Contribution of the Yugoslav Sokol organizations
to the interwar sphere of music*
___________________________
Ivana Vesić1
Research Associate, Institute of Musicology, Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts, Belgrade, Serbia
Допринос југословенских соколских организација сфери музике у међуратном периоду
__________________________
Ивана Весић
Научни сарадник, Музиколошки институт Српске академије наука и уметности, Београд, Србија
Received: 1 March 2021
Accepted: 1 May 2021
Original scientific article.
Abstract
In this article part of musical activities of two federal Sokol organizations (JSS and SSKJ) in interwar Yugoslavia will be thoroughly examined. Despite the fact that these organizations were primarily focused on development of gymnastics and certain individual sports, cultural advancement of its members as well as of Yugoslav population also occupied an important place, particularly in the 1930s. As a result of broadening of Sokol’s work, musical amateurism started to gain prominence in Sokol legions, societies and parishes (župe). This was reflected in the proliferation of Sokol vocal and instrumental ensembles, as well as their performances in various Sokol units, both in urban and rural areas. The flourishing of musical activities among Sokols from different parts of the country led to the change of circumstances in the cultural sphere of these regions, particularly in the undeveloped ones. Among other things, this included giving an impetus to the preservation and popularization of tamburitza orchestras and epic singing to the accompaniment of the gusle, promotion of national and Slavic music repertoire and enrichment and diversification of musical life.
Keywords: sokol organizations, Kingdom of SCS/Yugoslavia, musical activities, tamburitza orchestras, epic singing to the accompaniment of the gusle, concerts, musical repertoire.
Апстракт
У овом раду детаљно ће бити размотрене поједине музичке активности две савезне соколске организације из међуратне Југославије (ЈСС и ССКЈ). Упркос чињеници да су обе организације биле првенствено усмерене на развој гимнастике и индивидуалних спортова, културно унапређење чланства као и југословенског становништа имало је такође важну улогу нарочито током 30-их година. Као резултат ширења соколског рада, музички аматеризам добијао је на све већој важности у соколским четама, друштвима и жупама. То је долазило до изражаја у порасту броја соколских вокалних и инструменталних ансамбала као и њихових наступа у соколским јединицама како у урбаним, тако и у руралним областима. Процват музичких активности међу соколима из различитих крајева земље довео је до промене околности у културној сфери у овим крајевима, особито у оним који су били неразвијени. Поред осталог, то је подразумевало подстицање очувања и ширења тамбурашких орекстара и певања уз гусле, популаризовање националног и словенског музичког репертоара, те обогаћивање и плурализацију музичког живота.
Кључне речи: соколске организације, Краљевина СХС/Југославија, музичке активности, тамбурашки оркeстри, певање уз гусле, музички репертоар.
Introduction
As soon as the Great War ended, and the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes was proclaimed (on 1 December 1918), the Sokol organizations of three constitutive nations showed great enthusiasm for unification and continuation of their mission to physically, ethically and spiritually elevate the masses, with a goal to create a new, stronger and self-actualized Yugoslav man and woman. The revival of Sokol movement in the new historical, political and social circumstances gave impetus to novel interpretations of its priorities, which were strongly advocated by the proponents of the so-called reformative current. Despite the fact that its strivings were incorporated at a very slow pace into the programs of two federal Sokol organizations of the interwar period – the Yugoslav Sokol Association (Jugoslovenski sokolski savez, JSS, 1919–1929),2 and the Association of Sokols of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia (Savez Sokola Kraljevine Jugoslavije, SSKJ, 1929–1941),3 it was due to this process that music became indispensable part of Sokol movement at the time.
Music played a role both in the educational efforts of JSS and SSKJ and in the regular gymnastic routines. While JSS laid ground for a broader understanding of the role of music in the process of education of the masses and, consequently, its more complex uses outside of the routines, SSKJ further expanded educational programs and activities of its predecessor.4 It also put more focus on a systematic cultivation of vocal and instrumental music, on the shaping of musical repertoire embedded in Sokol ideology, pan-Slavism and integral Yugoslavism, and on the popularization of Yugoslav art and traditional folk music in Sokol units. As a result of activities of both JSS and SSKJ, as well as individual Sokol societies (društva, local units of Sokol organizations in urban areas), legions (čete, local units of Sokol organizations in rural areas) and parishes (župe, regional units of Sokol organizations),5 there were multiple contributions to the musical life of interwar Yugoslavia. Sokol units had a significant role both in extending the popularity of tamburitza ensembles outside of areas that were traditionally important for its development such as Slavonia, Bačka and Srem, and in keeping the interest for the sound of tamburitzas in these areas where it was threatened by the spread of novel, modern types of popular ensembles such as jazz orchestras. Apart from making tamburitza orchestras known throughout Yugoslavia, including the regions of Vardar Macedonia and Central and Eastern Serbia,6 Sokol units also gave impetus to the development of vocal musical amateurism through foundation of male, female, children’s and mixed choirs in Yugoslav towns and villages. Finally, the preservation and popularization of traditional folk music instruments and practices such as epic singing to the accompaniment of the gusle7 represented an important task of certain Yugoslav Sokol societies and župe, as well as the revitalization and spread of traditional folk dances. In addition, Sokol organizations took part in cultivating Yugoslav and Slavic art and folk music above all through the genres of patriotic songs, marches, vocally or instrumentally arranged folk songs, potpourries/garlands of folk songs etc. Beside promoting national music, these organizations were important for the engagement of Yugoslav professional musicians, particularly during the tough time of economic crisis in the 1930s that coincided with the negative impact of technological development on music profession.8
Numerous contributions of Sokol organizations to different segments of musical sphere of interwar Yugoslavia can be evaluated considering the following phenomena: 1. the richness/poorness of musical life in different Yugoslav regions, particularly in less developed ones and in regions outside of the sphere of cultural influence of three main urban centers – Belgrade, Zagreb and Ljubljana, 2. the effects of state initiatives in the domain of musical amateurism as well as of other, non-state actors, 3. the influence of cultural transfers from abroad in specific areas by means of cinematography and radio, 4. the presence of cultural, educational and music institutions of different kind (national, regional or travelling theaters; city or military orchestras; local choral societies; military and music schools etc.)
The preliminary results of the analysis of initiatives and activities of Sokol units from local to federal levels that followed a thorough examination of reports and discussions published in official Sokol press9 have revealed the significant role that these units played in enriching musical (and cultural) life primarily of peripheral, culturally undeveloped regions, and in stimulating cultural participation of less privileged social groups (workers, rural population, women and children from provincial towns and villages). Along with that, the cultivation not only of the sound of traditional instruments such as the gusle and relatively traditional ensembles such as tamburitza orchestras, but also of patriotic and folk tunes, made Sokol musical activities recognizable and unique in Yugoslav cultural space. Moreover, a specific blend of patriotic and traditional folk music and dancing, paired with ambition to culturally elevate the masses using musical amateurism as one of the vehicles, represented a possible model for cultural projects in the post-WWII socialist Yugoslavia. As it will be discussed in the concluding sections of this article, Sokol’s musical undertakings along with those of Seljačka sloga of the Croatian Peasants’ Party (Hrvatska seljačka stranka, HSS), particularly its smotre (festivals) of traditional music, anticipated numerous socialist Yugoslav initiatives in the domain of musical amateurism.10 It is probably due to the lack of research of Sokol’s work in this area that these links were neither highlighted nor discussed in detail. The resonating of Sokol’s heritage in the post-WWII period certainly cannot be limited to the choice of socialist Yugoslavia’s anthem – Hej, Sloveni,11 or to the design and form of the Youth Day (25 May) manifestations, including the organizing of rallies and the passing of a torch.12
In this article, the focus will be placed on examining the role of tamburitza orchestras in Sokol units along with playing the gusle. Attention will also be paid to the analysis of musical repertoires of concerts of Sokol župe, societies and legions. The goal is to consider general outcomes of Sokol music policies and initiatives and the impact that Sokol župe, societies and legions had on the local music scenes and musical practices in interwar Yugoslavia. Of special interest is to point to the distinctive character of Sokol musical amateurism at the time, in comparison with the results of other private organizations or the state itself. Finally, a precursory role of Sokol’s use of music in the post-WWII period will also be considered.
