Ottoman heritage in Serbia on a cultural route: students’ attitudes

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.7160/KS.2024.220104

Author: Aleksandra Terzić
Address: Geographical Institute „Jovan Cvijić“, Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts, Djure Jakšića 9, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia
E-mail: a.terzic@gi.sanu.ac.rs
Author: Željko Bjeljac
Address: Geographical Institute „Jovan Cvijić“, Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts, Djure Jakšića 9, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia
Author: Nevena Ćurčić
Address: Faculty of Science, University of Novi Sad, Dositej Obradović Square 3, 21000 Novi Sad, Serbia
Language: English
Issue: 1/2024 (22)
Page Range: 90-119
No. of Pages: 30
Keywords: Ottoman heritage, cultural route, tourism, Serbia, student perceptions.

Abstract: Cultural heritage is an important part of the cultural identity of any nation. The care of cultural heritage includes the protection and preservation of the material heritage of the majority nation and the heritage of all other ethnic communities that have left their cultural traces in the area under consideration. The protection of cultural heritage reflects the maturity of a society. That’s why the approach to the protection of cultural monuments should not be selective, narrow and strictly national, but comprehensive, preserving the cultural values of earlier eras and peoples as a general civilisational asset. The research aims to reveal how today’s youth perceive the Ottoman heritage in Serbia, their emotional relationship with it, and whether they recognise the Ottoman heritage as a possible resource for tourism in Serbia. The results indicate that the student population perceives the positive aspects of the Ottoman era in this region, as reflected in the legacy of Oriental culture and the multi-ethnic and multicultural order, to a large extent. Architectural heritage, gastronomy and intangible heritage (language and literature, legends, music, dances, traditions) are largely recognised as representative of the Ottoman cultural heritage and foreign influences on national culture. Their potential for tourism has also been recognised. However, the possible obstacles in the development process of the cultural route are foreseen in strong nationalism and negative collective memory, which were identified as key barriers.

Dr. Aleksandra Terzić is a senior researcher at the Geographical Institute „Jovan Cvijić“ of the Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts, specialising in social and cultural geography with a focus on tourism and cultural resource management. She completed her Ph.D. at the University of Novi Sad in 2012 and is the author of two books and over 100 articles. She is the President of the Tourismologists Association of Serbia since 2021.

Dr. Željko Bjeljac heads the Department of Social Geography at the Geographical Institute „Jovan Cvijić“, SASA, in Belgrade, focusing on tourism geography, historical geography and cultural heritage tourism. He is the author of five monographs and numerous scientific papers and is active in various international cultural and tourism organisations.

Prof. Dr. Nevena Ćurčić has been a full professor at the Department of Geography, Tourism and Hotel Management at the University of Novi Sad since 2018, and has also taught at the Faculty of Geography in Belgrade. Her areas of expertise include marketing and management in tourism, cultural tourism and sustainable development. She has published over 120 scientific articles, one scientific monograph, two textbooks and has participated in numerous international projects.

Celý příspěvek / Full Text Paper: PDF

1. Introduction

Cultural heritage is often used to construct, reconstruct, and harmonise different identities, as it inevitably carries different social and cultural meanings from the past and present^[1]. The contemporary international image of the Balkans, whether political, cultural or tourist, is inextricably linked to long-standing discourses and emotionally charged perceptions of space and heritage^[2]. The Balkans are associated with the image of the most “oriental” part of Europe, while Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia, Macedonia and Bulgaria are seen as the most „oriental“ European countries.^[3] Here, “oriental culture” refers to the adoption of the specific cultural model that penetrated these areas during Ottoman rule (15-19th centuries).

According to Lazarević Radak[4], stereotypes, emotionally coloured representations of events, narratives, discourses, representations, as well as models of behaviour in times of crisis, but also in times of peace, can be depicted on a map of the world, on which the Balkans are marked as a particularly problematic area. There are well-rehearsed ‚grand narratives‘ that project a distinct Balkan identity, with narratives of war, death and national survival particularly prominent.[5] Stojanović and Djordjevic[6] believe that ongoing political and ethnic tensions contribute to the entrenchment of deep nationalism and obsession with the past, which is a very pronounced feature of Balkan societies, especially Serbia.

Given the dynamic cultural processes that have taken place in the Balkans from prehistory to the present day, and the absolute dominance of the Ottomans in the region for about five centuries (from the Middle Ages to modern history), the role of the Ottoman legacy in the wider Balkan region is particularly highlighted. However, as it has deeply disrupted the process of defining the national identity of all the contemporary Balkan states, it is marked as a highly dissonant legacy.[7] In a historical context, the entire period of Ottoman rule and the legacy that resulted from it evokes a dominant traumatic sense of defeat, shame and unease that stems from the long-term vassal position of Serbs and other Christian peoples within the Ottoman Empire. At the same time, it generates a sense of national pride, defiance and general sacrifice for the country and the Christian faith, which also defines contemporary society’s relationship with this heritage.

Nevertheless, we can speak of numerous remnants of the tangible and intangible heritage of the Ottoman civilisation in this area, even if it is somewhat marginalised and in some cases almost invisible to the general public. This heritage carries with it complex social, ideological and political contexts that are deeply inscribed in the national identities of the Balkan peoples. Such negative perceptions slow down reconciliation and limit the practical application of multiculturalism in the Balkans in general and in Serbia in particular.

One of the very few socially acceptable contexts in which dissonant heritage, such as Ottoman heritage in Europe, is enthusiastically considered by the general public is its economic function, outlining its potential for tourism valorisation, primarily on the international market. Cultural tourism affects the local population through numerous complementary services, the revival of local traditions and the positioning of minority groups, outlining a broader role of cultural heritage. The development of the Ottoman Cultural Route can be seen as an attempt to revise the symbolic geography of the Balkans and to affirm the common heritage that unites the region. Even though such heritage in these areas was often neglected, unwanted, purposefully destroyed, or simply neglected and thrown into oblivion, it inevitably connects the region[8].

The “Sultan’s Trail – a European cultural route”[9], established a long-distance (2500 km) walking and cycling route on the theme of Ottoman heritage. Given the controversial nature of Ottoman heritage in Europe, this international project is extremely ambitious and complex.[10] A large part of this cultural route passes through Serbia, making it the central part of the corridor through which the historic caravan/military route between Istanbul (Constantinople) and Vienna (Western Europe) passed.[11] The active participation of Serbia in the process of creation and development of this cultural route is considered important not only for the future development of tourism, but also for the revitalisation of the rich Ottoman heritage that can be found in this country.

This research aims to determine the presence, importance and public attitudes towards the Ottoman heritage in Serbia and the potential for its revitalisation and tourism affirmation through inclusion in the cultural route, the “Sultan’s Trail”. The theoretical framework includes a qualitative and quantitative analysis of the attitudes of the Serbian population, with a particular focus on the national discourse and dimensions of national culture that contain some oriental elements or are in direct opposition to it. The quantitative analysis included a student survey on the perception of the Ottoman heritage represented in the national space. Several hypotheses were constructed in this line:

H1: Ottoman heritage is present in the national space and national discourse.

H2: Ottoman heritage is perceived in Serbia as dissonant (identity problematic) of wider cultural significance, and as such produces specific emotional responses.

H3: Ottoman heritage in Serbia has the potential to be used for tourism through the creation of cultural routes.

2. Contested heritage as a common heritage

Memory is not a passive repository of culture, but part of its contextual creation mechanism, a social construct that shapes identity and a component of contemporary politics.^[12]   Collective memory refers to mnemohistory, to engaging with the past as it is remembered, because the past is not simply ‚received’ by the present; it is modelled, invented, reinvented and reconstructed, because the present is constantly ‚haunted‘ by the past.^[13] “National historiography is a construct, not a reality”^[14] as history looks different depending on the perspective, as collective memories of various social groups are multiple and even contradictory. Their transfer into cultural memory, on the other hand, depends mostly on the distribution of power. Cultural memory is an institutionalised and symbolically mediated memory with an integrative social function in the creation of national identity.^[15] The creation of cultural memory, as well as national identity, is based on the active selection and codification of cultural expressions, transforming them into manageable symbols of representation and argumentation, often involving the suppression of some inappropriate and/or sensitive content. Different regimes create arenas for competing political and economic interests that seek to appropriate viable heritage resources, while preservation is simultaneously concerned with the politics of inclusion and exclusion.[16] Nevertheless, heritage remains an abstraction and what it means is subject to interpretation and evaluation, which can vary between positive and negative over time and space.

