This   level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Montenegro High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Montenegro, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Montenegro on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MontenegroWikipedia:WikiProject MontenegroTemplate:WikiProject MontenegroMontenegro articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Croatia Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Croatia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Croatia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CroatiaWikipedia:WikiProject CroatiaTemplate:WikiProject CroatiaCroatia articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

I know this will hurt the Montenegrins BUT since Prevlaka is Croatian and also the islet of Mamula- which has always figured in the registry i.e. "Katastar" of Dubrovnik- the whole entrance of Boka Kotorska is Croatian territorial water :) The late former prime minister of Croatia Racan wanted single-handedly to give Mamula away as a gift but no prime minister can. And it s only a matter of time until Croatia enforces that right in front of the entrance of the bay of Kotor. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.243.74.11 ( talk) 22:50, 8 February 2008 (UTC) reply

And you wanted to point out...what? -- PaxEquilibrium ( talk) 00:04, 9 February 2008 (UTC) reply

Aight, what's the rationale for moving to "Gulf of Kotor"? In terms of English Google searches, this is easily overrun by both "Boka Kotorska" and "Bay of Kotor". -- Joy [shallot] 00:42, 17 August 2005 (UTC) reply

How was Boka stolen from it's homeland Croatia? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Li-mu-bai ( talk • contribs) 03:25, 28 October 2005

Article is biased and should be reworked. -- Orjen 01:17, 26 November 2005 (CET)

Boka was never a part of Croatia. HolyRomanEmperor 21:35, 12 December 2005 (UTC) reply

Boka was part of Croatia at one time... The population was mostly Croatian according to books in Montenegro today. No propaganda....facts show the area was settled by Croats and all through history Croat familes were majority —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.111.75.195 ( talk • contribs) 04:50, 21 March 2006

I dare you say at what time, since no one else in the world knows it except yourself! According to what books? What facts? Anyone can say that - -- Dultz 16:47, 1 November 2006 (UTC) reply

This article contains is full of Serbian propaganda. It is written from a biased Serbian point of view. Here are some examples (as at 31 May 2018):

(1) "The Serbs, mentioned in the Royal Frankish Annals of the mid-9th century, controlled a great part of Dalmatia ("Sorabos, quae natio magnam Dalmatiae partem obtinere dicitur")." Firstly: the notion of Dalmatia was different in 9th century to what it is now. In the 9th century it referred to the Ancient Roman province, which reached into present-day Serbia and Albania. Secondly: This source has nothing to say about the Bay of Kotor region, and should be removed. In all likelihood, the Boy of Kotor region was still inhabited by the descendants of the Romanised population at the time, rather than by Slavs. Of course, no mention of Red Croatia. That is, this region, and the surrounding areas were part of Southern or Red Croatia in the early medieval period, a sister state of the Northern, or White Croatia, that was centered on present day Dalmatia, Lika and Bosnia regions.

(2) "Nemanja joined them, launching an offensive towards Kotor. The Bay was thenceforth under the rule of the Nemanjić dynasty." If the Serbs were living in the Bay of Kotor, there would be no reason for Nemanja, a Serbian ruler, to launch an offensive to conquer it. Further, just because the Nemanjić dynasty ruled over a region does not make that region ethnically Serbian - just like the conquest of Serbian principalities by the Ottoman dynasty did not cause the Serbs to become ethnically Turkish. Finally, the rule by the Nemanjić dynasty only lasted for a century or so. After that, Bay of Kotor fell under the Bosnian state and then its vassals, the rulers of Hum/Hercegovina. So, based on the amount of time alone, Bay of Kotor can be better described as Bosnian, rather than Serbian.

(3) "after the fall of Serbia to the Ottoman Empire in the late 14th century, Kotor was seized by the Venetian Republic." The fall of Serbia has nothing to do with the Venetian occupation of Kotor. This is because, at this stage, the area was a part of the Bosnian state, or rather the Bosnian, and later Hungarian vassals - the rulers of Hum.

(4) "the former Ottoman part had an Orthodox majority, while the part that was under Venetian rule had a Catholic majority." There is no mention that the Orthodox population saw itself as Montenegrin, while the Catholic populations saw itself as Croatians. It is a very Serbian strategy to omit the ethnic names when it does not suit them.