Tamburitza orchestras in Yugoslav Sokol units:
General observations
Tamburitza orchestras gained a prominent place during the 19th century among South Slavs settled in the Habsburg Monarchy, serving as one of the crucial means for articulating their national identity and political dissent.13 Popularity of this instrument in the urban areas and urban population south of Vienna grew steadily since the 18th century, reaching the climax in the decades preceding the Great War. Beside urban choral societies and cultural societies, which became the main promoters of tamburitza ensembles among the South Slavs, the emerging Sokol organizations of Slovenes, Croats and Serbs of that time also participated in this process. One of the key figures of interwar Sokol music projects, Svetolik Pašćan Kojanov (1892–1971), testified to the importance of tamburitza playing among the Habsburg South Slavs, particularly the South Slavic youth in the early 20th century. In his words, Serbian high-school students gathered in the Serbian High-School Society (Srpsko srednjoškolsko društvo), one of many Zagreb-based organizations that cultivated tamburitza playing, showed a great appreciation for performing tamburitza music and presenting it to the broader audience.14 Kojanov was among many students who mastered the art of playing different types of tamburitzas as a member of this society; he participated in its numerous concerts and cultural events and used his knowledge to establish tamburitza orchestras in other societes open to Serbs and South Slavs, including pre-WWI or post-WWII Sokol societies.15 It is interesting to note that, aside from educating a number of amateur tamburitza players, this society represented a well of talented tamburitza orchestra masters and composers some of whom, such as Aleksandar Aranicki, became leading figures of interwar tamburitza music performing.16
Thorough political change that was brought about to the majority of South Slavs of the Central and Southeast Europe after the Great War, together with the strengthening of impact of American and Western European popular cultures, affected the functioning of the cultural sphere in these areas. It was reflected, among other things, in the degradation of a large network of cultural-political societies and the decline of the role of cultural amateurism. Still, many organizations that held an esteemed place in the pre-WWI period continued with their work, trying to build on some of the important tasks from the past, particularly the ones regarding cultural emancipation of urban and rural population. In the beginning of 1919, Sokol organizations of the constitutive nations of the newly established Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes decided to take steps toward a thorough reform of the longstanding program. Apart from creating an integrated Yugoslav Sokol organization, the emphasis was on the broadening of scope of Sokol’s work, thus almost equating the importance of cultural and educational activities with gymnastics and sports. Owing to these aims, music performing, both vocal and instrumental, was planned to become part of Sokol’s ambitious program of physical, moral and spiritual advancement of the masses, both from Yugoslav urban and rural areas. Despite different obstacles and strong resistance that followed its implementation particularly in the 1920s, the importance of music performing grew steadily in the Sokol units across the country. This process was manifested in the constant increase of the number of vocal and instrumental ensembles in Sokol societies and legions during the interwar period, the rising awareness of the necessity to secure the quality of both performance and repertoire, and the growing interest in separate music events – concerts, competitions, festivals – in local, regional and federal framework. By the end of the 1930s, vocal or instrumental performing was well-integrated into the functioning of many Sokol societies and legions, being a part of Sokol gymnastic routines, as well as social and public events such as Sokol celebrations (akademije), balls (zabave), dance parties (igranke), variety programs (séla), or rallies (sletovi).
During the interwar period, various types of instrumental ensembles were used in the Sokol units. Woodwind and brass orchestras (Sokol fanfara) usually comprised clarinets, trumpets, cornets, a helicon, snare drum, bass drum and cymbals, string orchestras (Sokol muzika) which encompassed violins, viola, cello, double bass, flute, clarinets, cors anglais, trumpets, trombones and percussions, schramel orchestras that included violins, chromatic accordion and guitar, while jazz orchestras mostly included violins, accordions, saxophone, clarinet, trumpet, trombone, percussions and piano.17 Finally, tamburitza orchestras consisted of tamburitzas of different sizes, shapes and registers, and at least seven players. Among these ensembles, Sokol tamburitza, fanfara and string orchestras were the most prominent and widespread across Sokol societies and legions. Statistics from 1926 and 1932, and 1933 show not only the gradual rise in the number of instrumental ensembles in Sokol units, but also the predominance of tamburitza and, to a lesser degree fanfara orchestras (see Table 1).18
Table 1. Statistics of Sokol music ensembles from 1926, 1932 and 1933
Year |
Total number of instrumental departments/ensembles |
Total number of choral departments/ensembles |
Tamburitza orchestra |
Sokol fanfara |
Sokol muzika |
1926 |
100 |
19 |
50 |
30 |
20 |
1932 |
174 |
104 |
73 |
101 |
|
1933 |
252 |
154 |
153 |
99 |
During the first several years after the constitution of the JSS, Sokol societies mostly relied on the local military ensembles, choral societies or community orchestras for the realization of different public manifestations. The process of establishing Sokol orchestras was probably hampered by organizational, political and financial instability in certain parts of the country, but the influence of a slow implementation of educational policies also played an important role. However, despite a number of difficulties, there was a strong impetus for founding Sokol fanfare, Sokol muzike and tamburitza orchestras not only in the main urban centers, but in the provinces as well. In the case of tamburitza ensembles, it is important to note that the interest for such ensembles was shown both in the areas that were considered the cradles of tamburitza music such as Slavonia, Srem, Banat and Bačka, but also in the regions where tamburitza sound was not known before the Great War. For instance, from the early 1920s, there were reports on the establishment of tamburitza orchestras mostly in the small towns of Dalmatia (Imotski, Milna on Brač), South-Western Herzegovina (Livno), Šumadija (Kragujevac) and Central Serbia (Nova Varoš).19 Whether such trend continued in the following years is difficult to assess, since the first published federal statistics (1926/1927) contained only the cumulative data on the number of instrumental ensembles in Sokol societies. In addition, in that report, information was missing from a large number of Sokol župe and societies because they did not send filled-in questionnaires to the federal body.20Apart from the fact that out of 50 tamburitza orchestras in the JSS, at least nine belonged to the Tuzla župa, the territorial span of this kind of ensemble remained unclear. Unlike the 1926/1927 report, a report for the 1933 enables a better understanding of the spread of tamburitza orchestras in different parts of the Kingdom of SCS. According to this report, it seems that by the early 1930s this type of ensemble was present in the majority of Yugoslav regions (see Tables 2 and 3). Regarding the župe that did not submit statistics on music departments (Skopje, Split and Užice), it seems that there were not any tamburitza ensembles established in their societies and legions. This can be concluded on the basis of their annual reports published from 1931 to 1934 in the Sokolski glasnik as well as the data on various manifestations and celebrations that took place in that period. However, inside the Skopje and Split župe broad activities were initiated in the domain of musical amateurism, which included the foundation of Sokol muzike and fanfare.
Table 2. Statistics of tamburitza departments in Sokol župe (1933)
Name of Sokol župa |
Number of tamburitza departments |
Name of Sokol župa |
Number of tamburitza departments |
Banja Luka |
5 |
Novo Mesto |
/ |
Belgrade |
4 |
Osijek |
4 |
Bjelovar |
1 |
Sarajevo |
4 |
Celje |
15 |
Skopje |
no data |
Cetinje |
/ |
Split |
no data |
Karlovac |
2 |
Sušak-Rijeka |
8 |
Kragujevac |
/ |
Šibenik-Zadar |
3 |
Kranj |
/ |
Tuzla |
5 |
Ljubljana |
11 |
Užice |
no data |
Maribor |
8 |
Varaždin |
5 |
Mostar |
/ |
Veliki Bečkerek |
58 |
Niš |
/ |
Zagreb |
5 |
Novi Sad |
15 |
As the data from both tables clearly show, the highest concentration of tamburitza ensembles was observable in Vojvodina, Slovenia, and Croatian regions, most of whom represented the centers for this kind of ensembles in the 19th and early 20th century. What appeared as a distinctive feature was the fact that Slavonia and Srem were having much less tamburitza orchestra presence than Vojvodina, and, to a lesser extent, Slovenia, and almost equal presence as the Croatian part of Adriatic coast (Dalmatia and Istria). The decreased number of Sokol tamburitza ensembles in Northern and Central Croatia supports the claims of certain researchers of the decline of practice of tamburitza playing among the South Slavs settled in the former Habsburg Monarchy after the Great War.21 Still, this tendency could not be perceived in Vojvodina, particularly not in the Banat region where the Veliki Bečkerek župa was located. Whether Vojvodina’s Sokol tamburitza trends were developing contrary to the local circumstances or the decline was not drastic in certain areas cannot be evaluated with certainty withouth thorough examination of musical activities, sokol and non-sokol, in this part of the Kingdom of SCS/Yugoslavia.