Heritage is a specific social construct resulting from a selective interpretation of the past as a form of collective memory shaped by current political, economic and social circumstances. Kisić^[17] points out that heritage is increasingly perceived as both a threat and a means of creating intercultural dialogue. Heritage can be a unifying and divisive factor at the same time, depending on one’s position and current perception, and can be both the source and the result of conflict.

Previous research primarily dealt with heritage destruction and memorialization via the construction of monuments, in the process of dealing with the violent past as a precondition for reconciliation. Dissonant heritage represents the variety of competing or opposing meanings associated with heritage, which causes disagreements in the interpretation and presentation of the past^[18]. The revision of the past generally implies the reinterpretation in accordance with the current political situation, while cultural policies dictate the raising and revitalization of the heritage through consultative processes and compromising solutions[19].

Image 1: The Turk from European perspective: figurine and painting from Styria, 16th century.

Source: City Museum of Graz, Austria; Author’s photos.

3. Ottoman heritage in Serbia

The Ottoman heritage in Serbia is undoubtedly dissonant, as it has a specific symbolic meaning and occupies an important place in the national identity of the Serbian people. The Ottoman heritage in Serbia is also ambiguous, as the strict boundaries between Ottoman and national heritage are very difficult to draw. This heritage can be understood as a relic of foreign cultural influence in a purely “Ottoman/oriental” form, or, more often, as a modified symbiotic form of mutual influence between local folk and foreign culture. The Ottoman (Oriental-Islamic) culture, due to its long coexistence with the Christian (Slavic) culture, led to its general social acceptance and domestication on the soil of present-day Serbia. What’s more, it even became an inseparable part of the cultural superstructure of the Serbian people.^[20] As Baćićanin^[21] the interweaving of two distant cultures is logical in cases where peoples with different languages, scripts, religions and traditions share a common space for several centuries. Such interaction and intermingling of cultures creates a new cultural model with elements that are close and memorable to both nations, creating lasting ties between them. However, the collective memory of the Ottoman rule in general brings back “dark and painful” memories and places the national thought in a direct and very strong confrontation.

The Ottoman Empire (1299-1922) encompassed and controlled all of south-eastern Europe for a considerable period of time. Conquests in the Balkans, which began in 1354, marked the Ottomans‘ entry into Europe. The establishment of the Ottoman Empire was a direct cause of the end of the Byzantine Empire in 1453, one of the greatest traumas in European history.^[22] For Serbia, which gained its independence in 1166 and became a kingdom in 1217 under the Nemanjić dynasty, the loss of independence was particularly painful. Two events were particularly significant: the Battle of Kosovo in 1389, which marked the loss of independence, and the final fall of the state capital of Smederevo in 1459, after which Serbia became an integral part of the Ottoman Empire for centuries. Despite continued latent resistance, Serbia regained full autonomy only after two major Serbian uprisings (1804-1813, 1815-1817) in 1830.^[23]

Similar to the deep-rooted pan-European image of the ‚threatening Turk‘, which reflected the fear of a ruthless enemy, an invader of their lands^[24], this image had an even greater role in Serbia. It was the foundation on which Serbian national identity was built, as the “Turkish yoke” became an inseparable part of Serbian national identity, based on the antagonistic relationship with the Ottomans.^[25] The well-known Serbian “Kosovo myth” had a particular symbolic function, as the tragic defeat in the Kosovo battle took on a religious connotation, in which “Serbia has reached the kingdom of heaven” and the historical defeat was celebrated as a national (ideological) victory.^[26]

Image 2: Ottoman heritage in Niš, Serbia (hammam and mosque within Niš fortress (upper left and right), Skull tower (lower left and right); Source: photos by curtesy of Max Smits, Sultan’s Trail Foundation

The “Kosovo myth” took the crown in Serbian epic poetry and became the driving force behind the entire Serbian national movement in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.^[27] The rebellious nature of the Serbian people, inscribed in the popularity of “hajduks and uskoks” (outlaws who sporadically acted as freedom fighters), gained heroic status through oral tradition from the 17th to the late 19th century^[28] and eventually played a decisive role in the liberation struggles against Ottoman rule.

Image 3. The Battle of Kosovo, 1953. by Petar Lubarda (1907-1974).

Source: Gallery of Matica Srpska, Author’s Photo, 2023.

As Todorović^[29] points out, the biggest problem in promoting Ottoman heritage in Serbia is the negative association people have with the Ottoman period, which is seen as a “dark age”, the period of the mythical “Turkish yoke”, based mostly on collective memory and much less on historical facts. The history of the Ottoman Empire is closely intertwined with and an integral part of Serbian history, which people in Serbia tend to ignore.^[30] Understanding the Ottoman legacy and influence is an important aspect of Serbian culture and society, but even today, researching, understanding and promoting the Ottoman heritage faces many problems, stemming from the general and deeply inscribed perception of the Ottomans as a negative “other”.^[31] As “the Serbian public wants to distance itself from the Ottomans, or better still, forget the Ottoman period altogether”, public institutions and museums are helping them to achieve this goal.^[32] Strong nationalist views still prevail in Serbia, and any mention of the Ottoman heritage is met with strong opposition and rejection.

Apart from its fundamental social role, cultural heritage also plays an important role in political interests. The official politics of memory in contemporary Serbia operates within a populist framework and focuses on the dichotomy of heroism and victimhood, creating national narratives of the glorious past, with a clear glorification of the medieval Serbian state and an emphasis on the Kosovo myth. These narratives are presented in formal and informal education through history, epic folk poetry, popular legends and even film production. The nationalist colouring of the official discourse related to the period of Ottoman rule over Serbia largely reflects traumatic collective memories (e.g. the Battle of Kosovo, the blood tribute, the beheading of princes, taxes, slavery and atrocities, punishments, impalements, etc.), questioning individual and collective traumas with personal connections to the events in terms of identity.^[33] These narratives have been frequently used and abused in recent political discourses, with an obvious glorification of the Kosovo myth, which has been popular among the Serbian masses for centuries.^[34] It is a recurring theme in public discourse and has been particularly highlighted by the protracted crisis in Kosovo (since 1999)^[35], to which the Serbian public is particularly sensitive, as it still appears as an open wound. Still, in contemporary political conflicts, historical narratives are used in different contexts and with different goals^[36], causing the destruction of the material and immaterial forms of Ottoman heritage dispersed on the territory of Serbia. The destruction and obliteration of memory has been extensive and continuous in the past, with the most intensive destruction of Islamic heritage in Belgrade and Serbia since the second half of the 19th century,^[37] after the liberation. Then, with a few exceptions, it took the more discreet form of public neglect and decontextualisation.

For example, the town of Kruševac, founded in 1371 as the medieval capital of Prince Lazar Hrebeljanović, leader of the Serbian army in the decisive “Battle of Kosovo” against the Ottoman Sultan Murat I, is celebrated in Serbian history and collective memory.  It is symbolic of national identity and local pride. The city’s long Ottoman historical significance as “Aladža Hisar”, from 1427/1455 – 1833, has been lost, with the systematic destruction of public buildings, mosques, hammams, and the complete neglect of their archaeological remains. Five public fountains still visible in the medieval suburb of Kruševac are obviously of Ottoman origin, but they were all renamed in the national spirit. [38]

Image 4. Remains of old hammam (left) and old post-office (menzulana) in Kruševac;

Source: Author’s photos, 2024

The Ottoman heritage on the territory of Serbia and the Balkans can be seen in the material remains of mosques, bridges, fortresses, caravanserais, hammams and ethnographic artefacts, many of which have not been archaeologically explored, as well as in intangible forms (customs, legends, music, gastronomy, etc.).^[39] Ottoman cultural influences are present in folk architectural styles, furniture, national costumes, the use of Turkish words, etc. Contrary to the fate of the material remains of the Ottoman heritage, the intangible heritage and cultural influences in the Balkans were considered more socially acceptable and as such have largely been preserved to this day.^[40] Pišev^[41] points to the presence and even dominance of the “oriental” cultural taste of the contemporary world, which occupies a significant place in the popular culture of the Balkan countries, revealing a specific unity of national taste and close ties with Turkish culture.^[42] Turkish television began to develop productions as a soft tool of non-governmental public diplomacy to represent Turkey internationally, while popular TV series such as “The Magnificent Century” helped to erase the negative impression of Turkey left by the Ottomans in the Balkans.^[43]

