’ salaries were increased. He also significantly contributed to development of the Belgrade Higher School, in which he was also teaching. His ideal was a modern university, built upon model of European universities. As Minister of Education, he created 23 laws related to education which were passed between 1873 and 1883. Some of the more important laws were: Law on Elementary Schools, Proposal of the Law on Modernization of Schools, Amendments to the Law on Organization of Gymnasiums, Amendments to the Law on Organization of Higher School. Thanks to his efforts, 38 official proclamations, 9 orders, 12 rules and 6 new curriculums related to education were passed Научни скупови / Српска академија наука и уметности ; књ. 172. Председништво ; књ. 11

Српско питање према формулацији коју је користио Стојан Новаковић и други истакнути појединци његовог времена представљало је питање ослобођења и уједињења српског народа. Анексија Босне и Херцеговине у октобру 1908. године којом је Аустро-Угарска те покрајине, насељене претежно Србима, припојила хабзбуршким поседима, дубоко је погодила националне интересе Србије која је тиме доживела тежак ударац али је својим вишемесечним отпором да је призна допринела избијању међународне кризе. Народна скупштина у којој је предводио групу посланика послужила је Стојану Новаковићу као трибина да изнесе своја гледишта али је искористио прилику и да српској јавности, у својим објављеним текстовима, заокружено објасни суштину српског питања и покаже да је оно одавно било зрело али је тада драматично показало са чиме ће се Србија суочити. As per formulation used by Stojan Novaković and his other prominent contemporaries, the Serbian question was question of liberation and unification of the Serb people. The annexation of Bosnia and Herzegovina in October 1908, with which Austria-Hungary merged these provinces, mostly populated by Serbs, with Habsburg possessions, was a major blow to Serbia’s national interests, but Serbia, with its months-long refusal to recognize the annexation, contributed to creation of an international crisis. He used the National Assembly, in which he was leader of a group of MPs, as a stage for speaking out his views, but he also used his published articles to explain to the Serbian public, in a well-rounded manner, the essence of the Serbian question and show that it was long overdue, but that it also showed, in dramatic manner, what was Serbia about to face. Научни скупови / Српска академија наука и уметности ; књ. 172. Председништво ; књ. 11

Српско питање према формулацији коју је користио Стојан Новаковић и други истакнути појединци његовог времена представљало је питање ослобођења и уједињења српског народа. Анексија Босне и Херцеговине у октобру 1908. године којом је Аустро-Угарска те покрајине, насељене претежно Србима, припојила хабзбуршким поседима, дубоко је погодила националне интересе Србије која је тиме доживела тежак ударац али је својим вишемесечним отпором да је призна допринела избијању међународне кризе. Народна скупштина у којој је предводио групу посланика послужила је Стојану Новаковићу као трибина да изнесе своја гледишта али је искористио прилику и да српској јавности, у својим објављеним текстовима, заокружено објасни суштину српског питања и покаже да је оно одавно било зрело али је тада драматично показало са чиме ће се Србија суочити. As per formulation used by Stojan Novaković and his other prominent contemporaries, the Serbian question was question of liberation and unification of the Serb people. The annexation of Bosnia and Herzegovina in October 1908, with which Austria-Hungary merged these provinces, mostly populated by Serbs, with Habsburg possessions, was a major blow to Serbia’s national interests, but Serbia, with its months-long refusal to recognize the annexation, contributed to creation of an international crisis. He used the National Assembly, in which he was leader of a group of MPs, as a stage for speaking out his views, but he also used his published articles to explain to the Serbian public, in a well-rounded manner, the essence of the Serbian question and show that it was long overdue, but that it also showed, in dramatic manner, what was Serbia about to face. Научни скупови / Српска академија наука и уметности ; књ. 172. Председништво ; књ. 11

