Search

In 1873, the Serbian government proposed to abolish corporal punishment from the Criminal Code. (Since 1860, it existed in the form of beating of up to 50 strikes.) While the parliamentary committee supported this amendment, listing five arguments in favour of the abolishment, the opinions in the plenum were divided. Some MPs supported it, seeing corporal punishment as anachronistic, or underlining inequalities and abuse involved in its application. However, some thought that prison could not serve as a sufficient deterrent to potential offenders, and they feared that abolishing beating would lead to an increase in crime rates. The discussion was concluded by a long speech of Đorđe Cenić, Minister of Justice (and author of the amendment), after which the proposal was accepted with a prevailing majority. This article will analyse the MPs' attitudes towards this form of punishment, Cenić's influence both as a political figure and as an expert on criminal law, and the arguments given by both sides, while attempting to place the analysed case into a broader legal-political framework. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Crimen: Journal for Criminal Justice is the property of University of Belgrade, Faculty of Law and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The understanding of alcoholism as a medical and social problem dates back to the 19th century, both in Europe and in North America. Modern states have begun to sanction this phenomenon through social institutions, with the ultimate goal of creating a "better" society. In Serbia, one cannot talk about recognizing alcoholism as a problem in the full sense, as it has in modern European countries. When it comes to the context of the Principality of Serbia in the first decades of the 19th century, the term "excessive drinking" should be used rather than "alcoholism". Alcoholism implies a disease of addiction, as a term that was created later, although it had its predecessors. Since we do not have empirical research on the extent to which alcohol consumption has become an addiction in the Principality of Serbia, we should be cautious. Alcohol consumption was more of a widespread way of everyday life, but we cannot say with certainty to what extent we can talk about excess and to what extent about the frequency of consumption. It can be discussed about the condemnation of drunkenness, both by the state authorities and by compatriots. Prince Miloš did not tolerate drunkards, he did not forgive them for drinking alcohol and mischief, he made fun of them cruelly, which resulted in deaths. Also, the state enacted measures against "vagrants", moving at night without lanterns, staying in bars and taverns after a certain time of day. Night patrols were introduced to monitor idlers, drunkards who gathered in taverns and taverns and were potential miscreants. Thus, inns and taverns became places that represented the sources of criminal activities and immoral behavior. First of all, there were complaints against village priests, teachers and princes who indulged in drunkenness, that is, among the higher and more respectable layers of Serbian society. And ordinary people, men and women, were prone to drunkenness, in the everyday context, which led to domestic violence, which was sanctioned by corporal punishment. Misdemeanors that arose in the context of inns, in the form of fights, confrontations, swearing and similar inappropriate behavior, were punished in the same way. It is a commonplace that, as foreign observers noticed, brandy was cheap and easily available, that it was consumed in large quantities, as medicine, food and pleasure, and complete sobriety was not considered healthy among the people. On the other hand, exaggeration in drunkenness was not approved by the people, as evidenced by the rather rigorous folk customs used to wean drunkards off their addiction. Foreign travel writers emphasized the harmfulness of brandy for the Serbian nation, due to the presence of unhealthy substances in it, which also affected the appearance of Serbian residents. The state and Prince Miloš strove to suppress the increase in the number of inns, so a decrease in their number can be observed in the last years of the first reign of Prince Miloš. It can be said that the Serbian state followed European trends in the suppression of alcoholism through state institutions, although this was probably not part of an organized and planned long-term state policy, but rather a reflection of the understanding of Prince Miloš and the Serbian authorities that there are pressing problems in the Serbian state, whose further encouragement it was not in the state's interest. Certainly, the culture of consuming alcoholic beverages has remained dominant in Serbia until today, distinguishing the contexts that people introduce themselves. Thus, brandy was used for medicinal purposes, since there was a belief, partly scientifically based, in the beneficial effects of brandy on human health, which are mostly short-lived. As a food, brandy was considered to strengthen before greater physical efforts, as a source of strength and energy. Of course, brandy was a pleasure, associated with the socializing of men and the rituals related to the daily visit to a tavern or inn, as a place of drinking, but also of social life, where public and political discussions were held and public opinion was formed.