Table 3. The representation of tamburitza departments per historical regions22
Name of the region |
Number of tamburitza departments |
||
Slovenia (župa Celje, Kranj, Ljubljana, Maribor, Novo mesto) |
34 |
||
Croatia |
Slavonia, Croatian Zagorje and Međimurje (župa Bjelovar, Karlovac, Osijek, Varaždin, Zagreb) |
17 |
28 |
Dalmatia and Istria (župa Split, Sušak-Rijeka, Šibenik-Zadar) |
11 |
||
Bosnia and Herzegovina (župa Banja Luka, Sarajevo, Tuzla) |
14 |
||
Serbia and “South Serbia” |
Vojvodina (župa Novi Sad, Veliki Bečkerek) |
74 |
77 |
Central Serbia and Šumadija (župa Belgrade, Kragujevac, Užice, Niš) |
3 |
||
Kosovo and Vardar Macedonia (župa Skopje) |
/ |
||
Montenegro (župa Cetinje) |
/ |
While tamburitza ensembles were much scarcer in the areas outside of Vojvodina, Slovenia and Croatia, the published data from Sokol societies and legions from the mid-1930s to the 1941 reveal that, before the outbreak of the April War in the Kigdom of Yugoslavia (6 April 1941), such ensembles emerged in almost all Sokol župe and in the areas where they were underrepresented in the previous period or not present at all. For instance, the Kragujevac župa did not register any tamburitza orchestras in the aforementioned federal survey, but in the plans for its first educational rally in 1937, the intention was to organize a competition of “tamburitza and other vocal and instrumental ensembles.”23 Also, in the case of the Mostar župa there were no mentions of tamburitza orchestras in this survey; however, several years later, in 1937, it encompassed 9 such ensembles.24 In addition, tamburitza ensembles started to appear in certain villages and small towns in the regions of Vardar Macedonia (Stepanovo) and Eastern Serbia (Donji Milanovac) where this type of ensemble was rarely found in the pre-WWI period.25 Because of the fact that there were no periodical statistical records after 1934 on the federal level, the exact scope of territorial expansion of tamburitza ensembles and their concentration in some regions is difficult to assess. Another problem represented the change of format of Sokolski glasnik in 1936, with shortening of space dedicated to Sokol župe, societies and legions. As a result, the publishing of lengthy and detailed reports on educational (and musical) activities was discouraged by the editorial board, and, consequently, there was only very basic information on music events and ensembles. Such information does not enable an in-depth analysis of music undertakings of Sokol societies and legions, nor their tamburitza departments and ensembles.
Although it was not mentioned in the reports of activities of Sokol societies and legions during the 1930s, its tamburitza orchestras were based upon two different systems of tamburitza tuning – Farkaš and Srem systems26 – which were probably not equally represented. Since the only data regarding their popularity stems from the organization of the First Sokol Music Festival as a part of the regional rally in Sarajevo in June 1934 it is not possible to draw any definite conclusions.27 Considering the list of tamburitza orchestras that applied for the festival’s competition, it seems that Srem system was dominant among ensembles from Vojvodina, while Farkaš system held a more prominent place in Croatian Sokol units (Table 4). In other areas, both systems could be found even in the same župa or in the same orchestra!28
Another interesting phenomenon regarding Sokol tamburitza orchestras was the varying number of instruments and players that they encompassed. This was brought to light during the aforementioned festival, but also on other occasions. For instance, orchestras that applied for the festival’s competition comprised between 7 (Maslovare and Kasindo ensemble) and 30 players (Tešica ensemble) – on average from 8 to 10 players. Beside differences in size, the audience and the jury at the First and Second Sokol Music Festivals that took place in Subotica in 1936 had an opportunity to notice the distinctive quality of performance of tamburitza ensembles. According to the jury of the First Festival,29 the most skillful and versatile interpretations were presented by the following ensembles: (Bačka system, first category, first three awards) Subotica, Veliki Bečkerek, Srbobran, (Bačka system, second category, third award) Sv. Ivan Žabno; (Sisak system, first category, second award) Kotor Varoš, (Sisak system, second category, second and third awards) Srpske Moravice, Otok.30 The whole event was deemed successful “regarding organizational part and artistic level.”31 It was also noted that “competitors were prepared as well as they could and they worthily represented their Sokol societies.”32 Unfortunately, apart from the general appraisals, there were no detailed comments concerning the performing of tamburitza ensembles in the Sokol press.
Table 4. The representation of Farkaš and Srem system among the tamburitza orchestras that applied for Sarajevo Music Festival (1934)33
Type of system |
Farkaš (Sisak) system |
Srem (Bačka) system |
Name of sokol society and župa |
Kotor Varoš (Banja Luka) Otok (Osijek) Ivanec (Varaždin) Srpsko Moravice (Karlovac) Čučerje (Zagreb) Svodna (Banja Luka) Turan (Karlovac) Kamensko (Karlovac) Kasindo (Sarajevo) |
Banja Luka (Banja Luka) Srbobran (Novi Sad) Veliki Bečkerek (Veliki Bečkerek) Subotica (Novi Sad) Maslovare (Banja Luka) Tešica (Niš) Sv. Ivan Žabno (Bjelovar) Ada (Novi Sad) Kula (Novi Sad) |
Both First and Second Sokol Music Festivals shed some light on different aspects of the practice of tamburitza playing in the Sokol legions and societies, including the issue of musical repertoires of tamburitza orchestras. In the time of JSS, the selection of music performed by tamburitza ensembles was mostly left unaddressed in the published reports. Beside the fact that such ensembles performed in the Sokol balls and dance parties and, to a lesser extent, in Sokol celebrations, no other data were revealed. Therefore, it is not until the foundation of SSKJ, and particularly during the early 1930s, when societies and legions started to prepare lengthy reviews of their public, cultural and musical activities for the press, that more information on tamburitza orchestra repertoires began to emerge. Nevertheless, one of the most important sources in this respect is the Sarajevo festival booklet, with a list of musical pieces performed by each tamburitza ensemble, both compulsory and optional. The compulsory pieces that had been selected by the festival’s organizational board included the following works: (for Bačka system) Aranicki–Melnicki’s Yugoslav Flowers (Jugoslovensko cveće), Ivan Muhvić’s Sletovka march; (for Sisak system) Bosiljevac’s Sokol Ouverture, and Ivan Zajc’s To Battle, To Battle! (U boj, u boj!).34 The optional pieces selected by ensembles themselves are listed in the Table 5.
Table 5. The list of optional pieces performed by tamburitza ensembles at Sarajevo Music Festival (1934)35
The name of ensemble |
Optional piece |
The name of ensemble |
Optional piece |
Banja Luka (Banja Luka) |
I. Šrabec: Dalmatinski šajkaš |
Kotor Varoš (Banja Luka) |
I. Dominis: Karišik narodnih pesama |
Srbobran (Novi Sad) |
V. Jovanović: Samo tako hoću |
Otok (Osijek) |
R. Šimunaci: Iz slavonskih šuma |
Veliki Bečkerek (Veliki Bečkerek) |
Smjesa narodnih pesama |
Ivanec (Varaždin) |
M. Strahuljak: Hrvatska davorija |
Subotica (Novi Sad) |
P. Tumbas: Smjesa narodnih pesama |
Srpske Moravice (Karlovac) |
I. Šrabec: Dalmatinski šajkaš |
Maslovare (Banja Luka) |
Smjesa narodnih pesama |
Čučerje (Zagreb) |
R. Šimunaci: Polka |
Tešica (Niš) |
T. Šarl: Ura! |
Svodna (Banja Luka) |
Smetana–Farkaš: Prodana nevjesta |
Sv. Ivan Žabno (Bjelovar) |
I. Zajc: Noćni stražari |
Turan (Karlovac) |
M. Farkaš: Hrvatsko kolo |
Kula (Novi Sad) |
Smjesa narodnih pesama |
Kamensko (Karlovac) |
Narodne popjevke |
Ada (Novi Sad) |
Smjesa narodnih pesama |
Kasindo (Sarajevo) |
D. Hruze: Malenkost |
As the selection of music pieces suggests, the most popular types of compositions among tamburitza ensembles were the potpourries/garlands of folk songs (smese or karišici narodnih pesama) as well as the works with patriotic and national impulse mostly from the second half of the 19th century and early 20th century. Similar trend in the selecting of repertoire could be observed in the press reports throughout 1930s. Garlands of folk songs or arrangements of folk dances dominated the program of tamburitza orchestras for various festive occasions. Whether the possibility of using a very broad musical repertoire – from classical and folk-like pieces, to schlagers, popular dances, marches etc. was explored in Sokol societies and legions, cannot be concluded on the basis of the very scarce data from the press. Only a thorough research of regional Sokol periodicals and archival documents of particular Sokol societies could bring to the fore the diversity of musical works that were regularly performed by the tamburitza ensembles.