(5) "The plurality of Boka's citizens were Serbian Orthodox, under the jurisdiction of the Metropolitanate of Zeta." This is unsourced speculation.

(6) "Throughout Venetian rule, repeated assimilation attempts of the Slavs failed." It was never a policy of the Venetian state to assimilate anyone. They generally left the native ruling structures intact, albeit under the strict authority of native Venetian governors. The use of the word "Slavs" is an example of the Serbian strategy to omit the ethnic names when it does not suit them - that is, there was an absence of ethnic Serbs in the Bay of Kotor at the relevant time.

(7) "in 1654 when the Ottomans attacked, retaliating against Bokeljs who had sunk an Ottoman ship." The use of the word "Bokeljs" is an example of the Serbian strategy to omit the ethnic names when it does not suit them - that is, this should be a reference to Croats.

(8) "It attracted Petar Zrinski, a famous statesman in Europe." There is no mention that Zrinski was a Croatian, who was a ruler (ban = viceroy) of Croatia.

(9) "a union of the bay area with Montenegro was declared. In 1815, the bay was annexed by the Austrian Empire" This neglects to say that the union with Montenegro was not internationally recognised, and was never put into effect. Bay of Kotor was actually under Russian military occupation until it was handed over to Austria, following the Austrian liberation of Dalmatia in 1815. Austrian rule was recognised internationally following the 1815 Treaty of Vienna. Indeed, Bay of Kotor was Austrian from the fall of the Venetian Republic (Treaty of Campo Formio 1797) until the Treaty of Schönbrunn in 1809.

(10) "nationalist Croat politicians talked of Croatian regional autonomy". This uses weasel words. Why are Croat politicians "nationalist"? Also it is such a general statement that it conveys no useful information. It should be removed.

(11) "the Croatian viewpoint was that the Boka Catholics were ethnic Croats." This too uses weasel words. This is not a "viewpoint" that is debateable or contentious. Simply stated - Croats who have lived in the Bay of Kotor for centuries consider themselves as Croats. Wow!

(12) "The Catholics have mainly adopted a Croat national identity." Again propaganda. The Croats have not "mainly adopted" anything - they are, and they were - Croats.

(13) "included in the Italian Governatorato di Dalmazia until September 1943. Since 1945, it has been part of the Republic of Montenegro." There is no mention of how the separate (Croatian) character of the Bay of Kotor region was recognised by the anti-fascist resistance movement at first, but was then erased at the insistence of Serbian and Montenegrin nationalists. The resistance movement was originally governed by through the State Anti-fascist Council for the National Liberation of Montenegro and Boka (Zemaljsko antifašističko vijeće narodnog oslobođenja Crne Gore i Boke), but in 1944, with the war nearly over, the reference to Boka was erased.

(14) "Slavic tribes settled around the Bay in the 7th century. The region was divided between tribes, the Docleans and the Travunians." This sentence appears under the heading "Serbs & Montenegrins." It is at best confusing, because it does not explain the connection between the Docleans and the Travunians on the one hand and the Serbs & Montenegrins on the other. At worst, it is propaganda and should be removed.

(15) There is no mention of Sutorina and Igalo, which were Croatian territory, belonging of the Republic of Ragusa (Dubrovnik), gifted to the Ottoman Empire in 1699 following the Treaty of Carlowitz, and then gifted by the People's Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina to the People's Republic of Montenegro in 1947. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.111.106.183 ( talk) 14:56, 31 May 2018 (UTC) reply

What about Albanians the Croats know it best that the ilyrians are the first in that region. And maybe someone here knows something about "Queen Teuta". I am an Albanian and my ancestors are from Boka e Kotorrit too even my last name is Kotorri...