Дневник српског књижевника, педагога, преводиоца, историчара и етнолога Милана Ђ. Милићевића представља грађу од прворазредног значаја за политичку и културну историју Србије. Милићевић је као хроничар различитих друштвених збивања дао заокружен и уверљив преглед стања српског народа у последњој четвртини 19. века, а посебно српске престонице у периоду који је Дневником обухваћен. Aутор овог рада је покушао да на основу расположивих података пружи што целови тији приказ живота и рада Стојана Новаковића, истакнутог српског политичара, министра и председника владе Србије, дипломате, филолога, историчара књижевности, хералдичара и председника Српске краљевске академије, наравно из визуре Милићевића, његовог дугого дишњег блиског пријатеља и партијског саборца. Милићевић је својим драгоценим, пластичним и реалистичним писањем омогућио да боље сагледамо личност и свеукупну делатност Стојана Новаковића. Уверљивом хроничар ском нарацијом Милићевић је Новаковића очовечио, учинио га стварнијим, људскијим и жи вотнијим него што смо до сада имали прилике да га упознамо. Diary of Serbian writer, pedagogue, translator, historian and ethnologist Milan Đ. Milićević, which he was keeping for 37 years (1869–1905), is a material of huge importance for political and cultural history of Serbia. With his writing, Milićević, as a chronicler of various social events, provided well-rounded and convincing overview of status of the Serb people in the last quarter of the 19th century, and especially of Serbian capital in the period covered by the Diary. Using data found in the notes which were written into the Diary, the author of this paper tried to provide an overall overview of life and work of Stojan Novaković, prominent Serbian politician, minister and prime minister of Serbian government, diplomat, philologist, literature historian, heraldist and president of the Royal-Serbian Academy, of course from Milićević’s perspective, who was his long-time friend and partisan colleague. By writing down everyday events into his Diary for years, Milićević, with his precious, plastic and realistic writing, enabled us to have better view of character and overall work of Stojan Novaković. With his convincing chronical narration, Milićević brought Novaković to life, made him more realistic, more human and more vivid that we ever had a chance to see. All layers, which were being painted for decades, were scrubbed off of his character, turning him almost into semi-deity, idealizing him and his overall work and creating idealized picture of time in which he lived and worked. By presenting him to potential readers in a different light than before, and by providing new and little known information about Novaković, Milićević pictured a person of flesh and blood, with all his virtues and faults, numerous life problems and needs. Научни скупови / Српска академија наука и уметности ; књ. 172. Председништво ; књ. 11

Рад Преписка Стојана Новаковића у Архиву САНУ доноси податке када су, од кога и на који начин у Архив САНУ доспела писма која је Новаковић упућивао појединим личностима, као и она која су њему написана. Дат је њихов број и у најкраћим цртама садржина. У дужим и краћим изводима цитирана су писма или њихови делови да би аутентично показали које је и какве податке Новаковић тражио за неке од својих научних радова, давао савете за радове другима, саопштења, препоруке, предлоге, мишљења, указивао на грешке у радовима итд. На крају је изнето мишљење о значају и вредности ове Новаковићеве преписке. The work Stojan Novaković’s Correspondence in the SASA Archives provides data about when, from whom, and in what way did the letters which Stojan Novaković was sending to certain people, as well as the letters which were sent to him, got to the SASA Archives. Their number and short description of their content is provided. In longer and shorter excerpts, letters or their parts were quoted in order to authentically show which data was Novaković looking for for some of his scholarly works, what advices he was giving others regarding their works, announcements, recommendations, opinions, pointing out to mistakes in the works, etc. In the end, opinion about importance and value of this Novaković’s correspondence is given Научни скупови / Српска академија наука и уметности ; књ. 172. Председништво ; књ. 11

На Балкану, у позном 19. веку, где су велики друштвени и политички покрети и даље били у зачетку и прилично неуобичајени, покретачка снага политичког живота била је личност и визија политичких предводника. Стојан Новаковић је, без сумње, био један од најутицајнијих политичких фигура свог времена, на Балкану. Грцима је био познат као умерен државник и одличан дипломата са којим је грчка влада могла да постигне договор у вези са питањем зона одредница које су биле од утицаја у Македонији. Такође је био познат као угледан научник и византолог. Имајући у виду грчку славенофобију у касном 19. и раном 20. веку, однос Стојана Новаковића и његових веза са својим грчким колегама истиче се као још изузетнији. Stojan (Kosta) Novaković lived and acted in the period of fierce Greco-Slavic mistrust in the Balkans. In his studies and articles, he often fiercely criticized helenocentric policy of Ecumenical Patriarchate, especially in the moment when anti-Slavic syndrome among Greek political and intellectual elite was reaching stage of psychosis. However, the relations between the two sides were still characterized by mutual respect. In the eyes of Greeks, Novaković was seen as a reliable partner, with whom the Greek government could negotiate the delineating zones of interest, while Novaković himself saw the reaching of Greco-Serbian agreement as a cornerstone of a broader Balkan coalition. Научни скупови / Српска академија наука и уметности ; књ. 172. Председништво ; књ. 11

