The Ethnic Structure of the Population in Vojvodina
Source: The Serbian Questions in The Balkans, University of Belgrade, publisher - Faculty of Geography, Belgrade 1995.
The complex ethnic structure of the population in Vojvodina is the result of numerous historical circumstances. Particularly important are those dating some three hundred years back. The result of the long-lasting wars fought at the end of the 17th century and at the beginning of the 18th was an almost complete loss of population in that part of the Pannonian plain. The first settlements on the territory of Vojvodina were built spontaneously by the settlers who came mostly from southern regions and formed a strong Serbian ethnic core which was predominant throughout the years. Later, spontaneous as well as planned migrations occurred for economic, political, and social reasons, and an ethnic medley appeared as a result of various political dominations throughout the centuries. In the time of Austrian domination the Germans were favoured for political reasons. Towards the end of the last century, when Vojvodina was under the jurisdiction of the Hungarian part of the Monarchy, the number of Hungarians increased rapidly. After World War I new territorial divisions opened migrational routes from the south, which increased the number of the Slav population.
By reason of social security, the population from all the parts of the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy gathered in these regions, which were either over populated or devastated by frequent wars. The domiciles of these settlers were mountainous regions, which, regardless of their political goals, marked these immigrations as the migrations of the mountain - plain direction.
Political and economic reasons instigated the need for quick settling, cultivation, and economic activities in the newly constituted territories. That was the reason why even minor ethnic groups were moved to these regions as their members were particularly skilful in some crafts needed in the milieu.
These rather interesting migrations in the process of settling in Vojvodina were the topic of a number of monographic studies that are just mentioned here in order to give an explanation of the contemporary ethnic structure of the population. The ethnic structure and the changes that took place in the 20th century will be explained in greater detail.
Only nine nationalities will be mentioned in the analyses - Serbs, Hungarians, Germans, Croats, Slovaks, Romanians, Montenegrins, Ruthenians, and Macedonians - each of them accounted for more than 1% of the population in Vojvodina over the periods. All the data are relevant for the present territory of Vojvodina and current administrative division of its territory. The only exception is the data for the year of 1910, which does not have the information on six villages in Mačva which constitute the administrative units in today's Vojvodina.
The Ethnic Structure of the Population in the Period before World War I
The ethnic structure of the population before World War I will be illustrated by the 1910 census data. This census registered only seven nationalities which presented 95.2% of the province population. Particularly predominant were: the Serbs (33.8%), Hungarians (28.1%), and Germans (21.4%).
1) The Serbs (510,186 inhabitants) constituted a relative majority, i.e. 33.8% of the population. As regards their share by municipalities (in present boundaries), the Serbs comprised the absolute majority in 13, relative in 10, and in eight they were second in number. Only in nine municipalities did they comprise a minority of the population: Apatin, Bač, Bačka Topola, Bački Petrovac, Kanjiža, Mali Idjoš, Senta, Subotica, and Temerin. The Hungarian population prevailed in six municipalities, and "other" - the German population in one and the Slovak in one. As regards their shares by settlements, the Serbs constituted the absolute majority in 134 (38.8%) settlements, i.e. in the statistical units of the time.
2) The Hungarians (424,555 inhabitants) comprised 28.1% of the population in this region. In the three quarters of the Vojvodina municipalities, the Hungarians formed numerous groups (over 10% of the population) and they were spread all over the territory. The greatest number of them settled in Bačka, fewer in Banat, and fewest in Srem. They comprised the absolute majority in nine municipalities and the relative majority in two, which accounted for one quarter of the Vojvodina communes. Their highest concentration was in the north-eastern region of Bačka, in the municipalities of Kanjiža (94.4%), Senta (91.8%), Bačka Topola (87.6%), Temerin (80.2%), Bečej (67.1%), Čoka (61.2%), and Subotica (60.8%). The Hungarians comprised absolute majority in 53 settlements which was 15.4% of the settlements in Vojvodina.
