Nationalism or Patriotism? Gavrilo Princip: In His Own Words
by Carl Savich
Introduction: Nationalism or Patriotism?
“National hero?” “Criminal terrorist?” “Anarchist?” “Antichrist?” “Liberator?” “Nationalist?” “Patriot?” Who really was Gavrilo Princip? What is nationalism? What is patriotism? Are nationalism and patriotism the same? Different? Are they good or bad? Much has been written about the 1914 Sarajevo assassination, but what did Gavrilo Princip himself think and say?
The assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand in Sarajevo on Kosovo Day or Vidov Dan, St. Vitus Day, June 28, 1914, by Gavrilo Princip was one of the major events of the 20th century. It would lead to two World Wars. It was the spark or first shot of those two global conflicts. David DeVoss stated: “The ensuing Great War cost the lives of 8.6 million combatants and 6.5 million civilians.” The assassination led to the collapse of the old order and ushered in a new era. The assassination was a historical watershed, a defining moment, an act with far-reaching repercussions and ramifications. It represented the culmination, crystallization, and resolution of opposition to Austro-Hungarian occupation of Bosnia-Hercegovina. What motivated the assassination? The motives behind the assassination were a microcosm of the wider motivations for the two world wars: Nationalism and patriotism, independence and sovereignty. In essence, what motivated Gavrilo Princip was in a nutshell what motivated the political leaders of Germany, Great Britain, the United States, Austria-Hungary, Russia, France, Turkey, Serbia, Montenegro. The underlying motives were the same. But what is nationalism? What is patriotism? Are they good or bad?
Nationalism is the goal to identify collectively and as a group into a modern nation-state. Nationalism consists of the aggregation of ethnic groups and nationalities into political bodies or associations, the modern nation-state. Collective or group identification is required as well as an ideology that unifies the mass. Collective behavioral traits are necessary to form an organized group. To understand nationalism, then, political psychology must be examined. What drives the individual to form groups? What impels a single person to identify with others and to submerge his identity into a larger whole, the nation, state, ethnic group, religion, movement, party, association, club?
Nationalism requires empathy and the ability to sublimate one’s identity into a larger, all-encompassing entity or conglomeration. Gavrilo Princip was said to have had this ability to identify with the Serbian people as a whole. Princip spoke of “My Serbian people”. Princip made the sufferings of the Serbian population of Bosnia-Hercegovina his own, demonstrating an empathy and sublimation. DeVoss grudgingly admitted that the Serbian Orthodox population of Bosnia-Hercegovina suffered impoverishment/starvation and the denial of basic human and civil rights and freedoms during the Turkish Ottoman Empire and under the Austro-Hungarian Empire:
For decades the mountains of Bosnia had been a breeding ground for discontent. Serb peasants there were bound by a feudal system that forced them to surrender one-third of their harvest to Bosnian Muslim landlords. Abandoned to their poverty, Bosnia’s embittered Serbs turned inward, seeking inspiration from the heroic songs of wandering balladeers called guslas and instruction from nationalistic Orthodox priests.
Princip was regarded as a “national hero” of Bosnia and Yugoslavia after World War I because of “Gavrilo’s anticolonialism”. The Latin or Lateiner Bridge in Sarajevo near where the assassination took place was renamed Princip’s Bridge (Pricipov Most) and a Museum devoted to Gavrilo Princip and the Young Bosnia Movement (Mlade Bosne) was established in Sarajevo and opened in 1953. The Gavrilo Princip Grahovo Valley home in Hercegovina was declared a “national landmark” after World War II. In 1920, the remains of Gavrilo Princip and the other conspirators were disinterred from Austrian graves and reburied in Sarajevo, at the St. Mark Cemetery, where the Serbian Orthodox community built an Orthodox chapel and monument “to commemorate for eternity our Serb Heroes”, the “Heroes of Vidovdan”. But why then is there controversy?
Following the outbreak of the 1992 Bosnian Civil War and the break-up of Yugoslavia, Gavrilo Princip was transformed from Bosnian/Yugoslavian “national hero” to “criminal terrorist” and according to David DeVoss in “Searching for Gavrilo Princip”, he was “all but forgotten by Bosnia.” The Princip Bridge was renamed yet again the Latin Bridge (Latinski Most) back to what it was known as before the 1914 assassination. The Princip Museum was closed and “all traces of its name had been sandblasted from the exterior. “ The concrete footprints that marked the location where Princip fired his two shots from a .38 Browning have also been removed. The contents of the museum have been stolen, bashed to pieces, or looted. All traces of the event have been erased and cleansed by the Bosnian Muslim faction that now controls the city. The Princip family house in Grahovo was destroyed by US/NATO-backed Croatian troops in 1995. Much of the historical artifacts in the Princip/Young Bosnia Museum in Sarajevo were destroyed or plundered by Bosnian Muslim/Croat troops and civilians.
What Gavrilo Princip represented, the Yugoslav idea, South Slav unity and independence/sovereignty, were repudiated. Gavrilo Princip himself was repudiated. Princip was symbolic of everything that was antagonistic to the New World Order policy of Balkanization and secession. Inevitably his legacy was rebuked and his role was reinterpreted negatively and pejoratively. Princip no longer served a purpose. His legacy was therefore debunked. From “national hero” he was changed into “criminal terrorist”. But which was he?
Was Gavrilo Princip a freedom fighter or was he a criminal terrorist? Was he a national hero or a scoundrel, a villain? Was he a nationalist or a patriot? What did he espouse? Is there such a thing as bad and good nationalisms? Are all nationalisms the same or are they different? This is really the crucial question. The answer is that all nationalisms are exactly the same and follow the same dynamics and patterns in essential respects. Whether they are good or bad nationalisms depends on the conclusion or judgment of the individual making that decision. For example, Saudi Arabian businessman and volunteer Ossama Bin Laden was regarded as a freedom fighter, mujahedeen, in Afghanistan by the US media/government/historians when he was armed, trained, and supplied by the US to kill Soviet/Russian troops in the 1980s, when his role advanced US interests. But when Bin Laden turned on the US and supported mujahedeen attacks on US military and civilian targets, he became a “terrorist”. So from “freedom fighter” (mujahedeen) he became a “terrorist”. During the Bosnian Civil War, 1992-1995, the US/NATO allowed Bin Laden to infiltrate Bosnia and to participate in the war against the Bosnian Serbs as a member of the Bosnian Muslim Army. So during the Bosnian civil war, Bin Laden was a US ally. So how did he go from freedom fighter to terrorist? How did his nationalism change from good nationalism to bad nationalism? The choice is totally arbitrary. We decide based on our own self-interest and our own agenda. The choice is based on moral hypocrisy and is an arbitrary and subjective decision. History can be desultory, ambiguous, and ambivalent, always a function of whose agenda or interests it is advancing, depending on who is writing the history. In Bosnia, history has come full circle. According to DeVoss, “downtown Sarajevo still has the look of a small Austrian town. The bond between Vienna and its former colony remains strong…There even is talk of restoring the monument to Franz Ferdinand and Sophie that was demolished at the end of World War I… Austrian ambassador Valentin Insko …had inquired about restoring the Franz Ferdinand memorial.” The UN administrator for Bosnia, Wolfgang Petritsch, the modern-day Oskar Potiorek, who was the Austro-Hungarian Governor of Bosnia in 1914, is himself Austrian. So even Archduke Franz Ferdinand’s historical role can be revised and changed. DeVoss noted that the main street in Sarajevo has changed names repeatedly. During the Ottoman Empire, the main street in Sarajevo was named after a Muslim Turkish feudal landlord, Cemalusa. After World War I, the street was renamed King Alexander Street. When Bosnia was incorporated in the Ustasha NDH from 1941 to 1945, the street was renamed Adolf Hitler Street. After World War II, the street was yet again renamed, to Marsala Tita, after Josip Broz Tito. In the Balkans, history can be desultorily ambivalent and in flux. Can history get more absurd and ridiculous than this? Similarly, Gavrilo Princip went from the greatest “national hero” in Bosnian history to “criminal terrorist”. But had his role in history actually changed based on new evidence or based upon new knowledge? What changed was our subjective and arbitrary evaluation of his role based upon his usefulness in advancing our own agenda/interests, that is, depending on how we could exploit and manipulate it to advance our interests. But the underlying factors, nationalism and patriotism and sovereignty, remain constant.