First of all, there is big difference between Illyrians and Albanians. All these nations - Montenegrins, Serbs and Albanians are descendants of Illyrians, and all three nations mixed with Slavs, although in the case of Serbs and Montenegrins, the Slavic language prevailed, and in the case of Albanians the Illyrian language prevailed. However, Albanians are not Illyrians, but descendants of Illyrians, which is not same. I agree that something should be written about Queen Teuta and Illyrian history, but certainly not under title "Albanians". Regarding your ancestors, I do not believe that they are descendants of original Illyrian population of Boka, since that population was Romanized during Roman rule and lost its identity. Your ancestors probably migrated there from Albania some 400-500 years ago. PANONIAN (talk) 16:32, 22 May 2006 (UTC) reply

Added info on Queen Teuta who retired in Rhizon from Shkodra. For more info see Queen Teuta as this is an article on Kotor SULMUES (talk)--Sulmues 20:08, 28 December 2009 (UTC) reply

Croatia has always vied for ownership of Boka Kotorska because it would virtually complete their ownership of the entire Dalmatian Coast, but Boka was NEVER part of Croatia, nor was there EVER "a Croat majority" in Boka.

This section of Wikipedia on Boka was written by someone with a Croat political agenda -- and that surprises and dismays me because I thought Wikipedia was smarter than that!

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Bokababe ( talk • contribs) 23:03, 16 March 2006

Actually, Bay of Kotor was part of Croatia for a good period, when SHS(State of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes) was formed, Croatia lost Bay of Kotor untill NDH when Croatia regained it. In 2nd Yugoslavia(SFRY), Croatia lost Bay of Kotor Again, this time forever. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.60.100.101 ( talk) 17:30, 19 January 2013 (UTC) reply

I'd have to agree that Boka Kotorska was once part of Croatia (I mean like one of its original states and/or predecessors). I also found out that Kotor was a part of Montenegro since 1945 and has been conquered several times by Montenegro but has been lost. Also, Kotor was once part of the Republic of Venice. Boka Kotorska had to be a part of Croatia because I found out that from 1918-1941? or 1945?, Boka Kotorska was with the Hrvatska Banovina. Found this on Worldstatesmen.org Crna Gora ^{( Talk/ Contribs/ Edit Count)} 03:58, 1 June 2006 (UTC)-------------- reply

OHHHH Lepa Brena could'nt sing it better ...well done Crna Gora... U KNOW UNBIAS HISTORY... The Boka region was once part of Croatia and many of the people had Croatian origin. The picture changed over time. This is why there is a huge debate going on now...who are Bokkies??? They are Croat origin but today they are Montenegrin. I can't see them as Serb. One also has to remember that our Montenegrin people have also been there too all along.. not just Serbs and Croats. I guess its a bit like Bosnia ...mixed and politics driven.

Evergreen Montenegro1 06:48, 1 June 2006 (UTC) reply

What the heck are Bokelji? Are they inhabitants of Boka Kotorska? Note to above comment:Same here dude. ROCK ON!!!! CRNA GORA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Man, I LOOOOVE!!! Montenegro!!!.

I would like these two personalities to produce ANY evidence on this claim of theirs: "Boka Kotorska "was" settled by Croats as far back as 7hth century. Around 1910 they started to leave the area and the Serbs arrived in large numbers." ...? ...? Total nonsense!

Yeah right, Serbs were settled in 1910 probably by Austro-Hungarians because they loved them so much! 7th century?

The number of written records on ethnicicty from Boka in 7th c is equal to none so you might have said from 77th c. BC!!! What kind of "books" do you "read". Please educate yourself before you start giving other people lessons. Really... -- Dultz 10:39, 11 June 2006 (UTC) reply

Surely the former writer has a first hand opinion about the Boka bay area as his Croatian ancestors derive from this part of the Adriatic coast. Minority Croats are an important element of the population which in it's majority is of Montenegrin or Serb origin.

To talk in behalf of all the Bokeljs (Croats, Montenegrin, Serbs), with the notion they've (the Bokeljs) always been Croat and Catholic, and his polarizing statement that catholic churches outnumber a few orthodox ones is deeply regrettable.

While Perast, Dobrota have Catholic churches (with no prominent Croatian decent, as they were build by Venetians - and Kotor rightly has more catholic than orthodox churches important orthodox shrines from the 12th century are found ), Risan and Herceg Novi and the regions of Krivosije show the opposite, with a large number of orthodox shrines build during various times by Serbs.

Boka had traditionally Venetian (Italian) and Serb settlements. As Catholic settlements (Perast, Dobrota, Prcanj) are merely found at the shores of the Bay, all of the immidiate hinterland of the Bay was settled by Serbs from early medieval times. Kotor the main port had a mixed population while Herceg Novi and Risan were Serb populated.

