Danijel Džino, <i>Early Medieval Hum and Bosnia, ca. 450–1200</i>

The subject, as outlined in the monograph’s title, constitutes a highly interesting and fascinating chapter of the history of the medieval Balkans, which is also quite disputed in the different traditions of scholarship, be it in the region itself or internationally. The author aims to explore the social transformation, which led to the establishment of medieval Hum (future Herzegovina) and Bosnia in the period from ca. 450 to 1200 CE. In order to achieve his aim, he focuses on the available written and material sources, which form the basis of his eight chapters. At the same time, the author highlights that he is addressing an Anglophone readership. While he emphasizes that the local historiographies are riddled with nationalistic mythologemes, he states that his publication goes “beyond the myth” via new interpretations based on more recent theoretical frameworks.Whoever is doing research in this very field acknowledges the striking lack of sources, which the author points out several times in his publication. While his outline regarding the terminology is clear and succinct, the overview of the chapters already raises some questions. The labelling of Austro-Hungarian rule over Bosnia and Herzegovina as “colonial” (cf. the term “colonial archaeology”, p. 5 or “colonial enterprise”, p. 15) is neither explained in detail nor argued appropriately. Why is the period of Austro-Hungarian rule from 1878 until 1918 in the region to be regarded as “colonial” and other periods not? There is no clear line of thought to be discerned.Moreover, the author contradicts the widely accepted notion of the settlement of Slavs in Late Antique Dalmatia before the end of the 7th century, because it is drawn from later written sources such as the De Administrando Imperio (DAI) from the mid-10th century (p. 6). To regard the DAI as a problematic source and at the same time to omit the rich variety of analysis and research as presented in the secondary literature deriving from Byzantine Studies is a serious lacuna. For example, the German translation of the DAI with an excellent commentary by Peter Soustal and Klaus Belke from 1995 has been completely ignored. This is also the case with the Yugoslav series “Vizantiski izvori za istoriju naroda Jugoslavije” (volumes I–IV, VI, Belgrade 1955–1986), which contains translations and a comprehensive commentary to each written Byzantine source presented and, thus, explicitly shows that the widely accepted notion (see above) has been rightfully accepted based on a huge variety of sources within this series. Moreover, the author should have elaborated more on the term “land” (zemlja), to which eminent scholars in Historical Geography have extensively contributed (e.g., Sima Ćirković, Miloš Blagojević, Siniša Mišić, etc.). It is unclear why the author addresses the works of Thomas the Archdeacon of Split as very reliable on the one hand, but refutes parts of the DAI and the Chronicle of the Priest of Duklja on the other. Their disqualification as works allegedly containing “invented and incorrect facts” and being “a narrative of fictitious rulers of imaginary realm” leads to the conscious exclusion of parts of written sources, which again has the questioning of the story of the migration of the Croats and the Serbs in the seventh century as a consequence. While the author labels some scholarly publications on his book’s topic quite easily and without solid arguments as highly problematic and unsubstantiated, he himself asserts opinions, which would need to be discussed thoroughly with regard to their foundation.Regarding archaeology, the point made by the author that an emphasis in archaeological research in the region is put on cemeteries and church architecture, while there is a lack of interest in settlement archaeology, is quite true.In total, I would like to emphasize that the respective monograph is a contribution to the field, but not the contribution, which it probably aims to be. As a solid monograph in many aspects, containing incentives for further thought and discussion, it will become one of the jigsaw pieces of the entire puzzle, of which this vibrant and contested research field consists.