What is nationalism? In a 1945 essay “Notes on Nationalism”, George Orwell defined nationalism as “first of all the habit of assuming that human beings can be classified like insects and that whole blocks of millions or tens of millions of people can be confidently labeled ‘good’ or ‘bad’”. Nationalism necessitates an ideological identification with a greater entity and an arbitrary division into “us” and “them”, between “allies” and “enemies”. Sigmund Freud stated that the “narcissism of minor differences” leads to a dichotomy between us and them. We choose some peculiar traits to distinguish ourselves from others to create a group identity alien or antagonistic to others. But this group identification is meant to reassure our ego, our sense of self, and to reinforce our solidarity with the clan, tribe, group, or ethnicity. Group identification is primordial and an elemental component of the human psyche. We have a need to create “enemies” to ensure our solidarity and cohesion and to instill motivation and to mobilize resources against an outside threat. At the center of nationalism is the human need to be part of the tribe, the clan, the group that has always been part of the human psychological make-up. Gustave LeBon analyzed this phenomenon in The Psychology of the Crowd (1895), an examination of collective group behavior and the “mind” of the mob or the group or the “crowd”. Freud examined group psychology in Group Psychology and the Analysis of the Ego (1921). Nationalism and patriotism are psychological manifestations of group or collective behavior common to all ethnic, religious, national groups which are constant throughout history. Politicians and propagandists/PR firms/spin doctors seek to obscure this obvious fact for economic, political, or military advantage or gain, but nationalism and patriotism cannot be understood without a suspension of moral judgment.
Nationalism is group behavior organized around the nation-state, sublimating one’s individuality and individual freedom on behalf of the nation/state/government. Nationalism is “the habit of identifying oneself with a single nation or other unit, placing it beyond good and evil and recognizing no other duty than that of advancing its interests” according to Orwell’s definition. Orwell makes the distinction between “nationalism” and “patriotism”. Nationalism is bad while patriotism is good. Patriotism is defined as “devotion to a particular place and a particular way of life, which one believes to be the best in the world but has no wish to force upon other people” and which is “of its nature defensive, both militarily and culturally”. Nationalism on the other hand is “power hunger tempered by self-deception” whose goal is to “secure more power and more prestige, not for himself but for the nation or other unit in which he has chosen to sink his own individuality.” This distinction between nationalism and patriotism is arbitrary and subjective. Patriotism and nationalism are the exact same things, patriotism is only a milder and weaker form of nationalism, a politically correct form of nationalism if you will. The fact remains that there is no fundamental difference between patriotism and nationalism, one being only a more virulent and strident form of the other. In actual reality, there is only nationalism, by whichever name we call it, patriotism, ethnicity, tribalism. We define nationalism as good or bad solely on subjective and arbitrary criteria based on self-interest, our own agenda, and even whim. All nationalisms are created equal but some are more equal than others to paraphrase Orwell. Moral judgments are inappropriate in the critical analysis of nationalism. There is nothing either good or bad about nationalism. Our own biased and subjective and arbitrary judgment/conclusion makes it so, either good or bad, depending solely upon us. We decide. Nothing is learned and no useful intellectual purpose achieved when arbitrary judgments are substituted for objective analyses.
Who was Gavrilo Princip? What motivated his actions? Immediately after the assassination, Princip was dismissed as an insignificant and trivial actor in the assassination. Austria-Hungary sought to prove that the assassination was planned and organized by the Serbian government. The Sarajevo Trial was organized as a “show trial” to prove that Serbia was behind the assassination, that the Serbian government planned the assassination and was responsible for it. Why was this necessary? Only by showing Serbian state responsibility/complicity could war be declared against Serbia. The assassination became a pretext for a declaration of war by Austria against Serbia. Moreover, various conspiracy theories emerged. Gavrilo Princip was said to be part of a world-wide plot by the Freemasons. Erich von Ludendorff, the Chief of the German Staff, called Princip a “Jew” and alleged that he was part of a Freemason plot in collusion with Austrian, German, and Hungarian Freemasons. Julius Streicher’s official Nazi Party periodical Volkischer Beobachter in a January 8, 1936 article stated that Princip was “a Jew and a Freemason”. On April 6, 1941, on the occasion of the German invasion of Yugoslavia, Adolf Hitler, Austrian by birth, alleged that Gavrilo Princip was part of a plot organized by the British Intelligence Service and held Serbia responsible for the assassination. Most mainstream historians claimed that Princip was part of a conspiracy planned and organized by Colonel Dragutin Dimitrejevic-Apis, a key figure in Ujedinjenje ili Srmt (Union or Death), known as the Black Hand. Princip was thus seen as an instrument of the Black Hand in Bosnia, recruited by Apis to do his dirty work. Princip was thus seen as just a warm body, a cog, a foot soldier, a worthless pawn, a misguided youth manipulated by the Black Hand and Apis, a tool of Serbian Military Intelligence, the Serbian Government, and the Black Hand. Princip was seen as part of a plan organized by Major Vojislav Tankosic (whom Princip referred to as “a naïve man”) also a member of Union or Death. Princip was alleged to have been part of a conspiracy planned by the organization Narodna Odbrana (People’s Defense). He was said to be part of an “anarchist” plot. Princip was even referred to as “the antichrist”. Gavrilo Princip was described as “a Bosnian student”, “a Bosnian youth”, a “Bosnian Serb”, a “Bosnian”, a “Serbian nationalist”, a “19-year-old Serb nationalist”, a “Serbian teenager”, a “revolutionary”, a “national hero”, a “romantic teenage nationalist”, “an idealist”, “the liberator of the Slav people”, a “criminal terrorist”, a “national icon”, a “Jew”, a “Freemason”, an “anarchist”, a “socialist”, “the antichrist”, an agent of the Serbian government, an agent of the Black Hand, an agent of Serbian Intelligence, an agent of British Intelligence. Princip and the other conspirators, who included Nedeljko Cabrinovic, who was the first to attempt the assassination by throwing a bomb, Trifko Grabez, Danilo Ilic, Cvjetko Popovic, Vaso Cubrilovic, Veljko Cubrilovic, Nedjo Kerovic, Misko Jovanovic, Jakov Milovic, Croat Roman Catholic Ivo Kranjcevic, and a Bosnian Muslim, Mehmet Mehmetbasic, who eluded arrest, were termed “revolutionaries”, “Heroes of Vidovdan”, “idealistic schoolboys”. Hamilton Fish Armstrong, the managing editor of Foreign Affairs, described Princip as follows in 1927:
Who was Gavrilo Princip?…What were the ideas and motives of a man whose act so profoundly changed the course of our lives?…He was a patriot and an anarchist. He was an idealist and an assassin. He was a weak neurotic; he was a daring bravo….In describing himself Princip describes a whole generation---nationalist and revolutionary Young Bosnia….