This historical review aimed to demonstrate the contribution of Serbian officers to physical education in civilian schools by examining their historical ties. We explored mutual relationships and proved their relevance and contribution by using a theoretical and critical approach, which emphasized the importance of initiation of physical education in city schools, teaching staff, and exercise programs. Physical education was essential in the education and upbringing of the officer cadre. After independence, Serbia was able to modernize and prosper economically, politically, athletically, and academically. Officers made immeasurable contributions to martial arts, equestrian societies, and shooting groups. Many officers who graduated from the Military Academy abroad and in Serbia performed various teaching duties in civilian schools from 1815-1918, proving that the officers influenced the development of the armies in which they served and made a significant contribution to the mass spread of physical education (gymnastics and military skills) by training youth in civilian schools or sports clubs in the Principality of Serbia and the Kingdom of Serbia. The knowledge acquired in this historical review will undoubtedly shed more light on the officers' contribution and work in Serbian civilian schools in physical education.

Copyright of Issues in Ethnology Anthropology is the property of Issues in Ethnology Anthropology and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Proceedings of Matica Srpska for History / Zbornik Matice Srpske za Istoriju is the property of Matica srpska and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

In 2021, the first full biography of an outstanding figure in Serbian history — the leader of the second Serbian uprising, the ruler of the Serbian principality, and the founder of the Obrenović dynasty, Prince Miloš — was published. The author of the book is a respected historian, retired University of Belgrade professor Radosh Ljušić. This deep and grounded research fills a significant gap in Serbian historiography, as there were no studies on this subject until recently. This biography of the second Serbian ruler of the modern period is extremely comprehensive: In addition to the collections of documents, memoirs, diaries, and periodicals well-known to the scientific community, Ljušić actively used previously unpublished materials from Serbian, Russian, and Austrian archives while writing the book. It is also noteworthy that the author studied the huge amount of scientific literature while composing a biography of Miloš Obrenović. The monograph is a fairly voluminous writing (923 pages), divided into six parts: “From shepherd to leader”, “Prince”, “Outcast and returnee”, “Possessions”, “Traitor”, and “Rudnichanin”. The study is also provided with rich illustrative material and maps. For the first time in world history, the biography of a Serbian prince is presented without significant gaps and omissions. The undoubted advantage of this book is that by following the life milestones of Prince Miloš, the author does not ignore the events, customs, and social norms of that era in Serbia. This biography is written without ignoring the historical context. This article offers journal readers a brief review of this work, which is worthy of the attention of researchers and interested readers.

Since the first half of the nineteenth century, various census data have been collected regarding the ethnic characteristics of the Serbian population, although the data are incomplete and collected irregularly. The ten censuses conducted in the Principality of Serbia between 1833 and 1874 have immense archival value, but their usefulness for ethno-demographic studies is limited. Similarly, while the statistics collected in the censuses of the Kingdom of Serbia from 1874 to 1910 are somewhat more reliable than the previous ones, they suffer from the absence of a direct question on ethnicity. To determine the ethnic structure of the population during this time period, a researcher had to rely on an indirect approach through the identification of ethnic groups based on their linguistic affiliation. However, it is important to note that this method only provides an approximate estimation of ethnic composition. Despite this limitation, available census data can still provide valuable insights into the ethnic composition of the population of the Principality and Kingdom of Serbia, with the number and share of the Vlach population as the most numerous ethnic minority taking centre stage. This means that any data analyses must begin with the understanding that the indicators can only be presented for the Romanian-speaking population. If we accept the indirect approach to determining population ethnicity, we can deduce from the data that the number of Vlachs in Eastern Serbia increased up to 1895, and their percentage share increased up to 1884. It is noteworthy that the dynamics of the number of Vlachs until 1895 were relatively stable, implying that the increase was practically linear and consistent with the growth tendency of Serbia’s overall population at the time. Within the framework of demographic analysis, data on declared Vlachs in almost all censuses since the post-war census cannot be used to derive explainable demographic indicators. Therefore, it is reasonable to suspect that such data would also be of limited use in other academic fields, particularly in law, politics, and public life in general. This highlights the importance of paying closer attention to earlier ethno-statistic records, especially the first statistical aberration reported in the last decade of the nineteenth century.

