Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
10Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Nadgrobne ploče tri bosanska kralja

Nadgrobne ploče tri bosanska kralja

Ratings: (0)|Views: 459|Likes:
Nadgrobne ploče tri bosanska kralja
Nadgrobne ploče tri bosanska kralja

More info:

Published by: Tvrtko I Kotromanić on May 16, 2011
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

08/08/2013

pdf

text

original

 
229
Izvorni znanstveni rad
Srednjovjekovna
ar heologi ja  
Ori ginal scienti
  fi
c pa per 
 Mediaeval archaeology
UDK/UDC
904(497.6): 682
Primljeno/
 Recieved 
:
03. 04. 2006.
Prihva
ć
eno/
 Accepted 
:
11. 09. 2006.Mr. sc. MIRSAD SIJARI
Ć
Zemaljski muzej BiHZmaja od Bosne 3BA - 71000 Sarajevo
mirsnets@bih.net.ba
Nadgrobne plo
č
e tri bosanska kralja
Tombstones of three Bosnian kings
 Bobovac je, osim kao prijestolnica bosanskih vladara, poznat i kao mjesto ukopa više bosanskihkraljeva. Posebnu važnost me
đ 
u arheološkim nalazima s tog lokaliteta zauzimaju fragmentinadgrobnih plo
č 
a izra
đ 
enih od tvrdog crvenog vapnenca koji je va
đ 
en iz poznatih kamenoloma sa sjevera Ma
đ 
arske. Autor je u ovom tekstu izvršio detaljnu analizu svih fragmenata koja jeurodila identi
  fi
ciranjem do sada neprepoznate plo
č 
e. Klju
č 
ne rije
č 
i: kasni srednji vijek, srednjovjekovna Bosna, Bobovac, vladarski grobovi In addition to being known as the seat of Bosnian rulers, Bobovac is also known as a place of burial of several Bosnian kings. Particularly signi
  fi
cant among the archaeological 
  fi
nds fromthis site are the fragments of tombstones made of hard red limestone extracted from well-knownquarries in northern Hungary. In this text the author carries out a detailed analysis of all the fragments, which resulted in the identi
  fi
cation of a previously unrecognized tombstone. Key words: late Middle Ages, mediaeval Bosnia, Bobovac, rulers’ graves
Osnovni rezultati sustavnih arheoloških istraživanja dvaglavna stolna mjesta bosanskih vladara u kasnom srednjemvijeku - Bobovca i Kraljeve Sutjeske, koja je izvodio Zemaljskimuzej BiH u periodu 1959.-1967. godine, objavljeni su u mo-nografskom izdanju (An
đ
eli
ć
1973). Iskopavanjima na južnomkraju terase Crkvice na Bobovcu otkrivena je grobna kapeli-ca koja je orijentirana u pravcu istok – zapad, a koja je podpravim kutom sjekla glavni pravac pružanja terase i bobova
č
kekose. Unutar kapelice (plan 1) utvr
đ
ene su tri ve
ć
e i jedna manjazidana grobnica te dvije grobne rake bez posebne arhitekture,dok su izvan objekta, u trijemu, otkopane još tri, a uz sjevernizid i
č
etvrta zidana grobnica (An
đ
eli
ć
1973, 66-81). Grobnicekoje se nalaze u žarištu ovog rada, sastojale su se od grobnihraka s grobnom arhitekturom i kompozitnih sarkofaga (zapravo,pseudosarkofaga) s ukrašenim bo
č
nim stranicama, te gornjomplo
č
om na kojoj je u visokom reljefu bio prikazan lik pokoj-nika. Prije nego se iznese detaljnija analiza samih nadgrobnihplo
č
a, prijeko je potrebno ovdje dati nekoliko sažetih opažanjao samom položaju grobnica. Naime, uo
č
ljivo je da su tri kraljev-ske grobnice smještene u prednjem dijelu crkvene la
đ
e, premaapsidi, tj. u blizini neo
č
uvanog oltara. Takav odabir položajakraljevskih grobnica jasno odaje srednjovjekovni zapadni fune-rarni koncept prema kojem se vladarske li
č
nosti pokopavaju usredište hrama, a za što je kao izvorni primjer poslužio takavukop,
in medio choro
, cara Otona III. (983.-1002.) u kapeliciu Ahenu, te brojni drugi, kao npr. ugarskog kralja sv. Stjepana(+1038.) koji je u svojoj zadužbinskoj crkvi u Biogradu poko-The key results of the systematic archaeological excava-tions of the two main seats of authority of Bosnian rulers inthe late Middle Ages – Bobovac and Kraljeva Sutjeska, carriedout by the National Museum of Bosnia and Herzegovina in theperiod 1959-1967, were published in a monographic edition(An
đ
eli
ć
1973). The excavations at the southern end of the ter-race of Crkvica at Bobovac revealed a small cemetery chapelwith an east-west orientation, positioned at a right angle to themain line of orientation of the terrace and the Bobovac slope.Three larger tombs and one smaller built tomb were document-ed within the chapel (Plan 1), as well as two graves lackingany architectural features, while outside of the structure, in theporch, a further three built tombs were excavated, in addition tothe fourth one along the northern wall (An
đ
eli
ć
1973, 66-81).The tombs this paper focuses on consisted of grave holes withgrave architecture and composite sarcophagi (in fact, pseu-dosarcophagi) with decorated lateral sides and an upper slabon which the
gure of the deceased was represented in highrelief. Before going into a detailed analysis of the tombstones,we must make a few brief remarks regarding the position of thetombs. It is apparent that the three royal tombs are located inthe front part of the church nave, towards the apse, that is, closeto the unpreserved altar. This choice for the position of royaltombs clearly speaks of a mediaeval western funerary conceptaccording to which the ruling
gures were buried in the centreof the temple, for which the original example,
in medio choro
,was set by the burial of the emperor Otto III (983-1002) in the
 