The place of epic singing to the accompaniment of
the gusle in Sokol organizations
While in the 1920s epic singing to the accompaniment of the gusle was encountered sporadically in some Sokol societies of Bosnia and Herzegovina and Montenegro, a more systematic approach to popularizing this type of traditional music was manifested after the foundation of SSKJ in the early 1930s. The important steps in cultivating this practice among Sokol members and in making it more familiar to the broader audience were made by the Mostar župa representatives, as well as the Federal Educational Department of SSKJ. At first, it started to appear regularly as a part of local Sokol variety programs in certain rural Sokol units of the Mostar župa.36 According to press reports, Sokol legion of Posušje celebrated the Day of Unification (1 December 1932) in a very festive manner, which included organizing of an evening variety program. As it was stated, this type of event “was traditionally opened with the epic singing to the accompaniment of the gusle.”37 More intensive work on the popularization of epic singing and the gusle was initiated in 1934, owing to the organization of the Sarajevo Sokol Music Festival, whose segment was dedicated to the competition of guslars from various Yugoslav Sokol župe. This was the first public event of that kind in Sokol organizations and it gathered six guslars out of eleven who applied.38 The following participants took part in the competition: Milovan Tomanović (Lijeva Rijeka, the Cetinje župa), Miloš Lubura (Kasindo, the Sarajevo župa), Lazar Lubura (Kasindo, the Sarajevo župa), Milorad Pavličević (Topola, the Belgrade župa), Mirko Čečez (Donje Selo, the Mostar župa), Radovan Samardžić (Sarajevo, the Sarajevo župa);39 Tomanović, and Miloš and Lazar Lubura won the first three awards.40 The guslars that applied for the competition, most of whom eventually did not show up in Sarajevo, mostly came from the regions of South Serbia (Suvi Do, the Skoplje župa) and Bosnia and Herzegovina (Sarajevo, Kasindo, the Sarajevo župa; Donje Selo, the Mostar župa)41 which can possibly attest to the popularity of epic singing to the accompaniment of the gusle in these regions and in the listed Sokol župe. The Sarajevo competition of guslars probably inspired a similar initiative of the Mostar župa which was announced on the meeting of Sokol legions on July 22, 1934.42 The idea was to prepare competitions of epic singing of the Sokol members of each legion. The same initiative was renewed in the following year, and the legion of Kruševljani was among the first who contributed to it. In March 1935, a variety program and guslars’ competition were realized in front of the large audience. Sokol member Ostoja Glogović gave a lecture on the gusle in the past, after which seven guslars competed.43 The strivings of officials of the Mostar župa regarding the gusle promotion were manifest in preparing the First Congress of Sokol Legions in Mostar, which was announced with a guslars’ competition.44 This competition gathered 17 participant and its aim was to “preserve and develop this ancient cult of the sung epic poetry to the accompaniment of the gusle as something strongest and most typically ethnical and national that displays the spirit of glory, chivalry and honor of our nation, and all of its most prominent virtues and characteristics.”45 In the next period competitions inside legions were followed by competitions inside societies and the whole župa, and the tours of guslars. One such tour that included two guslars occurred in 1937. They performed in 152 units in front of 25,998 listeners.46
The touring of guslars from the Mostar župa continued in the late 1930s and early 1940s and unfolded in various Sokol župe. It represented one of the crucial undertakings of Federal Educational Department of the SSKJ as part of accomplishing the ambitious King Peter’s Five-Year Plan (1936–1941).47 This plan was meant to achieve broad educational aims that, among other things, included the “expanding of epic singing to the accompaniment of the gusle” inside Sokol organization. For that purpose, a talented guslar from the Mostar župa, Perko Mrkajić, was selected with a task to not only promote the art of performing on this traditional instrument, but also to present and explain the aims of the Five-Year Plan to a large audience. There were records of Mrkajić’s visits to Sokol societies of Priština, Novi Sad and Bosanska Dubica during 1939 and 1940 in the Sokol press.48
Apart from Mrkajić’s tour, other guslars also performed in Sokol societies and župe during the Five-Year Plan. For instance, a famous Yugoslav guslar who often participated in Radio Belgrade broadcasts, Ilija Vuković, took part in the Sokol celebration in Kreka (the Tuzla župa) in January 1941.49 The whole event was dedicated to the performing of traditional epic songs.
Although it is not possible to assess the general effects of SSKJ’s work on representation and popularization of epic singing to the accompaniment of the gusle and guslars on the basis of short and usually rather uninformative press reports, the fact that this process had a long continuity, particularly in the Mostar župa, and that it involved not only Sokol members, but a broad audience as well, testifies to its importance both for Sokol organizations and for broader public. The value of SSKJ’s initiatives is even more pronounced when state activities regarding this traditional instrument and performing practices are considered. Despite the scant research on this topic, the data from archival documents suggest that the state did not approach systematically the expansion of epic singing.50 Moreover, it seems that the state took a passive role in this process, mostly focusing on providing financial support for the realization of small tours of some of the most distinguished guslars in interwar Yugoslavia (Petar Perunović, Ilija Vuković, Tanasije Vućić etc.)51 according to their own conception and schedule. Therefore, there were no specific goals that state officials set out or followed, nor were there specific plans. Periodical performances of aforementioned performers in different parts of the country, mostly in schools, certainly helped to keep the practice of epic singing familiar to the broader audience, but unlike the Sokol events particularly those on the level of župa and federal level, they had more limited reach. In addition, Sokol units not only served as intermediaries between the guslars and public, but they also took part in the revitalization of this practice. As it was already emphasized, in the legions of the Mostar župa Sokol members were encouraged to actively participate in epic singing to the accompaniment of the gusle through regular competitions on various levels. This approach represented a distinctive feature of Sokol approach to the popularization of epic singing and the gusle, in comparison to the approach of state and non-state actors (cultural, educational and patriotic organizations).
Organizing music concerts in Sokol units
As the perspective on the place of educational work in Sokol organizations was changing, concert activities inside Sokol societies and župe became more frequent and thoroughly prepared. In 1920s, a special focus was put on the organization of federal and regional rallies, and, as important part of it, the concerts of most prominent Yugoslav vocal and instrumental ensembles. For instance, as side events of the regional rally in Osijek in 1921 there were performances of several operas (Tchaikovsky’s Evgeny Onegin, Smetana’s Bartered Bride, Vatroslav Lisinski’s Porin, Blagoje Bersa’s The Fire [Oganj]) in the National Theater, as well as the performances of Osijek Philharmonic Orchestra and a choral society.52 Even more elaborate was the program of JSS’ first federal rally in Ljubljana in 1922 that included concerts of the orchestral and choral societies Glasbena Matica from Ljubljana, the choral society Ljubljanski Zvon, the choral society Glasbena Matica from Maribor, along with several opera and drama performances at the Ljubljana National Theater.53
The tradition of organizing lavish concert performances on the rallies continued in the period of SSKJ whose first federal and pan-Slavic rally in Belgrade in 1930 encompassed two majestic concerts of the orchestra made of 400 military musicians, conducted by Dragutin Pokorni, and a series of performances of Belgrade Philharmonic Orchestra and Belgrade choral societies.54 Apart from that, there was an upsurge of concert activities among certain Sokol župe and societies in the first half of the 1930s. According to the the 1931 report, in 1930 there were 116 concerts in the Novi Sad župa and its 42 societies, 61 in the Mostar župa, 13 in Maribor župa, and 5 in župa Sušak-Rijeka.55 Other Sokol župe did not return their questionnaires and, consequently, it is not known whether they held concerts and how often were they prepared. In the following years, concerts were more frequently organized in the župe of Veliki Bečkerek, Mostar, Maribor, Cetinje, Split, but also in Celje, Kranj, Novi Sad and Osijek – usually dozens of such events took place during one year. The similar results were achieved in 1933, namely, most engaged in preparation of concerts were the župe of Veliki Bečkerek (341 concert), Maribor (66), Mostar (52), Cetinje (35), Šibenik-Zadar (21), Kranj (18), Novi Sad (15), Zagreb (15), Split (14), and Celje (14).56
Unlike the 1920s, art music concerts acquired a dominant position particularly in Slovenian part of the SSKJ in this period. The župe of Kranj, Maribor, and partly Ljubljana and some of their societies had a crucial role in organizing concerts with artistic aspirations. These events gathered amateur and professional musicians, mostly Sokol members, and amateur vocal and instrumental Sokol ensembles and were mostly based on Yugoslav and Slavic repertoire. Regarding the Maribor župa, of particular importance were the activities of the Dolnja Lendava society that prepared a series of concerts of classical music in 1933 and 1934. Owing to its orchestra and a very capable conductor M. Ljubič, as well as the guest-performers, the audience could listen to the short orchestral works or orchestral excerpts from operas of François-Adrien Boieldieu, Jacques Offenbach, Ludwig van Beethoven, Jan Kubelík, Franz Schubert, Léo Delibes, Gioachino Rossini, Giuseppe Verdi, Bedřich Smetana etc.57 Similar repertoire that included the compositions of Franz von Suppé, Verdi, Charles Gounod, Camille Saint-Saëns and others could be heard in the concerts of the Sokol society of Murska Sobota that also belonged to the Maribor župa.58 Almost parallel to the ambitious work in the Dolnja Lendava society, the župa Kranj initiated a series of annual Educational Day concerts as well as summer concerts in 1932 where sokol orchestras and choirs of local societies took part. These were the most enthusiastic enterprises concerning amateur performing of art music in the SSKJ. Five Educational Day concerts were prepared from 1932 to 1936, all of which consisted of performing of a large number of choral and orchestral pieces of Yugoslav and Slavic authors.59 Among the most popular were the choral works of Emil Adamič, Vinko Vodopivec, Anton Foerster, Mateja Hubad, Zorko Prelovec, Vasilij ,Mirk, Anton Schwab, Hugolin Sattner, Anton Lajovic, Davorin Jenko, Peter Jereb, France Marolt, Stevan Mokranjac, Stanislav Binički etc. and orchestral compositions of Jenko, Josif Marinković, Josip Čerin, Josef Suk, Antonín Dvořák and others. It seems that musician and conductor Albin Fakin played an important role in the preparation of these concerts as well as the large, mass ensembles based on the merging of choirs and orchestra of different Sokol units. Of particular importance were also performance skills of choirs of Sokol societies of Kranj, Jesenice, Radovljica and Škofja Loka that added to the overall quality of concerts.60
