Why the Serbs Lost Their "Holy Land"

8 307 32
Why the Serbs Lost Their "Holy Land"
The Great Migration of Serbs across the Danube. Drawing by Franz Juza


The Ottoman factor


The Ottoman conquest of the Balkan Peninsula in the 14th–16th centuries ranged from the Battle of Kosovo in 1389, when Serbia became a vassal of the Ottoman rulers, to the 15th century, when the Turks subjugated southern Serbia, occupied Smederevo, the Serbian capital, and effectively destroyed Serbian statehood. In 1521, the Turks captured Belgrade, then controlled by the Hungarians. From then until 1878, Serbia remained under Turkish rule, gaining its freedom following Russia's victory in the Russo-Turkish War.



The Serbian lands were utterly devastated and devastated. Slavic feudal lords perished, fled, or converted to Islam. Churches were relegated to Muslim use. Orthodox Christians were restricted in their civil rights. An exodus of Orthodox Christians began across the Danube and Sava rivers, to the lands of modern-day Croatia and Hungary, which were under the rule of the House of Habsburg.

During brutal wars and uprisings, when the Ottoman Turks literally massacred the population of rebellious regions, towns, and villages, the exodus of Slavic populations to neighboring areas free of Ottoman rule, the policy of Islamization of the remaining Slavs, and the settlement of the region by Muslim warriors and Albanians who received privileges and tax exemptions, the proportion of Serb Slavs steadily declined, especially in the southern part of Serbia—Raška, Kosovo, and Metohija. Raška received the Turkish name Sandžak.

At the same time, Constantinople essentially shaped the Albanian people, who were originally composed of Slavs and ancient indigenous mountain populations. Islamization and assimilation were facilitated by the migration of Turkic people from Asia Minor, mountaineers from the Caucasus, and Semites from the Middle East.

Constantinople relied on the loyal Muslim population, the Albanians, since the Serbs refused to convert en masse to Islam and supported Christian troops during the Porte's wars with the European powers. The Albanians resettled in historical Serbia (Old Serbia), and the Serbs fled further north. The Ottoman authorities intensified pressure on the Orthodox Church, which was the core of Serbian national identity. Monasteries and churches were destroyed and looted.

As a result, during the subsequent confrontation between the Sublime Porte and the Habsburg Empire over the Balkans in the 17th and 18th centuries, a significant number of Serbs left the Kosovo region, fleeing to Christian rulers. This process was called the Great Exodus (migration). Serbs constituted a significant portion of the Austrian army, defending the southern border from the Ottomans. The so-called granicari were Austria's irregular, border, and light troops, a kind of Serbian Cossacks.

Some Serbs and other Orthodox Christians, burdened by the Austrian Empire's pressure to convert to Catholicism or join the Union, even moved to Russia, under the auspices of the Orthodox dynasty. In 1751, Empress Elizabeth Petrovna announced to Colonel Ivan Horvat (who was busy advocating for his fellow countrymen) that "no matter how many of the Serbian people wish to join the Russian Empire, all of them, as co-religionists, will be accepted into service and citizenship."

In Novorossiya, New Serbia was established in the Dnieper steppes (now the Kirovohrad region) and Slavoserbia on the southern bank of the Seversky Donets (Luhansk region and Voronezh province). Serbs and other Orthodox warriors helped the Russians hold back the Crimean Tatars and Turks.

As a result, by the mid-19th century, Muslims constituted more than half the population, especially in the western part of the region (Metohija). During subsequent wars, the decline, and retreat of the Ottoman Empire, Muslims, including Albanians, fled Serbia for Kosovo.

After the First World War, the collapse of the Austro-Hungarian Empire and the establishment of the State of Slovenes, Croats and Serbs (SCS) in 1918, which soon united with the Kingdom of Serbia to form the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes, which was transformed into the Kingdom of Yugoslavia in 1929, the process of displacement of Albanians from Kosovo took place.

During World War II, when Yugoslavia was occupied by the Wehrmacht and Kosovo was incorporated into "Greater Albania"—a puppet state under the control of Fascist Italy and Nazi Germany—the region was actively resettled by Albanians. A policy of genocide was carried out against the Serbs, the Orthodox population. In Kosovo alone, more than 10 Serbs were killed, and over 100 became refugees.


Borders of "Greater Albania" in 1941-1945

Tito's mistakes


In the second half of the 20th century, the ratio of Serbs to Albanians in Kosovo was decisively influenced by the policies of Josip Broz Tito, who led Yugoslavia from 1945, when Russian troops liberated the Balkans from the Nazis, until his death in 1980.