230
M. S
IJARI
Ê,
NADGROBNE PLO»E TRI BOSANSKA KRALJA
,
Pril. Inst. arheol. Zagrebu, 23/2006, str. 229-256.
pan u
medio domus
, ili primjerice, njema
č
kog vladara salijskedinastije Konrada II. (1024.-1039.), ukopanog usred crkvenogkora, ispred oltara katedrale u Speyeru. Primjer Konrada II.,
č
ije je tijelo položeno u kameni sarkofag koji je potom ukopan ispodcrkvenog poda, zrcali krš
ć
ansku koncepciju ukapanja prije 12.st., bez upadljivih vanjskih oznaka, što se u vremenu razvije-nog i kasnog srednjeg vijeka bitno mijenja u pravcu ustaljivanjaprakse podizanja velikih vladarskih mauzoleja, gdje vladarskigrob zauzima posebno mjesto unutar hrama i ima monumen-talno nadgrobno obilježje. Smještanjem pokojnika u blizinuoltara nastojalo ga se približiti središtu liturgijskog obreda (jersu za oltarom
č
itane službe mrtvima i održavane zadušnice),te se i samom grobu vratiti kultna funkcija koja je izgubljenau prvome tisu
ć
lje
ć
u krš
ć
anstva kada se dosljednije primjenji-vala kanonska odredba o zabrani ukopa unutar crkve. Istodob-no, i sam nadgrobni spomenik doživljava preobrazbu u smisluve
ć
e monumentalnosti i bogatstva dekorativnih formi koje semožda i ponajbolje ogleda u popularnosti prikazivanja pokoj-nika u leže
ć
em položaju (
gisant 
), s razvijenim individualnim iikonografskim obilježjima. Takvi spomenici, obi
č
no sarkofazi,ukrašeni arkadama i leže
ć
om
gurom pokojnika, javljaju se nazapadu Europe još u 11. i 12. st., ali svoj puni oblik i popular-nost dostižu u 13. i posebno 14. st.,
1
što se na odre
đ
eni na
č
inogleda i u ostacima grobnica bosanskih kraljeva na Bobovcu.Njihov opisani položaj opet, analogan navedenim primjerima, uodre
đ
enoj mjeri pokazuje sli
č
nost i s nekim pogledima pokopaprema isto
č
no-bizantskom konceptu koji se odlikovao svoje-vrsnim eklekticizmom rimske i krš
ć
anske tradicije. Pritom,na umu treba imati da se unutar bizantskog primjera razlikujudva suštinski bitna razdoblja. Uspostavljanje principa za prvimilenij (do 11. st.), veže se za crkvu Svetih apostola koja jepodignuta u Konstantinopolju, vjerojatno prije 337. god., kaozadužbina Konstantina I. (306.-337.) i kao njegovo grobno mje-sto gdje je, položen vjerojatno u samu apsidu, ili u središnjemdijelu križno-obrazne gra
đ
evine, po
č
inuo okružen kenota
madvanaest apostola.
2
Takva usporedba Konstantina s Isusom,u smislu okruženosti apostolima, naravno, u
č
injena s jasnomnamjerom, izazvala je negativnu reakciju u crkvenim krugovi-ma, što je dovelo do toga da se za Konstancija II. (337.-361.)tijelo njegova prethodnika premjesti u poseban mauzolej, a nanjegovo prvobitno mjesto, u apsidu hrama, prenesu mo
ć
i apo-stola Timoteja, Andrije i Luke. Ovim potezom, za narednih 800godina, uspostavljeno je pravilo prema kojem se bizantski care-vi pokapaju u poseban mauzolej, dok je središnji prostor glavnecrkve isklju
č
ivo rezerviran za apostole tj. njihove relikvije.
3
U
1 Dužnost mi je i zadovoljstvo da se ovdje najiskrenije zahvalim dr. PáluL
ő
veiu, Andrijani Pravidur, prof. dr. Dubravku Lovrenovi
ć
u, MargitiGavrilovi
ć
, Alisi Huji
ć
i Dejanu Zadri na pomo
ć
i i podršci koju su mi pružili prilikom rada na ovoj temi.Iz vrlo obimne literature o ovoj problematici ovdje izdvajam: Panofsky1964; Bauch 1976; Herklotz 1985. Kao posebno važno djelo novijegdatuma o pokapanju kraljevskih li
č
nosti u srednjovjekovnoj Europi trebaizdvojiti: Meier 2002, s pedesetak stranica literature.