– Стојан Новаковић је са Матицом српском био повезан више од пола столећа, значи од почетка до краја свога бављења књижевношћу и науком. Први рад послао је 1861, а из те године је и његово прво сачувано писмо упућено неком од Матичиних руководи лаца и сарадника. Последњи текст објављен му је у Летопису 1893, а последње сачувано писмо датирано је 24. фебруара 1914. године. Имао је непуних деветнаест година када је успоставио везе са најстаријом српском културном установом и одржавао их је до пред крај живота – био је, између осталог, почасни члан Матице српске. Међутим, објавио је само деветнаест текстова у часописима које је она издавала – дванаест у Летопису, шест у Матици – што изгледа мало ако имамо у виду да Новаковићева библиографија броји скоро четири стоти не наслова, међу којима је и неколико књига. Важно је, међутим, нагласити да је Новаковић врло интензивно сарађивао са Матицом српском 60-их и почетком 70-их година 19. века, у време деловања Уједињене омладине српске, основане 1866. по узору на Младу италију. Но ваковић је тада у Београду уређивао часопис Вила и тесно сарађивао са Антонијем Хаџићем, уредником Матице која је излазила у Новом Саду. Поред тога, водили су рачуна о дистрибу цији других публикација Уједињене омладине. Сарадња Новаковића са Матицом српском се смањеним интензитетом наставила и у наредним деценијама, као и преписка са Антонијем Хаџићем који је од 1896. до 1911. био председник ове установе, а од 1892. и почасни члан Срп ске краљевске академије. Stojan Novaković was being connected with Matica Srpska for more than half a century, which means for the beginning of his literary and scholarly work. He sent his first work in 1861, and his first preserved letter to one of Matica’s managers or associates is from that same year. His last work was published in Letopis in 1893, and the last preserved letter was dated February 24th, 1914. He was not even 19 years old when he established relations with the oldest Serbian cultural institution and maintained them until shortly before he died – he was, among other things, an honorary member of Matica Srpska. However, he published only 19 works in publication Matica Srpska was publishing – twelve in Letopis, six in Matica – which seems little, having in mind Novaković’s bibliography which has more than 400 titles, among which there are several books. It is important, however, to emphasize that Novaković cooperated with Matica Srpska very intensively in the 1860s and in the beginning of the 1870s, at the time when the United Serb Youth, founded in 1866 and modeled after the Young Italy, was active. At that time, Novaković was in Belgrade and was editor of publication Fairy, having close cooperation with Antonije Hadžić, editor of Matica which was being published in Novi Sad. They were also taking care of distribution of other United Serb Youth’s publication. Novaković’s cooperation with Matica Srpska continued with lower intensity over the next several decades, as well as his correspondence with Antonije Hadžić who was the president of Matica Srpska from 1896 till 1911, and from 1892 also an honorary member of the Royal Serbian Academy Научни скупови / Српска академија наука и уметности ; књ. 172. Председништво ; књ. 11

У раду се на основу објављених и необјављених архивских и мемоарских извора, као и релевантне историографске литературе, анализира ток одбрамбених припрема српске владе у условима директне аустроугарске претње оружаном интервенцијом. Stojan Novaković’s government, formed as a government of broad coalitional character, faced with direct danger of Austro-Hungarian military aggression, was trying to quickly prepare the army for efficient resistance to the enemy. Main directions of its activities in the military area were strengthening of technical capabilities of the army, purchasing of modern weapons and military equipment, strengthening the army internally by eliminating divisions among the officers and increasing level of discipline. Important steps were made in terms of definite shaping of war plan, whose full purposefulness was proven in the conditions of harsh war reality in 1914. Besides, defining the policy of road and railway network development contributed not only to the country’s economic development, but also to its defensive capabilities. Increased taxation measures provided stable financing, not only of operational military needs, but also of huge program of army modernization. This way the foundations were laid for quick modernization of Serbian army, which was mainly completed by the beginning of wars for national liberation and unification (1912–1918). Научни скупови / Српска академија наука и уметности ; књ. 172. Председништво ; књ. 11