The whole-evening concerts featuring mostly art music works were much less common in societies and župe outside Slovenian regions and they were rarely organized. One such event was prepared in the Novi Sad society in 1934 and the program included the orchestral works of Friedrich von Flotow, Šrabec, Evgeny Bodej and Edward Grieg, as well as the performance of Bodej’s musical drama For the freedom of patria (Za slobodu otadžbine).61 Another atypical but interesting concert took place in Krapina society in 1934 and it included choral works of Miloje Milojević and Stanislav Binički, along with arrangements of Polish folk songs and pieces for tamburitza orchestra such as garlands of folks songs, as well as the arrangement of an excerpt from Smetana’s Bartered Bride.62 The attempt of the Sarajevo Sokol society and its orchestra (Sokol fanfara) to prepare and perform a musical drama in one act in 1934 should also be mentioned.63
From 1935 to 1941 there was a noticeable rise of the number and frequency of concerts dedicated to traditional folk music and dances, as well as popular music. In many societies Sokol jazz orchestras performed at humanitarian events. Sometimes these ensembles performed traditional music and dances.64 In addition, revues of folk dances, songs and crafts were organized more often in various societies. Among the most elaborate events were the so-called pan-Slavic balls in the Borovo society in the late 1930s and early 1940s that gathered traditional dancers from various parts of Yugoslavia and Slavic countries including a professional folk dance ensemble of the Belgrade National Theater.65 Beside performing traditional dances, ball attendants were wearing and promoting folk costumes and crafts. Less luxurious, but well attended were the pan-Slavic balls of some Belgrade societies in that period that consisted of performances of folk dances and songs with guest choirs and other ensembles.66 In the second half of the 1930s and the early 1940s, Sokol societies also showed a greater interest in preparing and performing operettas of Yugoslav composers than had previously been the case. Among others, the society of Kutina prepared segments mostly from domestic operettas such as The baron Trenck (Barun Trenk, composed by Srećko Albini), They can do us nothing (Kaj nam pak moreju, by Žiga Hirschler) and St. Anton (Sveti Anton, by Jara Beneš) in 1936,67 the society of Trogir staged Ivica and Marica (unknown author),68 while the society of Sinj presented an operetta The modern judges (Moderni suci, by A. Bubić and M. Božić) in 1940.69
The shift towards traditional folk music and art music of Yugoslav and Slavic composers that was reflected in the concert activities of Sokol units in the mentioned period was probably partly influenced by the initiatives of Sokol officials who since 1935 advocated more openly and strongly against the “foreign influences” in music repertoires and Sokol events. For instance, military musician and composer Ivo Muhvić asked for a stricter selection of works for concert programs of Sokol ensembles that was to be based primarily on Yugoslav folk and art music, and, if possible, the works of Slavic and other distinguished composers. Muhvić also advocated for a continuous promotion of Yugoslav folk music.70 Similarly to him, Sokol representatives from the Sarajevo župa were appealing for more authentic Sokol events that would be conceived on the basis of local folk traditions instead of appropriations of foreign formats and contents such as modern dances.71 The political circumstances inside and outside the Kingdom of Yugoslavia at the time, particularly the crisis of integral Yugoslavism and the threat of imperialism of fascist countries, could contribute to a certain extent to the return to folk heritage as an important source for Sokol music and public events.
Concluding remarks
Although primarily sports and gymnastics organization, JSS and particularly SSKJ, owing to taking the reformative course in the interwar period, developed a broad range of musical activities. Among them, vocal and instrumental musical amateurism that was manifest in the establishment of various types of orchestras and choirs held a prominent place and the results of such work were brought to the fore on different occasions of local, regional or federal character. In the process of flourishing of musical amateurism in Sokol units in the 1930s of great importance were certain initiatives of federal Sokol officials together with the diligent work of music representatives of many Sokol župe, societies and legions. As it was noted in the previous sections, federal and župe officials were trying to stimulate the expansion of music activities on the local level mostly by preparing competitions and festivals. Such events were supposed to foster disciplined work of Sokol ensembles, their competitive spirit, as well as enthusiasm for advancement of performance skills and results. On the other hand, local music representatives, inspired by the strengthening of the educational part of Sokol work, and the need for aesthetical and cultural elevation of Sokol members and broader public, approached with fervor the task to organize choirs and orchestras and to prepare sometimes very demanding concert programs. The attempts to better coordinate musical activities in all Sokol units and to create instructions for performing and repertoire selection gained particular prominence during Peter’s Five-Year Plan. Parallel to that, the diversification of musical repertoire performed at concerts or charitable events became more emphasized and, aside from art music, folk songs and dances and even popular and jazz music and operettas were presented to the audience. In addition to concerts, music performances were regular parts of many types of Sokol public events, particularly celebrations, balls, dance parties etc. Usually they consisted of renditions of anthems, patriotic songs such as Ivan Zajc’s U boj, u boj!, Josif Marinković’s Narodni zbor, Anton Hajdrih’s Adrijansko morje, Franjo Vilhar’s Slovenac (Srb) i Hrvat etc. as well as Sokol marches.
Despite complaints in the Sokol press that Sokol units were, contrary to the organizational policies, establishing music orchestras solely to gain material profits and that the quality of performing was often “third-rate”, the music results achieved after 1933, when activities in this domain intensified, were all but insignificant. If certain societies and župe are considered, together with the number of music ensembles, frequency of their public performances, selections of program and quality of interpretation, the accomplishments in the domain of musical amateurism could be evaluated as outstanding. This is even more pronounced if Sokol’s work is compared with the work of state and non-state actors. Roughly speaking, the range of musical activities that SSKJ initiated and supported and its aspirations at systematically approaching them were unparalleled in the interwar Yugoslavia, when compared to other federal or national organizations dedicated to cultural work and musical amateurism such as, for instance, Yugoslav Choral Association (Jugoslovenski pevački savez) and Croatian Choral Association (Hrvatski pjevački savez) or state bodies. Of specific importance is the fact that certain Sokol societies developed rich musical life in the areas where state-sponsored cultural institutions or private cultural organizations and associations did not have enough impact. This was particularly the case with Slovenian Sokol societies of the small towns of Dolnja Lendava, Murska Sobota, Kranj, Jesenice, Radovljica, Škofja Loka and others, whose instrumental or choral ensembles took active roles in both local and regional public spheres. It can be assumed that in these and many other urban places which, according to Yugoslav census of 1921 and 1931 had less than 5,000 inhabitants, Sokol ensembles and Sokol members who were music amateurs often served as the only source of public music performing and, thus, they were valuable mediators of Yugoslav and foreign art and folk music.
In conclusion, the fact that interwar Yugoslav Sokol movement inspired such broad musical activities and helped the expansion and popularization of certain traditional practices, as well as the promotion of the Yugoslav art and folk music, in particular the genres of patriotic songs and instrumental pieces and the arrangements of folk tunes, is of great significance if the post-WWII is considered. Although the preliminary results of this research need further elaboration, it may be assumed that Sokol’s work served as one of the models for subsequent socialist approach to musical amateurism, primarily regarding the establishing and preparing of the instrumental (tamburitza) ensembles. Even if such links were not so strong and influential as they seem, Sokol’s undertakings in musical amateurism still deserve historical recognition and proper clarification.
List of References
Andrić, Josip (1962) Tamburaška glazba: Historijski pregled, Slavonska Požega: [s.n.].
Anonymous (1920a) „Jugoslovenski soko u Milni na Braču (Dalmacija)“, Sokolski glasnik 4: 182–183.
Anonymous (1920b) „Sokolsko društvo u Lijevnu“, Sokolski glasnik 5: 217–218.
Anonymous (1921a) „Raspored II. Pokrajinskog sleta u Osijeku“, Sokolski glasnik 7: 231–232.
Anonymous (1921b) „Sokolsko društvo u Imotskom“, Sokolski glasnik 12: 438–439.
Anonymous (1922a) „I. jugoslavenski svesokolski slet u Ljubljani“, Sokolski glasnik 7: 193–296.
Anonymous (1922b) „Šumadijska sokolska župa, Sokolsko društvo u Kragujevcu“, Sokolski glasnik 10: 332–334.
Anonymous (1924) „Iz žup. Sokolska župa Užice“, Sokolski glasnik 8: 108.
Anonymous (1930) „Predsletski dani. Veliki monster koncerti na sletu, Glavni sletski dani“, Sokolski glasnik 12: 1–3.
Anonymous (1932a) „Iz župa i društava. Župa Mostar, sokolska četa Posušje“, Sokolski glasnik 49: 6.
Anonymous (1932b) „Iz župa i društava. Župa Kranj. Župni prosvetni dan“, Sokolski glasnik 12: 5.