2 Detaljno o crkvi Svetih apostola u djelu novijeg datuma, sa svomstarijom literaturom: Stockmeier 1980.3 Sve do 11. st. zajedni
č
ki mauzoleji, spomenuti Konstantinov teJustinijanov izgra
đ
en u prvoj polovici 6. st., podignuti uz crkvu Svetihapostola, jedino su mjesto ukapanja bizantskih careva. O tome uop
ć
eno,s obimnom bibliogra
 jom: Popovi
ć
1992, 137-146.
chapel in Aachen, as well as a number of others, such as theHungarian king St. Stephen (†1038), who was buried in his en-dowment church in Székesfehérvár in
medio domus
, or the Ger-man ruler of the Salian dinasty, Conrad II (1024-1039), buriedin the middle of the church choir, in front of the altar in the Sp-eyer cathedral. The example of Conrad II, whose body was laidin a stone sarcophagus, which was subsequently buried beneaththe church
oor, mirrors the Christian concept of burial priorto the 12
th
century, without any conspicuous exterior marks.In the developed and late Middle Ages this concept underwentsubstantial changes and it became an established practice tobuild large mausoleums for rulers, where the ruler’s grave occu-pies a special place within the temple and has a monumentalmark over the tomb. By positioning the deceased close to thealtar the intention was to bring him closer to the centre of thelithurgic rites (because services for the deceased were read andmemorial masses celebrated at the altar), and by this also onceagain bestow upon the tomb a cult function that had been lostin the
rst millennium of Christendom, when the canonic ruleforbidding burial within a church was more strictly followed.At the same time, the tomb monument itself underwent a meta-morphosis in terms of acquiring greater monumentality andwealth of decorative forms, which is probably best re
ected inthe popularity of representing the deceased in the lying posi-tion (
gisant 
), with developed individual and iconographic fea-tures. Such monuments, generally sarcophagi, decorated witharcades and a lying
gure of the deceased, appear in westernEurope as early as the 11
th
and 12
th
centuries, but reach theirfull shape and popularity in the 13
th
and particularly in the 14
th
 century,
1
which is re
ected, in a certain way, in the remains of the tombs of the Bosnian kings at Bobovac. Their describedposition again, analogous to the mentioned examples showscertain similarities also with some aspects of burial accordingto the eastern-Byzantine concept, which was characterized bya certain eclecticism of the Roman and Christian traditions.Here one should bear in mind that within the Byzantine exam-ple two essentially important periods can be distinguished. Theestablishment of the principle for the
rst millennium (until the11
th
century) is linked with the Church of the Holy Apostles,which was erected in Constantinople, probably before 337, asan endowment of Constantine I (306-337) and also his burialplace where he was laid to rest, probably in the very apse orin the central part of the cross-shaped building, surrounded bythe cenotaphs of the twelve apostles.
2
Such a comparison of Constantine with Jesus, in terms of his being surrounded by theapostles, executed, of course, with a clear purpose, provoked anegative reaction in ecclesiastical circles. This had as the result
1 It is my duty and pleasure to express my most sincere thanks to Dr Pál L
ő
vei, Andrijana Pravidur, Prof Dubravko Lovrenovi
ć
, Margita
 