Copyright of Matica Srpska Journal for Fine Arts / Zbornik Matice Srpske za Likovne Umetnosti is the property of Matica Srpska, Department of Visual Arts and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The paper provides an introduction covering the absence of measures against the plague and other contagious diseases in the Ottoman Empire, the measures practiced in the Austrian Empire, the terminology used for measures against the spreading of the disease in the Serbian language, etc. This is followed by a section that covers the plague during the First Serbian Uprising and the remembrance of its disastrous consequences. The central part of the paper focuses on the measures against cholera and the plague taken by the Principality of Serbia, starting the 1830s. Regulations modeled after the Austrian counterparts passed in 1839 and 1841, establishing a cordon sanitaire toward the Ottoman Empire.

The aim of the paper is to present the organization and work of the Čačak County Court in the 1840s. The source material used for the paper are the reports of the Ministry of Justice, with statistical data, and lists of officials with information about employees, as well as published official state data and the List of ax heads, municipalities and conciliation courts in the Principality of Serbia from 1839. Also, a comparison will be made in relation to other county courts in the country during the observed period. Basic data will be presented on the costs that were determined for this court and the amounts that were deposited within this court, as well as those that were kept in the name of the assets of persons under guardianship (so-called pupilar masses).

In the Principality of Serbia in the 19th century, the Orthodox Church represented a significant entity and had a privileged position as a state and national institution. This all affected its place in public life, as well as the public control of all the church activities regarding the churches' construction, equipping, painting, and renovation. Thus, the aesthetical criteria, demands, and effects of the cultural and scientific public were a tremendous factor in making church art common during the 19th century. The public had an influence on art development through various forms in the Principality of Serbia, and some of the instruments were both daily and periodical (printed) press. The public's attitude towards the church art was stated in the press and humongously affected the people's consciousness of the Church and church art's significance in relation to the state and nation, as well. Also, the ordering parties' tastes had thus been formed, which also had an impact on the complex mechanisms of the general church art trends during the 19th century. This kind of practice was characteristic of 19th-century Europe and Russia, and from there it was also accepted and developed in Serbia. Despite the fact that in the 19th century the Serbian people had lived in the territory of three states - the Ottoman Empire, the Principality/Kingdom of Serbia, and Austria, the periodical literature and newspapers had been available to the Serbian social and cultural elite at the mentioned territories. Since the press had not been strictly limited by the state boundaries, a wider reading audience had been familiar with the information and attitudes about art presented in both the newspapers and periodical literature, which were printed in Serbia and Austria, as well. The newspapers coming out in the period 1830-1882, such as Šumadinka, Srbske novine, Novine Čitališta beogradskog, Sion, Podunavka, Golubica, Orao, and others, contained different aesthetical attitudes on the church painting and architecture, but also considered various problems on the topics of erecting and painting the churches. The public significance of the works regarding the construction and equipping of the churches had been highlighted. Certain models of the church architecture and painting had been promoted, along with the individual artists' works. By reading the daily and periodical press, the reading public had been informed about the church heritage from the past through the reports about medieval churches and some debates on their renovation. Finally, the public of experts promoted, by using the (printed) press, certain advisable behavior models, such as the contribution activities towards the Church which were seen as the ultimate patriotic endeavor.

