From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Template:Wikiproject Montenegro

[edit] Ignorance or just hipocrisy?

"the red color of the tepelak symbolises the blood of people who have fallen for freedom (Fallen Serbs of the Kosovo Battle) , the black symbolises sorrow for lost freedom (when Ottoman Turkey conquered Serbia), and five golden threads symbolise the five centuries spent under Ottoman Turkey."

OK, who the hell wrote this bunch of crap, and where do you see any damn logic in it? I'm really getting tired of people using Wikipedia to relieve their stress and express their extremist political beliefs...

• Blood of the people fallen for freedom? Ok, that's even somewhat rational.
• Sorrow because of lost freedom? If you've ever read a single history book about Montenegro, you would know that it was never fully conquered by the Ottomans (Serbia was, but this is not Serbian cap, is it?). So, why would people who have defended their freedom express sorrow about the freedom being lost. You contradict yourself, if you haven't noticed.
• Same as above, Serbians have been conquered for 500 years, not Montenegrins. Also, this cap had been worn a while before the Montenegrin-Ottoman fighting reached 500 years. Where's the logic there?

If I add that this is a blatant lie written by a SANU(Serbian Academy of Sciances and Arts) historian, you sort of get the picture about his motivation to write such an absurd "explanation of cap's symbolism". I can say that red symbolises, say, blood of Christ, to emphasize importance ofreligion in theocratic Montenegro of that time. Black symbolises Lovcen, the black mountain, the bastion of Montenegrin freedom, and 5 gold threads symbolise 5 crucial battles that help liberate the rest of the country of the Ottoman attackers. I just made that up, but even that makes more sense that this quasi-historian's invention mentioned in the article.

Also, Serbian cross on the cap... Don't get me started on that one... Sideshow Bob 23:31, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

I'd like to find the primary source for the symbolism too. Regarding the cross, you could note that there is one on the very cap belonging to Nikola I. Nikola 05:50, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I can see that, but those two caps have nothing to do with traditional Montenegrin cap, besides the shape... Sideshow Bob 13:04, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

...and the fact that they were worn by Montenegrin king and queen. Nikola 18:46, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

How can you say that this cap ISN'T Serbian? The montenegrins, until Tito, were Serbs, the defenders of Serbdom from Turks? You are muslim, Sideshow, all anti-serbs are albanians or bosnjaks from Sandzak and the Kosovo border —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nexm0d (talk • contribs) 15:44, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

---

Original research, Sideshow Bob; delete. --PaxEquilibrium 15:51, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

BTW just a short correction - Montenegro was under Turkish occupation since 1499 (mind the short-lived 1514-1528 Ottoman para-state and 1592-1614). It's true the Ottomans failed to run the whole "accursed hills" in the 16th century so that the nomadic Montenegrins have developed a certain sense of autonomy within the Ottoman Empire (regardless if Ottoman authority and bureaucracy didn't actually reach there afterwards), but it is only that in the mid-to-late 17th century the Montenegrins have become truly independent from the Ottomans with the help of the Venetians.

Another point: Serbia was under direct Ottoman occupation for not much more than 300 years, rather. --PaxEquilibrium 21:36, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Nice sources on this info...Now I'm going to write that Montenegrins are of Illyrian origin, and that Serbs are our centuries-long enemies and cite Montenegrina.net... Sometimes I wonder why I bother trying to write the truth when no one wants to see it or admit to it. Sideshow Bob 22:46, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Just to avoid confusion, my comment is referring to Paulcicero's recent edits on the article, not Pax's comment above. ;) Sideshow Bob 02:15, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

The reason I added the references were because obviously many montenegrins (pro-serb probably) think that its the truth. So instead of complaining about sources and trying to deny the serbian legacy in montenegro you could rewrite the article from a neutral pov, like "according to some sources the caps symbolsim refers to etc...........". You have to understand that just because you dont like something it doesnt automatically make it untrue. Paulcicero 17:57, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

This sounds to me like the "Samo sloga Srbina spasava" of the four Ocilles (Betas). --PaxEquilibrium 18:38, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

I asked personaly George the Guardian of Zeintilik (WWI cemetery near Thessaloniki) about Montenegrin cap and he told me that serbian cross was added AFTER UNIFICATION !Stefke 05:58, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

LOL, is that supposed to be a source for Wikipedia? ;) Also the Cross was on the cap of Nicholas from the 19th century...and that's far before. :D --PaxEquilibrium 20:50, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

BTW do you know who will suceed him (Djordje) ? Unfortunetely, he doesent have son. Stefke (talk) 22:19, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I was plenty times in the Serbian cemetery and don't get me wrong, but I am certain he could not have been that ignorant. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 11:38, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Connexion of Montenegrin cap with Lovcen chapel

Firstly chapel of Lovcen (build during prince Danilo) had shape of Montenegrin cap. It was badly damaged by thunderstorms and rain, so Prince Nicholas added bigger roof and lighting-conduct. He also added HI initials on cap for the proclamation of Kingdom, as well as tried to give caps with green top to Muslim population (these caps are very rare). King banned wearing traditional costumes to citizens because they were too much expensive and made poverty to the people. Chapel was bombed by the Austrians and Njegosh bones were transported to Cetinje. After Serbian occupation (or as they say "liberation") Montenegrin flags that Serbians captured were attaint, Royal elm Tree (which grew near every royal palace in Europe, symbolized ruling dynasty) was chopped down, Ivan’s bell (gift from Skenderbey, symbolized Albanian - Montenegrin and Muslim - Orthodox friendship) was smelted down and from that metal Serbs made hasps from it. Also all Montenegrin symbols, including caps with HI were banned and cap with 4 oscyls were introduced. Montenegrin church was abolished in 1922 with decree of Alexander I. The ruins of old chapel were totaly removed and new chapel was finished in 1927. And that's the only building built by Serbs (or Karadjordjevic dynasty). Only that new chapel had 2 circles in stead of originally one, symbolizing the unity. Also all caps had 4 oscyls. Even it was put on Kotor traditional cloathes! Latterly Tito destroyed that chapel (basis were dug so Lovcen become 7m shorter than it really was before) and now it is believed that original basis do not exist at all. In fact original caps had 5 curved golden lines, and caps for female had small flover. All rest caps, are (i'll use German word kitsch to describe it).

