Dva pisma Hamdije Kreševljakovića Carlu Patschu iz Bayerisches Hauptstaatsarchiva

1. Uvod

Kroz radove objavljene u 18. broju časopisa Bosna Franciscana iz 2003. godine bosanskohercego- vačka naučna javnost je imala priliku da se opšir­nije upozna s ostavštinom Carla Patscha (Nehring, 2003; 1998; Zadro, 2003)¹ koja je upravo u momen­tima objavljivanja radova u spomenutom časopisu bila premještena iz Südost-Instituta u Münchenu, koji je građu otkupio 1956. godine (Nehring, 2003) u Bayerisches Hauptstaatsarchiv,² gdje se i dalje čuva (Zadro, 2003: 250). Riječ je o veoma značaj­noj ostavštini i u kontekstu proučavanja historije Bosne i Hercegovine s obzirom na Patschovu ulo­gu u naučnom životu ovog područja početkom 20. stoljeća. Jedan od njenih značajnijih segmenata su sačuvana pisma koja je Patsch tokom svoga živo­ta primao (Nehring, 2003), a među pošiljaocima se nalazi i niz poznatih ličnosti iz Bosne i Hercegovine (Zadro, 2003: 253). Na ovome mjestu bit će pred­stavljena dva pisma koja je tokom 1939. godine bo- sanskohercegovački historičar Hamdija Kreševlja- ković poslao Carlu Patschu, a s obzirom na sadržaj pisama posebna pažnja će biti usmjerena na drugo pismo koje se odnosi na Kreševljakovićevu ponu­du Patschu da učestvuje u velikom projektu pisanja historije Bosne i Hercegovine od najstarijih vreme- na.³ Na postojanje Kreševljakovićevih pisama već su ukazali autori koji su pisali o ostavštini Carla Patscha (Nehring, 2003: 242; Zadro, 2003: 253), ali ova pisma ranije nisu objavljivana niti je njihov sa­držaj korišten u postojećoj literaturi te je s te strane riječ o novim podacima koji mogu biti korisni u ra­zličitim vrstama istraživanja. Potrebno je istaknuti i određena ograničenja rada. Cilj ovog rada nije da ponudi krupnije zaključke vezane za intelektualne veze bosanskohercegovačkih istraživača i inostra­nih istraživača u međuratnom periodu, niti da se

1. . Introduction

Through the studies published in issue 18 of the journal Bosna Franciscana in 2003, the Bosnian- Herzegovinian scholarly community gained an opportunity to engage more deeply with the intel­lectual legacy of Carl Patsch (Nehring, 2003; 1998; Zadro, 2003).¹ At the time of these publications, Patsch’s archival materials had been transferred from the Südost-Institut in Munich, where they had been acquired in 1956 (Nehring, 2003), to the Ba­varian Main State Archives,² where they continue to be preserved (Zadro, 2003: 250). This collection represents a body of exceptional importance for the study of the history of Bosnia and Herzegovi­na, particularly in light of Patsch’s prominent role in the intellectual and academic life of the region at the beginning of the twentieth century. A par­ticularly valuable segment of this legacy consists of the letters that Patsch received during his life­time (Nehring, 2003), including correspondence from several distinguished figures from Bosnia and Herzegovina (Zadro, 2003: 253). This study examines two of these letters, both sent to Patsch in 1939 by the Bosnian-Herzegovinian historian Hamdija Kreševljaković. Owing to its content, spe­cial attention is given to the second letter, in which Kreševljaković invites Patsch to contribute to an am­bitious project dedicated to the writing of a compre­hensive history of Bosnia and Herzegovina from its earliest periods.³ The existence of Kreševljaković’s letters had previously been acknowledged by schol­ars researching Patsch’s legacy (Nehring 2003: 242; Zadro 2003: 253). However, the letters themselves had not been published, nor had their contents been examined in the existing historiographical litera­ture. Consequently, they constitute newly available

¹ The article by Karl Nehring was previously published in German.

² I would like to express my gratitude to the staff of the Bavarian Main State Archives for their kind communication, assistance, and for pro­viding the requested documents. I am also grateful to colleague De­jan Zadro from Zagreb, who, as an excellent connoisseur of the life and work of Carl Patsch, provided me with the necessary literature and offered valuable advice during the preparation of this article.

³ Nehring’s article notes the existence of a letter by Kreševljaković from 1911, but I was unable to consult or gain access to the afore­mentioned document.

198

Maslo

detaljno bavi Kreševljakovićevim i Patschovim in­telektualnim profilom. Iako pisma imaju potencijal za takvo nešto, ona bi se morala sagledati u širem kontekstu sačuvane korespondencije Kreševljako- vića i Patscha, ali i drugih savremenika, što ovom prilikom nije urađeno. Predstavljanjem ovih pisama u trenutnoj istraživačkoj fazi i na način prezentiran u ovom radu osnovni ciljevi su u odnosu na ranija istraživanja detaljnije ukazati na povezanost izme­đu Kreševljakovića i Patscha i koristeći se kompa­rativnim metodom nadopuniti znanja o problemima koji su pratili nastanak, u bosanskohercegovačkoj i jugoslavenskoj historiografiji, jednog poprilično kontroverznog djela Poviest hrvatskih zemalja Bo­sne i Hercegovine od najstarijih vremena do godine 1463. Također, objavljivanjem kompletnog teksta pisama ona će postati lakše dostupna i iskoristiva u budućim istraživačkim procesima.

2. . Carl Patsch i Hamdija Kreševljaković

S obzirom na značajan broj knjiga i radova posve­ćenih Carlu Patschu i Hamdiji Kreševljakoviću, na ovom mjestu neće se posvetiti prevelika pažnja nji­hovim biografijama, nego će veća pažnja biti po­svećena upoznavanju i suradnji dvojice naučnika koja je usko povezana s Institutom za proučavanje Balkana koji je Patsch osnovao u Sarajevu 1904. godine. Od 1904. do 1918. godine Institut je prošao kroz nekoliko faza od privatne ustanove do državne institucije.4 Također, u spomenutom periodu posto­jali su različiti stepeni finansijske i političke po­drške u ovom Institutu.⁵ Iako Carl Patsch prilikom osnivanja Instituta nije bio vođen političkim moti­vima, cjelokupna priča oko povezanosti vladajućih političkih struktura s Institutom može biti zgodno mjesto za propitivanje austrougarske kolonizator­ske politike u Bosni i Hercegovini.