In theory, Tito should have acted like Stalin in East Prussia and Königsberg, which became the Kaliningrad region and Kaliningrad: by evicting the Germans and settling the new region with Russians (“The land of this part of East Prussia is stained with Russian blood."). The Polish authorities did the same when they returned the historical Slavic regions that had belonged to Germans for several centuries. The Germans were expelled to Germany, and their place was taken by Slavs.

And that's it—the problem is solved. Harshly, but within the bounds of historical justice and political expediency. The Serbs are returning to their historical lands, the "Serbian Holy Land," and the Albanians are returning to their homeland. The enemies of socialist Yugoslavia (NATO) are deprived of the support of a potential "fifth column" in the form of the Albanian population hostile to Belgrade.

However, Tito sacrificed the national interests of the Serbs in favor of illusory internationalism, essentially continuing the policies of the Trotskyists. Kosovo Serbs were prohibited from returning to their homeland. At the same time, wanting to bring Albania into a federal Yugoslavia, Tito supported the policy of resettling Albanians in Serbia, creating a host of problems for the future Belgrade.

An extremely lenient policy was pursued toward the Albanians. After Belgrade's good relations with Moscow broke down, followed by Belgrade's break with Tirana, thousands of Albanian refugees resettled in Yugoslavia.

From that time on, the ethnic balance in Kosovo was decisively tipped in favor of the Albanians. At the same time, the Albanians, who retained the traditional family structure, outnumbered the Serbs, who had become an urban (industrial) society. In the 80s, they experienced a population boom driven by improved living conditions and advances in medicine. The Autonomous Province of Kosovo and Metohija became the "youngest" in Yugoslavia.

The Albanian intelligentsia developed its own "own" history of Kosovo and the Balkans. Albanians were said to be the peninsula's original inhabitants, while Serbs were newcomers, invaders. The ancestors of modern Albanians had always lived here, and the Slavs arrived during the Great Migration of Peoples in the sixth century.

At the same time, the region was traditionally a subsidized region, dragged into the future by the rest of Yugoslavia. Naturally, this further exacerbated political and national issues in Yugoslavia and Kosovo. This led to the collapse of Yugoslavia itself and a series of armed conflicts involving the "collective West."

As a result, the US and NATO turned Kosovo into their largest base in the Balkans. And the idea of ​​a "Greater Albania," represented by ethnic Albanian gangs, drug gangs, and nationalists, experienced a resurgence.


According to Tito's plan, the country was to become a centralized federation based on the principles of "proletarian internationalism."
32 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +17
    25 December 2025 04: 58
    Tito supported the policy of resettling Albanians to Serbia
    Tito was very afraid of Serbian nationalism and separatism, and therefore drove a wedge into the very heart of Serbian statehood.
    1. +9
      25 December 2025 09: 20
      Quote: Schneeberg
      Tito was very afraid of Serbian nationalism and separatism, and therefore drove a wedge into the very heart of Serbian statehood.

      All these Tito-Lenins are the same: a little earlier, fighting Russian "chauvinism," they deported and killed hundreds of thousands of Russians in Chechnya, Ingushetia, Semirechye, Kazakhstan...

      Where there are many beautiful, populous villages and stanitsas with churches, fields, and schools Ermolovskaya, Sunzhenskaya, Feldmarshalskaya, Romanovskaya and so on Ivanovs, Petrovs, Cossacks and so forth?

      ah-there's nothing, just villages, villages where the Dudayevs live.
    2. +15
      25 December 2025 12: 13
      Тахно тако. Ето лиш один из млогих бедих девиков, которие он выдал. Не умалја вини љодеи до и после его, он, не же, движи и објавил он отделнои провинциеи.
  2. +20
    25 December 2025 07: 08
    Tito was a Croat, and his views on historical justice were somewhat different from those of the Serbians.
    1. +24
      25 December 2025 07: 25
      I completely agree with the previous speaker. The current situation in Kosovo is his achievement. He let the goats into the garden.
      1. +14
        25 December 2025 09: 10
        That's right. However, looking at the current situation here in Russia, you start thinking about the future of the state... After all, we're letting the same goat loose.
      2. +20
        25 December 2025 12: 20
        My Russians are bad, sorry. We could easily use goats from the garden and ranshe, and we can make them eto and seichas. Problems with NATO.
        1. -2
          26 December 2025 00: 40
          And you'll get a kick in the ass again, just like last time when you decided to bully your neighbors.
          1. +1
            31 January 2026 21: 29
            Quote: IsDiG
            when they decided to bully their neighbors

