Page 79 - Dark Shades of Istria
P. 79
5.2 Istrian Identity
the one and the other immemorialised of their mother tongue, and
in the end, a hybrid population of Italian clothing, Slavic costumes
and Serbo-Italian language.
Von Czoernig (1857) did not identify a similar intertwining and in-
tersecting of the different nationalities in other parts of the Austro-
Hungarian Monarchy. In those circumstances, when conducting censuses
of the population in the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy in some areas of
today’s Slovenian-Croatian border, they found a completely different na-
tional structure of the residents each time (also diametrically opposite)
(Darovec, 2011; Dukovski, 2011a, pp. 47–48; Žerjavić, 1993; Žitko, 2017, p.
40). These oscillations were described by Klemenčić et al. (1993, p. 622) as
methodological anomalies of the census combined with unequal (previ-
ous) presentations of figures and political impacts. Darovec (2011, p. 141),
in reference to Hobsbawn, claims that national affiliation is developed
under the influence of the Centre’s policy.²³
A clear national identification of Istrian residents formally occurred
just after 1991. ‘Istrianity’ as an autochthonous regional identity, which is
not an ethnically homogenous concept, was identified (Ashbrook, 2005;
Bufon, 2008c, p. 104; Cocco, 2009; 2010; Kerma & Plesec, 2001; Kle-
menčić et al., 1993; Medica, 1998, p. 32, 2011, p. 253; Šuran, 1993; Zadel,
2016, p. 355; Zadel & Sedmak, 2015).²⁴ Šuran (1993, p. 769) understands
it as ‘the “weaker” identity or pluri-identity, which appears and is reaf-
firmed in reality as the ethically stronger one,’ while Medica (1998; 2011,
pp. 254–255) describes it as a heterogeneously interpreted phenomenon,
which is still not sufficiently defined in the regionalist political sense. On
the other hand, for the residents of Istria, ‘Istrianity’ is only a natural issue
of existence and a sense of belonging to this area.²⁵ Unification of identity
would be difficult and problematic since in the 20th century, the contin-
ual migration of nations had a strong influence on the ethnic/cultural
structure of the region. It is an interesting question how, in such complex
circumstances, a common identity can be developed at all.
‘Istrianity’ as a phenomenon was empirically (officially) confirmed in
the population census, e.g. in 1991 (the last Yugoslav census) (Klemenčić
et al., 1993, pp. 607–608). The results of the population census in 2011
²³ Much later, after w w i i, people did change due to opportunistic reasons (Šarić, 2015).
²⁴ Medica (1998) has identified some of the main researchers of ‘Istrianity’ since the 18th
century.
²⁵ More can be found in Medica (1998; 2011).
79
the one and the other immemorialised of their mother tongue, and
in the end, a hybrid population of Italian clothing, Slavic costumes
and Serbo-Italian language.
Von Czoernig (1857) did not identify a similar intertwining and in-
tersecting of the different nationalities in other parts of the Austro-
Hungarian Monarchy. In those circumstances, when conducting censuses
of the population in the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy in some areas of
today’s Slovenian-Croatian border, they found a completely different na-
tional structure of the residents each time (also diametrically opposite)
(Darovec, 2011; Dukovski, 2011a, pp. 47–48; Žerjavić, 1993; Žitko, 2017, p.
40). These oscillations were described by Klemenčić et al. (1993, p. 622) as
methodological anomalies of the census combined with unequal (previ-
ous) presentations of figures and political impacts. Darovec (2011, p. 141),
in reference to Hobsbawn, claims that national affiliation is developed
under the influence of the Centre’s policy.²³
A clear national identification of Istrian residents formally occurred
just after 1991. ‘Istrianity’ as an autochthonous regional identity, which is
not an ethnically homogenous concept, was identified (Ashbrook, 2005;
Bufon, 2008c, p. 104; Cocco, 2009; 2010; Kerma & Plesec, 2001; Kle-
menčić et al., 1993; Medica, 1998, p. 32, 2011, p. 253; Šuran, 1993; Zadel,
2016, p. 355; Zadel & Sedmak, 2015).²⁴ Šuran (1993, p. 769) understands
it as ‘the “weaker” identity or pluri-identity, which appears and is reaf-
firmed in reality as the ethically stronger one,’ while Medica (1998; 2011,
pp. 254–255) describes it as a heterogeneously interpreted phenomenon,
which is still not sufficiently defined in the regionalist political sense. On
the other hand, for the residents of Istria, ‘Istrianity’ is only a natural issue
of existence and a sense of belonging to this area.²⁵ Unification of identity
would be difficult and problematic since in the 20th century, the contin-
ual migration of nations had a strong influence on the ethnic/cultural
structure of the region. It is an interesting question how, in such complex
circumstances, a common identity can be developed at all.
‘Istrianity’ as a phenomenon was empirically (officially) confirmed in
the population census, e.g. in 1991 (the last Yugoslav census) (Klemenčić
et al., 1993, pp. 607–608). The results of the population census in 2011
²³ Much later, after w w i i, people did change due to opportunistic reasons (Šarić, 2015).
²⁴ Medica (1998) has identified some of the main researchers of ‘Istrianity’ since the 18th
century.
²⁵ More can be found in Medica (1998; 2011).
79