More recently, diplomatic relations between Serbia and Turkey have intensified, as investment in the revitalisation of Ottoman heritage in Serbia through TIKA activities can be observed. Such activities are reflected, for example, in the renovation of the mosque in Sjenica, the restoration of the Sokoli Mehmed Pasha fountain and the Damat Ali Pasha tunnel in the Kalemegdan fortress in Belgrade, the reconstruction of the Ram fortress, the preservation of the Muhadzir mosque in Subotica, etc. Despite the increased care and foreign investment in the preservation and revitalisation of Ottoman heritage in Serbia in the last decade, this heritage still needs to be addressed by professionals, creators of national policies. However, Turkey’s contemporary political visions for re-establishing regional dominance in the Balkans must be taken into account in this process.^{[44] [45]}

The Ottoman heritage on the territory of Serbia can and should be an important resource for highlighting multiculturalism. Such heritage, whether authentically “Turkish” or national with “oriental admixtures”, directly or indirectly linked to the Ottoman past, should be preserved and given social, educational, cultural and tourism-related functions. Tourism has an important role to play in the interpretation and management of dissonant heritage, with particular emphasis on its ideological meanings and influence on collective memory. The narrative power of tourism lies in its freedom to invent, adapt and erase problematic national historiographies,^[46] which is particularly important in post-conflict societies where myths and nostalgic references are more distant in time and less problematic pasts are renewed while the difficult issues are deliberately avoided.^[47] Its special function lies in its ability to use narrative to guide the audience towards certain attitudes and moral judgements.^[48]

3.1. Methodology

The study is part of a wider international research project carried out within the Sultan’s Trail academic network, in collaboration with academics and tourism professionals from several countries (Austria, Slovakia, Hungary, Croatia, Bulgaria, Serbia, Northern Macedonia).^[49] The questionnaire was prepared and students were defined as the first target group. The choice was based on the assumption that the attitudes of students reflect the general attitudes towards the value and importance of the Ottoman heritage in the country, despite a slightly more positive perception. The online survey was conducted in the period December 2020 – March 2021 and distributed through the academic network to universities in Serbia (Belgrade, Novi Sad, Niš, Kragujevac). Although based on non-probability sampling (snowball effect), the sample consisted of a variety of students from different regions of Serbia.

The questionnaire was divided into five sections with a total of 27 questions. It included standard socio-demographic structure of respondents (gender, age, nationality, place and country of residence, religion, university, profession and level of study). Different aspects of heritage and its tourism potential were explored.

Analytical methods. All questions were coded and the collected data were subjected to descriptive statistical analysis using IBM SPSS Statistics (Statistical Package for Social Sciences). The responses to the questions were presented as means on a five-point Linkert scale and as frequencies expressed as percentages.

Sample characteristics. A total of 140 duly completed questionnaires were received from the largest university centres in Serbia (Belgrade: 41, Novi Sad: 52, Niš: 44). The sample consisted of 77.1% undergraduate students, 13.6% masters students and 9.3% doctoral students, with a slight predominance of students of social sciences and humanities (45.7%) and tourism (33.6%), followed by students of technical sciences (10.7%), natural sciences (5.7%) and business and administration (4.3%). The majority (95%) declared themselves to be of Serbian nationality. Logically, Christian religious affiliation dominates (77.1%), followed by non-religious respondents (20%), while only 0.7% were members of Islamic religious groups and 2.1% belonged to other religious denominations. There is a clear predominance of female respondents in the sample (70%) compared to 30% of male respondents. The age structure of the sample was largely uniform, with 78.6% of respondents aged between 18 and 25, while 20% were slightly older (26-40) and only two people (1.4%) were over 40.

4. Results and discussion

4.1. Emotional colouring of the Ottoman heritage in Serbia

History and heritage interpretation play an important role in understanding the emotional connection between people and heritage, which should be given special attention.^[50] Lazarević Radak^[51] argues that although emotions are inseparable from everyday life, space and events, the formal understanding of history renders it neutral, universal, apolitical and thus free of specific values and emotions. However, heritage inevitably produces emotional effects, although these are generally rejected, avoided, suppressed or reduced in accordance with acceptable social norms.^[52]

Graph 1. Basic association with Ottoman heritage within national scopes in Serbia (* multiple answers allowed).

The survey shows that around 60% of Serbian students have neutral feelings about the Ottoman heritage in their country. Extremely negative attitudes are held by only 4.3%, while predominantly negative attitudes are held by 13.6% of respondents. Positive attitudes are held by 17.1% of students, while extremely positive attitudes are held by only 5% of Serbian students. Statistical tests based on Pearson’s square showed no statistically significant differences in the attitudes of the respondents depending on their gender (p=0.300), age (p=0.658), professional orientation (p=0.314) or university (p=0.744). The described neutrality of the respondents is probably due to a high degree of conformity of their attitudes to a “socially acceptable model of behaviour”. However, it may indicate that the popularisation and affirmation of this particular type of heritage may face certain problems in Serbia, especially among the less educated part of society.

This heritage evokes specific associations among Serbian youth, mainly related to oriental culture (53.6%) and multiethnic/multicultural heritage (37.9%) (Graph 1); neutral attitudes are reflected in the recognition of it as the legacy of a specific social order and Islamic religion, acknowledged by one third of respondents, while the other third of respondents marked negative associations related to the legacy of war and terror. The negative connotation of Ottoman rule was widely contained in formal and informal education, but also in family historiographies. As Gligorijević^[53] points out, the close and strong historical and cultural ties with the Turks have been expressed throughout history in certain conflictual relationships. It contributes to the specific positioning of the Ottoman heritage in Serbia, which carries predominantly negative connotations. These rigid attitudes have been somewhat softened by intensive propagators of cultural diplomacy, who focus on the positive aspects, such as oriental culture, gastronomy, popular Turkish music and TV series, which stimulate associations with the allure of oriental Istanbul and Suleiman the Magnificent, explained by intensive tourist contacts between Turks and Serbs.^[54]

4.2. Ottoman heritage and its cultural significance

Interestingly, the recognition of the Ottoman heritage as one’s own or shared heritage at the regional level is mostly positive, with this heritage being identified as a common heritage within the Balkans. To a lesser extent, it is recognised as part of national culture and identity in Serbia. The latent understanding of the Balkans, and of Serbia as part of it, is contextually located in an intermediate space oscillating between East and West. In the local population’s perception of identity, a specific identification with the “Balkan”, but also with the European cultural model, appears in parallel.^[55]

Graph 2. Types of Ottoman heritage present in Serbia (* multiple answers allowed).

In the understanding of Serbian national culture, there is a conflict between two cultural influences that is almost impossible to resolve. In this line, the Ottoman heritage is seen as a regional characteristic, while there is an apparent antagonism between the Ottoman and the national heritage. According to the results of the survey, about 64.3% of the students recognise the Ottoman heritage as a common heritage in Serbia. The identification of it as a common cultural aspect of Balkan identity is even more pronounced, with 73.6% positive responses. This heritage is much less recognised as a common European heritage (47.2%), with pronounced neutrality (32.9%), compared to neutrality in the same as a common ‚Balkan‘ (18.6%) or ‚Serbian‘ (21.4%) heritage. This attitude is shared by all countries in the region when it comes to the Ottoman heritage.^[56]

Most respondents believe that the architectural heritage from the Ottoman period is representative and recognisable in this area (77.1%). A significant proportion of respondents recognise the influence and importance of Ottoman gastronomy on Serbian national cuisine (51%), followed by intangible heritage reflected in language, literature, music, folk dances and customs (49%). Memorial sites associated with important events and personalities are also recognisable and strongly linked to national identity (45%). Ottoman heritage in religious places, customs and museum artefacts is much less recognised. When asked whether they know if there are some important examples of Ottoman heritage in Serbia, 60% of students believe that such sites exist, 32.9% do not know and 7.1% state that there are no such sites in Serbia.

Regarding the state of protection of the Ottoman heritage in Serbia, 42.8% of the students think that these sites are protected to some extent (12.1% think that they are well protected), 41.4% do not know in what physical state these heritage sites are, 12.9% stated that they are insufficiently protected, while 2.9% described them as very neglected or completely destroyed (Graph 3).