У раду је на основу архивске грађе и постојеће литературе објашњена улога коју је Стојан Новаковић имао у оснивању и раду српских средњих школа у Османском царству. Новаковићу, као дугогодишњем министру, реформатору просвете и професору Велике школе, било је јасно да је просвета важно оружје не само у образовању већ и у васпитању омладине у националном духу. Знајући да постоји озбиљан процес однарођивања српског становништва у Османском царству залагао се за отварање српских основних и средњих школа како би се очувала српска свест. На различитим функцијама: као члан Ученог одбора, министар просвете, посланик у Цариграду, државни саветник, члан Просветног савета, председник владе и министар иностраних послова креирао је рад српских школа и бавио се њиховим проблемима и потребама. Био је свестан чињенице да су те школе расадници српске просвете и да оне чувају Српство. Била је неопходна планирана континуирана акција да би се постигао циљ а за континуитет у раду, заслуга припада Стојану Новаковићу. The paper analyzes role of Stojan Novaković in foundation and work of Serbian secondary schools in the Ottoman Empire. Being a long-time minister of education, reformer of educational system and professor of the Belgrade Higher School, Novaković understood that education system is an important weapon, not only for education of the young, but also for their bringing-up in national spirit. He was advocating opening of elementary and secondary schools. In the Ottoman Empire there were six Serbian secondary schools: Seminary in Prizren (1871–1912), Serbian Gymnasium in Istanbul (1893–1902), Serbian Gymnasium “Home of science” in Thessaloniki (1894–1912), Serbian Boys’ Gymnasium in Skopje (1894–1912), Serbian Boys Gymnasium in Bitola (1897–1912) and Serbian Gymnasium in Pljevlja (1901–1912). Although these schools were opened and financed by the Kingdom of Serbia, it could not appear as their owner in front of Turkish authorities, because only subjects of the Empire or orthodox church dignitaries could be owners of schools. Officially, Serbian state had nothing to do with Serbian schools in the Empire. Thanks to well thought and well organized action by the Serbian state and its officials, above all Stojan Novaković, most of the population in Old Serbia and in Macedonia saw the Serbian army as liberators, and not as occupiers Научни скупови / Српска академија наука и уметности ; књ. 172. Председништво ; књ. 11

Стојан Новаковић је идејни творац и иницијатор израде Речника српскохрватског књижевног и народног језика САНУ и утемељитељ модерне српске лексикографије. У познатој „Посланици Академији наука философских“ он је изнео концепцију свог великог пројекта. Развој језика, његове употребе и еволуција лексикографских сазнања утицали су на то да ова концепција доживи извесне промене. Међутим, она је ипак сачувана у основим правцима датим пре више од сто година. Задатак овог рада јесте да осветли промене до којих је дошло, укаже на узроке који су до њих довели, али и да покаже континуитет у развоју модерне лексикографске мисли, коју је утемељио Новаковић, а која се реализује у Речнику САНУ . Stojan Novaković came up with the idea and was the initiator of creation of SASA Dictionary of the Serbian Vernacular Literary Language and founder of modern Serbian lexicography. In his famous “Epistle to the Academy of Philosophical Sciences” he explained the concept of his major project. Novaković wanted to create a dictionary which would form continuity with previous lexicographic works (Vuk’s and Daničić’s) and which would be a treasury of words collected from all Serbian dialects, as well as the words which were created in recent intellectual works. He wanted it to be a dictionary of vernacular literary language, which means dictionary of literary language on vernacular basis in spirit which was founded by Vuk. Development of language, his use and evolution of lexicographic learnings caused this concept to undergo certain changes. However, it is still preserved in its main directions which were set more than hundred years ago. Научни скупови / Српска академија наука и уметности ; књ. 172. Председништво ; књ. 11