Thousands upon thousands of books, analyses, studies, and treatises emerged following the assassination. Conspiracy theories flourished. Many differing explanations and scenarios were offered. But they all had one thing in common. Gavrilo Princip and his role and motives for the assassination were trivialized or minimized to the point of exclusion. Indeed, Princip was dismissed entirely. He did not matter. He was just an actor, a pawn, a cog in the bigger scheme of things. He was merely an insignificant detail in the bigger picture. What he said or thought was dismissed as unnecessary and superfluous. It did not matter.
Princip wrote poetic verses and corresponded. His testimony at the Sarajevo trial and his conversations with Dr. Martin Pappenheim, preserved as stenographic notes, in 1916 while Princip was in prison in Austria are extant. Pappenheim was a doctor in the Austro-Hungarian Army who worked at military hospitals and prisons, treating and studying shell-shock cases. While on duty at the Theresienstadt Prison, he conducted interviews and conversations with Gavrilo Princip, from February to June, 1916. Theresienstadt would be a Nazi concentration camp during the World War II Holocaust. Hamilton Fish Armstrong said about these conversations: “Here is the psychology of revolution revealed.” Princip revealed that the origin of the assassination was with him: “It was his idea.” Princip stated at the trial that he decided on the assassination or “attentat”, the political murder, even when he was still in Sarajevo: “Even when I was still at Sarajevo I had decided on an attentat. I often went at night to Zerajitch’s grave. I managed to stay there all night and thought over our affairs and our wretched condition, and then I made up my mind.” Moreover, Princip was convinced that the World War was inevitable and was independent of his act: “The World War would not have failed to come, independent of it.” According to Armstrong, Princip regarded the assassination “as an act of patriotism.” Princip spoke openly about the assassination and his role in it. In attempting to understand the 1914 assassination, the words of Gavrilo Princip are important and cannot be so easily dismissed. His words tell us what motivated his actions. We can better understand the event in Sarajevo by letting Gavrilo Princip tell the story himself, in his own words.
Gavrilo Princip: In His Own Words
Motives
I am a Yugoslav nationalist and I believe in the unification of all South Slavs in whatever form of state and that it be free of Austria….I was not for the dynasty. We didn’t think that far, but we thought: unification, by whatever means….By means of terror….That means in general to destroy from above, to do away with those who obstruct and do evil, who stand in the way of the idea of unification…. I did not think of the Karadjeordjevic dynasty. I never thought that after the assassination there would be a war. I thought that it would have an impact on the youth and that they would spread these ideas further…It is the moral duty of Serbia to free the South Slavs from Austria. We heard that from every honest Serb and Croat….Still another principal motive was revenge for all torments which Austria imposed upon the people…. Revenge is bloody and sweet….
The plan was to unite all South Slavs. It was understood that Serbia as the free part of the South Slavs had the moral duty to help with the unification, to be to the South Slavs as the Piedmont was to Italy…The political union of the Yugoslavs was always before my eyes, and that was my basic idea. Therefore it was necessary in the first place to free the Yugoslavs from the Svabe and from Austria; for every misfortune which hits the Yugoslavs stems from Austria. This spirit was especially developed among the youth in the Yugoslav lands and was a consequence of the embitterment of the people. This and all the rest moved me to carry out the assassination of the Heir Apparent, for I considered him, in regard to his activity, as very dangerous for Yugoslavia.
Not all exactly like myself. It was not necessary for all to be of the same opinions in the carrying out of his own ideas, nor was it necessary that everyone employ the same means….It was the opinion that Austria behaved badly to our people, which is true, and certainly that she is not necessary.
Hail to Zerajic! Hail and nothing else! He was my first model. At night I used to go to his grave and vow that I would do the same as he…The grave was neglected and we put it in order…I accept the ruling and warning, but I retain my opinions!
I had little to do with people at all. Wherever I went, people took me for a weakling---indeed, for a man who would be completely ruined by immoderate study of literature. And I pretended that I was a weak person, even though I was not.
Once, while we were talking about the plot at the Café Sturgeon, Ciganovic told us that on such and such a year the Freemasons sentenced Franz Ferdinand to death…As far as I am concerned, Ciganovic did not wish to give us weapons when we asked him the first time; he did this only at our second meeting. He said that he wanted to talk about the whole thing in detail with one man.
I have crossed so many times from Serbia to Bosnia and vice versa, and this time I could have done the same, but I wished to make a crossing this time as safe as possible.