Jedan od vanjskih suradnika ovog Instituta bio je i Hamdija Kreševljaković (Bakaršić, 2005: 44, 48). U trenutku kada je upoznao Carla Patscha Kreševljaković je još uvijek bio srednjoškolac, koji je povremeno počeo objavljivati tekstove različitog karaktera u sarajevskoj štampi. Susret i saradnja s Patschom uveliko su odredili pravac kretanja karijere Hamdije Kreševljakovića te je upravo angažman u Institutu za proučavanje Balkana imao presudan utjecaj na njegov odabir da se u budućnosti bavi proučavanjem i pisanjem historije. U kasnijim vremenima Kreševljakovićevi bliski suradnici će

primary sources that may significantly enrich fu­ture research across several areas of historical in­quiry. It is important to note certain limitations of this study. The aim is not to draw comprehensive conclusions concerning the intellectual relation­ships between Bosnian-Herzegovinian and foreign scholars during the interwar period, nor to provide a detailed analysis of the intellectual profiles of Kreševljaković and Patsch. While the letters indeed offer potential for such an inquiry, they would need to be contextualized within the broader corpus of preserved correspondence between the two, as well as with their contemporaries, a task that exceeds the scope of the present paper. By presenting these letters in their current stage of research and in the manner adopted here, the primary objective is to illuminate more fully the professional relationship between Kreševljaković and Patsch. Moreover, through a comparative and interpretative approach, this study seeks to expand the understanding of the historiographical challenges surrounding the pro­duction, within Bosnian-Herzegovinian and Yu­goslav historiography, of the controversial work Poviest hrvatskih zemalja Bosne i Hercegovine od najstarijih vremena do godine 1463. (The History of the Croatian Lands of Bosnia and Herzegovina from the Earliest Times to the Year 1463). Finally, by publishing the complete text of these letters, this paper contributes to making them more accessible and usable for future scholarly research.

2. . Carl Patsch and Hamdija Kreševljaković

Given the extensive number of scholarly works de­voted to Carl Patsch and Hamdija Kreševljaković, this section does not aim to provide a detailed ac­count of their biographies. Rather, it focuses on their acquaintance and collaboration, which were closely linked to the Institute for Balkan Studies founded by Patsch in Sarajevo in 1904. From its es­tablishment until 1918, the Institute underwent sev­eral developmental stages, evolving from a private initiative into a state-supported institution.⁴ During this period, it experienced fluctuating levels of fi­nancial and political backing.⁵ Although Patsch was not guided by political motives when he founded the Institute, its connections with the ruling admin­istrative structures provide a valuable context for examining Austro-Hungarian colonial policies in Bosnia and Herzegovina.

⁴ For a selective bibliography of works on Carl Patsch, see Zadro, 2003: 263–265. For more recent publications, see Baric, 2023. On Hamdija Kreševljaković, see Maslo, 2022.

⁵ For a more detailed discussion of the establishment and functioning of the Institute, see Kapidžić, 1968: 310-371.

199

BOSNIACA 2025; 30: 197-212

spominjati značaj njegove suradnje s Patschom. Kao primjer može poslužiti tekst Muhameda Hadžijahića koji je objavljen u Novom Beharu, tačnije broju tog lista posvećenom izboru Hamdije Kreševljakovića za akademika Jugoslavenske akademije znanosti i umjetnosti (JAZU) u Zagrebu, u kojem je napisano:

“Inače Kreševljaković još i danas često spomi­nje Dra Patscha, kojega uz Vjekoslava Klaića smatra svojim učiteljem i uzorom u naučnom radu. Više puta mi je Prof. Kreševljaković isti­cao jednu između mnogim maksima u naučnom radu, koju je – kako sam veli – naučio od Dra Patscha: ‘Nemoj ni o čemu pisati, prije nego što nećeš stići na teren i vidjeti sve što se može vlastitim očima!’.” (Hadžijahić, 1939–40: 32).

Podatke o suradnji Hamdije Kreševljakovića i Carla Patscha moguće je pronaći i u memoarima Jelice Belović-Bernadžikovske, učiteljice i kulturne rad­nice u Sarajevu na početku 20. stoljeća, koja je pri­likom posjete Hamdije Kreševljakovića napisala:

“Ove dane upoznala sam se sa jednim mla­dim Muslimanom, koji je još đak, a već radi na novinama. Bistar, naobražen i čedan mladić (19. godina): Hamdija Kreševljaković. Došao k meni kući, da me moli, da mu dadnem svoje radnje (narodne priče iz Bosne i leksikon) za novo osnovani ‘Zavod za ispitivanje Balkana’ u Sarajevu. Na čelu tog zavoda je dr. Patsch, a Kreševljaković mu nesebično pomaže, te mu sakuplja stare i nove knjige, štampane u Bosni. Bila sam u tome zavodu i tu me je dr. Patsch prijazno primio i pokazao mi sve, što je sabrao, pa kad je vidio i moje razumijevanje za stvar i moju iskrenost u razgovoru, tužio mi se, kako ga Vlada slabo pomaže u tom lijepom poduze­ću i kako ga najbliži saradnik dr. Truhelka zlobi i spletkari protiv toga zavoda. Patsch je kustos u muzeju i arheolog, a ovaj Zavod privatno je njegovo zanimanje. To je čovjek zauzet, učen i pošten.” (Omerović & Jacek Lis, 2023: 517­518; Dujmović, 2011: 495-498).

Kreševljaković je povezan s Institutom za proučavanje Balkana gotovo od početka njegovog postojanja. U drugoj polovini maja 1909. godine objavio je kratak članak u novinama Bošnjak u kojem se osvrnuo na koji način je došao u dodir s Institutom te opisao šta se to sve čuva u Institutu. U tekstu posebno ističe zasluge Carla Patscha koji je došao na ideju da osnuje ovu instituciju te moli Svevišnjeg da ga poživi i podari mu uspjeh (Kreševljaković, 1909: 3). Već iz Kreševljakovićevog teksta moguće je saznati da je Patsch sakupio značajan broj građe za Institut, među kojom je dosta rukopisa i

Among the external associates of the Institute was Hamdija Kreševljaković (Bakaršić, 2005: 44, 48). When he first met Carl Patsch, Kreševljaković was still a secondary school student who had already begun publishing occasional journalistic and liter­ary pieces in the Sarajevo press. His encounter and subsequent collaboration with Patsch had a pro­found influence on the direction of his intellectual and professional development. It was precisely his engagement with the Institute for Balkan Studies that played a decisive role in shaping his later dedi­cation to the study and writing of history. In sub­sequent decades, Kreševljaković’s close associates frequently emphasized the influence of this collabo­ration. One example can be found in an article by Muhamed Hadžijahić published in Novi Behar, in the issue dedicated to Kreševljaković’s election as a member of the Yugoslav Academy of Sciences and Arts (JAZU) in Zagreb, where Hadžijahić wrote:

“Kreševljaković still often mentions Dr. Patsch, whom he, along with Vjekoslav Klaić, consid­ers his teacher and model in scholarly work. Professor Kreševljaković has told me many times one of the guiding principles in research that he learned, as he says, from Dr. Patsch: ‘Never write about anything before you go to the field and see everything with your own eyes.’” (Hadžijahić, 1939–40: 32)

Further evidence of the collaboration between Ham- dija Kreševljaković and Carl Patsch can be found in the memoirs of Jelica Belović-Bernadžikovska, a teacher and cultural activist in Sarajevo at the beginning of the twentieth century. During a visit from Kreševljaković, she recorded the following observation:

“These days I met a young Muslim who is still a student but already works in journalism. A bright, educated, and modest young man of nineteen: Hamdija Kreševljaković. He came to my home to ask me to lend him my works (folk tales from Bosnia and a lexicon) for the newly founded Institute for the Study of the Balkans in Sarajevo. The head of the Institute is Dr. Patsch, and Kreševljaković assists him selflessly, collecting old and new books printed in Bosnia. I visited the Institute, and Dr. Patsch kindly received me and showed me his collec­tion. When he saw my interest and sincerity, he confided that the government provided little support for this valuable endeavor and that his closest associate, Dr. Truhelka, was undermin­ing the work of the Institute through intrigue. Patsch is a museum curator and archaeolo-

200

Maslo

dokumenata na orijentalnim jezicima. Veći dio građe na orijentalnim jezicima otkupljen je od zajedničkog prijatelja Carla Patscha i Hamdije Kreševljakovića, Sejfudina Fehmi ef. Kemure (Bakaršić, 2005: 43, 41; Arhiv UNSA-OIS: S 67, S 68).⁶ Na određene relacije između Patscha, Kemure i Kreševljakovića u kontekstu kupovine, prodaje i otkupa građe za Institut za proučavanje Balkana ukazao je Kemal Bakaršić (2005: 44, 48).

Patsch je nakon završetka Prvog svjetskog rata i ukidanja Instituta za proučavanje Balkana u onom obliku u kojem je postojao do tada napustio Saraje­vo, a svoju karijeru je nastavio u Beču kao profesor bečkog univerziteta, a kasnije i akademik Austrijske akademije nauka (Zadro, 2003: 252). S obzirom na blisku suradnju s Kreševljakovićem početkom 20. stoljeća pomalo se nevjerovatnim čini da su kroz godine koje su slijedile razmijenili samo dva pisma, i to 1939. godine. Ne treba isključiti mogućnost da je postojalo još pisama tokom godina koja nisu sa­čuvana ili su pohranjena u nekom drugom arhivu. Potrebno je imati na umu i činjenicu da je Patsch zbog razvoja situacije u vezi s Institutom za prouča­vanje Balkana vjerovatno razočaran napustio Sara­jevo te je moguće da je sve svoje veze i kontakte sa Sarajevom, Bosnom i Jugoslavijom pokušao svesti na minimum. Tome bi u prilog išla i činjenica da je njegova korespondencija s intelektualcima iz Jugo­slavije nakon napuštanja Sarajeva poprilično rijetka (Nehring, 2003). Ipak, kroz drugu arhivsku građu moguće je detektirati još poneki kontakt Hamdije Kreševljakovića i Carla Patscha. Naprimjer, među pismima koja je Hamdija Kreševljaković slao Jo­sipu Matasoviću sačuvano je pismo koje svjedoči o Kreševljakovićevom susretu s Carlom Patschom 1921. godine. Kreševljaković je pisao Matasoviću opširno o svom putovanju u Beč, Prag, Salzburg i Ljubljanu te mu je tom prilikom saopštio da se u Beču susreo i razgovarao s Patschom, koji je, pre­ma Kreševljakovićevim riječima, postao ordinarius (redovni univerzitetski profesor) te suradnik tamoš­njeg Instituta za Istok i Orijent (Hrvatski Držav­ni arhiv, dalje HR-HDA, Josip Matasović – fond, 1059/11, br. 373, 10. 10. 1921. godine).⁷

⁶ Građa Instituta za proučavanje Balkana je kasnije predata Zemalj­skom muzeju, da bi od 1950. godine i osnivanja Orijentalnog insti­tuta veći dio građe na orijentalnim jezicima koji se čuvao u Zemalj­skom muzeju bio pohranjen na čuvanje u novoosnovani institut, a samim tim i izgorio prilikom spaljivanja Orijentalnog instituta 1992. godine. Međutim, u Arhivu Orijentalnog instituta i dalje postoje sve­ske koje su bile dio ove biblioteke i koje na početnoj strani imaju zabilješku u kojoj je navedeno da su 1908. godine otkupljene od Sejfudina ef. Kemure. Rukopis bilježaka pripada Carlu Patschu.

⁷ Kreševljaković se tokom svojih putovanja i nekoliko decenija bav­ljenja historijom područja Bosne i Hercegovine za vrijeme osman­ske uprave povezao i sa značajnim istraživačima u oblasti osman­skih i orijentalnih studija. Ovdje će kao primjer biti navedeni Franz

gist, and the Institute is his personal scholarly pursuit. He is a diligent, learned, and honest man.” (Omerović & Jacek Lis, 2023: 517-518; Dujmović, 2011: 495-498)

Kreševljaković had been associated with the Insti­tute for Balkan Studies almost from its inception. In May 1909, he published a short article in the newspaper Bošnjak in which he described how he became involved with the Institute and what types of materials were preserved there. In this article, he emphasized Patsch’s pioneering role in founding the institution and expressed a wish that God grant him long life and success (Kreševljaković, 1909: 3). From the text, it is evident that Patsch had assem­bled an extensive collection for the Institute, includ­ing numerous manuscripts and documents in Orien­tal languages. Much of this material had been pur­chased from Sejfudin Fehmi ef. Kemura, a mutual friend of both Patsch and Kreševljaković (Bakaršić, 2005: 43, 41; Arhiv UNSA-OIS: S67, S68).⁶ The nature of the collaboration between Patsch, Kemu- ra, and Kreševljaković particularly concerning the acquisition of materials for the Institute was later analyzed by Kemal Bakaršić (2005: 44, 48).