Министарство народне привреде у првој влади Стојана Новаковића водио је Вучко Стојановић. Министарство је спроводило активну привредну политику и уна предило привредни амбијент доношењем закона о тзв. безличним акционарским друштвима и помагању прерађивачке индустрије и извозне трговине стоком. Истовремено, наставило је и новим мерама унапредило привредну политику претходних влада, првенствено у области трговине стоком и заштите шума. Међутим, исто министарство у другој влади С. Новаковића, које је водио радикал Јаша Продановић, због политичке кризе није водило активну привред ну политику, мада је наставило с политиком претходних радикалских влада. The Ministry of People’s Economy, after a short period in which it had an appointed representative, was led by Vučko Stojanović, who, in Stojan Novaković’s first government (1895–1896), was minister of economy for the first and only time. Still, his ministry was conducting a very active economic policy and managed to improve the economic environment with its proposal of systematic laws that were passed in the National Assembly (about helping the slaughter and meat processing industry, the so-called person-less stock companies, export of livestock, renewal of wine growing, etc). Combined with the laws proposed by the Ministry of Finance (laws on conversion of state debt, covering the state deficit, Timok railway, taxation, etc), these laws enabled more efficient functioning of the state and of the economy. The economic policy of the Ministry was in line with previous policies, whose solutions it built upon and improved. Since Stojan Novaković’s second term (in 1909) as the president of the Minister council came at the time of heavy political crisis caused by the annexation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, his coalitional government, which consisted of representatives of four most important political parties in the Kingdom of Serbia, was focused on foreign policy priorities. In this government, the Ministry of People’s Economy was led by the Radical Party’s Jaša Prodanović. However, this ministry did not significantly improve the economic legislature in Serbia. After the resolution of the political crisis, not only did the internal unity of the government weaken, but the government also focused more on resolving financial and not economic problems (new state loan for fixing the budget deficit and for weapons). For these reasons, economic legislature and economic policy in general remained outside of its focus. The Ministry of Economy in Stojan Novaković’s first government took some useful measures and provided realistic sources of funding in areas where it was needed, and, also, created legal framework for easier financing of economic activities via regulated system of stock companies, while the same Ministry in his second government led a far less profiled policy. The policies of the Ministry of Economy in both governments were directed on creating basis for economic emancipation in relation to Austria-Hungary. However, short periods during which they worked gave them little chance to implement the projected policies, which prevents us from evaluating adequacy, applicability and results of those policies Научни скупови / Српска академија наука и уметности ; књ. 172. Председништво ; књ. 11

У раду су проучени најважнији путеви којим је Стојан Новаковић дошао до својих југословенских идеја и кључни аргументи које је користио приликом њиховог образлагања. Посебно су наглашени заједнички језик Срба и Хрвата, потом угледање на лаичка и грађанска начела тадашње западне Европе, поверење у идентитетску политику и творачку моћ државе и нужност повећања броја становника и проширења територије, у циљу самоодбране од великих сила и суседа. This article researches the origin of Stojan Novaković’s Yugoslav ideas and the arguments which he used in their explanation. As shown, during his half-century long public activities, and especially in the last decade of his life, Novaković was presenting several key arguments in favor of the Yugoslav idea. Stojan Novaković believed that modern nations are, above all, language communities, and that the key factor for Serbs and Croats coming closer was their common, Serbian, language, which was born as a result of Ljudevit Gaj’s linguistic reform. Novaković then, being a convinced “Westerner”, believed in inevitability of victory of modern ideas of freedom, equality and lawfulness over mid- European religious divisions and class privileges, which, in his opinion, had to lead to convergence of Serbs and Croats. He also believed in “creational power of state” which, he claimed, was able to bring different identities together and give them new quality. Finally, he was writing about common interest of Yugoslavs to become united and stronger in numbers, in order to defend themselves from major powers’ and neighbors’ ambitions. Научни скупови / Српска академија наука и уметности ; књ. 172. Председништво ; књ. 11