The paper provides an introduction covering the absence of measures against the plague and other contagious diseases in the Ottoman Empire, the measures practiced in the Austrian Empire, the terminology used for measures against the spreading of the disease in the Serbian language, etc. This is followed by a section that covers the plague during the First Serbian Uprising and the remembrance of its disastrous consequences. The central part of the paper focuses on the measures against cholera and the plague taken by the Principality of Serbia, starting the 1830s. Regulations modeled after the Austrian counterparts passed in 1839 and 1841, establishing a cordon sanitaire toward the Ottoman Empire. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Knowledge of world / European history is important for a more complete understanding of complex processes, for comparisons and placing national and regional history in a broader context that provides more meaningful answers. What determines the course of history is sometimes “a series of smaller events in the midst of the context of big ideas”. The borders of the region are determined by geographical, cultural and geopolitical characteristics, as well as the political interests of those builders whose interpretation has dominance. In expanding or narrowing the territory of the Balkans, politics was usually more decisive than geography. Historical events in that area should be presented from the positions of all its peoples, including Muslim communities. Their narratives also form a legitimate part of the picture of that past. Muslims were not the “favorites” of multiple Balkan historiographies that minimized and marginalized their component, functioning as factors shaping their own national and political ideologies. Historiography does not only deal with the reconstruction of the past, but, with all the difficulties and pitfalls, it also interprets it. A fragmentary study of the destinies of Muslim communities hinders the identification of the broader processes and common denominators of their parcelized history. The processes of de-Ottomanization and Balkanization also led to their particular consciousness within the newly formed, post-Ottoman states. Their historical experience is largely not “condensed, preserved, and generationally transmitted”. The attitude that Muslims are “foreigners” in Europe is part of the mentality and process known as the “Eastern Question”. Minds are not too prone to change. Calling all Muslims “Turks” is not the result of ignorance, but of a concrete attitude. It was not until the Berlin Congress of 1878 that the question of their protection became somewhat relevant. The system of such protection was inadequate, without supervisory mechanisms to control the implementation of commitments. Major political changes most often brought about religious and ethnic changes and displacements in the Balkans. In the study of the decades-long process of formation of the Serbian state in the 19th century in the area of the Smederevo Sandzak and the emigration of Muslims from it, special attention is paid to the fate of two small settlements (Mali Zvornik and Sakar) on the right bank of the Drina. After the surrender of the towns to the Serbs in 1862, only Mali Zvornik and Sakar remained in the hands of the Muslims. The origin of the settlement of Mali Zvornik is connected to the existence of the Zvornik fortress and the town of Zvornik on the left bank of the Drina, which was first mentioned in 1412. Mali Zvornik grew on the right bank of the Drina as part of the town of Zvornik. In the first half of the 18th century, travel writers mention that Mala or Mahala of the Bosnian town of Zvornik, whose inhabitants were called Maholjani, was located there. South of Mali Zvornik lies village of Sakar. In the 19th century, in Mali Zvornik and Sakar, on the border with the Smederevo Sandzak, Muslims made up the majority of the population. As only the Drina separated them from the settlements of Divič and Tabaci on its other side, the inhabitants of these settlements were firmly connected by kinship, friendship and marriage, and they were economically oriented towards each other. The Principality of Serbia was persistent in its demands to get Mali Zvornik and Sakar, having in mind their geostrategic position. By the decision of the Berlin Congress in 1878, they became part of Serbia. Until 1912, these were the only settlements in it with a majority Muslim population. They lost that majority over time. What is conditionally called “local” history, in addition to great narratives, indicates, confirmed by various experiences, the multidimensionality of the past, its features and specifics in a particular area.

The aim of the paper before us is to present the basic features of the development of the County Court of Ćuprija in the 1840s, its organization and work, based on the report of the Ministry of Justice, which contain statistical data and conduit lists with information about employees. The paper is also based on published documents of the Court, schematism and the Census of Tax Heads, Municipalities and Conciliation Courts in the Principality of Serbia from 1839. The County Court of Ćuprija took its place in the network of county courts of the Principality of Serbia, which was the basis of the judicial system, which, after the Constitution of 1838, the first regulations, decrees and laws on organization and procedure, made its first serious steps. When it comes to staff, the members of the court were people with experience, most of the employees had completed normal schools, therefore, they had basic preconditions for performing the service. The Commission for the Improvement of Civil Procedure from 1845 found that the Ćuprija court also entered the group of overburdened, and increased its staff by one clerk. When looking at official data, the number of crimes and civil lawsuits at the Ćuprija County Court increased during the 1840s, especially in 1845 the court had problems with accumulated civil lawsuits. There was a drastic increase in adjudicated cases of crimes and lawsuits after 1845, and it seems that the interventions of state authorities have influenced the increase of efficiency, and, perhaps, the trend of adopting new, more differentiated, applicable, clearer and more efficient regulations, both in the field of judicial organization and various branches of civil and criminal law and court procedure.