After the conclusion of the First World War and the dissolution of the Institute for Balkan Studies in its original form, Carl Patsch left Sarajevo and continued his academic career in Vienna, where he became a professor at the University of Vienna and later a member of the Austrian Academy of Scienc­es (Zadro, 2003: 252). Considering his close collab­oration with Kreševljaković at the beginning of the century, it may appear surprising that the two ex­changed only two letters in subsequent years, both in 1939. Nevertheless, it is possible that additional correspondence once existed but was either lost or preserved in another archive. It is also important to consider that Patsch, likely disheartened by the political and institutional developments surround­ing the Institute for Balkan Studies, may have left Sarajevo with a sense of disappointment, seeking to minimize his connections with the city, Bosnia, and the wider Yugoslav region. This assumption is supported by the fact that his later correspondence with intellectuals from Yugoslavia is relatively

⁶ The archival documents and manuscripts of the Institute for Balkan Studies were later transferred to the National Museum. Following the establishment of the Oriental Institute in 1950, a substantial por­tion of the collection in Oriental languages that had been kept at the National Museum was deposited in the newly founded Institute. Consequently, this part of the collection was destroyed in the fire that consumed the Oriental Institute in 1992. However, the Archive of the Oriental Institute still holds several volumes that once formed part of this library. On their opening pages, these volumes bear a note indicating that they were purchased in 1908 from Sejfudin ef. Kemura. The handwritten notes are by Carl Patsch.

201

BOSNIACA 2025; 30: 197-212

Hamdija Kreševljaković je 1939. godine poslao dva pisma Carlu Patschu, jedno u drugoj polovini januara, a drugo krajem maja mjeseca (Bayerisches Hauptstaatsarchiv, dalje: BayHStA, Sudost-Insti- tut, 276, 21. januar 1939. godine, 29. maj 1939. godine). U prvom pismu od 21. januara 1939. go­dine Kreševljaković je zamolio Patscha da mu po­šalje primjerak svoje knjige Herzegowina einst und jetzt,⁸ a da će mu on zauzvrat poslati svoju novu knjigu o vodovodima, mlinovima i mostovima u Sarajevu koja je trebala biti objavljena u martu te godine (BayHStA, Sudost-Institut, 276, 21. janu­ar 1939. godine). Kreševljakovićeva knjiga koju spominje u ovom pismu objavljena je 1939. godi­ne (Kreševljaković, 1939).⁹ Patsch je očito poslao Kreševljakoviću traženu knjigu, jer je u narednom pismu Kreševljaković izrazio nadu da je Patschu stigla knjiga o vodovodima koju je poslao.

Po svome sadržaju drugo pismo je mnogo značajnije jer svjedoči o pokušaju angažiranja Carla Patscha da učestvuje u pisanju Povijesti Bosne i Hercegovine. Riječ je publikaciji koja je u naučnoj javnosti poznata pod nazivom Napretkova Povijest Bosne i Hercegovine (Poviest hrvatskih zemalja Bosne i Hercegovine od najstarijih vremena do godine 1463: 1942), čija je izrada svakako predstavljala jedan od najznačajnijih historiografskih projekata u Bosni i Hercegovini u periodu između dva svjetska rata. Kreševljakovićevo ime u ovoj priči pojavilo se već krajem 1932. i 1933. godine, kada se počelo razmišljati o pisanju ove publikacije, te je tada Mijo Vučak smatrao da je u vezi s izradom djela potrebno razgovarati i s ljudima koji se bave istraživanjem, pisanjem historije i srodnih disciplina, a u projektu je prema njegovom mišljenju trebao učestvovati i Hamdija Kreševljaković (Išek, 2011: 247), a isti stav je dijelila i središnja uprava udruženja (Išek, 2011: 249). Različite okolnosti su dovele do određene pauze u realizaciji projekta (Išek, 2011: 250), te

Taeschner i Franz Babinger. Taeschnera spominje i u pismima Mu­hamedu Hadžijahiću. (HAS, O-HK-219, br. 97, 28. 11. 1957; Maslo, 2024: 132)

sparse (Nehring, 2003). Despite this, other archi­val sources indicate that contact between Hamdija Kreševljaković and Carl Patsch continued intermit­tently. Among the letters that Kreševljaković sent to Josip Matasović is one that testifies to their meet­ing in Vienna in 1921. In this letter, Kreševljaković described his travels to Vienna, Prague, Salzburg, and Ljubljana, noting that during his stay in Vienna he met and conversed with Patsch, who, according to his account, had by then become an ordinarius (full professor) and a collaborator of the Institute for Eastern and Oriental Studies (Hrvatski Državni arhiv, hereafter: HR-HDA, Josip Matasović – fond, 1059/11, no. 373, 10. October 1921).⁷

3. The Content of Kreševljaković’s Letters from the Bavarian Main State Archives: With Special Reference to the Attempt to Engage Carl Patsch as a Collaborator in Writing Napredak’s History of Bosnia

In 1939, Hamdija Kreševljaković sent two letters to Carl Patsch, the first in the second half of Janu­ary and the second at the end of May (Bayerisches Hauptstaatsarchiv, hereafter BayHStA, Sudost-In- stitut, 276, January 21, 1939; May 29, 1939). In his first letter, dated January 21, 1939, Kreševljaković asked Patsch to send him a copy of his book Her- zegowina einst und jetzt,⁸ promising in return to send his own forthcoming book on water supply systems, mills, and bridges in Sarajevo, which was scheduled for publication in March of that year (BayHStA, Südost-Institut, 276, January 21, 1939). The book mentioned in this letter was indeed pub­lished in 1939 (Kreševljaković 1939).⁹ It appears that Patsch fulfilled the request, as in his next let­ter Kreševljaković expressed hope that Patsch had received the book on water supply systems that he had sent.

The second letter, dated May 29, 1939, is of con­siderably greater importance, as it testifies to an at­tempt to engage Carl Patsch as a contributor to the

⁷ During his travels and several decades of studying the history of Bosnia and Herzegovina under Ottoman rule, Kreševljaković estab­lished connections with prominent researchers in the field of Otto­man and Oriental studies. As examples, Franz Taeschner and Franz Babinger may be mentioned. Taeschner is also referenced in Krešev- ljaković’s letters to Muhamed Hadžijahić (HAS, O-HK-219, no. 97, 28 November 1957; Maslo, 2024: 132).

⁸ This refers to the book Herzegovina: Then and Now, which was pub­lished in Vienna in German in 1922. See: Patsch 1922.

⁹ Kreševljaković also mentioned this book in a letter written a year earlier, in which he informed Muhamed Hadžijahić that he was final­izing work on the volume, but that the process of writing it had been particularly taxing. Historical Archive of Sarajevo (HAS), Person­al Collection of Hamdija Kreševljaković (O-HK-219), Letter from Hamdija Kreševljaković to Muhamed Hadžijahić, Box 1, No. 29, 9 March 1938. See also: Maslo 2024: 34.

