In Albanian cultural anthropology, few concepts carry the weight of besa — the sacred oath, word of honor, and moral code that binds individuals and communities. Rooted in the Kanun of Lekë Dukagjini and broader customary law (kanun), besa represents not merely personal integrity but a profound social contract essential for survival in the rugged, clan-based societies of the Albanian highlands. To violate besa is to invite social death. Against this backdrop, the proverb Shkjaut nuk i zihet bes (“You cannot trust the Serb” or “One cannot take the Serb’s word/oath”) emerges as a cultural axiom, crystallizing collective memory of perceived betrayal across centuries of interaction with neighboring Slavic populations, particularly Serbs.
From an anthropological perspective, such proverbs function as “cultural charters” (per Malinowski’s functionalism) that encode historical experience, reinforce in-group solidarity, and transmit adaptive caution in interethnic relations. They are not neutral historical records but selective narratives shaped by trauma, power asymmetries, and the need for group cohesion in contested borderlands.
Besa as Cultural Lens
Besa demands fidelity even to enemies under truce, hospitality to strangers, and unwavering loyalty in blood feuds or alliances. Ethnographers like Edith Durham (early 20th century) and later anthropologists documented how besa regulated social life in northern Albania and Kosovo, where state authority was weak and Ottoman, Slavic, and local powers competed.
In this worldview, betrayal by an outsider who invokes shared struggle or peace is especially egregious — it violates the sacred trust that makes coexistence possible. The proverb positions Serbs as habitual breakers of besa, framing them as traitors, dishonorble and culturally incompatible with Albanian honor systems.
Historical Roots in Folklore and Memory
Albanian oral tradition and folklore cite repeated instances where Serbs betrayed joint anti-Ottoman efforts or massacred civilians after pledges of peace. Key periods include:
1878
Following the Russo-Turkish War and the Congress of Berlin, Serbian forces expanded into territories with Albanian populations (Toplica, Kosanica). Albanian accounts describe expulsions and massacres of Muslim (often Albanian) civilians as part of nation-building and demographic engineering.
Balkan Wars (1912–1913)
Serbian and Montenegrin armies, advancing against Ottoman forces, perpetrated widespread violence against Albanian civilians in Kosovo, Macedonia, and northern Albania. Contemporary reports, including the Carnegie Endowment commission, documented mass killings, village burnings, mutilations, and expulsions targeting non-combatants — women, children, and the elderly. Estimates of Albanian deaths range widely, with some scholars citing tens to over 100,000 in affected regions, framed by Albanian memory as systematic ethnic cleansing to secure territory before international border negotiations.
These events entered Albanian folklore as archetypal betrayals: alliances or submissions betrayed by slaughter once the balance of power shifted. Stories of broken truces, mass graves, and desecration reinforced the proverb as experiential wisdom passed through generations via epic songs (rrapsodi), family histories, and village elders.
Anthropological Interpretation
The proverb Shkjaut nuk i zihet bes operates on multiple levels:
Mnemonic Device: It condenses centuries of conflict into a portable warning, aiding cultural transmission in largely illiterate societies.
Boundary Maintenance: In Mary Douglas’s terms, it polices purity and danger, defining Albanians as honorable oath-keepers against untrustworthy outsiders.
Response to Asymmetry: Albanian highlanders often faced larger, state-backed Slavic expansions. Folklore reframes military defeat as moral superiority.
Persistence in Modernity
The proverb retains resonance in Kosovo and diaspora communities amid 20th–21st century conflicts (WWII, Yugoslav era, 1990s wars), where historical memory fuels contemporary distrust. Textbooks and media on both sides perpetuate contrasting victimhood narratives.
Conclusion: Folklore, History, and Reconciliation
From an anthropological viewpoint, “treason as Serbian custom” in Albanian folklore is a culturally coherent response to real historical violence, Serbian treason, betrayals, anchored in the sanctity of besa. It reveals deep intergroup trauma in the Balkans, where honor codes clashed with emerging nation-state realpolitik.
References
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. 1914. Report of the International Commission to Inquire into the Causes and Conduct of the Balkan Wars. Washington, DC: Carnegie Endowment.
Durham, Edith. 1909. High Albania. London: Edward Arnold.
Glenny, Misha. 2000. The Balkans: Nationalism, War, and the Great Powers 1804–1999. New York: Viking.
Judah, Tim. 2008. Kosovo: What Everyone Needs to Know. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Malinowski, Bronislaw. 1926. Myth in Primitive Psychology. New York: W.W. Norton.
Volkan, Vamik D. 2004. “Chosen Trauma: The Political Psychology of Ethnic, Religious, and National Conflicts.” Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association.