It is evident that the Hungarians concentrated in the regions by the border with their native country which was constituted in 1918. The question arose whether this border was correctly drawn. This division of the territories was a result of several facts. The decisive fact was that a considerable number of the Serbs had remained on the other side of the border (Segedin, Baje, and Pečuj environs). The Hungarian policy of assimilation was very effective and disproportions in ethnic structure became considerable. The other reason was that the Hungarian settlers in Vojvodina became numerous only after the Austro-Hungarian Compromise; in the times of the delimitation in this region only their first or second generation lived there. The aggressive process of Magyarization also seized other population in the 1910 census, many members of the Slovak, Ruthenian, and other nationalities were listed under the name of Hungarians".
3) The Germans (324,779 inhabitants) were the third in number with 21.4% of the total population. They were numerous in the settlements in central and western Bačka, in Banat, and in some settlements in Srem. They comprised the absolute majority in the municipalities of Odžaci (68.9%), Vrbas (61.1%), Apatin (60.3%) as well as in 63 settlements. This was 18.3% of the total number of the settlements in Vojvodina. They constituted the relative majority in five municipalities with the share which varied from 30.8 to 47.7%.
The most numerous among other nationalities were the Romanians - 75,223 or 4.97%. They settled mostly in the villages of central and southern Banat, and in 26 (7.5%) settlements they constituted the absolute majority of the population. The second in number were the Slovaks with 56,689 members which was 3.75% of the Province population.. They were mostly concentrated in three regions: in eight villages of southern Bačka, six villages of central Banat, and in Stara Pazova, where they comprised the absolute or relative majority, as well as in a number of other settlements. They presented one of the most homogeneous nationality in Vojvodina. The Croats followed with 34,089 inhabitants, which was 2.25% of the Province population. This census registered that the biggest Croats cohorts were in a few settlements in Srem (Sremska Mitrovica, Petrovaradin, Novi Slankamen, etc.), and in five settlements they created the absolute majority. It is interesting that there were not many of them in Bačka. At the same time, in those settlements in Bačka where the Croats were going to settle, there was a considerable number of those who declared themselves as "other" (Subotica, Sombor, Bajmok, Svetozar Miletić, Kolut, Bački Monoštor, Sonta, Bač, Vajska, Plavna, etc.). They were the Bunjevci and Šokci who later declared themselves as Croats. The analyses of the data led us to conclude that many of those who became Croats declared themselves as Hungarians at the time. The Ruthenians were the least numerous. There were 13,479 members of them that made 0.89% of the Province population; they were concentrated in three villages in Bačka, in two of which they constituted the absolute majority. The Ruthenians were highly concentrated in the areas in which they settled.
The Ethnic Structure of the Population in the Period between the Two World Wars
World War I did not have any considerable effect on the population in Vojvodina. It caused minor loss of population which was not even registered in the two consecutive censuses. According to these censuses' data, the number of the inhabitants almost stagnated: it dropped from index 105.0 (1910/1900) to index 100.2 (1921/1910).
As regards the ethnic structure of the population, it is obvious that greater changes occurred only in the shares of the Hungarians, Ruthenians, and Croats. The number and the share of the Hungarians rapidly dropped and had the index of 87.2, the Ruthenians 86.7, and the number of the Croats was increased (index 359.9). These phenomena are not difficult to explain.
The categories of the total population in the two censuses are only partially comparable. The 1910 census registered the population present at the time of the census, and the 1921 census registered only permanent residents. Thus, the population of Vojvodina included a considerable number of soldiers who went back to their homelands after the war. This was just one of the reasons for the minimum increase of the population and the drop in the number of the Hungarians.
Also, a number of Hungarian civil servants moved to their homeland. This was also the case with a small number of the members of other allochthonous population. There was also another important reason. At the time of the Hungarian rule in Vojvodina aggressive Magyarization took place. A lot of people who had yielded then did not declare themselves as Hungarians in the 1921 census. More detailed analyses show that the Croatian population surpassed the others in this. The phenomenon was most prominent in Subotica, Sombor, and Bajmok but it was not noticed in villages. This was probably due to the existence of civil servants whose careers greatly depended on their ethnic origin.
The drop in the Romanian ethnic element was, above all, caused by emigration to Romania and overseas. The other reason, which was to become predominant later, was that the Romanians declared themselves as Serbs. This phenomenon was slightly noticed in a few villages in southern Banat.
The most interesting changes in this period were noticed in the Croats. Their number and their share in the total population increased almost by four times. This was the result of the Šokci, Bunjevci, and some formally declared Hungarians declared themselves as Croats. From the time when they became a part of the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes, they were declaring themselves as Croats. In the newly constituted state this ethnic element gained considerable share in the population of Vojvodina.