The paper explains the historical and legal development of criminal sanctions on the territory of today's Republic of Serbia. The paper deals with the research of criminal sanctions and their effects in the Principality of Serbia, the Kingdom of Serbia and the Kingdom of Yugoslavia. The analysis of criminal sanctions in the paper was performed on the basis of the oldest legal monuments, both in our country and beyond. In this way, a systematic and thorough analysis of historical characteristics and opportunities leads to a complete understanding of today's knowledge regarding criminal sanctions, their types, their application and purpose. Observing the differences between the former way of punishment and today's way of resocialization of people enables a detailed analysis of the efficiency or inefficiency of more rigid criminal sanctions. By sublimating the basic criminal sanctions and their various forms throughout history, we strive to eliminate all illogicalities, ambiguities and dilemmas regarding this topic in criminal legislation of Serbia.

The paper addresses the legal measures regarding vaccination against smallpox in the Principality of Serbia in the 1830s-1840s. The main focus is on two normative acts-Rules for the inoculation of pox of 1839 and a Supplement to these Rules of 1842. Relying on archive material, the paper strives to show both the normative content of these acts (including a comparison with the Austrian regulations of 1836), as well as the circumstances in which they were passed and their application in practice. Particular attention is paid to the main obstacles to effective vaccination-distrust and fear of the procedure among the general population and insufficient available medical staff-and steps that were taken to overcome these difficulties.

Copyright of Istorijski časopis is the property of Istorijski Institut and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Mesovita Gradja is the property of Istorijski Institut and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Contributions / Prilozi is the property of Institute for History, University of Sarajevo and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The National Assembly (Narodna skupština) of the Principality of Serbia was for the most part an advisory body until the 'Regency' Constitution of 1869 gave it legislative powers (although inferior to the prince's, as it had no legislative initiative) and a more (though not completely) democratic composition. On the one hand, the subsequent National Assembly that convened in 1870 was held according to the provisions of the new constitution of 1869 and was tasked, among other things, to pass a number of organic laws that would regulate the constitutional framework in more detail. On the other hand, the members of the National Assembly had no experience in legislation or other new powers that the National Assembly gained in 1869, and their overall level of education was fairly low. Just as the Regency Constitution of 1869 was a compromise and a middle phase that led to, but did not yet introduce, parliamentarism in Serbia, this first session of the reformed National Assembly was a middle phase in its conquest of legislative power. This article analyses the work of the 1870 National Assembly and shows to what extent the democratic elements newly prescribed by the constitution were actually present in its proceedings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The development of mining in the Principality of Serbia in the 1860s was determined by the previous years, especially during the reign of Ustavobranitelji when government initiative in Majdanpek came to a halt. In the 1860s, the main points of interest were the mine of Majdanpek, Kučajna, and the mines in the Podgora region. The two former were owned by foreign capital, whilst the latter was being researched by Stevan Đuričić around 1867. The mining in Majdanpek was done by the French-Serbian Society between 1859 and 1866, when the operation was taken over by The Serbian Company for Iron and Copper. Kučajna was being worked on by a German mining expert, Felix Hofman, between 1862 and 1873. During this period, the Mining Law of 1866 was passed, setting the foundation for further improvement of mining operations in the Principality/Kingdom of Serbia. During the 1860s most of the state income concerning mining came from the regal tax which had to be payed in order for one to acquire a permission for ore extraction. Most of the expenses went to financing the mining offices in Majdanpek, the directory of mines in Krupanj, various mining investments, as well as scholarships for students studying abroad. It should be said that the incomes, as well as the expenses, were symbolic when compared to the overall state incomes/expenses, making up less than 0.1% of the state incomes and expenses. This created a situation where the state could not count on any major incomes from mining, with an increase in expenses coming only at the end of the period in question due to greater state financing of mine in the Podrinje region.

