CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · History & Society

1996 Croatia Open – Singles

tennis tournament event

Layered newspapers, civic records and oral-history reels arranged as chronological evidence
History and societyInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionSep 17, 2025
Entity authorityQ3697859 ↗
Source-derived summary

Thomas Muster was the defending champion but did not compete that year.

Carlos Moyá won in the final 6–0, 7–6(7–4) against Félix Mantilla.

Seeds

A champion seed is indicated in bold text while text in italics indicates the round in which that seed was eliminated.

Editorial summary

Begin with the source’s own compact description: “1996 Croatia Open – Singles” is tennis tournament event. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Croatia, Singles and tennis, not as a finished interpretation.

Editorial reviewA useful synthesis for locating the documentary relationships between formal authority, participants and affected communities. The current 45-word lead offers orientation but no explicit four-digit date, so chronology should not be assumed. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. For this dossier, Croatia, Singles and tennis is the immediate research focus.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

The phrase “tennis tournament event” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.

Evidence profile

Contemporary correspondence, administrative files and participant testimony can test how later narratives organized the event or institution. The source revision retrieved here is dated Sep 17, 2025. The linked authority identifier is Q3697859. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference.

Critical limits

Later summaries often reconcile disputed chronology or motive more neatly than the contemporary record permits. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Compare institutional narratives with records created by participants and affected communities. Dates and formal titles are useful anchors, but not substitutes for context.

Best used for
  • Event chronology
  • Institutional context
  • Locating named record creators
Verify next

Contemporary correspondence, government or organizational records, oral histories and cited historical scholarship.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “1996 Croatia Open – Singles”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow 1996 Croatia Open – Singles primary sources, 1996 Croatia Open – Singles archive and Croatia research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “1996 Croatia Open – Singles”?
  2. Which voices are present, absent or mediated by the institution?
  3. Who created the surviving record, and for what administrative purpose?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “1996 Croatia Open – Singles” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.