A major drop in number occurred in the heterogeneous group of other nationalities. The regression was evident in the index number of 34,6, but it was below the level of increase in the number of the Croats by 40,000 persons. If the natural increase in population was ignored, the score of these changes would show that approximately as many Croats declared themselves as Hungarians in the 1910 census, and that about 15,000 Hungarians emigrated from Vojvodina to Hungary.
The Ethnic Structure of the Population in the Period after World War II
Contrary to World War I World War II presented a very powerful demographic factor. We will just mention the changes reared to this subject, The first and the most important change was the emigration of almost the whole of the German population. They had 31,821 inhabitants or 1.91% of the total population according to the first post-war census, and 7243 members or 0.37% in 1971. Somewhat less effective was the moving out of the people who emigrated with the occupying armies or the moving in of those who were colonised into these pairs during the War. Immediately after the War their places were taken by 214,078 inhabitants who were brought to Vojvodina in the organised migration known as colonisation. This did not compensate for the effects of the emigration and the suffering of the population in the war. Most of the colonists came from Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, and Serbia, which means that the population brought to Vojvodina was mostly Serbian (73.5% Serbs, 10.5% Montenegrins, etc.). It is necessary to point out that the official name of that action was "Settling of veterans and veterans' families in Vojvodina". Most of them were Serbs. Thus the Serbian population in Vojvodina increased in number. Also, there were many immigrants from Montenegro. Less numerous migrations occurred from Macedonia and Slovenia. Still, they brought a new ethnic element and contributed to the ethnic medley of the population in Vojvodina. All of the colonists were settled in the old German settlements and they introduced enormous changes in the ethnic structure of the population.
In 1953, after the colonisation, the ethnic structure of the population in Vojvodina was comprised of two predominant groups. The Serbs were absolutely prevalent while the Hungarians numbered only one half of them, while less numerous were Croats, Slovaks, Romanians, Montenegrins, Ruthenians, Macedonians, and other.
1) There were 865,538 Serbs in 1953, approximately 65% more than in 1921. This increased their share to 50.9% in the population of Vojvodina. They comprised the absolute majority in 26 municipalities and relative majority in six, namely, in three-quarters of the municipalities. In 237 settlements or 52.4% of the settlements the Serbs comprised over one half of the total population, and in many settlements they were the only population. There were not many of them only in the municipalities of Senta, Kanjiža, and Bački Petrovac.
2) There were 435,179 Hungarians, which was 25.6% of the whole population of Vojvodina. Compared to 1921 the number of Hungarians was increased by 65,139 and their share by 1.2%. They were the predominant population in the same nine municipalities as before but their share, compared to 1910, dropped in six municipalities. Three municipalities in which the increased share of the Hungarians was registered (Ada, Mali Idjoš, Čoka) represented typical population loss milieus. It is important to point out that the number of the adherents in this group increased due to the fact that around 7000 Germans declared themselves as Hungarians.
3) There were 127,027 Croats, which was 7.5% of the Province population. They were not a predominant group in any of the municipalities, but they were second in number in the municipalities of Beočin, Indjija, Ruma, Sremska Mitrovica, Subotica, and Šid, while a large number of them lived in Apatin, Bač, Novi Sad, Sombor, and Stara Pazova. They constituted the absolute majority in 14 settlements in Srem and western Bačka.
There were no major changes in other nationalities. The counts and shares of the Slovaks and Ruthenians were increased. The increase in the number of the Ruthenians was rather substantial, but it was mostly the result of their merge with the Ukrainians. The number and the share of the Romanians dropped. The ethnic medley became even more diversified as a result of post-war migrations, which contributed to the increase in the number of those who declared themselves as "others".
The following changes were in accord with the growth of the total Province population, but there also appeared some differences based on the natural and mechanical migrations of the population. The natural migration depended on many social factors which conditioned birth late. High birth rates were not characteristic of this milieu since the period between the wars; in the less numerous nationalities they were below the Province average. Death rates did not vary that much, but this phenomenon was more pronounced because of the lower birth rates and the ageing of the population. The negative natural population increase was characteristic of the Romanians even in the period 1957-1959. In 1981, it reached the rate of-3.5%o. The Hungarians had a negative natural population increase rate of-2.8%o in the period 1976-1981, and it was minimised in other groups.