202

Maslo

se početnim idejama vratilo opet 1936. i 1937. godine i tom prilikom je formirani Odbor za izradu Povijesti raspravljao o konceptu, vremenskom okviru i tehničkim detaljima izdanja (Išek, 2011: 251-252). Među članovima Odbora nalazio se i Hamdija Kreševljaković (Išek, 2011: 251).

U pismu koje je poslao 29. maja 1939. godine Kre- ševljaković je Patscha upoznao s odlukom da se izda, kako je on napisao, Povijest Bosne od najsta­rijih vremena do 1918. godine i da će troškove iz­danja snositi društvo Napredak (BayHStA, Südost- Institut, 276, 29. maj 1939. godine). Također, oba­vijestio ga je da je član posebnog Odbora koji radi na izdanju ove knjige (BayHStA, Südost-Institut, 276, 29. maj 1939. godine). Glavni razlog ovog obraćanja Patchu bio je poziv koji mu je uputio da upravo on napiše poglavlje o “rimskom dobu” u Bosni i Hercegovini. Kreševljaković je istakao da ga je predložio Odboru i da mu se sada obratio u ime Odbora (BayHStA, Südost-Institut, 276, 29. maj 1939. godine). U drugom dijelu pisma zamo­lio ga je da prihvati ovu ponudu, da prilog ako želi napiše na njemačkom, dok će se prevod na hrvat­ski jezik naknadno uraditi, te da će za svaki rad biti isplaćen lijep honorar. Uz nadu da Patsch neće odbiti ovu ponudu, Kreševljaković mu je u prilogu pisma poslao i nacrt kako bi spomenuto poglavlje trebalo izgledati, s tim što mu je napisao da se ne mora striktno držati tog nacrta (BayHStA, Südost- Institut, 276, 29. maj 1939. godine).

Poglavlje “Bosna u rimsko doba” prvobitno je pla­nirano da bude četvrto poglavlje prve knjige Na- pretkove povijesti (BayHStA, Südost-Institut, 276, 29. maj 1939. godine). Međutim, naknadnim ume­tanjem poglavlja “Izvori bosanske povijesti” autora Ferde Šišića u samu publikaciju ovo poglavlje je objavljeno kao peto (Šišić, 1942; Išek, 2011: 254). Iz nacrta koji je Kreševljaković poslao Patschu vidi se da je ono trebalo biti podijeljeno na dva dijela. Prvi dio je trebao obuhvatiti period od 229. godine pr. n. e. do 9. godine n. e., a u njemu je bilo potrebno tematizirati sljedeće:

“Uzroci i povod rimskih ratova. Postepeno prodiranje Rimljana u unutrašnjost Bosne. Ilirska plemena u Bosni i Hercegovini u doba rimskih gradjanskih ratova. Bosanski teritorij izmedju Istoka i Zapada: Cezar, i Pompej, An- tonije i Oktavijan. Ustanak ilirskih plemena u Bosni i pacifikacija zemlje za cara Augusta.” (BayHStA, Südost-Institut, 276, 29. maj 1939. godine)¹⁰

¹⁰ Prilog pismu koji uključuje nacrt poglavlja o historiji Bosne i Herce­govine u rimskom dobu.

writing of the History of Bosnia and Herzegovina. This work, known in scholarly circles as Napre- dak’s History of Bosnia and Herzegovina (Poviest hrvatskih zemalja Bosne i Hercegovine od najstari­jih vremena do godine 1463, 1942), represented one of the most significant historiographical projects in Bosnia and Herzegovina during the interwar period. Kreševljaković’s name had already been associated with the project as early as 1932 and 1933, when the idea of preparing such a publication first emerged. At that time, Mijo Vučak emphasized that, for the project to succeed, it would be necessary to consult scholars engaged in historical and related research, and he considered Hamdija Kreševljaković one of the essential contributors (Išek 2011: 247). The same opinion was shared by the Central Committee of the Napredak Society (Išek, 2011: 249). Various circumstances, however, led to a temporary suspen­sion of the project (Išek, 2011: 250), and it was only in 1936 and 1937 that the initial idea was revived. During this period, a special committee was estab­lished to plan the work, deliberate on its conceptual and temporal framework, and define the technical aspects of the publication (Išek, 2011: 251-252). Among the members of this committee was Ham- dija Kreševljaković (Išek, 2011: 251).

In his letter of May 29, 1939, Kreševljaković in­formed Patsch that a decision had been made to pub­lish a History of Bosnia from the Earliest Times to 1918, and that the costs of publication would be cov­ered by the Napredak Society (BayHStA, Südost- Institut, 276, May 29, 1939). He also explained that he was a member of the committee overseeing the production of the work (BayHStA, Südost-Institut, 276, 29. maj 1939. godine). The principal purpose of his correspondence was to invite Carl Patsch to write the chapter on the Roman period in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Kreševljaković noted that he had personally proposed Patsch’s inclusion to the com­mittee and that he was now writing to him on its be­half (BayHStA, Südost-Institut, 276, 29. maj 1939. godine). In the second part of the letter, he urged Patsch to accept the invitation, assuring him that he could, if he wished, write his contribution in Ger­man, with translation into Croatian to follow later, and that every contributor would receive a generous honorarium. Hoping that Patsch would not decline this offer, Kreševljaković enclosed with his letter a draft of how the chapter should be structured, noting that it was not necessary to adhere strictly to the out­line (BayHStA, Südost-Institut, 276, 29 May 1939). The chapter “Bosnia in the Roman Period” was ini­tially planned as the fourth chapter of the first vol-

203

BOSNIACA 2025; 30: 197-212

Drugi dio ovog poglavlja trebao je obuhvatati:

“Diobe zemlje i početak romanizacije, povla­čenje Ilira. Uređenje provincija i provincijalna pripadnost Bosne. Rimski gradovi kao središta uprave. Gradovi kao središte¹¹ rimske civiliza­cije. Život u gradovima. Rimske ceste, vojnič­ki logori. Privreda u rimsko doba. Rudarstvo, trgovina, obrt. Opća slika rimske civilizacije, odnos Ilira prema rimskoj civilizaciji. Rimska vjera i vjerski život u ovim zemljama do po­jave kršćanstva. Kartografski prikaz rimskih naselja.”¹² (BayHStA, Südost-Institut, 276, 29. maj 1939. godine)