The June 28, 1914 Sarajevo Assassination
I said, “How about arranging an assassination?”---after which he showed me some newspaper clippings….They confirmed the news that the Heir Apparent was coming to Bosnia. At that we definitely decided to carry out the assassination…. When I came to Belgrade in the month of March I read it in the newspapers. I think the German ones….The final decision fell at the time when we received the newspaper clipping. Before that I thought of the assassination for myself… We thought about how to obtain them. If there were no means at all, we might at least manage to buy a revolver….We spoke about the Narodna Odbrana, but we knew that they would not give us the means because we were not known there. Then I tried to turn to someone in order to become acquainted with Ciganovic. I had known him earlier, but not well enough to speak of the assassination. Thus Bukovac introduced me, and I told Ciganovic what I wished to do, but that I did not have the means. I asked him to give us bombs because I knew he had them, and that we would take care of the revolvers ourselves. He was quiet for a while and then he said, “We’ll see.” In the main he agreed at once to give them to me….He agreed completely…He was a Serb….A railway clerk….He was a refugee from Bosnia, and visited those cafes….The Pozorisna Kafana (Theater Café), Zirovni Venac, Amerika….There were Bosnians….For the most part they were nationalists….In my opinion, every Serb, Croat and Slovene should be an enemy of Austria….I had never discussed an assassination, but I had talked about the situation of the people and on the conditions in Bosnia and in general in Austria. I had never been intimate enough with him to make it possible for me to talk about carrying out an assassination….After some time Ciganovic said to me that he would give me bombs. Because those bombs exploded after several seconds, success with them was not certain. I told him that we needed revolvers. He told me to take care of that ourselves, but because I am poor he would see to supplying arms. He told me that he would see to it later. I don’t know how he came to that. I don’t know what he said to Tankosic…A naïve man…He has absolutely nothing to do with the Narodna Odbrana; on the contrary he is in conflict with the secretary and with the executive committee in general….He was a volunteer. Otherwise he is nothing in the Narodna Odbrana….Cabrinovic had money, and Grabez is well off….Just in a conversation I mentioned, “How about contacting the Narodna Odbrana, which gives support to impoverished students.”….I talked with Ilic earlier about the means to found an organization which would act so that we could get money, as revolutionaries do. But in this case it wasn’t necessary…
I don’t know. I think Ciganovic talked with him….Ciganovic said that Tankosic summoned him….He said that he was interested but that Tankosic made a bad impression on him. Tankosic sent for one of us, and we decided that Grabez would go….To see whether we were capable. For the rest, I have told all before. It is inconvenient for me to talk when I am standing here. He was of the same opinion as we. We studied together and so on, and we knew each other….Before our departure…I examined them when I was at Ciganovic’s….He had about twelve pieces before the Bulgarian war…I had in Prokuplje and Belgrade. I had trained with Brownings on the Drina frontier and at Topcider….On Ascension Day…Two days before…I got 150 dinars from Ciganovic…From Sarajevo I went to Hadzici. I was at my brother’s one day and I went back to Sarajevo to attend a festival of the Omladina. I took a room at Ilic’s and I talked with him about the assassination…Because I said to him to find reliable people, he said, “Good.” Because I believed that he was reliable, I believed that he would also find trustworthy companions….He was a nationalist like me. A Yugoslav….He was. That all the Yugoslavs had to be unified….We decided that one of us would go. Because I had already gone once we decided that he should go. He went several days later. I told him how to meet with Jovanovic and what to say to him and he left…Yes, a box of Stefanija cigarettes….Then he came back to Sarajevo. He didn’t tell me who he saw. I stayed with him until the assassination and we talked the whole time. On the last day he did not wish to carry out the assassination. He wanted to dissuade me, but I insisted that we had to carry it out. Because he saw that it would be useless to talk to me, he stopped. I only said to him to see to it that the people to whom we gave arms to perform the assassination were reliable….I took them from the house about eight o’clock and took a walk. He also took some and I don’t know who he gave them to or where they had agreed to meet. Some got them a day or so earlier….On the day of the assassination I wanted to find someone who would not be conspicuous, and I found the son of the prosecutor, Svara, and one Spiric. First I walked with Spiric. Then we invited Svara and we walked and talked about ordinary things. At first we were in the park and I wanted to stay there, but they wanted to go to the Korso. I didn’t want to stay there because I had to go to my place. So I returned there and I walked on the quay and I was at my assigned place…In any case Ilic had in the last ten days repeatedly expressed the opinion that we should not attempt this assassination because the present time was not favorably chosen and we should have no profit from this assassination. But I was not in agreement with the postponement of the assassination because a certain morbid yearning for it had been awakened in me….He said that now was not the time for an assassination and that it could have bad consequences, that there would be persecution of the people. I that that it would not be of such dimensions as happened after the assassination and I did not let him influence me…
I said that I had Ilic and that I could count on him…Only Sarac knew him, not Ciganovic.
If you want to know, they are. We are going to Sarajevo to assassinate the Heir Apparent. Now you know about it, you have to keep it quiet….. If I could force the whole of carsija in a box, I would set it alight….Bosnia is a tear in the eye of Serbia…
I acknowledge it and do not complain, but I am sorry that I have killed the Duchess of Hohenberg, because I had no intention of killing her…
The automobile arrived and I heard the blast of a bomb. I knew that that was one of ours, but I didn’t know which one. The mob started to run, and I ran a little too and the automobile stopped. I thought that it was over and I saw that they had Cabrinovic. I thought that I would kill him so that no one would know anything further, and then kill myself, too. I abandoned that idea, because I saw that the automobiles passed by. Up to then I had not seen the Archduke. I went to the Latin Bridge and then I heard that the assassination had not succeeded. Then I took thought as to where to stand, because I knew where he would pass from having read it in the Bosanska Posta and the Tagblatt. Then I saw that a lady was sitting with him, but because they passed so fast I did not know whether she was sitting. Then I stood and one Pusar came up to me and talked with me and said, “Do you see how dumb they are?” I was silent. He called me aside and because I thought he was a spy I thought that he wanted to get something out of me. A relative of his is a spy, so I thought that he was too. I don’t know whether or not he was near me, but then the automobile came and I took out the revolver and I shot at Ferdinand twice from the distance of four or five paces.
I saw that someone else sat there; I wanted to kill Potiorek….Because he was with them, I thought also of him and I am not sorry about that, because I believe that I did away with one evil and I thought that was good. In general he did evil to all things. He is the initiator of the “exceptional measures” and of the high treason trial….Those are all consequences from which the people suffer….That they are completely impoverished; that they are treated like cattle. The peasant is impoverished. They destroy him completely. I am a villager’s son and I know how it is in the villages. Therefore I wanted to take revenge, and I am not sorry. …They especially affected the Serbs. Thus all that influenced me. I knew that he is an enemy of the Slavs. As the prosecutor said, I did not think that he is a genius, but I thought that he would interfere with and harm the Slavs….As the future ruler, with our unification. He would introduce certain reforms, which, you understand, would be harmful to us…I did not know whether I had struck home. At that time I didn’t even know how many shots I had fired. Because I wanted to kill myself I raised my arm but the policemen and some officers grabbed me and beat me. Then, bloody as I was, they took me to the police station. Then they beat me again in order not to be unrevenged.
After Cabrinovic was caught, I went to the corner of the Appel Quay and Franz Josef Street, just at Schiller’s shop, when Mihajlo Pusara came to me, saying: “Look what has happened!” I replied: “I have seen it. What nonsense to commit such a thing at this time!” He then said that this had not been a good thing to do, and he invited me to go to the Sloga society, because there was a celebration. I was very much afraid of Mihajlo Pusara, because he was often in our company. I thought he was a spy, because he used to dine at his relative Simon Pusara’s, who is an innkeeper and a detective, and therefore I thought that when Pusara took me by the arm he wanted to take me to somewhere and search me. Therefore, I did not let myself be taken by the arm and when a moment later “Long Live” was heard, I succeeded in getting through the crowd to the corner of Schiller’s shop.
When the second car arrived, I recognized the Heir Apparent. But as I saw that a lady was sitting next to him I reflected for a moment whether I should shoot or not. At the same moment I was filled with a peculiar feeling and I aimed at the Heir Apparent from the pavement---which was made easier because the car was proceeding slower at that moment. Where I aimed I do not know. But I know that I aimed at the Heir Apparent. I believe that I fired twice, perhaps more, because I was so excited. Whether I hit the victims or not, I cannot tell, because instantly people started to hit me….