Graph 3. The state of Ottoman heritage in Serbia

Although the international postulates for the protection of cultural heritage are based on respect for diversity and mutual understanding and cooperation, the policy of ethno-cultural self-sufficiency still prevails in Serbia.^[57] Milenković^[58] points out that the process of selecting the heritage to be protected is in fact a political act, defined within the framework of national interest. In the process, heritage is also shaped, designed and, to a certain extent, recreated. Certain heritage sites only gain national relevance when foreign investors show an interest in protecting them. Such initiatives in relation to Ottoman heritage in Serbia can be observed in the activities of the Turkish Agency for International Cooperation and Development – TIKA, which has financially supported the reconstruction of many Ottoman heritage sites in Serbia (in Valjevo, Novi Pazar, Niš, Ram, Sjenica and Belgrade). Andrić’s findings^[59] show that the majority of young people in Serbia agree that the cultural heritage of all historical periods should be restored, and it doesn’t matter who pays for it.

4.3. Development perspectives of a cultural route of Ottoman heritage in Serbia

The trend towards the diversification of the tourist offer worldwide, especially in Europe, is reflected in the more intensive formation of various cultural routes and itineraries. Cultural routes are unique networks of spatially, historically and thematically linked heritage sites within a defined geographical area, developed with the aim of enhancing their attractiveness through a variety of tourist offers and experiences.^[60] In the process of creating such a complex tourist product, taking into account the public reluctance (going as far as open hatred) towards this type of heritage on the national territory, it is essential to assess the preconditions and public attitudes towards its tourist affirmation. In working out the overall potential for the creation of a cultural route of Ottoman heritage in Europe, it is necessary to take into account that a large part of the route passes through Serbia, being aware of the dissonance that this heritage carries in the collective memory of the Serbian people. In this regard, the survey shows that about 40% of Serbian students believe that the creation of such a tourist route is generally acceptable, 40% maintained a neutral position, while 20% of respondents find such a cultural route in Serbia unacceptable.

Graph 4. Have you ever visited any Ottoman heritage site in Serbia or abroad?

Despite the apparent lack of interest, over 81% of the students surveyed visited Ottoman heritage sites in Serbia, most of them (51.4%) during the educational process – excursions, 29.6% on tourist trips, 10.6% of the respondents never visited such heritage sites, while 8.5% could not remember visiting such heritage sites. Only 19.6% of the respondents have visited some sites related to the Ottoman period in other countries during the educational process, while many have visited such sites during their tourist travels (40.5%). About a third of respondents have never visited Ottoman heritage sites abroad, while 11.5% cannot recall such visits (Graph 4).

Graph 5. Are you interested in visiting the Ottoman heritage?

The overall interest in visiting and experiencing Ottoman heritage sites within the national territory is positive, with 80.7% of the respondents showing interest in such heritage sites, while 12.9% of the students were unsure. In comparison, only 6.5% of the students showed no interest. Similar responses can be observed with regard to Ottoman heritage sites in other European countries, where 81.5% of respondents have a positive opinion, 15% are undecided, and only 3.6% are very reluctant to rate such sites as valuable and interesting (Graph 5). The majority of the respondents (87.9%) consider the Ottoman heritage to be suitable for tourist presentation and commercialisation at different levels: 42.8% fully support commercialisation, 45% consider commercialisation to be acceptable at a certain level, 9.3% are neutral and only 2.9% think that such heritage sites should not be exploited for tourism.

A crucial aspect for the development of the Cultural Route is the existence of a critical mass of tangible and intangible cultural heritage, either authentic Ottoman heritage or syncretic, directly or indirectly related to Ottoman cultural influences. The existence of such heritage in Serbia is confirmed by the fact that 60.7% of respondents acknowledged the existence of tangible heritage, while 32.1% acknowledged the existence of intangible Ottoman heritage. Furthermore, realistic possibilities for combining Ottoman heritage with other cultural and historical heritage on the territory of Serbia were outlined by 48.6% and, to a lesser extent, with the country’s natural resources (19.3%) (Graph 6).

Graph 6. Predispositions for the creation of a cultural route of the Ottoman heritage in Serbia (* multiple answers allowed).

Favourable conditions for the development of such a cultural route are the perceived general interest of foreign (32.9%) and domestic (22.1%) tourists in such tourist products and, in this line, the perceived interest of local tourist entrepreneurs (30.7%) (Graph 6). Such an attitude is also expressed by Maričić, who points out that Serbia is an interesting destination for foreign tourists, with a significant participation of Turkish tourists, including those who come on the specialised tours “Traces of our Empire”.^[61] The lack of adequate tourist infrastructure can be a major constraint for the development of the cultural route, while several students pointed out the lack of such heritage in attractive areas and, in particular, the lack of knowledge about the existence of such heritage and the low interest of domestic tourists and local communities in the preservation of Ottoman heritage. A significant proportion of the respondents expressed a neutral attitude (35%) with regard to possible obstacles in the development of cultural routes with an Ottoman theme. Among those who expressed their opinion, 22.9% do not see any major obstacles, 21.4% see some minor obstacles, while 20% of the students point out the major obstacles that could hinder the development of such cultural routes (Graph 6).

Table 1. What should be in the focus of cultural route of Ottoman heritage?

Despite continuous efforts, Serbia still lacks an effective sustainable development policy, which is particularly evident in the development of destinations based on cultural resources, which often lack proper management, stable funding and monitoring. In addition, the role of the state in heritage protection is extremely strong, leading to bureaucracy, inertia and the exclusion of local communities from the decision-making process.^[62] When asked whether they would personally support the development of a cultural route based on the Ottoman heritage in Europe (including Serbia), 66.4% of the respondents gave a positive answer, 17.1% of the students were undecided, while 16.5% of the students had a negative attitude (8.6% strongly opposed the idea, while 7.9% would rather not get personally involved). According to the general opinion of Serbian students, such a cultural route should focus on the cultural interaction of different nations within the Ottoman Empire in Europe (51.1%). A third of the respondents think that the basic theme should focus exclusively on the Ottoman cultural heritage (30.5%), only 3% think that it would be good to focus on Islamic religious sites and practices, while 12.6% think that it should focus on both Islamic and Christian religious sites (Table 1).

5. Discussion and conclusion

The cultural and historical heritage of a given area is an important part not only of the identity but also of the daily life of the local population. The protection and conservation of cultural heritage and the promotion of related tourism activities focus on the role and general attitudes of local communities, on whom the sustainability of cultural heritage largely depends.^[63] Mihajlović^[64] outlines that the key to understanding the cultural identity of the Balkans lies in the concept of the “Balkan destiny”, which is conditioned by its location, soil and blood, and from which, despite the dynamic shifts on the historical stage, it continues.

Foley and Lennon^[65] argue that although recent historical events tend to be more traumatic than earlier ones, it is important to note the symbolic potential of historically distant events and places in fuelling political, religious and ethnic tensions. The basic elements of Serbian nationalism are reflected precisely in the antagonistic attitude towards the Ottoman heritage, which is reflected in the collective memory of conquest, subordination, terror, suffering and heroic sacrifice until the final national liberation.^[66]

Nevertheless, the remnants of Ottoman cultural influences on the national culture of the Serbs and other Balkan peoples are evident and socially accepted. This is particularly true of gastronomy, folklore and some ethnological features, where Ottoman influences are evident. The survey confirmed the initial assumptions about the presence and incorporation of the Ottoman heritage in the identity context of the Serbian people. In fact, this heritage represents a dissonant legacy that projects certain emotional reactions. These are often perceived as ‚negative‘, but are somewhat mitigated by media influences and social norms. As a result, neutral perceptions of the Ottoman heritage prevail among Serbian youth. Pronounced negative attitudes are present among 17.9% of respondents. The problem of spatial emotionality of the Balkans is inseparable from contemporary efforts to integrate the European image of “happiness and security” by excluding antagonistic components such as “oriental backwardness and aggressiveness of the Balkan peoples”. There are tendencies to exclude these undesirable components from the national image by transferring them to a wider regional context. However, this is not a recognisable aspect in the wider European context.

The physical presence of significant cultural-historical resources of this type on the territory of Serbia is obvious and they are recognised as interesting for tourist visits. At the same time, knowledge about the status and protection of such heritage sites is low.  Deconstructing the ideological and conflicting symbolism embedded in cultural heritage is the key to affirming certain destinations for tourism. A specific development approach is needed that requires negotiation rather than the current negation of the antagonistic elements of Ottoman heritage in Serbia.^[67]

The most representative forms of the Ottoman heritage to be found on this route are undoubtedly the objects of sacred and profane architecture (mosques, hammams, fortresses, bridges and fountains, but also caravansaries, inns, hans, etc.) that have retained the Ottoman style, some of them incorporating national cultural elements. The proper protection and development of the supporting tourist infrastructure is essential. This is particularly important in peripheral areas where such heritage is prominent and is not hidden by the presence of many other representative heritage sites of a less controversial nature.