King Nicholas cap is the unique one. Well indeed there are 4 oscyls, ass seen on this page [[1]] , but that was not on the top. Nichola had ambitions were to become King of united Serbia and Montenegro (during rule of Karadjordjevics in Serbia) or Duke of Montenegro in Serbian Kingdom (during rule of Obrenovics). He wanted to suceed his grandson but ... history was different and cruel. Even perjanik guard (since Njegosh) had special design, with fleather. However the popular one cap had strong connexions with the chapel.

Stefke (talk) 22:19, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Several corrections. Firstly, it is the angry Cetinjans (mostly belonging to the Whites) that in an angry mob moved to the center of the town and tore apart the Flag of Montenegro. It was a result of the anger created after the siege the Greens conducted during the Christmas Insurgence. But what many keep forgetting and misinterpreting / misusing in an effort to depict some ethnic-based conflict between Serb(ian)s and Montenegrins, is that that flag was also a Serb tricolor as much the flag of Serbia, as well as the fact that it is the Montenegrins who did that themselves, an act aimed against the Crown, which they saw as an oppressor (similar to the view of a huge quantity of the people on the King in 1945 in Yugoslavia).

Second of all, I see you have basically taken that content from Jevrem Brkovic, and he is, as we know, a very controversial dude. Especially unreliable as he makes some far fetched claims, and especially spreads total ignorance when he talks about the Montenegrin cap. I admit that, if true (I am checking right now), the melting of a historical and cultural monument important not just to Montenegrins, but Serbs in general too, seems horrible - and from that comes the first drop of my doubt in the event. The normal thing to do is put it into a Museum. But this brings me back to the next issue:

No structure built except the Lovcen Chapel? Well, The Cetinje Monastery didn't have a real Bell Tower at all. It was constructed as a personal endowment of Alexander in 1924 and 1925 - this explains the removal of Ivan's bell, but its destruction is incomprehensible to me.

Regarding the abolition of the Montenegrin Church, it wasn't abolished by decree of Alexander in 1922, this was discussed before. There was a long process from 1918 to 1922 of construction and reunification of the Serbian Orthodox Church with long and arduous negotiations, in which the Montenegrin Church's delegation was the most centrist and - which even led the process itself! The unification was by sanctioned by Alexander as the acting Head of State, approved by all other Churches, including the Holy Synod of the Serb-Orthodox Church in Montenegro, and even looked upon in such manner by King Nicholas. Anyway, as I said, this was discussed before.

As for cutting down the tree, I shall look, but what does any of this have to do with - Montenegrin Caps?

Brkovic is outright false, and maybe Nicholas pointed that out because of his pretensions (which weren't, BTW, any different than any of his seven dynastic predecessors for more than two centuries, or successor), but fact is that it was used before. I've in the meantime paid visits to the National Museums of Montenegro and Belgrade, and found four "typical Montenegrin caps", dated to the 19th century, all having that very symbol. And in general, like I say, this is fallaciously used as an attempt to point out that the Serbians have intentionally put that on Montenegrin heads for assimilation - this could be considered true, if really occurred in 1918 for the first time, but it didn't - aside the fact that only national-romantics tie the symbol to the Serbs and that it was present on not any other "Serb" cap - not in Serbian, not in Herzegovinian, Lika, or any of the many Vojvodinians. To add further, there are numerous pictures and event depictings from the late 19th and early 20th century that show how the very national-romanticism wording "Only Unity Saves the Serbs" was massively used in Montenegro on all kinds of celebrations etc...the symbol on caps is a logical extension to that. Another example is that the flag of the coastal Grbalj clan was a Serb tricolor with those very ornaments in its center. And in connection to the origins and oldest times of the symbol (before the national-romantic invented connotations) can in be seen perhaps in the Coat of Arms of Tsar Stephen the Little? Or even older, remember what was / is the Coat of Arms of the Orlović brotherhood? A darker one-headed eagle with the "Serb Shield" on its chest. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 12:30, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The Geographical Journal

This is according to this publishing of the Royal Geographical Society (The Geographical Journal) of the Institute of British Geographers. I have Number 5, Volume IV in my possession, from November of 1894. The article is called "Montenegro and its borderlands" and was written by W. H. Cozens-Hardy, M.A.

“

On the head is worn the peculiar Montenegrin cap. This is small and circular, black on the sides as a sign of mourning for the overthrow of the old Servian kingdom at the battle of Kosovo 500 years ago; red on the top to signify the blood shed to avert that defeat; while in addition to the letters "N.I." i.e "Nicholas the First", the gold semicircle of a rising sun denotes the ultimate triumph of a new Servian power.

”

So it might not just be a plain myth invented in the 20th century... --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 17:43, 12 June 2008 (UTC)