Anonymous (1933a) „Iz župa i društava. Župa Maribor. Sokolsko društvo Dolnja Lendava“, Sokolski glasnik 12: 6.
Anonymous (1933b) „Iz župa i društava. Župa Kranj. Spored za župni prosvetni dan“, Sokolski glasnik 12: 6.
Anonymous (1933c) „Iz župa i društava. Župa Kranj. Prosvetni dan“, Sokolski glasnik 13: 7.
Anonymous (1933d) „Iz župa i društava. Župa Maribor. Sokolsko društvo Murska Sobota“, Sokolski glasnik 22: 3.
Anonymous (1933e) „Iz župa i društava. Župa Maribor. Zlet sokolskega društva Dolnja Lendava“, Sokolski glasnik 26: 18.
Anonymous (1934a) „Iz naših župa, društava i četa. Župa Kranj. Župni prosvetni dan“, Sokolski glasnik 12: 5.
Anonymous (1934b) „Iz naših župa, društava i četa. Župa Sarajevo“, Sokolski glasnik 13: 7.
Anonymous (1934c) „Iz naših župa, društava i četa. Župa Maribor. Sokolsko društvo Dolnja Lendava“, Sokolski glasnik 14: 4.
Anonymous (1934d) „Muzički festival na II pokrajinskom sletu u Sarajevu“, Sokolski glasnik 20: 2.
Anonymous (1934e) „Iz naših župa, društava i četa. Župa Novi Sad“, Sokolski glasnik 22: 5.
Anonymous (1934f) „Iz naših župa, društava i četa. Župa Zagreb. Krapina“, Sokolski glasnik 22: 8.
Anonymous (1934g) „Veliki sokolski muzički festival. Rezultati takmičenja sokolski glazbi, fanfara, tamburaških zborova i narodnih guslara“, Sokolski glasnik 28: 2.
Anonymous (1934h) „Sokolsko pozorište i sokolska muzika. Muzika. Muzička utakmica“, Sokolska prosveta 3/4: 141–142.
Anonymous (1934i) „Sokolsko pozorište i sokolska muzika. I Sokolski muz. festival“, Sokolska prosveta 7: 291–292.
Anonymous (1935a) „Iz naših župa, društava i četa. Župa Kranj. Župni prosvetni dan“, Sokolski glasnik 11: 3.
Anonymous (1935b) „Iz naših župa, društava i četa. Župa Mostar“, Sokolski glasnik 14: 5.
Anonymous (1935c) „Peti prosvetni dan sokolske župe Kranj“, Sokolski glasnik 15: 4.
Anonymous (1935c) „Službena saopštenja. Hej Sloveni – sokolska himna“, Sokolski glasnik 35: 2.
Anonymous (1935d) „Sokolski preporod sela. Prvi sabor sokolskih četa u Mostaru“, Sokolski pregled 48: 1.
Anonymous (1936a) „II sokolski muzički festival i utakmica na pokrajinskom sletu u Subotici na Vidovdan 1936.“, Sokolska prosveta 3: 81–83.
Anonymous (1936b) „Male vesti iz naših jedinica“, Sokolski glasnik 11: 6.
Anonymous (1936c) „Male vesti iz naših jedinica. Župa Mostar“, Sokolski glasnik 14: 5.
Anonymous (1936d) „V župski slet i I župski prosvetni slet Sokolske župe Kragujevac“, Sokolski glasnik 42: 3.
Anonymous (1936e) „Male vesti iz naših jedinica“, Sokolski glasnik 49: 7.
Anonymous (1937a) „Skupština sokolske župe Sarajevo“, Sokolski glasnik 9: 2.
Anonymous (1937b) „Sokolsko društvo u Donjem Milanovcu“, Sokolski glasnik 12: 6.
Anonymous (1937c) „Rad Sokolske župe Mostar“, Sokolski glasnik 13: 5.
Anonymous (1939) „Sokolska četa Stepanovo“, Sokolski glasnik 4: 2.
Anonymous (1940a) „Sveslovenski ples sokolskog društva Borovo“, Sokolski glasnik 9: 4.
Anonymous (1940b) „Kratke vesti iz našeg sokolstva“, Sokolski glasnik 18: 2.
Anonymous (1940c) „Lepa sokolska svečanost na dobrovoljačkom naselju u Novoj Crvenki“, Sokolski glasnik 40: 3.
Anonymous (1940d) „Sokolsko drušvo u Bos. Dubici“, Sokolski glasnik 50: 6.
Anonymous (1941) „Akademija narodnih pesama u Kreki“, Sokolski glasnik 6: 8.
Antunović, Aleksandar (2021) „Rekonstrukcija relacija između tamburaške prakse i srpskog identiteta u Austrougarskoj“, Arhivum – portal arhiva Vojvodine, 2683–4405. / Антуновић, Александар (2021) „Реконструкција релације између тамбурашке праксе и српског идентитета у Аустроугарској“, Архивум – портал Архива Војводине, 2683–4405, https://archivum.arhivvojvodine.org.rs/?p=1114.
Bajić, Dušan (1936) “Uspeh sokolskog rada župe Mostar u selu od 1925 do 1935 god. IV Prosvetni rad“, Sokolski glasnik 1: 5.
Belajčić, Dr Vladimir (1931) „Izveštaj o sokolskom prosvetnom radu Saveza Sokola Kraljevine Jugoslavije u 1930. god.“ Sokolska prosveta 3/4: 53–77.
Bezić, Nada (2001) „Tamburica — hrvatski izvozni proizvod na prijelazu 19. u 20. stoljeće“, Narodna
umjetnost 38/2: 97–115.
Brat [Šoula, Ladislav] (1939) „Kako se osnivaju sokolski orkestri“, Sokolski glasnik 45: 6.
Ceribašić, Naila (2003) Hrvatsko, seljačko, starinsko i domaće, Povijest i etnografija javne prakse narodne glazbe u Hrvatskoj, Zagreb: Institut za etnologiju i folkloristiku.
Fori, Mark (2011) Saglasje tradicije i kulture u tamburaškoj muzici Vojvodine, Novi Sad: Prometej, 2011.
Dumnić, Marija (2013) “The creation of folk music program on Radio Belgrade before World War Two: Editorial policies and performing ensemble”, Mузикологија/Мusicology 14: 14–30.
Group of authors (1927) „Izveštaji za VIII. Glavnu skupštinu JSS u Beogradu 27. marta 1927“, Sokolski glasnik 5/6 (appendix): 1–62.
Group of authors (1934) „Izveštaj o prosvetnom radu Saveza SKJ u 1933. god.“, Sokolska prosveta 3/4 (appendix): 1–62.
I[van]. S[edlaček]. (1941) „Sokolska slovenska kostimirana zabava“, Sokolski glasnik 10: 2.
Knežević, M. (1939) „Zbor delegata društava župe Novi Sad“, Sokolski glasnik 46: 5.
Lajić Mihajlović, Danka (2007) „Hercegovački epski dijalekat“. U Dimitrije O. Golemović (ed.) Dani Vlade S. Miloševića, Međunarodni naučni skup, Banja Luka 24–25. april 2007, Zbornik radova, Banja Luka: Akademija umjetnosti Banja Luka – Muzikološko društvo Republike Srpske, 57–73. / Лајић Михајловић, Данка (2007) „Херцеговачки епски дијалекат“. У Димитрије О. Големовић (ed.) Дани Владе С. Милошевића, Научни скуп, Бања Лука, 24–25. април 2007, Бања Лука: Академија умјетности Бања Лука – Музиколошко друштво Републике Српске, 57–73.
Lajić Mihajlović, Danka (2008) „Guslar Petar Perunović Perun kao innovator tradicije pevanja epskih pesama uz gusle“. U Dimitrije O. Golemović (ed.) Dani Vlade S. Miloševića, Međunarodni naučni skup, Banja Luka 10–11. april 2008, Zbornik radova, Banja Luka: Akademija umjetnosti Banja Luka – Muzikološko društvo Republike Srpske, 197–214. / Лајић Михајловић, Данка (2008) „Гуслар Петар Перуновић Перун као иноватор традиције певања епских песама уз гусле“. У Димитрије О. Големовић (ed.) Дани Владе С. Милошевића, Међународни научни скуп, Бања Лука, 10–11. април 2008, Зборник радова, Бања Лука: Академија умјетности Бања Лука – Музиколошко друштво Републике Српске, 197–214.
Lajić Mihailović, Danka (2011) „Takmičenja kao oblik javne guslarske prakse“, Muzikologija 11: 183–202. / Лајић Михајловић, Данка (2011) „Такмичења као облик јавне гусларске праксе“, Музикологија 11: 183–202.
Lajić Mihailović, Danka (2014) Srpsko tradicionalno pevanje uz gusle. Guslarska praksa kao komunikacioni proces, Beograd: Muzikološki institut SANU. / Лајић Михаиловић, Данка (2014) Српско традиционално певање уз гусле. Гусларска пракса као комуникациони процес, Београд: Музиколошки институт САНУ.