As the controversy about the ownership of the Boka bay area between Serbs and Croats looms for a long time in such discussions as this one, the Bay never belonged to a Croatian state, which doesn't give good arguments for croatian ambitions. -- Orjen 20:23, 21 March November 2006 (CET)

hahhaha Serbian propaganada at work...you almost had me fooled. Where do you get your facts from??? Not from Boka, maybe from Belgrade.hahaha I have visited Boka Kotorska and know what im talking about. The place has a long history of Croatian settlement. My family are Croat and Catholic. Many books in Montenegro museums in Boka region show of Croatian families living in the area. They even mention them as being Croat in name, not Serbian. Majority was Croat. Today most Croats have gone, some as late as 1991 other much earlier 1910s. What i suggest my freind is you visit Boka , talk to locals, visit museums, look at some history books printed in Boka (not Serbia). You will quickly find out there was a majority of Croatians settled in the area with little Serbians. Its sad one has to debate this when a quick email to a tourist guide of Monetnegro will tell you. Sorry to hurt your feelings and your serb pride.

Ehm, I am originated from Boka and I am neither Croat nor Serb. Or "Montenegrin" for that matter. My ancestors were Bokezi, and if they new that you would bicker that much, they would've never declared themselves as ethnic Croats, nor would they vote for a union with Montenegro for a greater cause to unite the Serbs... Although, the Orthodox Church's a lot stronger than the Catholic one for 800 years by now... -- HolyRomanEmperor 18:36, 13 April 2006 (UTC) reply

I posted now numbers from some censuses (I have numbers from other censuses too which I did not posted), so we do not need to guess were more Serbs or Croats there since we have correct numbers. PANONIAN (talk) 23:27, 13 April 2006 (UTC) reply

TO Panonian.....WELL DONE....WELL DONE>>>>

Evergreen Montenegro1 03:21, 20 October 2006 (UTC) ' reply

Well, as historical census data show, Croats were majority in the certain areas of Boka, but not in the entire Boka which had Orthodox majority during the history, just a correction. PANONIAN (talk) 02:12, 20 April 2006 (UTC) reply

The fact that Kotor has 17 Catholic and only 2 Orthodox churches is the best illustration on how much religious liberty was there in Catholic Venetian Republic. Orthodox were majority in Kotor surely from 17th c onwards but got the first church (before they had to share St Luke with the catholics) only during the Napoleonic rule (1807-14) that brought religious freedom. In 1812 Orthodox Serbs of Kotor documented to marshal Marmont that there is more of them than the Catholics but they don't have even one church, so they were granted St Luke...

And one more nonsence. No native of Boka Kotorska was ever Montenegrin. Why? Because Montenegrin is someone from Montenegro and Boka became part of Montenegro only in 1918. Why in 1918? Because in that year Montenegro unified with Serbia so that the Serbs of Boka (and nobody declared himself as Montenegrin in Boka at the time), wanted also to unite with Montenegro and Serbia. -- Dultz 10:58, 11 June 2006 (UTC) reply

Just one notification for whole of the Bay: it has 250 Serbian Orthodox and 90 Roman Catholic churches and monasteries. -- PaxEquilibrium ( talk) 23:37, 12 January 2008 (UTC) reply

I made some edits in the article, assuming that Bay of Kotor starts at the top of Privlaka peninsula, that is part of Croatia. There is possibility that I may have made a mistake, in case that Boka actually starts a little deeper. In that case, no parts of Boka Kotorska is in Croatia.

So, if Boka really starts closer to Herceg Novi, I have no problem with someoine deleting patrts of my text and removing category "Geography of Croatia". But, I think the reader of the article might find interesting some facts about Privlaka, and Croatian and Bosnian border being very close to Boka, so don't just revert my changes - rather try to make article more informative. -- Ante Perkovic 09:34, 26 May 2006 (UTC) reply

Well, plainly said, yes, the Bay of Kotor is partially in Croatia. However - the actuay Bay does not begin with Herceg Novi - it begins there alright, but excludes it. The Bay's geographical boundries were decided in 1813, when a referendum was held to confirm the Montenegrin occupation forces and an official secession from the French Empire and joining the Kingdom of Montenegro. Back then - the City of Herceg Novi was part of Herzegovina. And then all back foils down to this - we need sources for every single thing on wiki - and not a single encyclopedia/encyclopedic-like source considers the Bay of Kotor lying somewhere else in Montenegro. It's just like this: Dalmatia is a geographical region of Croatia, but not Serbia and Montenegro (or Bosnia and Herzegovina) like it should be. -- HolyRomanEmperor 09:21, 29 May 2006 (UTC) reply

Also, it's Prevlaka - not "Privlaka".

