IVOANDRIĆ
THEBRIDGE
ONTHEDRINA
TranslatedfromtheSerbo-Croatby
LOVETTF.EDWARDS
WithanIntroductionby
WILLIAMH.MCNEILL
Originallypublishedin1945
Translation© GeorgeAllenandUnwinLtd.,1959
PhoenixEdition/977
ISBN:0-226-02045-2
Preparedandformattedby nepalifiction,TPB,2014
INTRODUCTION
TRANSLATOR'SFOREWORD
I
II
III
IV
V
VI
VII
VIII
IX
X
XI
XII
XIII
XIV
XV
XVI
XVII
XVIII
XIX
XX
XXI
XXII
XXIII
XXIV
INTRODUCTION
WilliamH.McNeill
ThecommitteethatawardedtheNobelprizeforliteraturetoIvoAndricin1961citedtheepicforceof The BridgeontheDrina, firstpublishedinSerbo-Croatin1945,asjustificationforitsaward.Theawardwas indeedjustifiedif,asIbelieve, TheBridge on theDrina isoneofthemostperceptive,resonant,andwell-wroughtworksoffictionwritteninthetwentiethcentury.Buttheepiccomparisonseemsstrained.Atany rate, if the work is epic, it remains an epic without a hero. The bridge, both in its inception and at its destruction, is central to the book, but can scarcely be called a hero. It is, rather, a symbol of the establishment and the overthrow of a civilization that came forcibly to the Balkans in the fourteenth to sixteenth centuries and was no less forcibly overthrown in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. That civilization was Ottoman—radically alien to, and a conscious rival of, both Orthodox Russia and the civilizationofwesternEurope.ItwaspredominantlyTurkishandMoslem,butalsoembracedChristianand Jewish communities, along with such outlaw elements as Gypsies. All find a place in Andric's book; and withaneconomyofmeansthatisallbutmagical,hepresentsthereaderwithathoroughlycredibleportrait ofthebirthanddeathofOttomancivilizationasexperiencedinhisnativelandofBosnia.
No better introduction to the study of Balkan and Ottoman history exists, nor do I know of any work of fictionthatmorepersuasivelyintroducesthereadertoacivilizationotherthanourown.Itisanintellectual andemotionaladventuretoencountertheOttomanworldthroughAndric'spagesinitsgrandoisebeginning andatitstotteringfinale.Everyepisoderingstrue,fromtheroleofterrorinfasteningtheTurkishpower firmlyonthelandtotheroleofanAustrianarmywhorehouseincorruptingtheoldways.Noanthropologist haseverreportedtheprocessesofculturalchangesosensitively,-nohistorianhasenteredsoeffectivelyinto themindsofthepersonswithwhomhesoughttodeal.Itis,inshort,amarvelouswork,amasterpiece,and verymuch suigeneris.
Perhaps a few remarks about Bosnia and its history may be helpful for readers who approach this work without prior acquaintance with the Balkan scene. Bosnia is a mountainous region in the central part of Yugoslavia.Todayitisoneoftheconstituentrepublicsofthatfederalstate.Inmedievaltimesitbrokeaway fromtheKingdomofSerbiaina.d.960andthereafterbecamemoreorlessindependent,thoughperpetually subject to rival jurisdictional claims because of its borderland position between Orthodox and Latin Christendom.Inthetwelfthcentury,therulerofBosniasoughttoassertafullerindependencebybecoming aBogomil.Thiswasareligion,relatedtoManichaeism,thatspreadalsotowesternEuropewhereitwas knownasAlbigensianism.ManyBosniansfollowedtheirruler'sexample,remaininghereticsintheeyesof theirChristianneighborsuntilaftertheTurkishconquest,whennearlyalloftheBogomilsbecameMoslem.
Asaresult,aboutone-thirdofthepopulationofBosniaisMoslemtoday,eventhoughtheyspeakaSlavic language,Serbo-Croat,astheirancestorshaddonebacktoBogomildays.