At the first moment I intended to throw the bomb, which I had in my belt on the left side. But because the bomb was screwed closed it would not have been easy for me to open. Also, in so great a crowd it would have been difficult to take it out and throw it. Therefore I drew the revolver instead and raised it against the automobile without aiming. I even turned my head as I shot. I let go two shots one after the other, but I am not certain whether I shot twice or more often, because I was very excited. That is also why I did not want to throw the bomb, because the strength for this failed me. Thereupon the people began to lynch me. Somebody took the revolver away from me, and the bomb fell out of my belt.
I had the firm intention to kill myself and therefore had the opinion that no one would know after the completed assassination why it was done. My thought was therefore only on the success of the assassination; of some unfavorable consequence or other I had not thought at all.
What do you think I am, a beast?
I do not feel like a criminal because I put away the one who was doing evil…..Austria represents the evil for our people, as it is, and therefore it should not exist….Do not pay any attention to my defense, concentrate all your efforts on the defense of the other three; try to save their necks and study their cases more thoroughly. If you waste your time on my defense, this will be at the expense of the other three. You could help them, because they are innocent, while I, in any case, am ready to face the worst.
I will explain everything in detail and name the guilty, but only so that innocent people do not suffer. For we guilty ones were in any case ready to go to our deaths. I nevertheless request that you confront me briefly before the hearing with Danilo Ilic and Trifko Grabez, to whom I want to say only two or three words. Then I will tell everything. Otherwise I will confess nothing at all, even if you beat me to death….Confess everything, how we got the bombs, how we traveled and in what society we were, so that just people do not come to harm….Since the court has already learned much and so that we can save the innocent it is necessary that you tell everything, among whom you divided the weapons and where the weapons are.
Serbia may be invaded but not conquered. Serbia will one day create Yugoslavia, mother of all South Slavs.
Letters and Journals
The wet logs on the open fire gave the only light to the closely packed kmets and their wives, wrapped in thick smoke. If I tried to penetrate the curtain of smoke, the most that I could see were the eyes of the human beings., numerous, sad and glaring with some kind of fluid light coming from nowhere. Some kind of reproach, even threat, radiated from them, and many times since then they have awakened me from my dreams.
I flunked, Gavro….Look up on the map where Prokuplje is. We are now here, and where we shall go further we do not know. (“For freedom and fatherland.”)
Regards from yours,
Gavro
Gone are the days of annoyance and boredom behind the dirty scribbled desks---holidays are here. After three days of celebration at home, we decided to enliven these hot and boring days---and travel somewhere---let us go to the Bjelasnica Mountain and beyond; no sooner said than done. We left Hadzici at sunset when the western sun was blazing in purple splendor, when the numberless rays of the blood-red sun filled the whole sky and when the whole of nature was preparing to sleep through the beautiful, dreamy summer evening in the magic peace----that beloved, ideal night of the poet. Walking briskly, we reached the foot of the Bjelasnica Mountain, boasting of our speed and wiping large beads of sweat from our brows. After a short rest and a bite at the edge of the forest, we started to climb…Without a word we progressed hesitantly through the forest, entranced by the magic, deep silence, listening to the whisperings of the sweet-smelling flowers and motionless trees. Following our noses, we struggled upward through the thick forest; we looked at each other despairingly when we were surrounded by hellish darkness, which seemed like the laughter of ugly monsters. A light, faint shudder went to out rather weary limbs, and we continued to march upward in silence, lumbering over fallen trunks and scattered branches. Heavens, how many times the thought went through my mind that I would be hurled into some bottomless precipice. We could go no further. We ate our frugal supper. We built a fire---the best sight I ever saw. No poet has ever described it well enough. Oh, if you could have seen what beautiful and ever-changing scenes were made by the lively red fire and black …. Hellish darkness, the whispering of the tall, black fir trees, and this hideous Night, the protector of hell and its sons; it seemed to me like the whisperings of bedeviled giants and nymphs, as if we were hearing the song of the four sirens and the sad Aeolian harp or divine Orpheus. My companions fell asleep around the fire. I could not. I was sleepy, I dozed, but how could one sleep in this empire of brooding illusions. A little storm---the wild winds howled sadly through the silent giant trees. My friends woke up - with regret - my heartache, my sorrow, my life---my visions and my illusions. We started to sing a sad song, and my own heart whispered and trembled more strongly than my bedeviled monsters. My companions burrowed into the leaves, and I sang, dreamed and prayed to my secret; oh, what sweet and painful moments in the beautiful time before the dawn, sweeter than sleep, more beautiful and ideal than any European poet has described it - this heavenly flash and blood-red-coral sun could only be described by a son of the glorious and imaginative east. Look at it and you will see it. After a happy and pleasant halt at Mr. Setnik’s, we continued our journey…
Bjelasnica Mountain, June 25, 1911.
Gavrilo Princip,
Fifth Grade,
The Sarajevo High School
I feel a deep, sincere pain reading your letter, as if I were looking at the grief of a girl abandoned by everyone and forgotten. Do not suffer and do not let bloodshot eyes reveal your sorrow. Think and work. One needs a lot of strength in order to live, and action creates this. Physical labor also strengthens the character and firmness of will. Be individualistic, never altruistic. My life also is full of bitterness and gall, my wreath has more thorns than others. I go from nothingness to nothingness, from day to day, and in me there is less and less of myself. Do read, you must read: this is the best way to forget the tragic side of reality. How beautiful Wilde’s The Happy Prince is….Is the rose I gave you on our departure still alive? I know that it withered a long time ago, but perhaps the memory is enough to make it blush. I would like so much to be with you again in the first warm days of autumn somewhere under the leafy branches, and to hear you reciting to me:
In the black knot of the pine tree
The cricket chirps away
With the stifling trochee and strident black iambus.
It is noon. The sun’s dithyramb is dispersed like the becalmed sea.
Poetic Verses
Time goes slowly and
There is nothing new---
Today everything is like yesterday,
And tomorrow will bring the same---
But I will always remember
The just words of the fallen falcon Zerajic:
“He who wants to live, has to die.
He who is ready to die, will live for ever.”
Instead of being on the battlefields,
Where the war trumpets are blown;
Here we are in the dungeons,
Listening to the jingling of chains.
…
Our ghosts will walk through Vienna
And roam through the Palace, frightening the lords.
Dr. Martin Pappenheim’s Conversations With Gavrilo Princip
Prison
19 II 1916
27 VII 1894. Here since 5 XII 1914. The whole time in solitary confinement. Three days ago, chains off. Father a peasant, but occupies himself with enterprises. Father a quiet man, does not drink. Father lives at Grahovo, Bosnia. No diseases in the family. School at Sarajevo 5 classes, then 3 classes at Belgrade without matura.
Always has been healthy. Knew nothing of serious injuries before the assassination. At that time injuries on the head and all over. At that time senseless. Scarlet fever. No bed-wetting. In the Gymnasium, sleepwalking. Walking about the room. Only during one year. Was waked up. In the third class. Never had attacks of unconsciousness.