The paper addresses the legal measures regarding vaccination against smallpox in the Principality of Serbia in the 1830s--1840s. The main focus is on two normative acts -- Rules for the inoculation of pox of 1839 and a Supplement to these Rules of 1842. Relying on archive material, the paper strives to show both the normative content of these acts (including a comparison with the Austrian regulations of 1836), as well as the circumstances in which they were passed and their application in practice. Particular attention is paid to the main obstacles to effective vaccination -- distrust and fear of the procedure among the general population and insufficient available medical staff -- and steps that were taken to overcome these difficulties. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper is a synthesis of research results stemming from the author's earlier studies on the unsuccessful attempt of drafting the first civil code in the Principality of Serbia in the period from 1829 to 1835. The failure of this codification effort is observed in light of several important historical facts reflecting the relations between Prince Miloš Obrenović and the Legislative Committee. Prince Miloš was indeed the one who initiated the drafting of the civil code, which was to be modelled on the French Civil Code of 1804. Moreover, the Committee membership was appointed by the Prince himself. Yet, in the specific historical circumstances, the Prince's initiative was actually a political move largely forced by the widespread discontent with his autocratic rule without enacting legislation. Many indications suggest that Prince Miloš assumed that the public discontent would subdue if he were recognized in the public eye as the one who had established the Legislative Committee for drafting the civil code, and that it would suffice to allow the Committee to embark on the codification work. Yet, Prince Miloš was not genuinely interested in a successful outcome of this project. It is rather symptomatic that the members of the Legislative Committee, which were appointed by the Prince himself, had no legal knowledge and skills for such a serious codification project. On the other hand, Prince Miloš frequently acted on his own accord, kept changing the Committee members without any explanation, allowed frequent interruptions and long periods of inactivity, and granted long leaves of absence to individual members of the Committee. When the Committee finally prepared the draft version of the civil code, Prince Miloš was highly negative and critical about it, and he practically dismissed it altogether. The manuscript of this draft civil code has not been preserved in the historical archives. Bits and pieces of its content may barely be reconstructed, mainly by examining the contents of letters in which Prince Miloš passed his extremely negative remarks and extended his criticism on the draft civil code.

Copyright of Matica Srpska Journal for Fine Arts / Zbornik Matice Srpske za Likovne Umetnosti is the property of Matica Srpska, Department of Visual Arts and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

There are several theories about the exact time of construction of the Belgrade Bayrakli Mosque. According to one, it was built in 1690, or few years later, as the endowment of Sultan Suleiman II, after he reclaimed the city from the Austrians for the second time. According to another theory, it was built between 1660 and 1688, while there are also some opinions that it was built in the 16th century by Sultan Suleiman the Magnificent, which is the least likely. In any case, since the second half of the 19th century, when the last Turkish squads left the country, after which the Principality of Serbia grew increasingly independent, it became the only active Muslim place of worship in the capital city, until this very day. Its first reconstruction, undertaken by the Serbian state, was made in 1868, and the second in 1897, after which it never stopped working, although it was restored several times more during the 20th century. Both reconstructions in the 19th century were primarily driven by higher national and political goals that focused mostly on the Muslim population, especially those of Slavic descent and language, who continued to live in those parts of the Ottoman Empire that Serbia historically and traditionally regarded as its lands and wanted to reclaim it. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper is a synthesis of research results stemming from the author’s earlier studies on the unsuccessful attempt of drafting the first civil code in the Principality of Serbia in the period from 1829 to 1835. The failure of this codification effort is observed in light of several important historical facts reflecting the relations between Prince Miloš Obrenovic and the Legislative Committee. Prince Miloš was indeed the one who initiated the drafting of the civil code, which was to be modelled on the French Civil Code of1804. Moreover, the Committee membership was appointed by the Prince himself. Yet, in the specific historical circumstances, the Prince’s initiative was actually a political move largely forced by the widespread discontent with his autocratic rule without enacting legislation. Many indications suggest that Prince Miloš assumed that the public discontent would subdue if he were recognized in the public eye as the one who had established the Legislative Committee for drafting the civil code, and that it would suffice to allow the Committee to embark on the codification work. Yet, Prince Miloš was not genuinely interested in a successful outcome of this project. It is rather symptomatic that the members of the Legislative Committee, which were appointed by the Prince himself, had no legal knowledge and skills for such a serious codification project. On the other hand, Prince Miloš frequently acted on his own accord, kept changing the Committee members without any explanation, allowed frequent interruptions and long periods of inactivity, and granted long leaves of absence to individual members of the Committee. When the Committee finally prepared the draft version of the civil code, Prince Miloš was highly negative and critical about it, and he practically dismissed it altogether. The manuscript of this draft civil code has not been preserved in the historical archives. Bits and pieces of its content may barely be reconstructed, mainly by examining the contents of letters in which Prince Miloš passed his extremely negative remarks and extended his criticism on the draft civil code. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Povijesni Prilozi is the property of Croatian Institute of History and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This paper examines the normative framework of criminal procedure in the Principality of Serbia and its development in the period from 1846 to 1865, which is of great importance for legal history. The process of developing criminal procedure legislative framework was based on the legal provisions on judicial powers envisaged in the Constitution of1838, the first Enactments on the organization of courts issued in 1839 and 1840, and numerous official circular letters which explained and modified the existing legal standards. In the period from 1846 to 1865, there were significant developments in court proceedings. The first judicial standards were established by the Law on the Organization of County Courts adopted in 1846. In the subsequent period, legal provisions on criminal justice proceedings were constantly revised and amended. The legislative efforts ultimately resulted in the adoption of the 1865 Code on Court Procedure in Criminal Offences. The aim of this article is to reconstruct the norms of criminal justice proceedings before the first codification and to examine the development of related judicial practice, none of which have been systematically studied so far.

