Jelavich clearly knows her stuff, and this (and its successor volume) serve as an excellent general study. However, the writing style is very dry and can be difficult and a little boring to read. Further, the work is a bit dated, neglecting all of the extraordinary events after the mid-80s. The bibliography is very good, though keep in mind obviously no recent works are there. Citations are a bit sparse, making it difficult to pursue a line of thought further.

This is overall a good book, but readers interested in first learning this subject absolutely should start with Stavrianos' "The Balkans since 1453." It's even more dated, but is unbeatable as a general study on the region up to about 1950.

Although published in the late 1980s with no updated editions in later years, Jelavich's masterful "History of the Balkans" is still by far the best introduction to contemporary Balkan history. This first volume traces the developments among the various Balkan peoples as they moved into modernity and formed independent nation states. Jelavich begins with a short and very informative introduction to Balkan history up to the end of the 17th century, i.e. the time when Ottoman power in the region seriously began to wane and the role of the Habsburg Monarchy and Russia (and later all of the major European powers) in the region became crucial. The author focuses mostly on the Ottoman Empire and the Balkan nationalities under Ottoman rule, the Bulgarians, Greeks, Romanians and Serbs, and the Albanians to a lesser extent, as it was among these people that the first revolts occurred and the first nation states were formed in the Balkans. Even so, Jelavich provides excellent analysis of the main currents in the Habsburg Monarchy's Balkan possessions, mainly the Croatian lands but also Vojvodina and Transylvania with their large Serbian and Romanian populations. Perhaps the main thing that comes out of this volume is that Ottoman rule in the Balkans was not as oppressive as it was often later portrayed (i.e. the notorious "Turkish yoke" of national(ist) historiography in the Balkans). It was in fact this empire's decentralized governing institutions, tolerance of non-Islamic religious communities, and general inefficiency that made possible a great deal of local autonomy among the Balkan peoples and proved conducive to the nationalist uprisings of the 19th century. Also important is Jelavich's repeated emphasis on the region's general poverty. Throughout the period this book covers, the vast majority of the Balkan people were peasants who often lived at subsistence levels. This factor was crucial in shaping the region's history. This book contains both detailed accounts of the major events in Balkan history during the period it covers as well as strong analysis of the underlying social and political processes. It therefore provides a strong basis for understanding Balkan history, and greatly helps in comprehending current events in the region.

This text is now a bit dated: it does not cover the tumultuous events of the 90s. This book, nevertheless, covers what took place earlier in the 20th century with great depth and balance. Jelavich's book is for any person who wants a serious look into the history of the Balkans. Such knowledge is a must and a primer for a true understanding of the "balkanization" of the Balkans in the 1990s. If you want a quick, light read, this book in NOT for you. This book is at times heavy and hard, but is worth the effort.

cao! I would like to found more about Author s biography Thanks advance Boban Barbare

The scope of Jelavich's second volume of her "History of the Balkans" actually covers the last several decades of the nineteenth century and ends with the early 1980s, when it was published. No updated editions were ever published. This unfortunately makes an otherwise exemplary historiographical work somewhat dated. Jelavich's analysis of events and developments in the communist Romania, Albania and Bulgaria, as well as Greece is, however, a good summary of the history of these countries from 1945 to the early 1980s. Where the book is obviously dated is in its coverage of the former Yugoslavia: in her conclusions, the author implies a generally positive course for this country based on its relative successes until then in economic and overall social development. Nonetheless, her examination of socialist Yugoslavia does provide a view into the country's flaws, which would eventually lead to its violent collapse in 1991. Jelavich's treatment of the late 19th century, the two World Wars and the interwar is comprehensive and very informative; the author's vast knowledge of numerous primary sources and the extensive secondary literature on this region comes to the fore here. Although Jelavich's strength is her knowledge of political and diplomatic history, she provides a strong analysis of the region's underlying economic problems (which in all countries considered is the relative technological backwardness). The only weakness of this volume is the short-shrift given to cultural/social issues - thus, very little is said about literary and artistic activity, or the effects of the vast social change in Western Europe and the U.S. on the various Balkan countries. Her overall conclusion is obviously a bit dated since all of the communist regimes have since fallen. Nevertheless, this is an excellent integrated history which is broken down into logical chronological and geopolitical sections, making it also useful as a reference work.

This short and well-written study uses Russian archives to follow the course of Russian foreign policy towards the Romanian Principalities in a single year: 1859, the year of the "double election" of Alexander Cuza as hospodar of both Wallachia and Moldavia, the first step toward Romanian national union. The interests of Russian foreign minister Gorchakov and envoy Giers in the fate of a large territory adjacent to Russia were complicated and in the end overwhelmed by two other Russian interests: the need to placate France in the hostile, post-Crimean world, and the need to stand tall on behalf of Orthodoxy, even if that meant antagonizing the Romanians. This second factor was behind the dispute over the "Dedicated Monastaries", which controlled fully one quarter of the land of Wallachia and one third of Moldavia, but which paid no taxes, were under no Romanian state control, and sent their revenues to the foreign "holy places" to which they were "dedicated". Jelavich tells her story well, letting the documents speak for themselves and providing useful discussion and interpretation. Interested readers will want to consult two other useful sources on Romanian developments in the 19th century: Radu Florescu's "The Struggle Against Russia in the Romanian Principalities, 1821-1854," and Paul Michelson's "Romanian Politics 1859-1871: From Prince Cuza to Prince Carol." Some of the emotion behind the Russian national view is expressed in Dostoevsky's fascinating "Writer's Diary."