The Turks conquered Bosnia between 1386 and 1463. Conversion to Islam proceeded rather rapidly, especially among the landowning families of Bosnia; and with religious conversion went a cultural transformation that made Bosnia an outpost of Ottoman civilization. From the fifteenth century onwards, Bosnian military manpower reinforced Ottoman armies. Year after year, Moslem warriors answered the summonsesoflocalgovernorstogoraidingintoChristianlandstothenorthandwest.Simultaneously,at irregularintervalsagentsfromConstantinoplechoseChristianpeasantconscriptstoreplenishtheranksof thesultan'spersonalhousehold.Theserecruitswereofficiallyclassedasslaves,andinadditiontomilitary service in the Janissary corps many performed menial services in and around the court. Some, however, afterappropriatetraining,emergedasthetopmostmilitaryadministratorsandcommandersoftheOttoman armies.Aselectfewrosetothesupremeadministrativepostofgrandvizier.
Andric's story of how the bridge was built is completely historical. A Bosnian peasant's son, Muhammad Sôkôllu (né Sokolović) became grand vizier in 1565, and as such governed the empire until his death in 1579.Havingbeenrecruitedintothesultan'sserviceasayouth,herememberedwellhisBosnianbirth,and among other acts acknowledging his origins, he chose his own blood brother to become patriarch of the Serbianchurch.TheconstructionofthebridgeacrosstheDrinawasanother,similaractemanatingfromthe grandvizier'sdesiretoberememberedintheplaceofhisbirth.
Ever since the Turkish conquest, Bosnian society had comprised a complex intermingling of Moslems, Roman Catholics and Orthodox Christians. As long as Turkish power remained secure, local Moslem dominance was assured, both by the prowess of Moslem landowners and by the sporadic force Ottoman armiescouldbringtobearagainstanyoutsidechallenge.AsOttomanpowerdiminished,however,andthe might of adjacent Christian empires correspondingly increased, the religious divisions of Bosnian society became potentially explosive. Revolt by an oppressed Christian peasantry could expect to win sympathy abroad,eitherinRussia(fortheOrthodox)orinAustria(forRomanCatholics).Simultaneously,mounting populationpressuremadeitharderandharderforthepeasantrytomaintaintraditionalstandardsofliving.
Ontopofthis,earlyinthenineteenthcentury,ahandfulofintellectuals,educatedinGermany,pickedup the idea that nationhood and language belonged together and could only attain full perfection within the bordersofasovereign,independentstate.Sinceexistingliterarylanguagesdidnotdefineclearboundaries between the Slavic dialects spoken in Balkan villages, the ideal of linguistic nationalism intensified confusion in the older religiously structured (and divided) society by offering individuals alternative loyaltiesandprinciplesofpublicidentity.
These circumstances provided the background for the "Eastern question" that so bedeviled nineteenth-centuryEuropeandiplomats.Bosniaplayedaconspicuousrole.FirstitwasMoslemswhorevoltedagainst Constantinople (1821, 1828, 1831, 1838-50) in a vain effort to defend their accustomed privileges. Soon after their reactionary ideals had met final defeat (1850), through military conquest by reformed (i.e., partiallywesternized)Ottomanarmies,ChristianpeasantsofBosnia,objectingtoanintensifiedtaxburden broughtonbyamodernizedadministrati
on,tookupthestandardofrevolt(1862,1875-78).This,inturn, provoked intervention by the Christian powers of Europe, with the result that at the Congress of Berlin (1878), Bosnia and the adjacent province of Herzegovina were placed under an Austrian protectorate. A generationlater,in1908,theAustriansannouncedtheannexationofthesetwoprovincestotheHapsburg crown. This precipitated a diplomatic crisis that was part of the prologue to World War I; and, of course, thatwarwasitselfoccasionedbythemurderoftheArchdukeFerdinandinSarajevo,theBosniancapital,by BosnianrevolutionarieswhowantedtheirlandtobecomepartofSerbia.After1918,theyhadtheirway,for Bosnia was incorporated into the new south Slav kingdom of Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes. During World WarII,Bosnia,becauseofitsmountainouscharacter,becameTito'sprincipalstronghold,andafter1945it wasmadeoneofthesixconstituentrepublicsofthenewfederalYugoslavstate.