The process of reproduction with various nationalities was differently affected by migrations. They had no positive effects on the non-Yugoslav peoples that were separated from their homelands by state borders. Moreover, their migrating into foreign countries for economic reasons urged these peoples to move and some of them ended up being constantly on the move. At the same time, the territory was open to immigrants from Serbia, Croatia, Montenegro, and other republics. These mass immigrations lasted for less than a decade (from 1958 to 1966) and they were very selective. They brought mostly the Serbian population to Vojvodina from Serbia, Bosnia, and Croatia Bigger groups of immigrants came from Montenegro.
Emigrations were also characteristic of the Croatian population and they were directed towards their home republic. The available data are no sufficient for explaining these emigrations which were equal to immigrations All these changes resulted in the homogenisation of the population. The number of the Serbs and Montenegrins was constantly increasing, while the number of other nationalities was constantly on the downgrade. According to the 1991 census data, the number of the municipalities in which the Serb comprised the absolute majority went up to 33, and the number of those ii which the Hungarians constituted the absolute majority went down. Toda the Hungarians have only the relative majority in Subotica. In Alibunar municipality, in which the Romanians comprised the absolute majority, the most numerous are Serbs. These changes can easily be recognised b settlements, which is shown in Table 1.
Table I Settlements of Vojvodina by Nationality Prevalence
The 1991 census
There are also other nationalities of which some are predominant in smaller environments. In the last census on this territory were registered: Muslims (6079 or 0.3%), Slovenes (2563 or 0.1%), Yugoslavs (168,859 or 8.4%), Albanians (2959 or 0.2%), Romanies (24,895 or 1.2%), Bunjevci (21,552 or 1.1%), Šokci (1866 or 0.1%), and Ukrainians (2057 or 0.1%). According to number, Yugoslavs, an insufficiently investigated group, were third in Vojvodina.
Table 2 Changes in the Ethnic Structure of the Population in Vojvodina from 1910 to 1991
Certain Consequences of the Ethnic Homogenisation of the Population in Vojvodina
The ethnic structure of a population is only one demographic phenomenon or one feature. It is much more important how that structure affects other demographic and geographical phenomena and different aspects of life. All this depends on the capability to adapt to life in co-existence.
Specific demographic features of some nationalities in Vojvodina have not been studied enough. The research runs into difficulties because of the lack of data on movements and structures of the population according to their ethnic origin; it can only be done indirectly through the investigation of homogeneous ethnic milieus. The research shows many interesting phenomena. We are going to deal with the following:
1) Changes in number
2) Changes in natural reproduction
3) Mobility in migrations
4) Demographic links with other ethnic groups
1) According to the 1991 census data, there were 122 settlements in which the less numerous nationalities constituted absolute majorities and 31 settlements in which they constituted relative majorities. In the last inter-censal period, out of 93 settlements in which the Hungarians comprised the absolute or the relative majority the population was increased in only four (Šatrinci, Irig municipality; Novo Selo, Kanjiža municipality; Tornjoš, Senta municipality; Palić, Subotica municipality). In only one of these settlements, in Novo Selo, the increase in the population was followed by the increase in the number of the Hungarians. Apart from this little village, the Hungarians increased in number in only one other settlement - Bajša, Bačka Topola municipality, and that caused a drop in the number of the Slovaks. It is necessary to point out that the majority of the Hungarians from Bajša are Slovaks by origin.
The number of inhabitants did not increase in any of the Romanian, Croatian, Bunjevci or Czech settlements, and this was also the case with their respective nationality. The population increase was registered in three Slovak settlements (Lug, Beočin municipality; Belo Blato, Zrenjanin municipality and in Kovačica), but the count of the Slovaks increased in Lug only. The same happened in one of the villages with the Macedonian population (Jabuka, Pančevo municipality), and in one with the Ruthenian population (Kucura, Vrbas municipality).
Our of four Montenegrin settlements with the population increase (Lovćenac, municipality of Mali Idjoš; Bačko Dobro Polje, Savino Selo, and Vrbas) the number of the Montenegrins increased in only the last two.