У раду се обрађује делатност „владе четворне коалиције” на чијем челу се налазио Стојан Новаковић и која је трајала од 24. фебруара до 24. октобра 1909. године. У њу су ушле све четири релевантне парламентарне странке. Овај кабинет управљао је земљом у време Анексионе кризе. Иако је стицајем неповољних међународних околности, и под претњом рата од стране Аустроугарске, влада 31. марта 1909. признала анексију Босне и Херцеговине, успела је да одржи унутрашњу стабилност и одложи сукоб са несразмерно моћнијом суседном царевином. The four-party coalition government, with Stojan Novaković at its helm, lasted from February 24 till October 24 1909. It consisted of all four relevant parties of then-Serbia, and was supported by 159 out of 160 parliament members (all except for one Socialist), 84 Old-radicals, 48 Independents, 20 Liberals and only 7 Progressivists, whose member was the new Prime Minister. It had 4 ministers from the Radical Party, 2 from the Independent Party and one from the Liberal and the Progressive Party each. This cabinet ran the country at the time of the most difficult crisis Serbia faced after gaining independence in 1878 – the Annexation crisis. Beside political pressure, there was a realistic danger of Austria-Hungary’s military intervention which could have easily led to loss of Serbia’s independence. Also, this foreign policy strike was a major test for the political system of parliamentary democracy, and for the Serbian society as a whole. In such circumstances, the Government managed to maintain stability and postpone conflict with much more powerful Austira-Hungary. Thanks to Novaković’s wisdom, experience and responsibility, and that of the other leaders of political parties, Nikola Pašić’s above all, war was avoided, and Serbia, who was forced to recognize annexation of Serb provinces in Bosnia and Herzegovina with its statement of March 31, 1909, avoided falling into deep crisis and self-destruction. By the end of its work on October 24, 1909, the Government was resolving some other issues such as Prince Đorđe’s abdication, question of re-activation of conspirators and pardoning of counter-conspirators, normalization of relations with Austria-Hungary, improving relations with Bulgaria, as well as taking loans, appointing officials, etc. Still, it is remembered by the aforementioned statement of March 31st, 1909. Научни скупови / Српска академија наука и уметности ; књ. 172. Председништво ; књ. 11

Анализирајући Новаковићево схватање историјске науке и његово место у развоју модерне српске историографије, оцртавамо духовни пут који је Новаковић прешао, трагајући притом за проблемима „философске историје“ у његовом опусу. Нагласак је на Новаковићевом сагледавању односа српске средњовековне прошлости и модерног доба, његовом схватању историјског времена и идеје напретка у историји, идеје народности и „васкрса“ српске државе. Посебна пажња је посвећена недовољно уоченој духовној вези која Новаковића спаја са француским либералним историчарима прве половине 19. века, а посебно државником и историчаром Франсоа Гизоом који уз Леополда Ранкеа представља један од стубова европске историографије 19. века. In the development of modern Serbian historiography Stojan Novaković performed merging of two European traditions: erudition, which originated in ancient knowledge of the Renaissance and reached its expression in the classic epoch of the 17th century, and rationalistic philosophy of the 18th century. Thanks to this fruitful merger, Novaković was able to develop his broad studies in the spirit of one widely understood cultural history which was moving from philology and literature, to political and military overviews, to history of the society. Novaković was putting together scholarly spirit, requests for precision and aspiration towards historical truth with interest in completeness and fullness of historical processes. By his polyhistoric profile, he was a child of historism, of belief in power and spirit of the people, but he was no less marked by spirit of enlightenment, thanks to which he was able to fortunately make relation between national history and history of civilization. Follower of Leopold Ranke, Novaković was also an expert in French liberal historiography from the first half of the 19th century, which strongly influenced his overall view of historical development of the Serb people. Научни скупови / Српска академија наука и уметности ; књ. 172. Председништво ; књ. 11