Always “excellent student” up to the fifth class. Then fell in love. Began to have ideals. Left the school in Sarajevo in 1911. At that time nationalistic demonstrations were taking place against Tisza. Was in the first lines of the students. Was badly treated by the professors. Read many anarchistic, socialistic, nationalistic pamphlets, belles letters and everything. Bought books himself; did not speak about these things. Father not occupied with political matters. Was not much with other schoolboys, always alone. Was always quiet, sentimental child. Always earnest, with books, pictures, etc. Even as a child was not particularly religious.
Designates the year 1911 as critical. Went alone to Belgrade. Told nobody about it. Father and brother would not send any money. Promised to be a good student. Then they agreed with his remaining in Belgrade.
Father 54 years old, mother 45 years. Two other brothers, one 26, one 18 years. Six others died as small children before 10 years. Himself the fourth child. Of his brothers, one a student in the Real-schule and the other a merchant. Brothers quite ordinary men. The love for the girl did not vanish, but he never wrote her. Relates that he knew her in the fourth class; ideal love, never kissed; in this connection will reveal no more of himself. Study as a private student. Intercourse with nobody’ solitary, always in libraries. Wanted to go into the Balkan War, but was found too weak. Was every year for some months as a brother’s in the neighborhood of Sarajevo.
Only in May, 1914, took examinations for the eighth class. At the time of the assassination was injured on the head and back and all over. Took cyanide of potassium, but was weak and vomited.
It is very hard in solitary confinement, without books, with absolutely nothing to read and intercourse with nobody. Always accustomed to read, suffering most from not having anything to read. Sleeps usually only four hours in the night. Dreams a great deal. Beautiful dreams. About life, about love, not uneasy. Thinks about everything, particularly about conditions in his country. He had heard something about the war. Had heard a tragic thing, that Serbia no longer exists. His life is in general painful, now that Serbia does not exist. It goes hard with my people. The World War would not have failed to come, independent of it. Was a man of ideals wanted to revenge the people. The motives---revenge and love. All the young men were in the same sort of revolutionary temper. Spoke of anarchistic pamphlets which incited to murder.
Thinks differently today, thinks a social revolution is possible in all Europe, as things are changing. Will say no more in the presence of the guard. Is not badly treated. All behave properly toward him.
Admits attempt at suicide a month ago. Wanted to hang himself with the towel. It would be stupid to have a hope. Has a wound on the breast and on the arm….A life like mine, that’s impossible. At that time, about 12 o’clock, he could not eat, was in bad spirits, and on a sudden came the idea to hang himself. If he had opportunity he would do it. Thinks of his parents and all, but hears nothing of them. Confesses longing. That must exist in everybody.
Prison Hospital
12 V 1916
He recognizes me immediately and shows pleasure at seeing me. Since 7 IV here in hospital. Always nervous. Is hungry, does not get enough to eat. Loneliness. Gets no air and sun here; in the fortress took walks. Has no longer any hope for his life. There is nothing for him to hope for. Life is lost. In former days was a student, had ideals. Everything that was bound up with his ideals is all destroyed. My Serbian people. Hopes that something may turn for the better, but is skeptical. The ideal of the young people was the unity of the South Slav peoples, Serbs and Croats, Slovenes, but not under Austria. In a kind of state, republic or something of the sort. Thought that if Austria were thrown into difficulties then a revolution would come. But for such a revolution one must prepare the ground, work up feeling. Nothing happened. By assassination this spirit might be prepared. There already had been attempts at assassination before. The perpetrators were like heroes to our young people. He had no thought of becoming a hero. He wanted merely to die for his idea. Before the assassination he had read an article of Kropotkin about what we can do in case of a world-wide social revolution. Studied, talked about it. Was convinced it was possible…
For two months has heard nothing more of events. But it all is indifferent to him, on account of his illness and the misfortune of his people. Has sacrificed his life for the people. Could not believe that such a World War could break out as a result of an act like his. They did indeed think that such a World War might break out, but not at that moment.
On being requested to write something on the social revolution, he writes on a sheet of paper the following, saying that for two years he has not had a pen in hand. Translates: “On a certain occasion we spoke among comrades on a question which Kropotkin had put in Welfare for All---What will the anarchists do in case of a social revolution? We all took this more for a phrase of an old revolutionist than that he had seriously thought such a revolution possible at this time. But we nevertheless all debated over this revolution and nearly all admitted that such a revolution was possible, but according to our conviction that previously in all Europe there must be created between peoples….”
Broke off here, feeling ill. My thoughts are already---I am very nervous.
…Cannot believe that the World War was a consequence of the assassination; cannot feel himself responsible for the catastrophe; therefore, cannot say if it was a service. But fears he did it in vain. Thought that Serbia and Montenegro should help in case of a revolution of the national States in Austria.
Our old generation was mostly conservative, but in the people as a whole existed the wish for national liberation. The older generation was of a different opinion from the younger as to how to bring it about. In the year ’78 many Serb leaders and generals prayed for liberation from the Turks. The older generation wanted to secure liberty from Austria in a legal way; we do not believe in such a liberty.
It naturally goes hard with our co-nationals in Austria. Also does not believe it goes well with the Czechs and Poles. Has heard and read that the Slav peoples in Austria are badly off. Are persecuted. In Bosnia high treason trials and Iznimne mjere---exceptional law. That often existed in Bosnia. In Bosnia too few schools. In Serbia more, ten times more. In Belgrade six Gymnasia, in all Bosnia four. One million, nine hundred thousand people of all faiths.
The time before he wrote ten lines and one word. Now after this talk he continues writing again. Stops often and reflects. Complains himself that it is difficult for him. Ceases writing again after fifteen lines. Again translates: “… there must be created a relation where all differences equalize…, are equalized, between European peoples. But we as nationalists, although we had read socialistic and anarchistic writings, did not occupy ourselves much with this question, thinking that each of us had another duty---a national duty.”…
18 V 1916
Wound worse, discharging very freely. Looking miserable. Suicide by any sure means is impossible. “Wait to the end.” Resigned, but not really very sad.
…Sometimes in a philosophical mood, sometimes poetical, sometimes quite prosaic. Thinks about the human soul. What is the essential in human life, instinct or will, or spirit---what moves man?
Many who have spoken with him think he is a child, think that he was inspired by others, only because he cannot express himself sufficiently, is not in general gifted as a talker. Always a reader and always alone, not often engaging in debates.
Cabrinovic and Grabez were with him in Serbia. The three had resolved to carry out the assassination. It was his idea. Thought first of an attempt on Potiorek. Had come from Belgrade to Sarajevo, to his brother’s. Was always in company of Ilic, who has since died; was his best friend. Resolved that one of them should make an attempt on Potiorek. That was in October or November, 1913. He was in the hospital. Ilic was a little lightheaded, spoke of pan-Slavist ideas, said they should first create an organization. In all Bosnia and Croatia. Then, when all was ready, they should make the attempt. Therefore the plan was given up. Wanted first to study further himself, at Belgrade in a library. Thought he was not yet ripe and independent enough to be able to think about it.