Na osnovu nacrta moguće je primijetiti da se raču­nalo na jako ozbiljan prilog u ovom segmentu, te da nije ni čudo što je poziv upućen upravo Carlu Patschu, kao jednom od najboljih poznavatelja tog perioda bosanskohercegovačke prošlosti. Međutim, postoje i određena pitanja koja proizilaze iz same hronologije dešavanja koja je poznata. S obzirom na to da je pozivno pismo Patschu upućeno kra­jem maja 1939. godine u trenutku kada je značajan broj priloga već bio stigao i dok je nekim autorima prethodno rok produžen (Napredak, 1938: 80-81; Išek, 2011: 254), gotovo sigurno se može tvrditi da je prije poziva Patschu već postojala osoba koja je trebala napisati ovo poglavlje.¹³ Da li je ta osoba u međuvremenu odustala ili Odbor nije bio zadovo­ljan kvalitetom primljenog priloga pa je odlučio po­nuditi prostor Patschu pitanje je na koje je u ovom trenutku teško dati odgovor. Odgovor Carla Patscha na ovu molbu nije dostupan, ali, ako je postojao, bio je negativan. Komparirajući ga s drugom do­stupnom izvornom građom, prije svega onom koju je objavio Išek, ovo pismo je još jedan jasan poka­zatelj da je Napredak u drugoj polovini tridesetih godina 20. stoljeća imao ozbiljne probleme vezane uz angažiranje stručnjaka koji će učestvovati u izra­di Napretkove povijesti. Tome u prilog idu i ranije spomenuti podaci iz korespondencije Hamdije Kre- ševljakovića i Josipa Matasovića, ali i drugih aktera povezanih s ovim projektom.¹⁴

¹¹ Poslije ove riječi u originalu slijedi prekrižena riječ.

¹² Prilog pismu koji uključuje nacrt poglavlja o historiji Bosne i Herce­govine u rimskom dobu.

¹³ U prilog tvrdnji da je prije Patscha postojala osoba koja je trebala obraditi ovo poglavlje ide i činjenica da se u pismu iz januara 1939. godine Kreševljaković požalio Josipu Matasoviću na saradnike koji su trebali napisati poglavlja u Napretkovoj povijesti Bosne i Herce­govine da ne šalju svoje radove. HR-HDA, Josip Matasović – fond, 1059/11, br. 373, 23. 1. 1939. godine.

¹⁴ Krajem 1937. godine u Napretku su se susreli s ozbiljnim proble­mom jer je akademik Ferdo Šišić zbog drugih obaveza otkazao uče­šće u izradi sinteze. Ipak na nagovaranje Miroslava Vanina (“Mi ne možemo biti bez Vašega imena i u tom smo svi složni, pa sad ako bude moguće, ne oglušite se molbi ‘Napretka’ i ovih ovamo ‘Hrva­ta’”) Šišić je na kraju pristao napisati poglavlje za ovu sintezu, što je izazvalo veliku radost i olakšanje kod ljudi okupljenih oko ovog

ume of Napredak’s History of Bosnia (BayHStA, Sudost-Institut, 276, May 29, 1939). However, fol­lowing the later inclusion of the chapter “Sources of Bosnian History” by Ferdo Šišić, it was published as the fifth chapter (Šišić, 1942; Išek, 2011: 254). The outline that Kreševljaković sent to Patsch in­dicates that the chapter was intended to be divided into two parts. The first part was to cover the period from 229 BCE to 9 CE and to address the following topics:

“The causes and motives of the Roman wars, the gradual penetration of the Romans into the interior of Bosnia, the Illyrian tribes of Bosnia and Herzegovina during the Roman civil wars, the Bosnian territory as a frontier between East and West in the time of Caesar, Pompey, Anto­ny, and Octavian, and the uprising of the Illyri­an tribes in Bosnia followed by the pacification of the region under Emperor Augustus” (BayH- StA, Südost-Institut, 276, May 29, 1939).¹⁰

The second part of this chapter was intended to in­clude:

“The division of land and the beginning of Ro­manization, the withdrawal of the Illyrians, the organization of the provinces and the provincial affiliation of Bosnia (with further discussion to focus exclusively on the part of Roman Dalma­tia that corresponds to the territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina). Roman cities as administra­tive centers, with the aim of determining, where possible, the locations of those mentioned in the sources. Cities as centers¹¹ of Roman civi­lization and urban life. Roman roads and mili­tary camps. The economy in the Roman period, including mining, trade, and crafts. A general overview of Roman civilization and the rela­tionship of the Illyrians toward it. Roman re­ligion and religious life in these lands until the advent of Christianity. A cartographic repre­sentation of Roman settlements.”¹² (BayHStA, Südost-Institut, 276, 29 May 1939)

Based on the draft, it is evident that a highly sub­stantial and scholarly contribution was expected in this section. It is therefore unsurprising that the invitation was extended to Carl Patsch, one of the foremost authorities on this period of Bosnian- Herzegovinian history. However, several questions arise from the chronology of known events. Since

204

Maslo

Ipak, kao rezultat projekta izrade sinteze o historiji Bosne i Hercegovine na početku Drugog svjetskog rata u Napretkovom izdavaštvu objavljena je knjiga čiji je naslov glasio Povijest hrvatskih zemalja Bo­sne i Hercegovine od najstarijih vremena do 1463. godine.¹⁵ Poglavlje “Bosna i Hercegovina u rimsko doba” napisao je Mihovil Mandić (1942; o Mandiću vidjeti: Periša, 2007). Razlog zbog kojeg je Patsch odbio suradnju nije poznat. Potrebno je spomenuti da se on već nalazio u poznim istraživačkim godi­nama i da je sve manje objavljivao, i iako u pismu nije definiran vremenski rok u kojem bi trebalo na­pisati poglavlje, on nije bio dug. Također, među sa- radnicima Napretka u ovom projektu nalazio se Ćiro Truhelka s kojim je Patsch za vrijeme svoga borav­ka u Sarajevu bio u neprijateljskim odnosima, što je isto tako moglo imati utjecaja na negativan odgo- vor.¹⁶ Sa druge strane, poglavlje Mihovila Mandića je skromno, nije imalo nikakav značajniji utjecaj na dalja istraživanja, a iako se u nekim dijelovima autor držao nacrta koji je bio poslan Patschu, sam prilog nije ni približno ispunio očekivanja koja bi se dala iščitati iz samoga nacrta. U konačnici, unutar publi­kacije nije objavljen ni prilog koji je predao Hamdija Kreševljaković. Nije poznato o čemu je Kreševlja- ković pisao, jer se on inače nije bavio istraživanjem historije prije 1463. godine, ali je Tomislav Išek na osnovu izvorne građe konstatirao da je tekstove na­pisalo ukupno 17 autora među kojima je bio Krešev- ljaković, ali i da njegov tekst nije objavljen kao ni tekstovi Josipa Nagyja, J. Kopričevića i Leona Pe- trovića (Išek, 2011: 256), a već od ranije je poznato da zbog neslaganja u stavovima nije objavljen ni rad Jaroslava Šidaka (Agičić, 2012).