Appearently, there is this large confusion of whether Boka was historically Craotian up 10 the 1910-1991 die-out period. I do not want to mix with these troublesome facts - but the most indiginous people of the Bay: Bokezi/Bokeljani - are part of the Serbian cultural heritage, rather than Croatian. Even though their numbers are small and are in a minority - today the vast majority of the Bay's population is Serbian. Croats had majority in some municipalities in 1948/1953/1961/1971/1981/1991 - but no more since the new territorial changes of 2003. -- HolyRomanEmperor 09:53, 29 May 2006 (UTC) reply

This is the traditional attire of the population of Boka (ever since the beginnings of its tradition).

Also, there is the famous 1848 Assembly of the Gulf of Kotor. According to the advising of Montenegro's Prince-Episcope Petar II Petrović Njegoš, the Gulf was unite with Croatia-Slavonia into a unified Croatian Realm within the Habsburg Monarchy. However, they wrote the Croat Assembly in Zagreb, refusing it, and claiming that Serbs have to be unitied first - and then they will unite with other South Slavs (according to Njegoš's ideology). They announced: The Gulf of Kotor, according to its location, history, language and tribal majority belongs to Serb nationality. It was written by a patriot from Budva - Stefan Mitrov Ljubiša in Serbian - who is also famous for his citation - The people of Boka Kotorska are pure Serbs. The text was printed by don Niko Luketić. here is the letter sent to Njegoš of Montenegro and here's the letter sent to the Croatian Assembly in Zagreb. The actual proclaimation of the Assembly can be read here and here (in Serbian). The whole assembly was funded/organized by the Serb National Guard of Kotor (that operated throughout the 19th century). -- HolyRomanEmperor 10:10, 29 May 2006 (UTC) reply

Serb National Guard of Kotor

It was founded in 1862 as the only armed cultural organization of Serbs in the Bay of Kotor. On 5 May 1912, a massive feast was held in the Kingdom of Montenegro to honour a half-century iubillee of the Serbian culture and this organization in the Bay of Kotor. The flag, a picture of one of its Gatherings and the seal can all be seen here. -- HolyRomanEmperor 10:13, 29 May 2006 (UTC) reply

Throughout the recent modern history of the Bay of Kotor there can be found stricly Serbian national organizations - culminating with the opening of the Serb Library in Herceg Novi on 14 (26th) June 1899. -- HolyRomanEmperor 10:17, 29 May 2006 (UTC) reply

I think that one of the main confusions is this: Tito decided how little peoples would declare - and thus he gave them only one choice: Croatian nationality. True, many declare as Croats even nowdays. On 18 January of 1916, the fatheful Navy of Boka fought alongside the Austro-Hungarian Army and Lovćen was conquered - a vast celebration of the one people's unity under the Habsburg-Lorraines was proclaimed. However, around this time (when the Austrian Empire was exceedingly anti-Serbian) the Roman Catholics of the Bay of Kotor attain a strict Croatian national affilation - and even is the Boka marine called with a prefix Croatian. This however, cannot undo the numerical superiority Orthodox (Serbs) in Boka Kotorsa from 1420 up to those times - and absolute majority up to today. -- HolyRomanEmperor 10:29, 29 May 2006 (UTC) reply

I dont get you or i misunderstood, how did tito decide the nationality when came topower in 1945, and you are talking about events prior to ww1?-- Jadran 13:27, 8 June 2006 (UTC) ____________________________ reply

I could agree - but I would need factual sources for the claim. Where are your arguements? Your word alone? Also, PANONIAN pointed out that Croats (Catholics) did not have majority over all of Boka - but only regionally. -- HolyRomanEmperor 19:12, 7 June 2006 (UTC) reply

OK - Kotor indeed did have a Croatian majority, I agree there. However - it's very unlikely for Herceg-Novi, Risan & Tivat. -- HolyRomanEmperor 19:16, 7 June 2006 (UTC) reply

My dad is from Perast Montenegro. My mum is from Tivat Montenegro. Both are Catholic and both familes have some history books clearly saying they are Croatian in origin. Today my parents and me are Montenegrins and very proud of this fact.. This origin debate was not an issue prior to 1991.