Lajić Mihajlović, Danka (2016) “The institutionalisation оf guslars practice and the tradition of singing epic songs with the gusle in Yugoslav and post-Yugoslav contexts”. In Fatima Hadžić (ed.) Music in Society. The Collection of Papers, Sarajevo: Musicological Society of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina – Academy of Music, University of Sarajevo, 410–428.
Lajić Mihajlović, Danka (2019) „(Pre)oblikovanje srpske tamburaške tradicije kroz individualne prakse: repertoarski i stilski aspekti“, Zbornik Matice Srpske za scenske umetnosti i muziku 60: 11–25. / Лајић Михаиловић, Данка (2019) „(Пре)обликовање српске тамбурашке традиције кроз индивидуалне праксе: репертоарски и стилски аспекти“, Зборник Матице српске за сценске уметности и музику 60: 11–25.
Lazarević, Rad. (1941) „Lepe manifestacije slovenskog bratstva u Borovu“, Sokolski glasnik 9: 5.
March, Richard (2013) The Tamburitza Tradition: From the Balkans to the American Midwest, The University of Wisconsin Press.
Muhvić, Ivo (1935) „Sokolsko pozorište i sokolska muzika. Je li glazba potrebna sokolstvu?“, Sokolska prosveta 7: 367–368.
Ranisavljević, Zdravko (2011) „Tamburaška praksa u Vojvodini – hronologija, aspekti i perpsktive razvoja”, Etnološko-antropološke sveske 17/6: 109–126. / Ранисављевић, Здравко (2011) „Тамбурашка пракса у Војводини – хронологија, аспекти и перспективе развоја.” Етнолошко-антрополошке свеске 17/6: 109–126.
Tomić, Dejan (ed.) (2009) Marko Nešić sa pesmom u narodu, Novi Sad: Tiski Cvet. / Томић, Дејан (ed.) (2009) Марко Нешић са песмом у народу, Нови Сад: Тиски Цвет.
Vesić, Ivana (2013) “Radio Belgrade in the process of creating symbolic boundaries: The example of the folk music program between the two world wars (1929–1940)”, Mузикологија/Мusicology 14: 31–56.
Vesić, Ivana, Peno, Vesna (2017) Između umetnosti i života. O delatnosti udruženja muzičara u Kraljevini SHS/Jugoslaviji, Beograd: Muzikološki institut SANU. / Весић, Ивана, Пено, Весна (2017) Између уметности и живота. O делатности удружења музичара у Краљевини СХС/Југославији, Београд: Музиколошки институт САНУ.
Vukosavljev, Sava (1990) Vojvođanska tambura, Novi Sad: Matica Srpska.
Živković, Rad. (1939) „Rad društva Priština“, Sokolski glasnik 35: 5.
Ивана Весић
Допринос југословенских соколских организација сфери музике у међуратном периоду
(Резиме)
Упркос томе што је реч била о организацијама првенствено усмереним на ширење спорта и гимнастике у широј популацији, Југословенски соколски савез (ЈСС) и Савез Сокола Краљевине Југославије (ССКЈ) поклањали су значајну пажњу неговању различитих врста музичких активности током међуратног периода. То је особито било изражено током 30-их година након што је реформски курс, актуелан од краја Првог светског рата, добио на важности. Захваљујући томе што је соколство поставило шире циљеве не само у погледу унапређења физичкe способности маса, већ и њиховог културног уздизања, започет је интензиван рад на развијању музичког аматеризма. Он je обухватао оснивање различитих врста оркестара, углавном тамбурашких, дувачких (соколске фанфаре) и великих (соколске музике), као и хорова (мешовити, мушки, женски, дечји), те подстицање очувања традиционалних народних инструмената и пракси (певање уз гусле). Почев од оснивања ССКЈ, а особито после 1933. када је са савезног нивоа покренута иницијатива за изразитије ширење музике у соколству дошло је до пораста броја ансамбала на нивоу земље, јачања концертне активности у соколским друштвима, те до веће заступљености музике у различитим соколским догађајима. Поред појаве веома амбициозно осмишљених наступа соколских ансамбала у појединим друштвима и жупама с програмом сачињеним од дела уметничке музике и обрада народних мелодија, у овом периоду појавила се и идеја о такмичењима музичких ансамбала и гуслара, како на савезном нивоу, тако и на нивоу жупа, друштава и чета. Од музичких активности и појава у оквиру ЈСС и ССКЈ, посебан фокус у овом раду стављен је на рад тамбурашких оркестара, потом на процес популаризовања певања уз гусле и, најзад на концертну активност у соколским јединицама. На основу извештаја у соколској штампи, као и других извора, указано је на ширење тамбурашких ансамбала током 20-их и 30-их година у соколству, на њихове опште карактеристике и репертоар. Осим тога, праћено је и подстицање певања уз гусле у појединим жупама, као и на савезном нивоу током 30-их година. Напослетку је дат кратак осврт на тенденције у вези с организацијом концерата у соколским јединицама. Узимајући у обзир прелиминарне резултате анализе, закључује се да допринос соколских организација, особито ССКЈ, различитим сегментима музичког живота у међуратној Југославији није био занемарљив уколико се пореди с доприносом различитих културних организација, те државних тела. Изнета је и претпоставка да су активности међуратних соколских организација у области музичког аматеризма могле да послуже као модел у креирању приступа тој области у социјалистичкој Југославији. Иако је за њену потврду неопходно да се изврше детаљна додатна истраживања, евидентно је да је и пре тога потребно да се укаже на историјски значај рада соколских организација на културном унапређењу маса путем музичких активности.
Кључне речи: соколске организације, Краљевина СХС/Југославија, музичке активности, тамбурашки оркестри, певање уз гусле, музички репертоар.
1* This paper was financed by the Ministry of Education, Science and Tehnological Development of the Republic of Serbia (RS-200176).
2 The official name of the first federal post-WWI Sokol organization was the Sokol Association of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes (Sokolski savez Srba, Hrvata i Slovenaca) and it was adopted during the First Congress in Novi Sad on St. Vitus’ Day in 1919 (28 June). At the congress, separate Sokol organizations of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes agreed to establish a federal association grounded on the idea of brotherhood, collaboration and unity. Soon after (1920) the name was changed into Yugoslav Sokol Association – a version that reflected the organization’s policies regarding the national issue in a newly formed state. However, despite its strong Yugoslav orientation and willingness to gather not only the three constitutive nations, but also other nations who lived in the Kingdom, JSS’s integrity was called into question in 1922 after a large portion of its Croatian members and units decided to continue to work in a separate Croatian Sokol Association (Hrvatski sokolski savez).
3 This association was constituted after King Aleksandar Karađorđević, the Council of Ministers and Minister of Military Affairs and Navy passed the Law on Foundation of the Sokol of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia on 5 December 1929. Since the law dictated the dissolution of all Sokol organizations that were active in the Kingdom of Yugoslavia prior to its enactment, federal officials and delegates of various units of JSS decided to collectively join new, state-supervised Sokol organization in an Extraordinary Assembly on December 15, 1929. Despite the change of formal framework, SSKJ was completely built on the basis of former JSS in terms of its organizational structure, leadership, ideology and program.
4 A detailed exploration of the JSS’s and SSKJ’s approach to the process of cultural emancipation of masses in the Kingdom of SCS/Yugoslavia and its implementation, with special focus on the role of music, represents the main part of the study which is currently being prepared by the author of this article. It is expected to be submitted and published by the end of 2021.
5 The division into čete was introduced after the founding of the SSKJ.
6 The chronology and the extent of spread of tamburitza orchestras in these areas will be discussed in the following section.
7 Throughout this article the phrase “epic singing to the accompaniment of the gusle” will be used to designate the traditional practice of performances of epic poetry by the guslars – epic singers who created and interpreted both vocal and instrumental parts.
8 On the effects of the expansion of radio stations, phonographic and film industry in the context of the global economic crisis on the functioning of music sphere and social positioning of professional musicians in interwar Yugoslavia, see Vesić, Peno 2017: 102–113, 126–136.
9 The following periodicals and all their published issues were taken into consideration: Sokolski glasnik (1919–1929), Sokolski glasnik (1930–1941), Sokolska prosveta (1931–1938, 1941), Soko (1938–1939), Sokolič/Sokolić (1919–1941). Both digital and paperback versions were used from the fonds of the Digital Library of Slovenia and the Natonal Library of Serbia.
10 See more in March 2013: 107–110. See also Ceribašić 2003.
11 Hej, Sloveni, a song that enjoyed popularity among Slavic and Yugoslav Sokols for a long time was officially accepted as the SSKJ’s anthem in 1935 on the initiative of its Federal Educational Department (see Anonymous 1935c). It was often sung in the important Sokol events including the celebrations of historical anniversaries, state holidays, rallies, etc.
12 The Youth Day (celebrated on 25 May), one of the most popular and politically significant manifestations of the socialist Yugoslavia, relied on certain prominent features of the pre-WWII Sokol public celebrations. This included the organization of a central rally on a stadium, the passing of a torch that preceded this manifestation (The Relay of Youth), and presentations of mass-executed choreographies with music accompaniment. The amalgamation of patriotic, folklore-inspired and national elements was also characteristic for both types of events.