Ivo Andric was born in Travnik, Bosnia, in 1892, but he spent his first two years in Sarajevo, where his fatherworkedasasilversmith.Thiswasatraditionalart,preservingartisanskillsdatingbacktoOttoman times;buttastehadchangedandthemarketforthesortofsilverworkIvo'sfatherproducedwasseverely depressed.Thefamilythereforelivedpoorly;andwhenthefuturewriterwasstillaninfant,hisfatherdied, leaving his penniless young widow to look after an only child. They went to live with her parents in VisegradonthebanksoftheDrina,wheretheyoungIvogrewupinanartisanfamily(hisgrandfatherwasa carpenter)playingonthebridgehewaslatertomakesofamous,andlisteningtotalesaboutitsoriginand history which he used so skillfully to define the character of the early Ottoman presence in that remote Bosnian town. The family was Orthodox Christian, i.e., Serb; but in his boyhood and youth Andric was thrownintointimatecontactwiththeentirespectrumofreligiouscommunitiesthatcoexistedprecariously intheBosniaofhisday;andhisfamilysharedthepuzzlingencounterwithastrangenewAustrianworld thatheportrayssosensitivelyin TheBridge on the Drina.
The young Andric returned to Sarajevo to attend secondary school, and there became a nationalist revolutionary.Thisdidnotprevent
himfromattendingHapsburguniversities,atZagreb,Cracow,Vienna,andGraz;butwiththeoutbreakof WorldWarIhispoliticalactivitycausedtheAustrianpolicetoarresthim.Andricthereforespentthefirst threeyearsofWorldWarIinaninternmentcamp,wherehewrotehisfirstsuccessfulbook,publishedin 1918.Onrelease(1917)hetookanactivepartinconductingaliteraryreviewthatadvocatedthepolitical union of all south Slav peoples, and he had a minor part in the political transactions that brought Croatia intothenewKingdomofSerbs,Croats,andSlovenesthatemergedinDecember,1918.
Thereafter, Andric returned to academic pursuits, working towards a doctor's degree at the University of Graz,achievedin1924.Histhesiswasentitled"TheDevelopmentoftheSpiritualLifeofBosniaunderthe InfluenceofTurkishSovereignty."Thesolidandprecisehistoricalinformationthatunderlies TheBridgeon theDrina wasthussystematicallybuiltupthroughacademicstudy;butinsteadofcontinuingasahistorian Andric opted for a diplomatic career. Between 1924 and 1941 he was stationed at various European capitals.Inhissparetimehewroteshortstoriesandplannedhislater,largerworks.
WorldWarIIpresentedhimwiththeenforcedleisurenecessaryforrealizationofthoseambitions.Withthe collapsein1941ofthegovernmenthehadserved,Andric,whohadbeenYugoslavambassadoratBerlin, returnedtoprivatelifeinBelgrade.Duringtheensuingyearsofharshoccupationandmountingresistance, he wrote no less than three novels, including The Bridge on the Drina. They were published in rapid successionin1945,andatonceestablishedhisreputationinYugoslaviaasamajorwriter.Translatedinto English in 1959, The Bridge on the Drina became the principal basis for his Nobel Prize for literature, which,inturn,madehimaliteraryfigureofworldrenown.UnderTito,Andricheldanumberofhonorific offices,butevenaftertheNobelPrizehemaintainedadisciplineofworkthatpermittedcontinuedliterary creation,andkeptazoneofprivacyaroundhimselfthatfewcouldpenetrate.HediedinBelgradein1975.
WhatseemstrulyremarkableaboutAndric'sliteraryachievementin TheBridgeontheDrina isthewayhe entered into the minds of the Moslems of Bosnia. No doubt, in his youth he had ample opportunity to observethefracturedworldinwhichtheBosnianMoslemsfoundthemselves.Veryearlyinlifehefound the Orthodox Christian world view he himself had inherited to be inadequate. Revolutionary linguistic nationalism, to which he lent support in his student days, recognized no distinction between speakers of Serbo-Croatonthebasisoftheirreligion.YetolderhabitsofthoughtandfeelinglingeredoninBosnia,so that Orthodox Serbs and Roman Catholic Croats stubbornly distrusted one another, while both Christian communitiesrememberedtheformerMoslemdominationwithdread.