In 1868, after more than four centuries, the Principality of Serbia decided to rebuild national monetary system in line with the minting standards of the Latin Monetary Union. The paper explains the international circumstances in which this decision was made and analyzes a specific plan created for the implementation of monetary reform. Because of the general shortage of small coins in circulation, Serbia decided firstly to mint domestic copper and small silver coins, and subsequently larger denominations of silver and gold coins. The research is based on archival documents of the State Council of the Principality of Serbia that are kept in the Archives of Serbia in Belgrade.

The Constitution of 1838 anticipated the Court of Appeal, as a court of the second degree, which was situated in the capital. It strictly inspected and judged lawsuits that passed through lower courts. In that way, three kinds of courts were established: communal, district first-degree courts and the Court of Appeal in the state capital. Until the Constitution of 1838, judicial authority had not been independent and it interloped with the police. Authority of cassation was in the hands of the prince. The Supreme Court was founded in 1846 and, as the court of the third, final degree, considered lawsuits that had already been judged by the first and second degree court. The Court of Cassation was established in 1858. It was abolished in 1860, and the Court of Appeal became the only higher court. The final organization of Serbian 19th century judiciary system was established in 1865. It was a three-level system, with district courts of the first degree, the Court of Appeal as the second and the Court of Cassation as the third-degree court. The basics for the reconstruction of Serbian criminal and civil judicial proceedings represent the Constitution of 1838, organizations of district courts, Court of Appeal, Supreme court and Court of Cassation, and various circulars of the Ministry of Justice, especially the one from 1842, considering evidence in the course of judicial proceedings. Additional rules from 1845 prescribed oral judicial proceedings and anticipated new codes, which were brought in 1853, for the regulation of civil, and in 1865 for the regulation of criminal judiciary proceedings. New codes of civil judicial proceedings were brought in 1860 and 1865. The picture of the judicial proceedings before these codes can be taken on the basics of numerous regulations and circulars that were often brought from case to case, without long-lasting politics and theoretical fundament.