13 On the appropriation of tambura among the South Slavs and the importance of tamburitza orchestras in the process of nation-building and cultural resistance to the Austrian and Hungarian elites of the Habsburg Monarchy see more in March 2013; Bezić 2001; Andrić 1962. Cf. also Vukosavljev 1990; Tomić 2009; Fori 2011; Ranisavljević 2011; Lajić Mihajlović 2019; Antunović 2021.
14 See The Institute of Musicology SASA – Archival Collection, IMSASA-AC, Legacy of Svetolik Pašćan Kojanov, SPK-136, Autobiography, signed by Svetolik Pašćan – Kojanov, typescript, Belgrade, 20 June 1958 (10 pages), 2–5.
15 Ibid. According to Kojanov’s testimony, immediately after the Great War, from 1918 to 1922, he took up the role of a music referee and member of the Educational Department of the Zagreb Sokol society. One of his main duties was to lead the tamburitza orchestra and choir.
16 Aleksandar Aranicki was not only one of the most skilled primaš (leading player in a tamburitza orchestra) in the interwar Yugoslavia, but he also led a very influential tamburitza orchestra that performed regularly on Radio Belgrade since 1933. His ensemble represented an official Radio Belgrade’s tamburitza orchestra from 1936 to 1941 (Cf. Dumnić 2013: 24–25; Vesić 2013). Aranicki wrote arrangements of art and popular music and composed tamburitza garlands based on folk tunes.
17 According to Brat [Šoula, Ladislav] 1939. The terms Sokol fanfara and Sokol muzika were in widespread use among Sokol officials, press commentators and members of Sokol organizations. Sokol muzika was seldom explained in terms of instrumentation and the number of performers, but it seems that it mostly referred to large orchestras or string orchestras as they were named by Ladislav Šoula, one of the interwar experts on Sokol music ensembles, that also included woodwind and brasswind instruments and percussions.
18 Data were taken from two reports created by the leading personnel of the JSS and SSKJ and published in 1927 and 1933. See Group of authors 1927; Group of authors 1934.
19 See Anonymous 1920a; Anonymous 1920b; Anonymous 1921b; Anonymous 1922b; Anonymous 1924.
20 According to the report of the SSKJ’s president, of 23 Sokol župe only 12 responded to the plea to send detailed overviews regarding their “technical” (gymnastics and sports) and educational activities. In addition, out of 443 Sokol societies, 372 prepared the reports, while the remaining 71 never responded. See Group of authors 1927 (appendix): 9–10.
21 See Bezić 2001: 110.
22 It should be noted that the boundaries of certain sokol župe cut across territories of listed historical regions. As a consequence, some of the calculated numbers should be observed with reserve. Nevertheless, even with such flaws, statistics of tamburitza orchestras per historical regions can give valuable insights into the trends of expansion of this type of ensemble in the interwar sokol organizations. It is also important to add that at the time Sokol statistics was created, Yugoslav territory was divided into banovinas – units that were named by the most important rivers of various parts of the state and that mostly did not follow the established boundaries of historical regions. In order to observe the trends of spread of tamburitza orchestras in the interwar period in connection with the pre-war period banovinas were not taken into consideration.
23 See Anonymous 1936d.
24 See Anonymous 1937c.
25 See Anonymous 1937b; Anonymous 1939.
26 See more in March 2013, 79–81. Apart from that terminology, other terms were used in parallel such as Sisak (Farkaš) and Bačka (Srem) system.
27 On the preparing and realization of the First Sokol Music Festival in Sarajevo see Anonymous 1934h; Anonymous 1934d; Anonymous 1934i; Anonymous 1934g; IMSASA–AC, Legacy of Svetolik Pašćan Kojanov, without signature, Program booklet of the First Sokol Music Festival with competition of the Sokol muzike, fanfare, tamburitza ensembles and guslars (Sarajevo, 27–29 June, 1934).
28 For instance, the orchestra of Banja Luka society encompassed a combination of instruments of both Bačka and Sisak systems and a total of 14 players. See Anonymous 1934g.
29 The jury consisted of composers, conductors, musicians, military musicians, teachers, professors and Sokol officials: Jovan Zorko, Kosta P. Manojlović, Dr. Bogdan Milanković, Dr. Mihajlo Miron, Damjan Nikolić, Makso Unger, Kosta Travanj, Ljubo Bajac, Cvjetko Rihtman, Ivan Vincetić, Ladislav Pešek, Beluš Jungić. Franjo Topić, Klemens Menšik, Anton Urban, Nikola Knežević and Svetolik Pašćan Kojanov. See Anonymous 1934i.
30 See Anonymous 1934g.
31 Anonymous 1934i.
32 Ibid.
33 According to IMSASA–AC, Legacy of Svetolik Pašćan Kojanov, without signature, Program booklet of the First Sokol Music Festival with competition of the Sokol muzike, fanfare, tamburitza ensembles and guslars (Sarajevo, 27–29 June, 1934).
34 Compulsory pieces for the Second Sokol Music Festival in Subotica were the following: Pejačević–Farkaš Canzonetta, Lisinski–Farkaš: Tužaljka (The Lament) from opera Porin, Aranicki: Jugoslovenske pesme (Yugoslav Songs), Mokranjac–Aranicki: Rukovet (Garland). See Anonymous 1936a.
35 According to IMSASA–AC, Legacy of Svetolik Pašćan Kojanov, without signature, Program booklet of the First Sokol Music Festival with competition of the Sokol muzike, fanfare, tamburitza ensembles and guslars (Sarajevo, 27–29 June, 1934).
36 It should be noted that the engagement of Mostar župa regarding popularization of epic singing to the accompaniment of the gusle was not surprising given the general role of Herzegovina region in the expansion of this type of traditional practice. Namely, Herzegovina represents a part of Dinaric cultural zone and also a center of epic singing practice. See more in Lajić Mihajlović 2014.
37 Anonymous 1932a.
38 See IMSASA–AC, Legacy of Svetolik Pašćan Kojanov, without signature, Program booklet of the First Sokol Music Festival with competition of the sokol muzike, fanfare, tamburitza ensembles and guslars (Sarajevo, 27–29 June, 1934).
39 Anonymous 1934i.
40 Ibid.
41 See IMSASA–AC, Legacy of Svetolik Pašćan Kojanov, without signature, Program booklet of the First Sokol Music Festival with competition of the sokol muzike, fanfare, tamburitza ensembles and guslars (Sarajevo, 27–29 June, 1934).
42 It is important to note that guslars’ competitions were taking place in the Mostar župa regularly over a longer time span. According to the ten-year report of the Mostar župa (from 1925 to 1935) around 61 competitions were organized, while 196 guslars participated. See Bajić 1936.
43 See Anonymous 1935b.
44 Anonymous 1935d.
45 The first prize on the competition was awarded to Veljko Vreća from Hum, the second to Osman Lizde from Domanović and the third to Perko Mrkajić from Bradina.
46 See Anonymous 1937c.
47 The Plan carried the name of the King Alexander I’s son, Petar Karađorđević, who was a minor at the time and who was supposed to be crowned on 6 September 1941. It encompassed various segments of Sokol work, particularly the educational part. The very broad and meticulously conceived milestones were expected to be carried out each year as a result of collective efforts of members of Sokol legions, societies and župe and Sokol officials.
48 See Živković 1939; Knežević 1939; Anonymous 1940d.
49 See Anonymous 1941.
50 A wealth of documents on the activities of guslars across the Kingdom of SCS/Yugoslavia is available in the fond of the Ministry of Education of the Archives of Yugoslavia (see, for example, AJ, 66-375). Apart from that, valuable data and insights on different aspects of interwar epic singing to the accompaniment of the gusle, including the contribution of certain regions and guslars, as well as the importance of organization of public competitions can be found in Lajić Mihajlović 2007, 2008, 2011, 2014, 2016.
51 On the work of Petar Perunović, Tanasije Vućić and other interwar guslars see more in Lajić Mihajlović 2008, 2014.
52 Anonymous 1921a.
53 Anonymous 1922a.
54 Anonymous 1930.
55 Belajčić 1931.
56 Group of authors 1934: 55.
57 Anonymous 1933; Anonymous 1933e; Anonymous 1934c.
58 Anonymous 1933d.
59 Anonymous 1932b; Anonymous 1933b; Anonymous 1934a; Anonymous 1935a; Anonymous 1935c.
60 Cf. Anonymous 1933c.
61 Anonymous 1934e.
62 Anonymous 1934f.
63 Anonymous 1934b.
64 Anonymous 1940c.
65 Cf. Anonymous 1940; Lazarević 1941.
66 I[van]. S[edlaček] 1941.
67 Anonymous 1936b.
68 Anonymous 1936e.
69 Anonymous 1940b.
70 Muhvić 1935.
71 Anonymous 1937a.