Clearly,Andricgrewupinaworldwhererivalandmutuallyincompatibleworldviewsfoundthemselvesin acute conflict. This in itself is liable to provoke intellectual detachment, at least among sufficiently intelligent, sensitive, and experienced individuals. Andric's mature years pushed him further in that direction, for his youthful reliance on linguistic nationalism as a means of bridging gaps between Serb, Croat,andMoslemsoonprovedvain.DuringWorldWarIIhesawTitoleadyetanotherrevolutionaryideal topower.Buthisageandtemperamentdidnotallowhimtolendthatmovementactivesupport.Instead,he turned his mind backward to the deeper past, probing for the roots of the conflicts that so distracted his Bosnianhomeland.
In youth he had repudiated the Orthodox outlook. In middle age he was compelled to abandon the expectationofhisyouththatlinguisticnationalismwouldsomehowresolvesocialconflictinBosnia.Just what he thought of the Communist recipe for solving ethnic and social conflicts is unclear. He definitely preferredtheinclusivesouthSlavsympathiesofTito'smovementtothenarrownationalismsofrivalSerb andCroatleaderswhodisputedpowerwiththeCommunistsduringtheoccupationyears.Thismadehim acceptabletothepostwarCommunistgovernment.Yetanyonereading TheBridgeontheDrina willfindit hardtobelievethatitsauthorthoughtMarxismoranyothernewfaithcouldbeexpectedtoresolvelong-standingnationalandreligiousconflicts.
In spite of the many honors paid him by Tito's regime, it seems plausible to suggest that Andric by the 1940shadbecomeathoroughgoingconservative.Heclearlyimpliesthatthesortofculturaltransformation requiredtotranscendBosnia'sreligiousandsocialdivisionswillcostagreatdeal,requiringthesurrenderof
precious local peculiarities and identities. Moreover, to judge by how such changes came in the past, as Andric understands that past, the requisite cultural changes are most likely to come about, if at all, not through intelligence and good will but through force and brutal interference from without—as happened both when the Ottoman identity was implanted on the province from distant, mysterious Constantinople, andwhenwesternpatternswereimposedbyanolessdistantandincomprehensibleVienna.
Such a message cannot appeal to the youthful enthusiast who wants to make all things new and to brush away past errors. But for a person who has lived long enough to experience the persistent gap between human achievement and expectation, Andric's sensitive portrait of social change in distant Bosnia has revelatoryforce.Thatisthewayitwas.Hereishumanreality,stubborn,irregular,awkward,heartfelt,and ever-changinginspiteofeverythingpeoplecandotomaintain,ortooverthrow,inheritedpatternsoflife.
TRANSLATOR'SFOREWORD
Thecustomsandt
hemindsofmenalterlessrapidlythanthevagariesofpolitical
andideologicalchange.ThevisitortoYugoslaviacanstillseethebridgeonthe
Drina,whosefateisdescribedinthisbook,thoughonceagainmodernizedand
repaired. But he will find Višegrad itself less changed than he may expect and
willnotfindithardtoidentifythetypesofAndrić'snovelevenunderanational
stateandacommunistadministration.TheBosnianpeasantfacesthehazardsof
an
egalitarian
administration
with
the
same
incomprehension
and
imperturbability as he faced the novelties of the Austro-Hungarian occupation;
heexperiencedthegreaterbrutalitiesofthelastwarwiththesamecourageand
resignation as he faced those of World War I, and his relations with state
controlledpurchasingagenciesdiffermainlyindegreefromthoseofhisfathers
with the banks and merchants of the Višegrad market. The last war, in Bosnia
especially, showed examples of horror and torment at least equal to those of
Turkishtimes,whiletheidealismandfanaticismofyouth,sowelldescribedin
the conversations on the kapia, have only changed slightly in direction, while retaining their essential mixture of practical politics and imaginative
romanticism.
Dr Ivo Andrić is himself a Serb and a Bosnian. These provincial and religious
subtletiesarestillasimportantinpresent-dayYugoslaviaastheywereinearlier
times.ButinthecaseofDrAndrićtheyhavehadaneffectdifferentfromthaton otherYugoslavwritersandpoliticians.
Instead of intensifying the local and religious conflicts that still bedevil
Yugoslavia—aswasonlytootragicallyshownduringthelastwar—theyhave