It is a logical and legitimate aspiration of the Serbian public to focus on the presentation of national history and heritage in the process of tourism development in Serbia. However, the same attention should be paid to the preservation and promotion of the Ottoman heritage in order to strengthen intercultural dialogue and make the cultural heritage more visible and better exploited. The same heritage sites can be used to promote the national and Ottoman pasts in symbiosis, representing often conflicting dual narratives that can be particularly attractive to tourists.

Increased foreign investment in the restoration of the Ottoman heritage in Serbia has contributed to its better positioning. It should also be noted that Turkey is an important source market of foreign tourists for Serbia, with an overall share of 7.1% of total foreign tourist arrivals and 9.0% of total overnight stays in Serbia in 2022 (125,602 tourists from Turkey). With the improvement of the tourist offer and the proper presentation of the Ottoman heritage in Serbia in a more positive or at least neutral light, the growth of this market segment could be expected.

The general public, partly represented by the attitudes of the students, logically prefers the thematic framework of the Cultural Route, which enables the presentation of the cultural interaction between the Ottoman and Serbian national cultures. It provides an opportunity for national heritage and accompanying narratives to become an integral part of the tourist presentation of the cultural route. Its development can and should allow for dualism, multiple identifications and the presentation of conflicting values. The same allows local communities, but also tourists and other interested parties, to “ideologically intervene” in the route by identifying and incorporating different historical and fictional narratives produced by different communities, artists and professionals, creating innovative tourist products. An inclusive principle will be favoured in the creation of the Cultural Route. In addition to the Ottoman heritage, national narratives, places and content directly related to the heritage should also be present. The practice of selective narratives about the “conquering” or “subjugated” position and specific meanings that the heritage might reflect should be avoided, as it may be perceived as insulting or politically coloured by the wishes of the investors and propagators. The presentation of cultural heritage must be guided by the principles of integrity and mutual respect, and must meet the needs of local communities and other groups interested in preserving such heritage as their own.

Limitations: The results of the student survey cannot be generalised, but are indicative of the general attitudes of the younger and well-educated part of Serbian society. There are some limitations in conducting an online survey with relatively low response rates, resulting in a small, highly specific sample. For future research projects, an extension of the survey to reach the general public, tourists and stakeholders in Serbia is envisaged.

Acknowledgement: This research has been financially supported by the Ministry of Science, Technological Development and Innovation of the Republic of Serbia.

[1] SMITH, Laurajane: Uses of heritage. London: Routledge, 2006.

[2] LAZAREVIĆ RADAK, Sanja: Emotional Spatiality and Critical Geography of the Balkans. In: Serbian Political Thought, vol. 17 (iss.1), 2018, pp. 47-60.

[3] BAKIĆ-HAYDEN, Milica, HAYDEN, Robert: Orientalist Variations on the Theme ‘Balkans‘: Symbolic Geography in Recent Yugoslav Cultural Politics. In: Slavic Review, vol. 51(iss. 1), 1992, pp. 1-15; BAKIĆ-HAYDEN, Milica, HAYDEN, Robert: Nesting orientalism: The case of former Yugoslavia. In: Slavic Review, vol. 54 (iss. 4), 1995, pp. 917-931; TODOROVA, Maria: Imaginarni Balkan. Beograd: Biblioteka XX vek, 2006.

[4] LAZAREVIĆ RADAK, Sanja: Emotional Spatiality and Critical Geography of the Balkans.

[5] HERZFELD, Michael: Political optics and the occlusion of intimate knowledge. In: American Anthropologist, vol. 107 (iss.3), 2005, pp. 369-376; NAEF, Patric, and PLONER, Josef: Tourism, conflict and contested heritage in former Yugoslavia. In: Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change, vol. 14 (iss.3), 2016, pp. 181-188.

[6]  STOJANOVIĆ, Stanislav and ĐORĐEVIĆ, Branislav: Svetsko društvo rizika i zaštita nacionalnih interesa Republike Srbije. In Međunarodni problemi, vol. 69 (iss. 4), 2017, pp. 465-482.

[7] HAJDARPAŠIĆ, Edin: Out of the ruins of the Ottoman Empire: Reflections on the Ottoman legacy in south-eastern Europe. In: Middle Eastern Studies, vol. 44 (iss. 5), 2008, pp. 715-734; HOULISTON, Linda, Stanislav and WEBSTER, Craig: Nationalism in official tourism websites of Balkan countries: A multimodal analysis. Tourism: An International Interdisciplinary Journal, vol. 69 (iss.1), 2021, pp. 83-111.

[8] DRAGIĆEVIĆ ŠEŠIĆ, Milena & ROGAČ MIJATOVIĆ, Ljljana. Balkan dissonant heritage naratives and their attractiveness for tourism. In: American Journal of Tourism Management, vol. 3 (iss.1B), 2014, pp. 10-19.

[9] The Sultans‘ Trail Foundation: https://sultanstrail.com/

[10] BRYCE, Derek. The Absence of Ottoman, Islamic Europe in Edward W. Said’s Orientalism. In: Theory, Culture & Society, vol. 30 (iss.1), 2013, pp. 99-121; BRYCE, Derek & ČAUŠEVIĆ, Senija: Orientalism, Balkanism and Europe’s Ottoman heritage. In: Annals of Tourism Research, vol. 77, 2019, pp. 92-105; CUPCEA, A: The Ottoman heritage in the Balkans, Brukenthalia – Romanian cultural history review, supplement of Brukhental. In: Acta Musei, vol. 2, 2012, pp. 121–126; DELANTY, Gerard: The historical regions of Europe: civilizational backgrounds and multiple routes to modernity. In: Formations of European Modernity: A Historical and Political Sociology of Europe, London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2013, pp. 195-214.

[11] ZIROJEVIĆ, Olga: Islamizacija na južnoslovenskom prostoru. In: Posebna izdanja Akademije nauka i umjetnosti BiH, vol. 36, 2007, pp. 108-120.

^[12] ASSMAN, Aleida: (2008). Transformations between history and memory. Social Research: An International Quarterly, vol. 75 (iss. 1), 2008, 49-72.

^[13] ASSMAN, Jan.: Communicative and Cultural Memory. In: Cultural Memory Studies: An International and Interdisciplinary Handbook, A. Erll, A. Nünning (Eds.), Walter de Gruyter, 2008, pp. 109-118.

^[14] GRÄF, Rudolf: Harald Heppner – a historian of Southeastern Europe. In Studia Universitatis Babes-Bolyai-Historia, vol. 62 (iss. 1), 2017, p.88.

^[15] VASILJEVIĆ, Jelena, SLÁDEČEK, Michal, PETROVIĆ TRIFUNOVIĆ, Tamara: Kolektivno sećanje i politike pamćenja. Beograd: Institut za filozofiju i društvenu teoriju, 2015.

[16] KUUTMA, Kristin. Between arbitration and engineering: Concepts and contingencies in the shaping of heritage regimes. Heritage regimes and the state, 2012, 21-36.

[17] KISIĆ, Višnja: Governing Heritage Dissonance: Promises and Realities of Selected Cultural Policies. Amsterdam: European Cultural Foundation, 2013.

[18] KISIĆ, Višnja. Governing heritage dissonance. Promises and realities of selected cultural policies, 2016.

[19] HASANBEGOVIĆ, Adnan, STOJČIĆ; M. (Ur.) Kako pomiriti (h)istorije. Sarajevo: CNA, 2014, p. 10; BOŽIĆ MAROJEVIĆ, Milica: Memory wars:(Ab) uses of dissonant heritage for political purposes. In Kultura, vol. 152, 2016, pp. 155-170.

[20] ŠOP, Ivan: Istok u srpskoj književnosti: šest pisaca–šest viđenja. Beograd: Institut za književnost i umetnost, 1982, p. 24.

[21] BAĆIĆANIN, Fuad. Preplitanje kultura na tlu Srbije u osmansko doba-na primeru alhamijado književnosti. Beograd: Univerzitet u Beogradu, 2016.

[22] QUATAERT, Donald. The Ottoman Empire, 1700-1922, vol. 34, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005.

[23] TODOROVIĆ, Miloš. The Problems of Studying Ottoman Heritage in Serbia. Journal of Balkan and Black Sea Studies, 2021, 6: 213-237.