2) It is evident that most of the less numerous nationalities had unfavourable demographic development. The first sign was the drop in the natural population increase rate, which eventually became negative. The natural increase in these villages was going down during the last three decades (available data). For example, in the period 1961-1970, the natural increase was negative in 71 settlements or in 15.8% of all the settlements in Vojvodina. This number included 35 settlements in which the less numerous nationalities constituted absolute or relative ethnic majority. This was almost one quarter of the settlements. In the following decade, the number of such cases in Vojvodina increased to 113 settlements or 25.1%, but up to 88 settlements or 56.5% among the less numerous nationalities. In the period 1981-1990, the natural population increase was negative even in 122 settlements in which the less numerous nationalities had prevalence, while it was positive in 25 of them only.
In the settlements with the predominant Romanian population, the situation was the worst. In the period 1961-1970, 84.2% of the settlements had negative natural increase. In the following decade none of the settlements had natural reproduction of the population. In the period 1981-1990, the situation was the same in all of the settlements with the predominant Ruthenian and Czech population, as well as in 85.9% of the settlements with the predominant Hungarian, 85.7% Croatian, 73.3% Slovak, 75.0% Bunjevci population. However, positive natural population increase was recorded in all the settlements with the Montenegrin and Macedonian population.
A decrease in the natural reproduction of the population produces far-reaching consequences. The most pronounced ones are the ageing of the population and the lowering of viral contingents, which again reduce the birth rate. This is especially dangerous for small settlements where the influx of the population is low.
3) Specific patterns of behaviour in migrational movements are noticed. In the greatest number of cases the less numerous nationalities are less mobile. It is particularly pronounced in the Slovaks, Romanians, and Ruthenians. The reasons can hardly be generalised. The existing language and faith barriers cannot be ignored as these make it difficult for them to adapt to a new environment. This is also true for other nationals when they come to these settlements. It was noticed that the Romanians and Slovaks are traditionally attached to their native places and agriculture. Besides, the Romanians are inert in local and very mobile in outside migrations. These patterns of behaviour were also noticed in some Hungarian environments.
Migrational "isolation" of some of the settlements of these nationalities causes certain negative consequences. The basic one is that negative health effect, such as haemophilia, schizophrenia, moronity in children, etc follow the reproduction in small ethnic environments. In addition to this, it impedes communicating with and getting accustomed to other nationals. This, by the way, is one of the causes of population losses.
4) Links between these nationalities have several aspects. If they are existent among the majority of the population, the possibility of spontaneous assimilation is greater. For some it is quire normal, which was the case with the Romanians whose number decreased. There are no historical and religious antagonisms between them and the Serbs, and there is a long tradition of the two peoples living together, so the process of assimilation can be expected. Those types of assimilation are also known in small groups of the Slovaks, Croats, and Ruthenians in the milieus with the predominant Hungarian population. This is exemplified in the frequent surnames of the Hungarians, which are typically Slovak or Ruthenian. Ethnic assimilation is not known among the peoples who nourish antagonism. It creates difficulties for their living together. Unfortunately, these phenomena are existing in Vojvodina and they are mostly the result of historical background, religious influences, various psychological features of the population, etc.
Some processes contrary to the process of assimilation were recorded over the last decades. Namely, the process of the Romanies becoming an ethnic group took place and their count increased from one census to the other. Apart from the high natural increase, the reason is also that the population who used to declare themselves as Hungarians, Romanians, or "Serbs now declare themselves as Romanies.
Vojvodina presents an example of a long tradition of living together. This helps the population to grow accustomed to one another and coexistence is much easier with the nationalities of the kind. Especially important are the language and faith similarities. The process of getting accustomed is also known in rather dissimilar groups, but there is also a latent danger that good relationships may be destroyed; there is a lack of trust as well as different stands and patterns of behaviour in specific situations. These are just some of the general rules which are mostly applicable in peaceful periods. In wartime the patterns of behaviour change. In World War II, retaliation affecting innocent population was frequent. The victims were mostly Serbs, Jews, and Romanies.
5) The geographical distribution of allochthonous peoples is very important for the state. In the course of this century demographic changes in the region have caused ethnic homogenisation of the population in Vojvodina. This is evident in the increased share of the Yugoslav peoples in the total population.