            Albanians disemboweled raped Serb women for their organs and sold the organs of those executed to Europe under NATO cover. A popular idea on Muslim websites is that the mission of Circassians, Uyghurs, and Albanians in the new Western democratic world is to act as overseers of the Slavs and Chinese. Only active resistance can convince such people that it's easier to exploit the West. After 2014, the Chinese managed to bring the Uyghurs to their senses.
    2. +14
      25 December 2025 12: 17
      Его веглјади бил приследиално противони вам, что какос Сербии.
    3. +7
      25 December 2025 15: 23
      Tito was a Croat, and his views on historical justice were somewhat different from those of the Serbians.
      He's half Croatian. His mother is Slovenian. There were even rumors at the time that he was the illegitimate son of Emperor Franz Joseph. But that's just a conspiracy theory.
  3. +9
    25 December 2025 09: 21
    All wars are religious in nature.
    The Serbs have a motto, "For the Cross and Freedom!", which is many centuries old. The Serbs themselves are a Christian, heroic and extraordinary people.
    But they lost their Holy Land, losing to the Muslims, which is noted in the title of the article.
    How is this possible if the people are heroic and were ready to perform any feat for the cross.
    This is how the great teacher of the Church, Saint Nicholas of Serbia (Veljamirovich) explains:
    - in their lawlessness, Christian nations have become much worse than non-Christian nations, who firmly hold on to their gods.
    1. +13
      25 December 2025 12: 29
      For the Holy Cross and the Golden Freedom! So brother, thank you for your kind words. You can learn a lot from Sveto Vladika Nikolay Velimirovic. Our main problem was communism. That is, we had not the same kind of communism as in Russia, but Titoism. We still haven’t fully recovered and, probably, we never will.

      He also said: “In the end, everything will be fine, and if everything is fine, then it’s not the end yet.”
  4. +15
    25 December 2025 09: 30
    The mistake is actually quite different: the creation of an autonomous region within Serbia—Kosovo (essentially Albanian). If Serbia were united, there wouldn't be a problem. This applies to any state. There should be only one format, like the regions in the Russian Federation. And that's it. I view all these republics, autonomous regions, districts, federal entities, and so on with skepticism. All this national parochialism is a direct path to the collapse of our common home.
    1. +12
      25 December 2025 12: 31
      Как ја уже приложиш, ето не било ихкои, ето било будет встречально, но да, Ви прави. Исли би этого не было, ми би сеичаст не какисја в етои ситуации.
      1. +2
        25 December 2025 16: 56
        Quote: VojvodaSERB
        Как ја уже прилише, ето не било оружиекои, ето било будет встречался више,.....
        Life was better in Yugoslavia than in Albania. Albanians fled their country and settled in compact settlements. I read that Tito dreamed of annexing Albania, and, as the author wrote, the Albanians enjoyed all sorts of advantages and began to shape their own history (sound familiar). Moreover, they oppressed the Serbs. So it turned out that Tito's policies...
        a coat was sewn to a button
        It wasn't small, impoverished Albania that joined Yugoslavia with its territory, but rather, that received part of Yugoslavia.
    2. +5
      25 December 2025 14: 25
      Quote: Antony
      All this national parochialism is a direct path to the collapse of the common home.
      In a multinational state, such a common, unified home won't last long. Ukraine is an example.
  5. +4
    25 December 2025 09: 58
    The Balkans are complex in terms of the historical distribution of peoples. Take the Arvanites, Orthodox Albanians, and so on. The author mentioned the Battle of Kosovo, although four years earlier, in 1385, Serbian and Albanian princes were allies and were defeated at the Battle of Savra.
    1. +10
      25 December 2025 12: 35
      Your information is incorrect. At that time, it was Serbian territory, and the Albanians fought on the side of the Ottomans against the Serbs. Orthodox Albanians then, as now, represented a statistical error.
  6. +8
    25 December 2025 10: 00
    It's simply eye-opening from such a nuclear concentration of, to put it mildly, controversial statements.
    Serbia was under Turkish rule until 1878.

    Anyone can check, but things weren't quite like that. Or rather, completely different.
    Constantinople, in essence, forms the Albanian people, which originally consisted of Slavs and the ancient autochthonous mountain population.