[24] JEZERNIK, Božidar (ed.). Imagining ‘the Turk’. Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2009.

[25] TODOROVIĆ, Miloš: The Problems of Studying Ottoman Heritage in Serbia. Journal of Balkan and Black Sea Studies, 2021, vol. 6, pp. 213-237.

[26] RISTIĆ, Stana; LAZIĆ-KONJIK, Ivana. „Stereotip o Srbima.“. U Srbi i srpsko, ur. Dejan Ajdačić, 2016, 19-49.

[27] PAVLOVIĆ, Aleksandar: Rereading the Kosovo Epic: Origins of the „Heavenly Serbia“ in the Oral Tradition. In Serbian Studies: Journal of the North American Society for Serbian Studies, vol. 23 (iss. 1), 2009, pp. 83-96.

[28] BJELJAC, Željko, et al. Image of Hajduks and Uskoks and its role in formation of traditional sports and games as intangible heritage of ex-Yugoslav area. In: Forum Geografic. Romania: University of Craiova, 2022, pp. 224-237.

[29] Ibidem.

[30] TODOROVIĆ, Miloš: The Problems of Studying Ottoman Heritage in Serbia. Journal of Balkan and Black Sea Studies, 2021, vol. 6, pp. 213-237

[31] Ibidem.

[32] Ibidem.

[33] LAZAREVIĆ RADAK, Sanja: Emotional Spatiality and Critical Geography of the Balkans; GLIGORIJEVIĆ, Ivana: An analysis of ethnocultural stereotypes: The stimuli Turks and Turk in an association test. In: Zbornik radova Filozofskog fakulteta u Prištini, vol. 50 (iss. 1), 2020, pp. 129-145.

[34] SPASIĆ, Ivana. The trauma of Kosovo in Serbian national narratives. In: Narrating Trauma. Routledge, 2015, pp. 81-105.

[35] All references to Kosovo in this document should be understood to be in the context of United Security Council resolution 1244 (1999).

^[36] ADIE, Bailey Ashton: Marketing Europe to Islamic heritage tourists. In HALL, C. M. and PRAYAG, G. (Eds.): The Routledge Handbook of Halal Hospitality and Islamic Tourism, Routledge, 2019, pp. 157-168; BRYCE, Derek & ČAUŠEVIĆ, Senija: Orientalism, Balkanism and Europe’s Ottoman heritage; GALLAGHER, Tom: Outcast Europe: The Balkans, 1789-1989: From the Ottomans to Milosevic. Routledge, 2013.

[37] LAZAREVIĆ, Dragana: Tradition of Demolition: Architecture of Terror—Urban Destruction as a Political Message, or How the Destruction of the Ottoman Heritage in Early Modern Serbia. In: Serbian Studies: Journal of the North American Society for Serbian Studies, vol. 30 (iss.1), 2019, pp. 1-26.

[38] AMEDOSKI, Dragana and GARIĆ PETROVIĆ Gordana. Transformation of a Medieval Town into an Ottoman Administrative Center:Case of Kruševac (Aladza Hisar). In Contemporary Research in Turkology and Eurasian Studies. Cluj Napoca: Presa Universitara Clujeana, 2013, pp. 389-402.

[39] TERZIĆ, Aleksandra & DOGRAMADIJEVA, Elka: A cultural route for Ottoman heritage in Europe: Opportunities and challenges from the perspectives of students. Journal of Heritage Tourism, vol. 17(iss.6), 2022, pp. 718-736; DOGRAMADIJEVA, Elka & TERZIĆ, Aleksandra: Perceptions of Contested Ottoman Heritage in Europe: An International Study among Students. In: Heritage & Society, pp. 1-24.

[40] TANASKOVIĆ, Darko: Islamsko u književnosti i kulturi balkanskih naroda. In: Letopis Matice Srpske, vol. 482 (iss.4), 2008, pp. 677-705.; Pišev, Marko: Balkanizam i osmansko kulturno nasleđe u savremenoj Srbiji: između negacije i autoegzotizacije. In: Kulturni identiteti kao nematerijalno kulturno nasledje. Beograd: Srpski genealoški centar, 2011, pp. 73-91.

[41] Ibidem.

[42] GLIGORIJEVIĆ, Ivana R. An analysis of ethnocultural stereotypes: The stimuli Turks and Turk in an association test. Zbornik radova Filozofskog fakulteta u Prištini, 2020, 50.1: 129-145.

[43] ÇEVIK, B. Senem. Turkish soap opera diplomacy: A western projection by a Muslim source. Exchange: The Journal of Public Diplomacy, 2014, 5 (iss.1), p. 6.;  AĞIRSEVEN, Nehir; ÖRKI, Armağan. Evaluating Turkish TV series as soft power instruments. OPUS International Journal of Society Researches, 2017, 7 (iss.13), pp. 836-853.; YAVUZ, Talha, ELCİM, Şirin, DUYGULU. Turkey’s Soft Power and Public Diplomacy: The Case of Serbia Between 2002-2019. Nitel Sosyal Bilimler, 2020. CABRIC, Nemanja, NEMANJA, Nedelkovska, M., Demoli, D., & Hamzic, A. Turks Bewitch the Balkans with Their Addictive Soaps. Balkan Insight.May, 2013, 1. Available at: https://balkaninsight.com/2013/05/01/turks-bewitch-the-balkans-withtheir-addictive-soaps/

[44] LUKE, Christina: Cultural sovereignty in the Balkans and Turkey: The politics of preservation and rehabilitation. In: Journal of Social Archaeology, vol. 13 (iss.3), 2013, pp. 350-370.

[45] AJZENHAMER, Vladimir & TRAPARA, Vladimir: Turska politika prema Srbiji i Zapadnom Balkanu u kontekstu aktuelnih međunarodnih i regionalnih trendova. In: Srbija u Jugoistočnoj Evropi: zbornik radova, 2013, pp. 1-17. TANASKOVIĆ, Darko: Neoosmanizam – povratak Turske na Balkan. Beograd: JP „Službeni glasnik“, 2010.

[46] PITCHFORD, Susan, and JAFARI, Jafar (Eds.): Identity tourism: Imaging and imagining the nation. Emerald Group Publishing, 2008.

[47] PAVLIČÌĆ, Jelena. Dissonant heritage and promotion of tourism in the case of Serbian medieval monuments in Kosovo. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change, 14 (iss.3), 2016, pp. 189-205.

[48] NAEF, Patrick, and PLONER, Josef: Tourism, conflict and contested heritage in former Yugoslavia. In:Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change, vol. 14 (iss.3), 2016, pp. 181-188; BENDIX, Regina: Memorial interventions: Negotiating paths through complicated pasts. In: Folklore, vol. 130 (iss.3), 2019, pp. 221-236.

[49] Two comparative studies based on the same sample were already published: Dogramadjieva, E., & Terzić, A. (2024). Perceptions of Contested Ottoman Heritage in Europe: An International Study among Students. Heritage & Society, Online first, pp. 1-24; Terzić, A., & Dogramadjieva, E. (2022). A cultural route for Ottoman heritage in Europe: Opportunities and challenges from the perspectives of students. Journal of Heritage Tourism, 17(6), pp. 718-736.

[50] TRUDEAU, Dan, and MCMORRAN Chris: The geographies of marginalization. In: A companion to social geography, New Jersey: Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2011, pp. 437-453; SMITH, Mick, DAVIDSON, Joyce, CAMERON, Laura and BONDI, Liz: Geography and Emotion – Emerging Constellations. In: Emotion, Place and Culture. Routledge, 2009, pp. 1-18.

[51] RADAK, Sanja Lazarević. Emotional Spatiality and Critical Geography of the Balkans. Serbian Political Thought, 17 (iss.1), 2018, pp. 47-60.

[52] Ibidem.

[53] GLIGORIJEVIĆ, Ivana R. An analysis of ethnocultural stereotypes: The stimuli Turks and Turk in an association test. Zbornik radova Filozofskog fakulteta u Prištini, 50 (Iss.1), 2020, pp. 129-145.

[54] Ibidem.

[55] JANSEN, Stef: Svakodnevni orijentalizam: Doživljaj „Balkana”/„Evrope “ u Beogradu I Zagrebu. In: Filozofija i društvo, vol. 18, 2001, p. 36.

[56] DOGRAMADJIEVA, Elka; TERZIĆ, Aleksandra. Perceptions of Contested Ottoman Heritage in Europe: An International Study among Students. Heritage & Society, 2024, 1-24., p. 20.