Re population and ethnic background ..depending on which book you read ..is it from Zagreb or Belgrade???? Ask the locals/////////or just ask me...I know in recent times Serbs have tried to hide some facts about Croatians in Boka.

)

Evergreen Montenegro1 02:49, 8 June 2006 (UTC) reply

If you know you are croat in origin, and you live in Australia, and i assume from previous comments that you have Croatian friends,as there are not many Montenegrins(ethnicity) in Australia Why dont you call yourself a Montenegrin Croat, after all Montenegro only recently gained independence, and during the SFR yugoslavia and FR Yugoslavia, Montenegrin Nationalism was seppressed, and "may" not have been very existent.

You also mentioned that your Grandfather called himeself Croat, So i dont think it would be like goin back into ancient History eg 600 AD you have only been calling yourself montengrin for, i assume your generation or your parents generation.

You have an opportunity to keep the croatian presence in Boka allive, and prevent its history being ursurped into Serbian propaganda. Dont you have any feeling inregards to Croat presence dieing. btw Montenegrin Nationalism and ethnicity, will only devlop and develop, it will not die...you have a state, while croats in Kotor are fighting onn 3 fronts maybe even 4(bosniaks) 1. against serbian propaganda 2.lessor extent however you a living reality and testiment, boka will become "catholic montenegrin" 3. Hardcore Bosniak claims over all the Former Yugo( i see a strong similiarity bosniak actions today and serbian i.e Megamaniac for a greater Bosnia

4. finally the Demographic Cascade.-- Jadran 13:21, 8 June 2006 (UTC) -- Jadran 13:21, 8 June 2006 (UTC) reply

So, your parents were born in Communist Yugoslavia, right? Well then - we know that Croats have been a minority in the Bay of Kotor throughout the entire period 1945/1953/1961/1971/1981/1991/2003 censi say so. But then again, if you draw origin from the Bay of Kotor - that's most certainly before it was included into the borders of Montenegro. Also, I agree that a certain amount of Boka's population was Croatian - but in the same manner as a certain amount of Hungarians in Vojvodina, Bosniaks in Sandzak, Albanians in Serbia... No one's denying that there were some Croats in the Bay... -- HolyRomanEmperor 12:58, 8 June 2006 (UTC) reply

BiH traži Boku? http://www.slobodnadalmacija.com/20060616/bih02.asp -- Jadran 02:36, 18 June 2006 (UTC) reply

Iam Montenegrin Australian but i do have Croatian roots....

Evergreen Montenegro1 23:05, 13 June 2006 (UTC) reply

Check the figures, i think you'll see that there is large inconsistency with population claim

Some one should fix this up

[ [1]]

[ [2]] -- Jadran 12:55, 8 June 2006 (UTC) reply

Croat should be replaced by Serb of Catholic faith. Are Germans of Catholic faith called Poles? Croats always lived northern from the river Cetina, conditionally Neretva. After the invasion of the Turk they fled to the island and to Graz and Agram. The empty land was then inhabited by the Serbs. NORTHERN FROM CETINA!!!

Please, no original research. Ante

You are Military Frontier guy as well as you are from Boka... You spread lies on this wikipedia in order to deny essential facts of Croatian history.

