Архив Војводине / Archives of Vojvodina

No. 116

STATEMENT OF STOJAN ILIĆ FROM THE VILLAGE OF JEGIN LUG ON APRIL 16, 1942, ABOUT THE KILLING OF ALL INHABITANTS AND THE COMPLETE DESTRUCTION OF THE VILLAGE ON APRIL 11, 1942, BY MUSLIM LEGIONARIES.[1]

Transcript.

Ilić Stojan, worker in

coal mine, Kreka.

born in Tinje,[2] Mun.[icipality] of Živinice.

The above mentioned stated today as follows:

I am married from the village of Jegin Lug, I have 4 children and a wife.

On the third day (April 13, 1942) after the killings and looting in Jegin Lug by armed Mohammedan Legionnaires, I dressed in clothes worn by Roman Catholic peasants and went to Jegin Lug to see if anyone remained alive of my wife’s family, who comes from the Tadić family.

When I got there, whole piles of corpses were lying on the edge of the forest. There were women, children and men. The bodies were not buried. There were many dogs tearing pieces off the corpses.

The whole village was looted, the houses were empty and everything was dragged away. Even the window frames were removed from the houses, the valuables were destroyed and the iron parts were taken away. All that was left were empty walls to stand there. Stables and granaries empty, cattle driven away or slaughtered. The village was completely devastated and in ruins. Apart from the three houses that were burned down (of Neđo Marjanović’s family), the others were still standing.

My sister-in-law’s family owned the following:

28 pigs

7 heads of cattle

5 heads of horses

about 30 heads of various poultry

10 quintals of corn flour

10 quintals of potatoes

60 kg of wheat flour 180 kg of beans

20 kg of bacon

10 kg of lard

in addition to the above, the entire contents of the dwelling house.

The cattle were driven to the Mohammedan village of Vukovije and various other villages in the Zvornik District. (Suhopolje) etc.

  1. IV. 942

Tuzla.[3]

[1] АВ, Ф. 562, 3.1.1.2, 362.

[2] Tinja.

[3] Handwritten note.

This – English – edition of the book is a translation of the one in the Serbian language, published in 2022 under the title Ustaška zverstva: Zbornik dokumenata (1941–1942). As far as the corpus of the Dossier from the personal fonds of Slavko Odić is concerned – and it makes the essential body of this book – the translation team worked from its Serbian version given in the said book and not from the German original.

The Serbian edition, with the documents translated from German, was printed in the Cyrillic alphabet, which necessitated some explanations provided by the Editor, Dr. Milan Koljanin, with regard to the linguistic traits, orthography and punctuation resorted to by the translators from German into Serbian (Tatjana Janićijević, Akademija Oxford) and the Editor. Naturally enough, numerous clarifications referring to the Serbian edition do not apply on the English one in most of the aspects of translation work. Hence the need to write this Note.

To begin with, the translators basically opted for the varieties of the American English rather than British English.

Personal names in the officially processed documents are most often written in what is today considered inverse order: family name/surname first, followed by one’s first/Christian name, without a comma in between.

Originally, the documents (letters, reports, statements etc.) were written (typed) in bureaucratic style and with a page layout practised by German offices, so these traits have been retained herein, and so have the obvious spelling and/or typing errors (personal names, toponyms); the latter have been corrected in the footnotes. The parts of text/sentences which are underlined or written with spaces between letters as means of emphasis correspond to the German original and its Serbian/Croat counterpart. The same applies to whole words or lines written in capital letters.

Punctuation has been kept almost completely, except when the meaning demanded comma (usually related to the rules of word order in an English sentence). Some marks, such as hyphens, dashes or slashes may impress the Reader as outdated or misplaced. Earlier typewriters did not have buttons with parentheses, and the slash was used instead of them.

Dates are written with differing uses or omissions of period (full stop), whereby month is written in three ways: fully in letters (20 January), in Arabic numerals (e.g. 20.1.) or Roman numerals (e.g. 20.I.). In rare cases, the slash can be found in dates (e.g. 12./X. 1941), but not as a regular separator between their constituents. Years are occasionaly written without the first digit, e.g. 942 instead of 1942, which is a frequent occurrence in oral communication.

Abbreviations, other than official identification means for offices, titles or codenames (VB, MA, RSHA etc.), have been translated (e.g. ’etc.’). The translators chose to retain the Croat/Serbian abbreviation for the name of the wartime ’state’, that is, ’NDH’ is standing for Nezavisna Država Hrvatska (Independent State of Croatia) instead of the less known English name (ISC). Some words were written in a shortened form for the reason of economy of expression, and the habit has been transferred to the translation, including the Editor’s intervention in the Serbian edition: Reg.[ister], Gend.[armerie], Gor[nja] Tuzla.

Footnotes in the English edition partially differ from those in the Serbian version. Some proved to be unnecessary (those that provided original names which were transliterated into the phonetical Cyrillic alphabet). New footnotes have been added by the Subeditor in order to explain/clarify the specific, locally used, words or phrases with which the Reader may not be familiar (such as slava, din, sokolski dom), or to indicate some nuances in the meaning (student, profesor). Here and there, the Reader will find notes in brackets inserted into the main body of the text by translators or the Editor where immediate understanding was needed.

Finally, it is noteworthy that the above-mentioned bureaucratic style of the presented documents mirrors the established conventions of communication in Central Europe and the Balkans of the first half of the 20th century, particularly in state and military affairs, yet also illustrates the specific ’hierarchy’ of various authorities on the occupied territories during World War Two, accentuating the relations between the German organs/institutions in power and the various offices subordinated to the administrative and military system of the Third Reich. As to the information, facts and accounts of events recorded in these documents, they are the subject of the history science and studies related thereto.

A. Č. P.