The period before the Code of Civil Judicial Proceedings was brought in 1853 is of great importance for researches of Serbian legal history, because legal norms on which civil judicial proceedings in the Principality of Serbia was based were not gathered and analized until now. This paper is a sequel to previous researches and a try to present the way how civil judicial proceedings was regulated before the codification. The bordering years are 1846, when new organizations of courts were brought, and 1853, when the first Code of Civil Judicial Proceedings appeared. In the period 1846-1853 constant work of legislative and executive authorities can be seen with purpose to find solutions for problems which occured in judicial proceedings practise. Civil judicial proceedings were at the beginning based on few regulations, they were created as a result of a work in progress and current judicial practise. Though regulations grew in number and became more precise during time, the lack of code in which all the problems of civil judicial practise would have been covered was felt. The Code of Civil Judicial Proceedings brought in 1853 had many disadvantages, the new one was brought already in 1860. The Code of Civil Judicial Proceedings of 1865 stood on power for almost six and a half decades.

Copyright of Istorijski časopis is the property of Istorijski Institut and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Istorijski časopis is the property of Istorijski Institut and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The basic idea of regime of ustavobranitelji was to insure everybody's private property, so written laws and organized judiciary were necessary. The first years after the Constitution of 1838 were fundamental, with first laws that determined and established judicial instances and jurisdiction of the Ministry of Justice, and circulares, which closer defined judicial practice. The basic norms of civil judicial proceedings were defined in regulations of communal and district courts, brought in 1839 and 1840, Additional rules of civil and crimminal judicial proceedings from 1845 and their explanations from 1846, and also in many circulares concerning certain aspects of civil judicial practice.

In this paper we tried to present the organization of district courts in the period 1846-1858, which is marked by the two reconstructions of judicial system. In the first reconstruction of 1846, new court organization laws were brought and the second reconstruction of 1858 meant the foundation of the Court of Cassation. Organization of district courts is considered as very important; district courts of the first degree bore the burden of judicial system and other judicial instances were dependent on efficiency of district courts. Organization of district courts was a reflection of the inner policy of Ustavobranitelji. Legislative and executive authorities faced various challenges in the judicial practice and brought solutions by which legal norms were interpreted or changed. The search for the right solutions and learning on own mistakes led to the definitive court organization in 1865.

The nature of the relationship between the Serbs from Serbia and the Serbs from the Habsburg Monarchy in the nineteenth century is important for understand­ing the process of national development of the Serbian people as a whole. Therefore the paper analyzes the controversy over Švabe or Nemačkari, as the Serbs from Austria were called, which was one of the factors responsible for internal instability of the Principality of Serbia in the nineteenth century.

A subject usually neglected in the historical work on Ilija Garašanin’s role as a statesman has been discussed. Attention has been drawn to the legal status of Serbia at the moment Garašanin entered civil service and how it changed during the thirty years of his political career (1837–67). The first part of the paper looks at his views against the background of three vitally important issues for Serbia’s legal status at the time: the constitutional issue, the issue of hereditary succession and the issue of internal independence. His views on the three issues reflect his understanding of the existing status of the Principality of Serbia. The second part of the paper looks at how he envisaged a future Serbian state. Its largest portion is naturally devoted to the ideas put forth in the Načertanije (1844), the first programme of nineteenth-century Serbia’s national and foreign policy. It also looks at Garašanin’s attempt, made through the Serbian representative at the Porte in the revolutionary year 1848, to achieve the reorganization of the Ottoman Empire into a dual monarchy with the Serbian United States (or a Serbian vice-kingdom) as a constituent state. Finally, attention has been paid to the creation of a Balkan alliance through agreements concluded by Balkan states.

Copyright of Zbornik Radova Pravnog Fakulteta u Nisu is the property of Law Faculty in Nis and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

After the disintegration of the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy and the foundation of the new state and later with the foundation of the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenians, the Slovenians found themselves faced with new state symbols, decorations and orders. Those most affected were soldiers and officers, who until that time had proudly displayed various imperial decorations and orders that were no longer allowed in the new state. Decorations and orders bestowed upon them were stored in drawers and the Austro- Hungarian state and monarchic symbols on decorations were replaced by those belonging to the Serbian Karadjordjevič dynasty. The aim of the present article is to examine comparisons, differences and similarities between the orders and decorations of the Austro-Hungarian Empire and the new post-1918 Kingdom. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Bankarstvo Magazine is the property of Association of Serbian Banks and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Mesovita Gradja is the property of Istorijski Institut and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)