Jašta. :P -- George D. Božović 21:36, 15 June 2007 (UTC) reply

I think this is a more appropriate and specific name for the article. And by comparing [3] and [4], I concluded that Google agrees with me. Anyone have a problem with this proposed move? Sideshow Bob 17:25, 15 June 2007 (UTC) reply

I tried to do that several times, but a redirect already exists so we'd have to copy the entire article and place it there; turning this one into a redirect. As I didn't have enough time then, I never got to do it really. ;0) -- PaxEquilibrium 23:44, 15 June 2007 (UTC) reply

And what about the title Boka Kotorska? I believe translating it to either "Gulf of Kotor" or "Bay of Kotor" is at least a little bit of original research. -- George D. Božović 13:01, 16 June 2007 (UTC) reply

Its the same story with all articles relating to southern Dalmatia. People need to stop being nationalistic and understand that ethnicity only became an issue for people in modern times. Therfore it is pointless asking whether the Bokas were originally Croats ot Serbs. The "Croat" ethnogenesis occurred in northern dalmatia (around Nin, Split, Zadar). This was the Croat heartland. Similarly, Serb core areas were Lim, Piva, upper Drina basins. Apparently, Caslav klonimirovic secured the alliance of local nobles in southern Dalmatia in the 10th century, and later, Nemanya did too, so they were (politically) Serbian during these times, although still highly regionalised. In between a local dynasts established their own rule, like the Voislavs.

We have to be careful with equating the presence of Catholics or Orthodox with Croats and Serbs, respectively, because this is anachronistic. Although I'm sure some Croats moved to Kotor during the Ottoman times, or whtever, local Slavs might well have become Catholic under their own impresions. In fact, for much of early Croat history priests wore beards, married and gave liturgy in Slavic, meaning that they were little different to those in Orthodox Serbia or Bulgaria, although they were officially Catholic. So the issue is very complicated Hxseek ( talk) 14:39, 7 August 2009 (UTC) reply

By the demographic map of Boka, it's clear that Serbs are majority on the greater part of Boka and Montenegro's coastline. Thus, Serbs have at least 3 big cities on Adriatic Sea, and it doesn't matter that politically they are in the state called - "Montenegro". Regards. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.216.132.111 ( talk) 06:29, 3 March 2011 (UTC) reply

An image for this article is being discussed at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Bay of Kotor. Jujutacular  ^talk 05:59, 11 December 2010 (UTC) reply

I changed the word "harbours" to harbors underneath the geography section right by the image associated with geography. Scastr5 ( talk) 20:46, 6 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:20090719 Crkva Gospa od Zdravlja Kotor Bay Montenegro.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on July 26, 2012. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2012-07-26. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :) Thanks! — howcheng { chat} 08:05, 25 July 2012 (UTC) reply

Picture of the day

The Bay of Kotor is a winding bay on the Adriatic Sea in south-western Montenegro. It is a ria of the disintegrated Bokelj River which used to run from the high mountain plateaus of Mount Orjen. The bay has been inhabited since antiquity and has some well preserved medieval towns, making it an important tourist attraction in Montenegro.Photo: Ggia

Archive – More featured pictures...

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Bay of Kotor. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{ cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{ nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20140422233113/http://www.brodovi.me/?p=22 to http://www.brodovi.me/?p=22

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{ source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.— ^{cyberbot II} _{Talk to my owner:Online} 07:26, 8 January 2016 (UTC) reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Bay of Kotor. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{ cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{ nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110727092412/http://www.monstat.org/EngPOPIS1.htm to http://www.monstat.org/EngPOPIS1.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{ Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{ source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.— ^{cyberbot II} _{Talk to my owner:Online} 07:50, 28 February 2016 (UTC) reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bay of Kotor. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.monstat.org/EngPOPIS1.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{ Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{ source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.— ^{cyberbot II} _{Talk to my owner:Online} 14:14, 13 April 2016 (UTC) reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bay of Kotor. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.monstat.org/EngPOPIS1.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{ Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{ source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.— ^{cyberbot II} _{Talk to my owner:Online} 17:24, 26 May 2016 (UTC) reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bay of Kotor. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150924111640/http://www.rastko.org.rs/rastko-bo/zemlja/smatavulj-boka.html to http://www.rastko.org.rs/rastko-bo/zemlja/smatavulj-boka.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{ source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 11:02, 16 July 2017 (UTC) reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bay of Kotor. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140320114211/http://skemman.is/stream/get/1946/7407/19823/1/Bjarki_Friis_master_thesis_ready_for_printing_V3.pdf to http://skemman.is/stream/get/1946/7407/19823/1/Bjarki_Friis_master_thesis_ready_for_printing_V3.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{ source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 02:03, 4 September 2017 (UTC) reply