    Interesting pies.
    since 1945, when Russian troops liberated the Balkans

    Is the USSR even present on the world map from 1922 to 91, as presented by modern journalists?
    Tito's mistakes

    I absolutely don't understand why people, perhaps intelligent in their own right, stubbornly believe that Tito should have championed the Serbs, even while leading a rather multi-ethnic federation (literally, not like in the Russian Federation, where ethnic Russians constitute an overwhelming majority of 80+%). They championed the Serbs under the monarchy, and as a result, after the assassination of Franz Ferdinand, inspired by Serbian secret services, the Austro-Hungarian occupation killed something like 15-20% of the population. Foreign and domestic policy was distinguished by such rare balance and rationality that royal Yugoslavia considered all its neighbors enemies, and the bulk of the subject population simply hated the Serbs, seeing them as the main instrument of power.
    Albanians are the indigenous inhabitants of the peninsula, and Serbs are newcomers
    Which is generally true. What I personally don't understand is why this fact is considered so important, but it is.

    In fact, all of this is really minor. The key mistake is the Serbian elites' stubborn confidence in their ability to dominate the region, a confidence that is completely unfounded. If the preconditions had been there, they would have tolerated the Albanians, who are given disproportionate attention in the article, and the Serbs' main enemies, the Bulgarians (and who are you thinking of?). But the fact is that even in the backward Balkan region, the Serbs were, at certain periods in history, at best first among equals. The lesson of this rather sad story is this: carry your own burden, lest you fall while walking.
    P.S. What's the root of this fervent brotherly love for South Slavs in general and Serbs in particular? It doesn't apply to all Slavs; I've never heard anything good about the Poles. The Czechs (and Slovaks and Slovenians) are a separate breed altogether. I've personally heard a lot of new things about Ukrainians, and they don't exactly ring a bell. Have you even seen any Serbs or Bulgarians? I'm not saying they're bad people (they're not), I'm saying there's a huge mentality gap there.
    1. 0
      25 December 2025 19: 54
      Regarding the war, there's Arutyunov's book, "The Lenin Dossier Unedited," which cites an excerpt from a published court speech at the Trotskyist trial, with a clear hint about those directly involved in provoking the war. An unexpected twist, if you believe it...
  7. +10
    25 December 2025 11: 20
    I'll write in Serbian because it's easier for me, and add the translation below. Hello to you all and support from Serbia.

    The text is correct, you can see the author veoma recognizes the topic. We are very interested in this topic in Russia. Right bih river and Tito is not in the right direction of sin, but it is with the intention of weakening the SRP factor in Yugoslavia. Tito је bio Hrvat and kao tak је bash imao a lot of understanding for Srbe and our needs. Let us not remember the destruction of innocent civilians who were massively massacred, killed and tortured because the communists beat them. This was most convincingly the case in Srbia. Iako smo mi Srbi current godin ruled dosta sinner, kao shto author of the text spomiњe, morality smo osbiљnie da se obračunamo sa Albantsima, Tito and Jehovah communism su ti koi su su directed border and prvi od Kosovo directed something doubled, separately. This is also true for Vojvodina. Let me add that in the text, Albanian terrorists have been committing mischief against Srbim for the sake of “brotherhood and unity” ever since the Other Secular Rat. This culminated with the terrorist rebellion of 1998. At last, they successfully resolved this issue. Don't worry about NATO. NATO could have been victorious or not interfered with, but we solved the problems quickly. This was the case with the Islamic government of ISIS, who was a volunteer for the head of the institute, bio from the so-called. Kosova. This is a constant connection with Al-Qaeda before the NATO intervention. NATO is clear that America has not deceived the Islamic terrorists and taken them to Al-Qaeda instead of the white Christians.

    Following the words of our late Patriarch Pavel: “God let us return Kosovo whenever we deserve.”

    An excellent text; the author is clearly very knowledgeable about the topic. I'm glad there's interest in this subject in Russia. First of all, I would say that Tito made no mistakes, because all of this was done with the goal of weakening the Serbian factor in Yugoslavia. Tito was a Croat and, as such, didn't really understand the Serbs or our needs. Not to mention the tens of thousands of innocent civilians who were shot, murdered, and tortured en masse for not being communists. Most of this happened in Serbia. Although we Serbs have made many mistakes over the years, as the author mentions, we had to take the Albanians much more seriously. It was Tito and his communists who drew borders and were the first to make Kosovo something separate and special. The same applies to Vojvodina. I'll add something else that wasn't mentioned in the text: Albanian terrorists committed crimes against Serbs for years after World War II, which were hushed up and went unpunished for the sake of "brotherhood and unity." This culminated in the terrorist uprising of 1998, after which we successfully got rid of them. Until NATO came along. We couldn't conquer NATO, but if it hadn't intervened, we would have solved the problem once and for all. It's also interesting that during the existence of the Islamic State (ISIS), the largest number of volunteers per capita came from the so-called Kosovo. There are also clear links to Al-Qaeda before NATO's intervention. NATO, that is, America, decided to support Islamic terrorists linked to Al-Qaeda over white Christians.