Рад се бави политичким, културним и књижевно-историјским проблемима историје Балкана у научном делу Стојана Новаковића. Хронолошки обухвата период XIX и почетка XX века, али и неким временски удаљеније историјске феномене. Балканске прилике Новаковић је сагледавао пре свега као научник енциклопедијског образовања, али и као државник и дипломата који је вршио важне државне послове последњих деценија XIX и почетком XX века. Посебну пажњу Новаковић је посветио грчким и бугарским студијама. Широка историјска знања омогућила су му да као државник дубље и шире разуме савремене политичке и друштвене појаве. Међу српским научницима и државницима, Стојан Новаковић се истиче изузетним познавањем балканских питања. При свој сложености политичких и националних спорова, Новаковић је остао у оквирима разумних и трезвених судова о балканским проблемима. As one of the leading Serbian scholars and statesmen, Stojan Novaković, both because of his official duty and because of his scholarly curiosity, was carefully monitoring historical processes in the Balkans during previous centuries, and especially during the 19th and the beginning of the 20th century. In several of his works, Novaković was criticizing nearsightedness of Serbian statesmen, who were not paying attention to position of Serbs in their ancient, native regions. In his numerous historical-political and travelogue studies, Novaković was focusing on confrontation of Serbian, Greek and Bulgarian national programs in the second half of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century. By analyzing this complex Balkan knot, Novaković came to the conclusion that Bulgarians were the main Serbian rival in Macedonia, and that Greeks could be Serbian allies if they reduced their aspirations to a reasonable level. Although in Greeks he saw Serbs’ natural ally in the Balkans, Novaković was still very critical of their national aspirations and their ideological basis. In spite of great complexity of political and national disputes, Novaković remained within limits of reasonable and sober judgements on Balkan issues. Even during his first tenure in Istanbul (1886–1891), Novaković noticed the role of the Albanian factor in the Balkans, pointing out that ˝there are planned activities on destroying the Serbian element in the Old Serbia, with the aim of having purely Albanian population there˝. Novaković disliked the possibility of Albanian autonomy on the territory of Old Serbia, which would greatly jeopardize Serbian national aspirations towards South. In Novaković’s shorter or longer historical-travelogue studies, one can notice frequent parallels between events of the late Middle Ages and of the 19th century. His broad historical knowledge helped him recognize traces and sings of the past times in some modern aspects of folk tradition of the Balkan people. In those studies, there are some interesting points of ethnographical nature. The analysis of the Balkan political mentality, deep understanding of character of the Balkan nations. Stojan Novaković understood historical background and modern characteristics of complex Balkan issues better than any other Serbian scholar or statesman. In these studies interesting facts of ethnographic character can be found, analysis of Balkan political mentality and getting through the character traits of the people. Научни скупови / Српска академија наука и уметности ; књ. 172. Председништво ; књ. 11

– Стојан Новаковић се прво као министар просвете и црквених дела осамдесетих година деветнаестог века а потом као председник владе (1895–1896) бавио по ложајем католика и организацијом католичке цркве у Србији, која се налазила под јурисдик цијом Јосипа Јурја Штросмајера, ђаковачког бискупа и апостолског администратора Београд ске дијецезе. Штросмајер је у више наврата настојао да увери Новаковића и српску владу у неопходност закључења конкордата са Светом столицом којим би био регулисан и положај католичке цркве у Србији. Међутим, услови под којима је Штросмајер предлагао закључење конкордата оцењени су од Новаковића и српске владе као неприхватљиви и супротни срп ском законодавству. Пославши барнабиту Ћезара Тондија као мисионара у Србију, Штрос мајер је открио основни циљ свог залагања за конкордат, јер се Тондини у Србији отворено залагао за унију са римокатоличком црквом. Због оваквог става српска влада је захтевала да Тондини буде повучен из Србије а закључење конкордата је одложено. Као председник владе Новаковић је настојао да закључи конкордат како би пружио доказ о верској толеранцији у Србији што је био и предуслов за националну акцију у Старој Србији, Македонији и Босни и Херцеговини, где су католици чинили значајан део локалног становништва. Stojan Novaković was first the Minister of education and religious affairs in the 1880s and from 1895 to 1896 he was the President of government of Serbia. On both occasions, he had to deal with the issue of the position of the Catholics in Serbia since there was no catholic hierarchy in Serbia. Josip Juraj Strossmayer, bishop of Djakovo, in the nearby province of Austria-Hungary, was the titular bishop of Belgrade. Strossmayer tried on numerous occasions to convince Novaković and the Serbian government to conclude a convention with the Holly See in order to create the conditions for the establishment of the catholic hierarchy in Serbia. The conditions he considered as indispensable before such a convention could be concluded, were judged by Novaković and the Serbian government as excessive and contrary to the Serbian laws. Furthermore, Strossmayer’s real objective was revealed by his missionary in Serbia, Tondini, who openly spoke about the need of the union of the Serbian Orthodox Church with Rome. Thus, the Serbian government obtained the removal of Tondini from Serbia and the issue of the convention with the Holly See was adjourned. As President of the Serbian government (1895–1896) Novaković tried to conclude a convention with Rome in order to demonstrate the religious tolerance of Serbia. He deemed it indispensable precondition for the national action both in Old Serbia and Macedonia and Bosnia and Herzegovina, where an important part of the population were Catholics. Научни скупови / Српска академија наука и уметности ; књ. 172. Председништво ; књ. 11