From the political point of view, the most interesting is the distribution of the Hungarians. In the time of the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy when numerous Croatian and other inhabitants declared themselves as Hungarians, this group seemed to be a rather homogeneous one. At present, the region in which this population is predominant covers the central and the eastern pare of Bačka, and it borders on Hungary in the Kanjiža municipality, in the length of 10 km. In the municipalities of Novi Kneževac and Sombor the Hungarians are in minority and in the Subotica municipality they constitute only the relative majority.
In Srem, along the border towards Croatia, there is not a single settlement in which the Croats comprise absolute majority. In Bačka, along this border, there are three villages. Croats constitute relative majority in two of them (Plavna 33.8%, and Bački Breg 46.8%) and absolute majority in one (Sonta 58.1%). Along the border with Romania there are five villages with the predominant Romanian population (Vojvodinci, Kuštilj, Sočica, Markovac, and Mali Žam).
On the basis of this research it can be concluded that Vojvodina has great importance for Serbia. Serbia established its cultural, national, economic, and administrative centre at the mouth of the Sava river into the Danube due to the forcible movement of its population from the south. The borders were also moved further north and the big rivers no longer acted as the borderline; Belgrade, the capital of Serbia, was no longer the country's periphery. New geopolitical position of Serbia with its centre around the downstream courses of the Sava, Tisza, and Morava rivers, and the points of confluence with the Danube river, secures Serbia a very important position in the future. Open lowland in the northern and north-eastern parts of Vojvodina, however, make it difficult to defend this vital region. When food production, energy (petrol, gas) generation, and the industry of building materials are considered, Vojvodina is the most important factor in the economic development of Serbia and its entering Central Europe.
Dr Slobodan Ćurčić is Professor of Cartography and Geography of Settlements at the Institute of Geography, University of Novi Sad, His scientific field is Thematic Cartography and Geography of Settlements and Population He has published about two hundred professional and seventy scientific papers and several books. He is the author of: Geografska monografija opštine Pećinci /Geographical Monograph of the Pećinci Municipality/ (1973); Stanovništvo Fruškogorske oblasti /The Population of Fruška Gora/ (1980); Geografska monografija opštine Stara Pazova /Geographical Monograph of the Stara Pazova Municipality/ (1984). He has published in co-authorship- Vode Fruške Gore /The Waters of Fruška Gora/ (1973); Migraciona kretanja u Vojvodjanskim selima /Migrations in the Villages of Vojvodina/ (19S6); Srbija /Serbia/ IV (1989); Geografska monografija opštine Ruma /Geographical Monograph of the Ruma Municipality/ (1990), Geografska monografija opštine Novi Sad) /Geographical Monograph of the Novi Sad Municipality/I (1987), II (1990), III (1994); Ribarsko gazdinstvo Ečka /Fish Farm of Ečka/ (1992), and Population development in Baranja (1993).
Dr Vladimir Đurić is Professor Emeritus of Economic Geography, Geography of Settlements and Geography of Population at the Faculty of Geography, University of Belgrade. He has published widely, about one hundred papers, about one thousand encyclopedic entries, and three university and five secondary school textbooks. He is the author of Pančevački rit (1953); Promene u naseljima u FNR Jugoslaviji/Changes in the Settlements in the FNR of Yugoslavia (1960); Najnovije naseljavanje Bačke kolonistima iz Hrvatske /The Recent Settling of Bačka with the Colonists from Croatia/ (1960) Contributions to monographs: Poljoprivreda SR Srbije /The Agriculture of the SR of Serbia/ (1982), Seoska naselja SR Srbije/Rural Settlements in the SR of Serbia) (1982); Etnički sastav stanovništva Vojvodine /The Ethnic Structure of the Population of Vojvodina/ (1993, with two co-authors).
Dr Saša Kicošev is Assistant Professor of Regional Geography of Asia and Africa, Landscape Planning in Tourism, and Geographical Elements of Physical Planning at the Institute of Geography, University of Novi Sad. His major area of research is Demography and Geopolitics. In addition to numerous scientific papers, he has published Geografske i demografske karakteristike Rumuna u Vojvodini /Geographical and Demographic Characteristics of the Romanians in Vojvodina/ (1991); Ribnjak Ečka /Fish Preserves of Ečka/ (1992); Razvoj populacije Baranje /Population Development m Baranja/ (1993), and Opština Apatin /The Municipality of Apatin/.