4. Zaključak

U ovom radu su tematizirana dva pisma koja je to­kom 1939. godine Carlu Patchu, profesoru bečkog univerziteta u mirovini i bivšem direktoru Instituta za proučavanje Balkana u Sarajevu, poslao Hamdija Kreševljaković. Kroz rad je predstavljena suradnja između ove dvojice intelektualaca početkom 20. stoljeća, a koja je upravo vezana za ranije spomenu-

projekta (“Kad sam jutros Vašem negdašnjem drugu na sveučilištu gosp. Miličeviću priopćio Vaš odgovor, vjerujte, pomladio se za 10 godina”). (Arhiv Hrvatske akademije nauka i umjetnosti, Osobni fond Ferde Šišića, 61 - XIII - A, Pisma raznih korespondenata Šiši- ća, Pismo Miroslava Vanina Ferdi Šišiću (1V – 6, 7), 11. 11. 1937, 21. 11. 1937.)

¹⁵ Drugi planirani dio nikada nije objavljen. Iako se u ovoj publikaciji nalazi niz kvalitetnih poglavlja, na njenu recepciju u kasnijim perio­dima je značajno utjecala činjenica da se u Predgovoru knjige veliča prvi čovjek nove profašističke vlasti u Nezavisnoj Državi Hrvatskoj (NDH) Ante Pavelić. Vidjeti: Poviest hrvatskih zemalja Bosne i Her­cegovine od najstarijih vremena do godine 1463, 1942: V-VII.

¹⁶ Ovom prilikom je objavljeno pet Truhelkinih poglavlja. Vidjeti: Truhelka, 1942a–e. Vidjeti i: Kaljanac, 2024.

the invitation letter to Patsch was sent in late May 1939, at a time when many contributions had al­ready been received and deadlines for some authors had been extended (Napredak, 1938: 80-81; Išek, 2011: 254), it is almost certain that another person had originally been assigned to write this chapter.¹³ Whether that individual withdrew in the meantime or the Editorial Committee was dissatisfied with the quality of the received text and decided to offer the section to Patsch remains unclear. Patsch’s response to this request is not available, but if one existed, it was most likely negative. When compared with other available primary sources, particularly those published by Išek, this letter serves as further evi­dence that Napredak faced significant difficulties in the late 1930s in securing qualified experts to con­tribute to its History of Bosnia and Herzegovina. This conclusion is supported by earlier correspon­dence between Hamdija Kreševljaković and Josip Matasović, as well as with other participants in­volved in the project.¹⁴

Nevertheless, as a result of this effort to produce a synthesis of Bosnian and Herzegovinian history, Napredak eventually published a volume at the be­ginning of the Second World War titled The History of the Croatian Lands of Bosnia and Herzegovina from the Earliest Times to 1463.15 The chapter “Bos­nia and Herzegovina in the Roman Period” was written by Mihovil Mandić (1942; see also Periša, 2007). The reason for Patsch’s refusal to collabo­rate remains unknown. It should be noted that at the time he was already in the late stage of his academic career and publishing less frequently. Although the letter did not specify a strict deadline for completing the chapter, the timeframe was not generous. Ad-

¹³ Supporting the claim that there was a person assigned to work on this chapter before Patsch, it is noteworthy that in a letter from January 1939, Kreševljaković complained to Josip Matasović about collabo­rators who were supposed to write chapters for Napredak’s History of Bosnia and Herzegovina but were failing to submit their work. (HR- HDA, Josip Matasović – fond, 1059/11, no. 373, 23 January 1939)

¹⁴ At the end of 1937, Napredak faced a serious problem, as Academi­cian Ferdo Šišić had declined participation in the preparation of the synthesis due to other commitments. However, at the urging of Mi­roslav Vanino (“We cannot do without your name, and we are all in agreement on this, so if possible, please do not disregard the request of Napredak and of us ‘Croats’ here”), Šišić ultimately agreed to write a chapter for the synthesis, which brought great joy and relief to those involved in the project (“When I conveyed your reply this morning to your former colleague at the university, Mr. Miličević, believe me, he looked ten years younger”). (Arhiv Hrvatske akadem­ije nauka i umjetnosti, Osobni fond Ferde Šišića, 61 - XIII - A, Pis­ma raznih korespondenata Šišića, Pismo Miroslava Vanina Ferdi Šišiću (1V – 6, 7), 11. 11. 1937, 21. 11. 1937)

¹⁵ The second planned part was never published. Although this vol­ume contains a number of high-quality chapters, its reception in later periods was significantly influenced by the fact that the Preface of the book praises the leader of the new pro-fascist regime in the In­dependent State of Croatia (NDH), Ante Pavelić. See: Poviest hrvat­skih zemalja Bosne i Hercegovine od najstarijih vremena do godine 1463, 1942: V-VII.

205

BOSNIACA 2025; 30: 197-212

ti Institut za proučavanje Balkana. Posebna pažnja na ovom mjestu je posvećena pozivu koji je Kre- ševljaković uputio Patchu, a koji se ticao njegovog eventualnog učešća u pisanju poglavlja o rimskoj historiji Bosne i Hercegovine u okviru Napretkovog projekta pisanja sinteze historije Bosne i Hercego­vine. Patsch nije prihvatio poziv, a na ovom mjestu je raspravljano i o razlozima koji su mogli biti uzrok odbijanja ponude. Sve to predstavlja još jedan jasan pokazatelj da je Napretkova uprava imala ozbiljne probleme u angažiranju stručnjaka koji su trebali učestvovati u pisanju sinteze. Pisma tematizirana na ovom mjestu su uvrštena u rad, a inače se čuvaju u Bayerisches Hauptstaatsarchiv.

ditionally, among Napredak’s collaborators on this project was Ćiro Truhelka, with whom Patsch had been on hostile terms during his time in Sarajevo, which may also have influenced his decision to de- cline.¹⁶ Conversely, Mandić’s chapter proved mod- est in scope and had little influence on subsequent research. Although the author partially adhered to the outline originally sent to Patsch, the contribu- tion fell short of the scholarly expectations that can be inferred from the draft itself. Ultimately, the pub- lication did not include the contribution submitted by Hamdija Kreševljaković. It is not known what topic Kreševljaković addressed, as he generally did not engage in research on periods prior to 1463. However, based on primary sources, Tomislav Išek established that a total of seventeen authors con- tributed to the project, including Kreševljaković, but that his text, as well as those by Josip Nagy, J. Kopričević, and Leon Petrović, remained unpub- lished (Išek, 2011: 256). It was also already known that Jaroslav Šidak’s contribution was excluded due to disagreements over certain interpretative issues (Agičić, 2012).