    Finally, I would like to add the words of our late Patriarch Pavle: “God will return Kosovo to us when we deserve it.”
    1. +4
      25 December 2025 14: 29
      Albanians are the mafia, they traffic people, drugs, organs, and so on. So I'm not surprised about ISIS. You should have solved the Kosovo problem right away...
    2. 0
      25 December 2025 19: 57
      The return of Kosovo to Serbia is also important for Russia, for several reasons...
  8. +1
    25 December 2025 11: 24
    What are the roots of this tender brotherly love for the South Slavs in general and the Serbs in particular?

    The roots lie in the fact that the Serbs play by your decisions, regardless of the consequences. Their actions in the world wars (they are at least guilty of the First World War, for starting it) are, I think, sufficient proof. And then everyone starts screaming about how everyone else is a scoundrel, and the Serbs are angels.
    1. +13
      25 December 2025 12: 41
      Batko, are you Bugarin? How can we understand why you write like that?
      But it's irresponsible to assert that Serbia is guilty of the First World War, and that the country is irresponsible. Is this just history lessons from first grade elementary school?

      And who says that Serbi are angels, and all others are bad? Even we, Serbi, don't say that!
      1. +3
        26 December 2025 07: 30
        Quote: VojvodaSERB
        And who says that Serbi are angels, and all others are bad? Even we, Serbi, don't say that!

        Why should they be ashamed of their policies? NATO countries defended a gang of black transplant surgeons who disemboweled raped Serbian women to sell their organs to wealthy European elders. Albania and Kosovo are a symbiosis of drug mafia and human trafficking. One of the main goals of the US when sending troops to Afghanistan was to restore heroin production and foster drug addiction. It's no wonder that the Epstein case reveals that political leaders from both parties participated in the rape of minors in the US.
    2. +1
      25 December 2025 20: 00
      There's much more the politicians are keeping quiet about this provocation of war (not all archives have been opened). Furthermore, blaming an entire nation on a single individual is wrong.
    3. +1
      26 December 2025 07: 24
      Quote: stoqn477
      They are guilty, at least, of the First World War.

      Germany planned for war in advance, orchestrating the creation of heavy artillery capable of destroying Belgian and French fortresses by 1914. Moreover, preparations were multifaceted. For example, well before the war, a decision was made to reinforce the Turkish fleet with the German battleship Gaben. German diplomacy miscalculated in assuming that Great Britain would remain neutral and that Japan would attack Russia rather than Germany's colonies.
    4. 0
      26 December 2025 09: 00
      The Serbs play according to your decisions
      Did they come from beyond the curb? By the summer of 1914, Serbia was firmly in the wake of French policy. In 1941, the government, which had generally been fairly friendly to the Germans, was overthrown, and pro-British politicians came to power.
      They are guilty, at least, of the First World War.
      Beginning at least in the second third of the 17th century, European states began to squabble among themselves on a global scale. Every 20-30 years, like clockwork. By 1914, everything was long overdue, even without the Serbs.
      Their actions in the world wars
      It wasn't the Serbs who crossed the border first both times, it seems. Well, let's say the Archduke's blood cried out for vengeance. What did they do to you the second time?
      (what caused it to begin)
      The Archduke and company were killed not by some "Serbs", but by very specific people, with the support and under the leadership of no less famous personalities.
      What scoundrels everyone is, but the Serbs are angels.
      Compared to the Ukranian or Ustasha gold traders, the Serbs, despite their Balkan peculiarities, look pretty good overall. Compared to user stoqn477, who graciously omitted two not-so-small genocides, they're also okay.
  9. +2
    26 December 2025 09: 01
    Quote: VojvodaSERB
    For the Holy Cross and the Golden Freedom! So brother, thank you for your kind words. You can learn a lot from Sveto Vladika Nikolay Velimirovic. Our main problem was communism. That is, we had not the same kind of communism as in Russia, but Titoism. We still haven’t fully recovered and, probably, we never will.

    He also said: “In the end, everything will be fine, and if everything is fine, then it’s not the end yet.”

    and it's true - "this is not the end yet."
  10. +1
    26 December 2025 22: 46
    Tito did not understand simple things, that all people are mortal, including him....