[57] MILENKOVIĆ, Miloš. Heritage-for-Peace and Development: An Opportunity Not to be Missed. In: Etnoantropološki problemi/Issues in Ethnology and Anthropology, vol. 16 (iss.4), 2021, pp. 1149-1164.

[58] Ibidem.

[59] ANDRIĆ, Gordana: Turska daje nadu novog života ruševinama otomanskog doba u Srbiji. In: Balkan Insight. [online] [2010-12-16]. https://balkaninsight.com/sr/2010/12/16/turska-daje-nadu-novog-zivota-rusevinama-otomanskog-doba-u-srbiji/

[60] TERZIĆ, Aleksandra. Perspektive razvoja kulturne rute“ Tvrđave na Dunavu“ u funkciji obogaćivanja turističke ponude Srbije. Geografski institut „Jovan Cvijić “SANU, 2014.

[61] MARIČIĆ, Slobodan: Srbija i Turska: Šta je sve opstalo posle nekoliko vekova turske vladavine. In: BBC News [online] [2019-10-7]. https://www.bbc.com/serbian/lat/srbija-49962499.

[62] TERZIĆ, Aleksandra: The stakeholder networking approach as a necessary factor of cultural tourism development in Serbia. In: Kultura, vol. 150, 2016, pp. 254-270.

[63] GRMUŠA, Milka, ŠUŠNJAR, Sanda and LUKIĆ TANOVIĆ, Mariana: The attitudes of the local population toward the importance of cultural and historical heritage. In: Journal of the Geographical Institute “Jovan Cvijić” SASA, vol. 70 (iss.3), 2020, pp. 299-307.

[64] MIHAJLOVIĆ, Vladimir: Genius loci Balkani: recepcija prošlosti i konstruisanje akademskog narativa o balkanskom nasleđu. In: Etnoantropološki problem, vol. 8 (iss.3), 2013, p. 793.

[65] FOLEY, Malcom & LENNON, John: Dark tourism. London: Continuum, 2000.

[66] ŠUICA, Marko: Percepcija Osmanskog carstva u Srbiji. In: Imaginarni Turčin, ed. B. Jezernik, Belgrade, 2010. p. 287.

[67] DRAGIĆEVIĆ ŠEŠIĆ, Milena & ROGAČ MIJATOVIĆ, Ljiljana: Balkan dissonant heritage narratives and their attractiveness for tourism. American Journal of Tourism Management, 2014, 3 (iss.1B), p. 16.

References

ADIE, Bailey Ashton. Marketing Europe to Islamic heritage tourists. In HALL, C. M. and PRAYAG, G. (Eds.): The Routledge Handbook of Halal Hospitality and Islamic Tourism, Routledge, 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315150604-11

AĞIRSEVEN, Nehir; ÖRKI, Armağan. Evaluating Turkish TV series as soft power instruments. OPUS International Journal of Society Researches, 2017, 7 (iss.13), pp. 836-853. DOI: https://doi.org/10.26466/opus.353287

AJZENHAMER, Vladimir & TRAPARA, Vladimir. Turska politika prema Srbiji i Zapadnom Balkanu u kontekstu aktuelnih međunarodnih i regionalnih trendova. In: Srbija u Jugoistočnoj Evropi: zbornik radova, 2013, pp. 1-17.

AMEDOSKI, Dragana and GARIĆ PETROVIĆ Gordana. Transformation of a Medieval Town into an Ottoman Administrative Center:Case of Kruševac (Aladza Hisar). In Contemporary Research in Turkology and Eurasian Studies. Cluj Napoca: Presa Universitara Clujeana, 2013.

ANDRIĆ, Gordana. Turska daje nadu novog života ruševinama otomanskog doba u Srbiji. In: Balkan Insight. [online] [2010-12-16]. https://balkaninsight.com/sr/2010/12/16/turska-daje-nadu-novog-zivota-rusevinama-otomanskog-doba-u-srbiji/

ASSMAN, Jan. Communicative and Cultural Memory. In: Cultural Memory Studies: An International and Interdisciplinary Handbook, A. Erll, A. Nünning (Eds.), Walter de Gruyter, 2008, pp. 109-118. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110207262.2.109

ASSMANN, Aleida. Transformations between history and memory. Social Research: An International Quarterly, 2008, 75.1: 49-72. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/sor.2008.0038

BAĆIĆANIN, Fuad. Preplitanje kultura na tlu Srbije u osmansko doba-na primeru alhamijado književnosti. Beograd: Univerzitet u Beogradu, 2016.

BAKIĆ-HAYDEN, Milica, HAYDEN, Robert. Nesting orientalism: The case of former Yugoslavia. In: Slavic Review, vol. 54 (iss. 4), 1995, pp. 917-931. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2501399

BAKIĆ-HAYDEN, Milica, HAYDEN, Robert: Orientalist Variations on the Theme ‘Balkans‘: Symbolic Geography in Recent Yugoslav Cultural Politics. In: Slavic Review, vol. 51(iss. 1), 1992, pp. 1-15. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2500258

BENDIX, Regina: Memorial interventions: Negotiating paths through complicated pasts. In: Folklore, vol. 130 (iss.3), 2019, pp. 221-236. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0015587X.2019.1585718

BJELJAC, Željko et al. Image of Hajduks and Uskoks and its role in formation of traditional sports and games as intangible heritage of ex-Yugoslav area. In: Forum Geografic. Romania: University of Craiova, 2022, pp. 224-237. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5775/fg.2021.017.d

BOŽIĆ MAROJEVIĆ, Milica. Memory wars:(Ab) uses of dissonant heritage for political purposes. In Kultura, vol. 152, 2016, pp. 155-170. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5937/kultura1652155B

BRYCE, Derek. The Absence of Ottoman, Islamic Europe in Edward W. Said’s Orientalism. In: Theory, Culture & Society, vol. 30 (iss.1), 2013, pp. 99-121. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276412456562

BRYCE, Derek; ČAUŠEVIĆ, Senija. Orientalism, Balkanism and Europe’s Ottoman heritage. Annals of Tourism Research, 2019, 77: 92-105. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2019.06.002

CABRIC, Nemanja; NEMANJA, Nedelkovska, M., DEMOLI, D., & HAMZIC, A. Turks Bewitch the Balkans with Their Addictive Soaps. Balkan Insight.May, 2013, 1. Available at: https://balkaninsight.com/2013/05/01/turks-bewitch-the-balkans-withtheir-addictive-soaps/

ÇEVIK, B. Senem. Turkish soap opera diplomacy: A western projection by a Muslim source. Exchange: The Journal of Public Diplomacy, 2014, 5 (iss.1), p. 6..

CUPCEA, A. The Ottoman heritage in the Balkans, Brukenthalia – Romanian cultural history review, supplement of Brukhental. In: Acta Musei, vol. 2, 2012, pp. 121–126.

DELANTY, Gerard. The historical regions of Europe: civilizational backgrounds and multiple routes to modernity. In: Formations of European Modernity: A Historical and Political Sociology of Europe, London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2013, pp. 195-214. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137287922_11

DOGRAMADJIEVA, Elka; TERZIĆ, Aleksandra. Perceptions of Contested Ottoman Heritage in Europe: An International Study among Students. Heritage & Society, 2024, 1-24., p. 20. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/2159032X.2023.2299638

DRAGIĆEVIĆ ŠEŠIĆ, Milena & ROGAČ MIJATOVIĆ, Ljljana. Balkan dissonant heritage naratives and their attractiveness for tourism. In: American Journal of Tourism Management, vol. 3 (iss.1B), 2014, pp. 10-19.

FOLEY, Malcom & LENNON, John. Dark tourism. London: Continuum, 2000.

GALLAGHER, Tom. Outcast Europe: The Balkans, 1789-1989: From the Ottomans to Milosevic. Routledge, 2013. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315774473

GLIGORIJEVIĆ, Ivana. An analysis of ethnocultural stereotypes: The stimuli Turks and Turk in an association test. In: Zbornik radova Filozofskog fakulteta u Prištini, vol. 50 (iss. 1), 2020, pp. 129-145. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5937/ZRFFP50-25240

GRÄF, Rudolf. Harald Heppner – a historian of Southeastern Europe. In Studia Universitatis Babes-Bolyai-Historia, vol. 62 (iss. 1), 2017, p.88. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24193/subbhist.2017.1.07

GRMUŠA, Milka; ŠUŠNJAR, Sanda and LUKIĆ TANOVIĆ, Mariana. The attitudes of the local population toward the importance of cultural and historical heritage. In: Journal of the Geographical Institute “Jovan Cvijić” SASA, vol. 70 (iss.3), 2020, pp. 299-307. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2298/IJGI2003299G

HAJDARPAŠIĆ, Edin. Out of the ruins of the Ottoman Empire: Reflections on the Ottoman legacy in south-eastern Europe. In: Middle Eastern Studies, vol. 44 (iss. 5), 2008, pp. 715-734. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00263200802285278

HASANBEGOVIĆ, Adnan, STOJČIĆ; M. (Ur.) Kako pomiriti (h)istorije. Sarajevo: CNA, 2014.

