Texte remanié de: Thèse de doctorat--Histoire--Paris--EHESS, 2001. Titre de soutenance : Les voyageurs occidentaux dans l'Empire ottoman (partie européenne) durant la première moitié du XVIIe siècle. / Bibliogr. t. 1, p. 392-452. Notes bibliogr. Glossaire. Index à la fin du t. 2.

Before the sixth millennium BC, peoples across Europe subsisted as foragers: by hunting wild game, gathering wild foods, and fishing from rivers and oceans. These subsistence strategies changed with the advent of the Neolithic as food producing economies and societies were introduced or arrived in southeast Europe from the Near East. This shift appeared earliest in the regions adjacent to Turkey and the Mediterranean and slowly expanded northward and westward during the late 7th and early 6th millennium BC. As a result of this change, most zooarchaeological and palaeo-economic studies conducted in the Balkans for Neolithic remains focused on domestic livestock and consequences for subsistence and settlement, to the neglect of our understanding of the wild component of Neolithic economies and the information they can provide on subsistence and settlement. In this thesis, I examine the wild component of Neolithic subsistence in order to understand their contribution to diet and overall economic adaptations. In particular, I examine the remains of deer, which are the most common wild mammal exploited during the Neolithic of the region, in order to characterize deer exploitation strategies. The thesis research demonstrates that the hunting of red and roe deer was not necessarily a background activity, but an important part of the Neolithic exploitation strategy, for both food and other kinds of resources. By understanding these processes and their importance to Neolithic society, we are better equipped to understand the overall picture of subsistence strategies and the exploitation of other resources in the central Balkans during the Neolithic.

The thesis analyses Britain's political involvement in Bulgaria during 1943 - 1949. It explores Britain's motives for seeking increased influence in the country and traces the most significant British attempts to shape Bulgarian politics. It examines British strategic decisions and diplomatic activities in Bulgaria against the background of the evolving domestic political situation and of Soviet objectives in the Balkans. Evidence from British archives is tested against recently released Bulgarian and Russian sources. The study clarifies problems central to the interpretation of post-war Bulgarian developments and addresses the question of British attitudes to the whole of Eastern Europe. Bulgaria's marginal place in British political and military thinking is found to be at odds with the country's recognised strategic importance. Towards the end of the Second World War, Bulgaria attracted the attention of the British Government occasionally, mostly in the context of broader regional issues such as that of the Balkan Federation. Although the realisation of limited capabilities to influence Bulgarian developments coloured Britain's wartime approach, never did British policy makers disavow interest in Bulgarian affairs. The research establishes that in the armistice period British policy towards Bulgaria was overwhelmingly governed by traditional geopolitical factors. These focused around Bulgaria's potential military threat of British imperial positions in the Eastern Mediterranean and overshadowed any proclaimed British commitment to democracy. Britain's priorities were complicated by the emerging Cold War as a Soviet-dominated Bulgaria was perceived as a springboard for Communist penetration of Europe. Ironically, British unwillingness to challenge Soviet influence in the northern Balkans exacerbated the very dangers Britain was striving to alleviate. Wavering British support for the Bulgarian anti-Communist Opposition only served to expose Britain's weaknesses and further antagonise the Soviet Union. This engendered continuous restraint and gradually led to the isolation of Britain from Bulgarian politics after British recognition of the Bulgarian Communist Government in 1947.

No description available.

Diss. : Philosophische Fakultät : Bonn 1979. - Bibliogr. p. 271-283. Index. -

Inaug. - Diss.--Philosophische Fakultät--München, 1972. / Bibliogr. p. 147-151.

Boston University. University Professors Program Senior theses. / PLEASE NOTE: Boston University Libraries did not receive an Authorization To Manage form for this thesis. It is therefore not openly accessible, though it may be available by request. If you are the author or principal advisor of this work and would like to request open access for it, please contact us at open-help@bu.edu. Thank you. / 2031-01-02

The Dayton Peace Agreement was signed in 1995, which effectively ended the war in Bosnian and established a decentralized state. This divisive nature of this framework encourages the political elite and decision makers to place a greater importance upon preserving political power, rather than making meaningful institutional changes. They consistently instrumentalize interthnic fears as a means to gain popular support at the expense of the country's development. The inability to cooperate has led to political stalemate and contributed to low level of progress in many sectors. Nonetheless, the possibility of accession to NATO remains open if the criteria for membership are satisfied. The international community bears the responsibility of integrating Bosnia and Herzegovina because of its strategic importance and the potential threats that can develop if political tensions escalate into an armed conflict. The recent accession of Montenegro and North Macedonia to NATO proves the doors remains open for aspiring countries that show the political will to deepen their relationship with the Alliance. Bosnia has made remarkable transformations in its security and defense sector, though it must resolve the current issues that impeded its Euro-Atlantic aspirations.

No / Can the Balkans ever become a peaceful penisula like that of Scandinavia? With enlightened backing, can it ever make common cause with the rest of Europe rather than being an arena of periodic conflicts, political misrule, and economic misery? In the last years of the twentieth century, Western states watched with alarm as a wave of conflicts swept over much of the Balkans. Ethno-nationalist disputes, often stoked by unprincipled leaders, plunged Yugoslavia into bloody warfare. Romania, Bulgaria and Albania struggled to find stability as they reeled from the collapse of the communist social system and even Greece became embroiled in the Yugoslav tragedy. This new book examines the politics and international relations of the Balkans during a decade of mounting external involvement in its affairs.

No / At the end of the Cold War, the Balkan states of South East Europe were in crisis. They had emerged from two decades of hardline communism with their economies in disarray and authoritarian leaders poised to whip up nationalist feelings so as to cling on to power. The break up of Yugoslavia followed in 1991 along with prolonged instability in Romania, Bulgaria and Albania. The Balkans After The Cold War analyses these turbulent events, which led to violence on a scale not seen in Europe for nearly 50 years and offers a detailed critique of Western policy towards the region. This volume follows on from the recently published Outcast Europe: The Balkans, 1789 - 1989 - from the Ottomans to Milosevic, also by Tom Gallagher.