This paper has examined two letters that Hamdija Kreševljaković sent in 1939 to Carl Patsch, a re- tired professor of the University of Vienna and for- mer director of the Institute for Balkan Studies in Sarajevo. The discussion has highlighted the early twentieth-century collaboration between these two intellectuals, centered around the aforementioned Institute for Balkan Studies. Particular attention was devoted to Kreševljaković’s invitation for Patsch to contribute to the Napredak project, a comprehen- sive synthesis of the history of Bosnia and Herze- govina, by writing a chapter on the Roman period in Bosnian history. Patsch ultimately declined the invitation, and the paper has also considered pos- sible reasons for his refusal. As an appendix to the study, the texts of the letters are included, providing further valuable insight into these dynamics. The letters are preserved in the Bavarian Main State Ar- chives in Munich.

¹⁶ In this edition, five chapters by Truhelka were published. See: Tru- helka, 1942a–e. See also: Kaljanac, 2024.

206

Maslo

Pisma / Letters

Prvo pismo / First letter

Veleučeni gospodine profesore!

Meni je vrlo potrebna Vaša studija „Herzegowina einst und jetzt”, pa Vas najljepše molim, da mi pošaljete jedan primjerak, a ja ću se Vama u najkraćem roku odužiti svojom studijom “Vodovodi, mlinovi i mostovi u starom Sarajevu”, što će izaći prvih dana marta o. g.

U nadi, da ćete mi ovu uslugu učiniti, unaprijed Vam se na tome zahvaljujem i ostajem s odličnim poštovanjem

Vaš odani

Hamdija Kreševljaković

Sarajevo, 21. I. 1939.

Mjedenica ul. 12

Very learned Mr. Professor!

I need very much your study “Herzegowina einst und jetzt”, so please send me a copy, and I will repay you with my study as soon as possible, which will be released in the first days of March this year.

In the hope that you will do me this favor. I thank you in advance and remain with great respect.

Yours faithfully

Hamdija Kreševljaković

Sarajevo, 21. I 1939.

Mjedenica st. 12

207

BOSNIACA 2025; 30: 197-212

Pismo Hamdije Kreševljakovića Carlu Patschu / Letter from Hamdija Kreševljaković to Carl Patch (Bayerisches Hauptstaatsarchiv, Südost-Institut, 276, 21. 1. 1939)

208

Maslo

Drugo pismo / Second letter

Veleučeni gospodine profesore!

Mi smo ovdje odlučili izdati Povijest Bosne od najstarijih vremena do 1918. godine. Trošak oko izdanja snosi društvo „Napredak“, a posebni odbor radi oko izdanja ove knjige. Pojedina poglavlja obradiće najbolji stručnjaci. I ja sam u tome Odboru i za rimsko doba u BiH predložio sam Vas kao jedinog pozvanog stručnjaka za ovo doba. I u ime odbora slobodan sam Vas najljepše zamoliti, da se primite ovog posla. Vi to možete napisati njemački, a mi ćemo to prevesti na hrvatski. Svaki će se rad lijepo honorisati. U prilogu Vam šaljem nacrt toga rada, koji Vi po volji možete izmijeniti. Nadam se, da nas ne ćete odbiti.

Mislim da ste primili moje „Vodovode“

S odličnim poštovanjem.

Vaš odani

H. Kreševljaković.

Sarajevo 29. V 1939.

Mjedenica ul 12.

Very learned Mr. Professor!

Here we have decided to publish the History of Bosnia from the earliest times to 1918. The cost of the publication is borne by the company “Napredak”, and a special committee is working on the publication of this book. Individual chapters will be covered by the best experts. I am also in that Committee and for the Roman era in BiH I proposed you as the only invited expert for this era. And on behalf of the board, I am free to ask you to accept this job. You can write it in German, and we will translate it into Croatian. Each work will be handsomely remunerated. I am sending you a draft of that paper in the attachment, which you can modify as you wish. I hope you will not refuse us.

I think you received my “Vodovodi”

With great respect.

Yours faithfully

H. Kreševljaković.

Sarajevo 29. V 1939.

Mjedenica st. 12.

209

BOSNIACA 2025; 30: 197-212

Pismo Hamdije Kreševljakoviću Carlu Patchu / Letter from Hamdija Kreševljaković to Carl Patch (Bayerisches Hauptstaatsarchiv, Südost-Institut, 276, 29. 5. 1939)

210

Maslo

Dodatak pismu s tekstom nacrta kako bi trebalo izgledati planirano poglavlje / Addition to a letter with the draft text of how the planned chapter should look

Izvori / Sources

Arhiv Hrvatske akademije nauka i umjetnosti (Arhiv HAZU), Osobni fond Ferde Šišića, 61 – XIII – A.

Arhiv UNSA-OIS, Arhiv Stari, Sidžili S 67, S 68.

Bayerisches Hauptstaatsarchiv (BayHStA), Südost-Insti- tut, 274.

Historijski arhiv Sarajevo (HAS), Osobni fond Hamdije

Kreševljakovića (O-HK-219)

Hrvatski Državni arhiv (HR-HDA), Josip Matasović – fond, 1059/11, br. 373.

Omerović, E. S., & Jacek Lis, T. (Ed.) (2023). Memoari Jelice Belović-Bernadzikowske (Ljube T. Daničić). Sarajevo: Univerzitet u Sarajevu – Institut za histo­riju, Historijski arhiv Sarajevo.

Štampa / Serials

Bošnjak (1909)

Napredak. Glasilo hrvatskog kulturnog društva Napre­dak (1938)

Novi Behar (1939/1940)

Objavljeni izvori / Published sources

Baric D. (Ed.) (2023). Die Lebenserinnerungen von Carl Patsch: Archaologie eines Lebens zwischen Böhmen und Bosnien. Berlin: Frank & Timme Ver­lag für wissenschaftliche Literatur.

Maslo, A. (Ed.) (2024). Pisma Hamdije Kreševljakovi- ća Muhamedu Hadžijahiću (1938–1959). Sarajevo: Historijski arhiv Sarajevo, Univerzitet u Sarajevu – Orijentalni institut

211

BOSNIACA 2025; 30: 197-212

Bibliografija / Bibliography

11(18), 250-266.

212