Went in February to Belgrade. Heard in March that the Heir Apparent comes to Sarajevo. Thought it would be a chance. Spoke with Cabrinovic on this matter, who was of the same opinion. Cabrinovic said he ought to leave the attempt to him. But he was a type-setter, not of sufficient intelligence. Thought he was not sufficiently nationalist because previously and anarchist and socialist. Said they would both do it.
…Read much in Sarajevo. In Sarajevo used to dream every night he was a political murderer, struggling with gendarmes and policemen. Read much about the Russian revolution, about the fightings. This idea had taken hold of him. Admits that the earlier constraints had vanished…
Knows Grabez from boyhood, was also with him at Belgrade. Knew that he had similar thoughts. In March Grabez takes examination in the eighth class and returns to Sarajevo to prepare for matura. Said to him to tell Ilic. This one agreed. But he had no energy. Reading had---he confessed---made him quite slack. Ilic was under his influence, though he was five years older and already a teacher. Wrote he himself would also take part. Said he should procure five or six weapons. In cipher writing.
Grabez came back again to Belgrade a fortnight later, resolved on participation. First Princip told him to save himself for another occasion. But then we he came back to Belgrade, he said he would participate. Major Tankosic knew at the last moment, when they were already mentally ready.
Ciganovic, a Bosnian Serb, was there as deserter. Princip told him about it because he had bombs, he was komitadji. When he was ready to go back to Sarajevo he told him who it was that the attempt was to be made against. Ciganovic promised him also to procure revolvers from Tankosic, who was chief of komitadjis. Then got the revolvers. Went then, at the end of May, the 26th of May, to Sarajevo.
In the following month he was still able to read and study quietly. Had a nice library, because always was buying books. Books for me signify life. Therefore now so hard without books.
Thought that as a result of repeated attempts at assassination there could be built up an organization such as Ilic desired, and that then there would be general revolution among the people. Now comprehends that a revolution, especially in the military state of Austria, is of no use. What he now thinks the right thing he would not say. Has no desire to speak on the matter. It makes him unquiet to speak about it. When he thinks by himself, then everything is clear, but when he speaks with anybody, then he becomes uncertain.
If he had something to read for only 2-3 days, he could then think more clearly and express himself better. Does not speak to anybody for a month. Then when I come he wants to speak about ideas, about dominating thoughts. He considered that if he prepared the atmosphere the idea of revolution and liberation would spread first among men of intelligence and then later in the masses. Thought that thereby attention of the intelligentsia would be directed upon it. As for instance Mazzini did in Italy at the time of the Italian liberation. Thought that the Kingdoms of Serbia and Montenegro should be united.
5 VI
When permission comes, arm is to be amputated. His usual resigned disposition.
Conclusion
There is no need to carry me to another prison. My life is already ebbing away. I suggest that you nail me to a cross and burn me alive. My flaming body will be a torch to light my people on their path to freedom.
Even when I was still at Sarajevo I had decided on an attentat. I often went at night to Zerajitch’s grave. I managed to stay there all night and thought over our affairs and our wretched condition, and then I made up my mind.”
In trying to insinuate that someone else has instigated the assassination, one strays from the truth. The idea arose in our own minds, and we ourselves executed it. We have loved the people. I have nothing to say in my defense.
Sources:
Armstrong, Hamilton Fish. “Confessions of the Assassin Whose Deed Led to the World War”. Current History, Vol. XXVI, Number 5, August, 1927, pp. 699-707.
Dedijer, Vladimir. The Road to Sarajevo. NY: Simon and Schuster, 1966.
DeVoss, David. “Searching for Gavrilo Princip.” Smithsonian, August, 2000, Volume 31, Number 5, pp. 43-53.
Jevdjevic, Dobrosav. Sarajevski Atentatori. Zagreb: Binoza, 1934.
Owings, W.A. Dolph. The Sarajevo Trial. Cherry Hill, NC: Documentary Publications, 1984.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...enary.html
My great uncle started World War One: Relative of the man who assassinated Franz Ferdinand caught in the middle of diplomatic row as Bosnia plans to mark centenary of his act
Gavrilo Princip shot and killed Archduke Franz Ferdinand on June 28, 1914
Tensions run deep as city of Sarajevo prepares to mark the centenary
Many see Princip as a hero who liberated a nation after years of oppression
But to others he was terrorist who plunged Europe into years of war
Two rival sets of events are being planned, amid accusations of 'revisionism'
By DAILY MAIL REPORTER
PUBLISHED: 10:00, 11 March 2014 | UPDATED: 19:40, 11 March 2014
127 shares 30View
comments
To some he is hero, a selfless freedom fighter who liberated his nation after years of oppression.
But to others he is a ruthless terrorist who lit the fuse for World War One, plunging Europe into years of darkness and despair.
Now, 100 years after 19-year-old Gavrilo Princip assassinated Archduke Franz Ferdinand and his wife, Sophie, as they rode through Sarajevo, the act continues to create bitter divisions in a deeply fractured country.
Scroll Down for Video
+11
Miljkan Princip, the grandson of Gavrilo Princip's brother, poses with a photo of the assassin's old house as he stands in front of it in Bosansko Grahovo
Among those caught in the middle of the row is Princip's great nephew who was given his name and still resides in East Sarajevo, where he runs a hotel.
Serbs who fled the region are collecting money to rebuild the family home in time for the centenary on June 28.
More...
MAX HASTINGS: Yes, slavery was evil. But it would be insane to force us to pay damages for age-old wrongs
Winston Churchill's country estate gets its sixth marmalade kitten named Jock in honour of dying request
Newsnight host Jeremy Paxman claims modern society is too 'self obsessed' with no concept of 'duty' to fight a World War Three
Princip's house is one of hundreds of gutted homes scarring the bleak plateau, untouched since they were sacked by Croat forces on the heels of fleeing Serbs at the end of the Bosnian war. The Sarajevo footprints have gone.
The house was razed three times, during the two world wars and again in 1995. They're wasting their time, said Gavrilo.
'It will be burned down and destroyed again,' he said. 'We build and then we destroy. That's how things are in Bosnia.'
An assassin who sparked WWI divides his native Bosnia
+11
Fateful day: Archduke Ferdinand and his wife Sophie ride through Sarajevo one hour before they were shot and killed by Serb nationalist Gavrilo Princip
+11
This is an artist's impression of the moment when Archduke Ferdinand and his wife were shot by Gavril Princip
Bosnian Serb forces under Ratko Mladic attempted just that eight decades later.
Sarajevo mayor Ivo Komsic, a Bosnian Croat, noted the city's role in the two wars that framed the last century when unveiling plans for the centenary last month.
'The eyes of the world will be focused on Sarajevo once more and it is important that we send messages completely different from the messages of war sent in 1914 and 1992,' he said.