HERZFELD, Michael. Political optics and the occlusion of intimate knowledge. In: American Anthropologist, vol. 107 (iss.3), 2005, pp. 369-376; NAEF, Patric, and PLONER, Josef: Tourism, conflict and contested heritage in former Yugoslavia. In: Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change, vol. 14 (iss.3), 2016, pp. 181-188. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1525/aa.2005.107.3.369

HOULISTON, Linda, Stanislav and WEBSTER, Craig. Nationalism in official tourism websites of Balkan countries: A multimodal analysis. Tourism: An International Interdisciplinary Journal, vol. 69 (iss.1), 2021, pp. 83-111. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37741/t.69.1.7

JANSEN, Stef. Svakodnevni orijentalizam: Doživljaj „Balkana”/„Evrope “ u Beogradu I Zagrebu. In: Filozofija i društvo, vol. 18, 2001, p. 36.

JEZERNIK, Božidar (ed.). Imagining ‘the Turk’. Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2009.

KISIĆ, Višnja. Governing Heritage Dissonance: Promises and Realities of Selected Cultural Policies. Amsterdam: European Cultural Foundation, 2013.

KUUTMA, Kristin. Between arbitration and engineering: Concepts and contingencies in the shaping of heritage regimes. Heritage regimes and the state, 2012, 21-36. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/books.gup.367

LAZAREVIĆ RADAK, Sanja. Emotional Spatiality and Critical Geography of the Balkans. Serbian Political Thought, 2018, 17.1: 47-60. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22182/spt.1712018.3

LAZAREVIĆ, Dragana. Tradition of Demolition: Architecture of Terror—Urban Destruction as a Political Message, or How the Destruction of the Ottoman Heritage in Early Modern Serbia. In: Serbian Studies: Journal of the North American Society for Serbian Studies, vol. 30 (iss.1), 2019, pp. 1-26. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/ser.2019.0006

LUKE, Christina. Cultural sovereignty in the Balkans and Turkey: The politics of preservation and rehabilitation. In: Journal of Social Archaeology, vol. 13 (iss.3), 2013, pp. 350-370. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1469605313487622

MARIČIĆ, Slobodan. Srbija i Turska: Šta je sve opstalo posle nekoliko vekova turske vladavine. In: BBC News [online] [2019-10-7]. https://www.bbc.com/serbian/lat/srbija-49962499.

MIHAJLOVIĆ, Vladimir. Genius loci Balkani: recepcija prošlosti i konstruisanje akademskog narativa o balkanskom nasleđu. In: Etnoantropološki problem, vol. 8 (iss.3), 2013, p. 793. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21301/EAP.v8i3.8

MILENKOVIĆ, Miloš. Heritage-for-Peace and Development: An Opportunity Not to be Missed. In: Etnoantropološki problemi/Issues in Ethnology and Anthropology, vol. 16 (iss.4), 2021, pp. 1149-1164. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21301/eap.v16i4.7

NAEF, Patrick, and PLONER, Josef. Tourism, conflict and contested heritage in former Yugoslavia. In:Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change, vol. 14 (iss.3), 2016, pp. 181-188. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14766825.2016.1180802

PAVLIČÌĆ, Jelena. Dissonant heritage and promotion of tourism in the case of Serbian medieval monuments in Kosovo. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change, 14 (iss.3), 2016, pp. 189-205. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14766825.2016.1169349

PAVLOVIĆ, Aleksandar. Rereading the Kosovo Epic: Origins of the „Heavenly Serbia“ in the Oral Tradition. In Serbian Studies: Journal of the North American Society for Serbian Studies, vol. 23 (iss. 1), 2009, pp. 83-96. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/ser.2009.0000

PIŠEV, Marko. Balkanizam i osmansko kulturno nasleđe u savremenoj Srbiji: između negacije i autoegzotizacije. In: Kulturni identiteti kao nematerijalno kulturno nasledje. Beograd: Srpski genealoški centar, 2011, pp. 73-91.

PITCHFORD, Susan and JAFARI, Jafar (Eds.) Identity tourism: Imaging and imagining the nation. Emerald Group Publishing, 2008.

QUATAERT, Donald. The Ottoman Empire, 1700-1922, vol. 34, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511818868

RISTIĆ, Stana; LAZIĆ-KONJIK, Ivana. „Stereotip o Srbima.“. U Srbi i srpsko, ur. Dejan Ajdačić, 2016, 19-49.

SMITH, Laurajane. Uses of heritage. London: Routledge, 2006. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203602263

SMITH, Mick, DAVIDSON, Joyce, CAMERON, Laura and BONDI, Liz. Geography and Emotion – Emerging Constellations. In: Emotion, Place and Culture. Routledge, 2009, pp. 1-18.

SPASIĆ, Ivana. The trauma of Kosovo in Serbian national narratives. In: Narrating Trauma. Routledge, 2015, pp. 81-105. DOI: https://doi.org/10.12681/sas.822

 STOJANOVIĆ, Stanislav and ĐORĐEVIĆ, Branislav. Svetsko društvo rizika i zaštita nacionalnih interesa Republike Srbije. In Međunarodni problemi, vol. 69 (iss. 4), 2017, pp. 465-482.

ŠOP, Ivan. Istok u srpskoj književnosti: šest pisaca–šest viđenja. Beograd: Institut za književnost i umetnost, 1982, p. 24.

ŠUICA, Marko. Percepcija Osmanskog carstva u Srbiji. In: Imaginarni Turčin, ed. B. Jezernik, Belgrade, 2010. p. 287.

TANASKOVIĆ, Darko. Neoosmanizam – povratak Turske na Balkan. Beograd: JP „Službeni glasnik“, 2010.

TANASKOVIĆ, Darko. Islamsko u književnosti i kulturi balkanskih naroda. In: Letopis Matice Srpske, vol. 482 (iss.4), 2008, pp. 677-705.

TERZIĆ, Aleksandra. Perspektive razvoja kulturne rute“ Tvrđave na Dunavu“ u funkciji obogaćivanja turističke ponude Srbije. Geografski institut „Jovan Cvijić “SANU, 2014.

TERZIĆ, Aleksandra. The stakeholder networking approach as a necessary factor of cultural tourism development in Serbia. In: Kultura, vol. 150, 2016, pp. 254-270. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5937/kultura1650254T

TERZIĆ, Aleksandra; DOGRAMADJIEVA, Elka. A cultural route for Ottoman heritage in Europe: Opportunities and challenges from the perspectives of students. Journal of Heritage Tourism, 2022, 17.6: 718-736. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1743873X.2022.2098042

The Sultans‘ Trail Foundation: https://sultanstrail.com/

TODOROVA, Maria. Imaginarni Balkan. Beograd: Biblioteka XX vek, 2006.

TODOROVIĆ, Miloš. The Problems of Studying Ottoman Heritage in Serbia. Journal of Balkan and Black Sea Studies, 2021, 6: 213-237.

TRUDEAU, Dan, and MCMORRAN Chris. The geographies of marginalization. In: A companion to social geography, New Jersey: Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2011, pp. 437-453. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444395211.ch25

VASILJEVIĆ, Jelena, SLÁDEČEK, Michal, PETROVIĆ TRIFUNOVIĆ, Tamara. Kolektivno sećanje i politike pamćenja. Beograd: Institut za filozofiju i društvenu teoriju, 2015.

YAVUZ, Talha, DUYGULU ELCİM, Şirin. Turkey’s Soft Power and Public Diplomacy: The Case of Serbia Between 2002-2019. Nitel Sosyal Bilimler, 2020.

ZIROJEVIĆ, Olga. Islamizacija na južnoslovenskom prostoru. In: Posebna izdanja Akademije nauka i umjetnosti BiH, vol. 36, 2007, pp. 108-120.