Such comparisons have riled Serbs in Bosnia and neighbouring Serbia, for whom Princip is a pan-Slavic hero, the shot he fired marking the death knell for centuries of foreign occupation over Serbs, Croats and Bosniaks alike.
THE ASSASSINATION OF ARCHDUKE FRANZ FERDINAND AND HIS WIFE
Archduke Ferdinand was killed in Sarajevo, the capital of Bosnia and Herzegovina, alongside his wife, Sophie on June 28 1914.
Eventually killed by 19-year-old Gavrilo Princip, the couple had earlier that day been attacked by another man who threw a grenade at their car.
Archduke Ferdinand was shot in the neck, while his wife was hit in the abdomen.
The assassination is believed to have started a domino effect which led to the break out of the First World War a month later.
Princip and others wanted Bosnia to become part of Serbia.
This action led to Austria-Hungary declaring war on Serbia.
After that Serbia's ally Russia, and Russia's allies France and Britain, were pulled into conflict with Austria-Hungary and its treaty partner, Germany.
Two rival sets of events are being planned, and accusations of 'revisionism' are flying at a time of renewed Cold War-style tensions between East and West.
The row goes to the heart of Bosnia today, a country still affected by big-power divisions and still arguing about the past, divided by the present and uncertain about the future.
'We haven't moved on,' said Bosnian historian Vera Katz. 'It's like we're 100 years before 1914, not 100 years after.'
Sarajevo bookended the 20th century, opening with Princip's Browning revolver and closing with the sniper rifles and mortars of his ethnic kin besieging the city from the hills during Bosnia's 1992-95 war.
To some, like the woman at the museum, the two events were part of the same arc of Serb nationalism.
According to that narrative, Princip was a 'terrorist' bent on uniting Orthodox Serb lands at the expense of Bosnia's Muslim Bosniaks and Catholic Croats.
This was the official narrative for decades in socialist Yugoslavia, when Princip was venerated as a freedom fighter for all the nations and faiths gathered together by Josip Broz Tito.
Schools and roads took the assassin's name. His footprints were enshrined in the pavement at the spot from which he fired.
In his native mountain region of Bosansko Grahovo, a plaque erected in 1949 still stands above the doors to the local school, hailing Princip's 'fearless' fight for the 'national freedom of our peoples'.
Today, the plaque is blackened, licked by the flames that razed the school in 1995 as Yugoslavia crumbled.
Sarajevo, now inhabited largely by Bosniaks, plans to mark the centenary of the assassination with a series of cultural events sponsored in large part by France and also with the help of Austria and possibly the European Union.
+11
The grandson of Gavrilo Princip's brother, Miljkan Princip poses with an old photograph of Princip's house as he stands in front of the ruined building in Bosansko Grahovo
+11
Mayor of Bosansko Grahovo stands in the house which once belonged to Gavrilo Princip whose assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand is widely believed to have lit the fuse for World War One
It will take place at a sensitive time in international relations, with Western nations accusing Serb big power backer Russia of preparing to annex Crimea from Ukraine and Moscow arguing it is defending Russians from Western stooges in Kiev.
Organisers of the Sarajevo commemoration, who are hoping to get funding from the EU, say it will steer clear of the issue of whether Princip was terrorist or hero.
The centrepiece will be a concert of the Vienna Philharmonic in the city's much-loved Vijecnica, Sarajevo's city hall-turned-National Library that burned down at the start of the 43-month Bosnian Serb siege of the city. The concert will mark its reopening.
On June 27, French philosopher Bernard Henri-Levy, who supported the Bosniak call for Western intervention to halt the war in Bosnia, will premiere his latest play in Sarajevo, which deals specifically with the 1992-95 conflict.
Bosnia's autonomous Serb Republic has refused to participate, except in a leg of the Tour de France cycling race in the capital on June 20-23.
+11
A political poster in Gavrilo Princip's hometown of Bosansko Grahovo is pictured above graffiti bearing the assassin's name
+11
Destroyed buildings in Gavrilo Princip's hometown Bosansko Grahovo. His house was one of hundreds sacked by Croat forces on the heels of fleeing Serbs at the end of the Bosnian war
+11
Gavrilo Princip's house was razed three times, during the two world wars and again in 1995
Instead, the Serbs plan their own ceremony in Visegrad, a town made famous by Ivo Andric's 1945 novel 'Bridge on the Drina', and infamous by Serb paramilitaries who tossed their victims from the Ottoman bridge in 1992 as the first waves of the war washed through eastern Bosnia.
The Serb events will be choreographed by filmmaker Emir Kusturica, a Sarajevan born into a Bosniak family but who later took on the Serbian Orthodox faith, who plans to stage an opera about the assasination and show a documentary about Princip.
Authorities in Serb-controlled East Sarajevo say plans are in the pipeline for a statue of the assassin.
'We once all lived in one state (Yugoslavia), and we never looked on it as any kind of terrorist act, as some historians try to present it today,' said Nenad Samardzija, the Serb mayor of East Sarajevo.
'We looked on it as a movement of young people who wanted to liberate themselves from colonial slavery.'
The contradictions are inevitable, said sociology professor Slavo Kukic.
'Through no fault of his own, Gavrilo Princip is the result of all those political conflicts and differences on the territory of the former Yugoslavia ... over the past quarter of a century,' he said. 'We've had many Gavrilo Princips in our recent past.'
+11
Hotel manager Emela Burdzovic points to a portrait of Archduke Franz Ferdinand on the ceiling at the Franz Ferdinand hostel in Sarajevo. Two rival sets of events are being planned to mark the centenary of the assassination amid accusations of 'revisionism'
+11
Hotel manager Emela Burdzovic arranges a room bearing pictures of Austrian Archduke Franz Ferdinand, at the Franz Ferdinand hostel in Sarajevo
+11
A worker opens the door at the Franz Ferdinand hostel in Sarajevo. 100 years after 19-year-old Gavrilo Princip assassinated Archduke Franz Ferdinand and his wife, Sophie, as they rode through Sarajevo the act continues to di
![[Слика: _Гаћиновић.jpg]](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/sr/2/26/Владимир_Гаћиновић.jpg)
![[Слика: Bogdan_Zerajic.jpg]](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/sr/c/c7/Bogdan_Zerajic.jpg)
![[Слика: Nedeljko_Cabrinovic.jpg]](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/98/Nedeljko_Cabrinovic.jpg)
![[Слика: Vaso_Cubrilovic.jpg]](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/08/Vaso_Cubrilovic.jpg)
![[Слика: 1551651_609344279115480_258906531_n.jpg]](http://s16.postimg.org/xr35mu3ed/1551651_609344279115480_258906531_n.jpg)
![[Слика: 53e55e5deafa.png]](http://i022.radikal.ru/1401/9e/53e55e5deafa.png)
![[Слика: bog.jpg]](http://mojahercegovina.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/bog.jpg)
![[Слика: 10517620_10152948755272119_2078523891003942058_o.jpg]](https://scontent-a-vie.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpa1/t31.0-8/10517620_10152948755272119_2078523891003942058_o.jpg)