Gavrilovi
ć
, Alisa Huji
ć
and Dejan Zadro for their help and support duringmy work on this topic.
Among the exstensive literature regarding this topic I would like toemphasise: Panofsky 1964; Bauch 1976; Herklotz 1985. A recent workof special importance on the burial of kingly
gures in mediaevalEurope: Meier 2002, with some
fty pages of literature should also bementioned.2 A recent in-depth work regarding the Church of the Holy Apostles,including all the earlier literature: Stockmeier 1980.
 
231
M. S
IJARI
Ê
,
TOMBSTONES OF THREE BOSNIAN KINGS
,
Pril. Inst. arheol. Zagrebu, 23/2006, str. 229-256.
razdoblju 11-15. st., bizantski carevi uglavnom podižu zaseb-ne hramove – grobne crkve u koje se pokapaju, i to više ne umonolitne sarkofage kao njihovi prethodnici, ve
ć
u grobnicepod zemljom. Ako se zna da su oni, posebno carevi iz dinastijeKomnena, imali obi
č
aj monašenja prije smrti, iz svega nave-denog jasno se raspoznaje napor u smislu pokušaja raskida santi
č
ko-rimskom tradicijom i približavanja krš
ć
anskim ideali-ma.
4
 
Kada bi vladarskim grobnicama na Bobovcu, za sada sa-mo u vezi smještaja groba u hramu, pokušali navesti paraleleu samoj Bosni
5
ili u najbližem susjedstvu, morali bismo seograni
č
iti na srednjovjekovnu Srbiju, jer za vladarske gro-
4 U odnosu na razdoblje do 11 st., pitanje vladarskih grobova poznog dobaBizanta znatno je slabije istraženo. Za op
ć
i pregled i osnovnu literaturu,usp.: Popovi
ć
1992, 140-146.5 Situacija oko ukopa Stjepana II. Kotromani
ć
a i Tvrtka I. Kotromani
ć
au Milima, današnjim Arnautovi
ć
ima kod Visokog, u posljednje vrijemeizgleda da ponovo dobiva još jedan neo
č
ekivan obrat, pa do objavljivanjarezultata novih istraživanja koja su u tijeku, tog se problema ne
ć
udoticati. Za potpuni historijat istraživanja i potpunu literaturu o pitanjusrednjovjekovnih Mila, usp.: Zadro 2004.
that during the reign of Constantius II (337-361) the body of his predecessor was transferred to a separate mausoleum, whilein his original place, in the apse of the temple, were placed therelics of the apostles Timothy, Andrew and Luke. This moveestablished a rule for the next 800 years, by which the Byzan-tine emperors were buried within separate mausoleums, whilethe central space of the main church is reserved exclusively forthe apostles, i.e. their relics.
3
In the period between the 11
th
and15
th
century, the Byzantine emperors generally built separatetemples – grave churches in which they were buried, no longerin monolithic sarcophagi as their predecessors but in tombs un-der the ground. If we recall that they, particularly the emperorsfrom the Comnenus dinasty, followed the custom of becominga monk prior to death, we can clearly discern from the all of theabove an effort to break with the tradition of the classical-Ro-man period in favour of moving closer to Christian ideals.
4
If one is to look for parallels for the Bobovac rulers’ tombsin Bosnia
5
or in the immediate neighbourhood, for the timebeing only with respect to the position of the grave within thetemple, , we would have to limit ourselves to mediaeval Serbia,because there is not enough data regarding rulers’ graves in con-temporary Croatia.
6
An exception, which in the context of thiswork does not play a particular role, is a fragmented tomb slabwith an inscription of the Croatian queen Jelena, buried in thesecond half of the 10
th
century in the atrium of the Church of Our Lady of the Island in Solin.
7
In the
rst place in the burial of the Serbian rulers it is evident that each built a separate temple – church for himself, which in the wider sense can be perceivedas a monumental tomb. In contrast to the fore examples in theEast (the mentioned St. Apostles) or in the West (Speyer, SaintDenis etc.), their temples – endowments did not grow into fam-ily mausoleums, even though examples were recorded whereother persons were also buried there, in addition to the donors – rulers, such as church dignitaries, members of the immediatefamily, but sometimes also non-members (Popovi
ć
1992, 175).When it comes to the positioning and the location of the grave inthe temple space the Serbian rulers show a remarkable consist-ency. They are buried without exception in the western part of 
3 Up until the 11
th
century the communal mausoleums built next to theChurch of the Holy Apostles, e.g. the mentioned mausoleum Constantineas well as that of Justinian, built in the
rst half of the 6
th
century, werethe only places of burial for the Byzantine emperors. On this in general,with an extensive bibliography: Popovi
ć
1992, 137-146.4 In comparison with the period until the 11
th
century, the state of researchon rulers’ graves in the late Byzantine period is much poorer. For ageneral survey and basic literature, comp.: Popovi
ć
1992, 140-146.5 The situation regarding the burial of Stephen II Kotromani
ć
and TvrtkoI Kotromani
ć
in Mila, present-day Arnautovi
ć
i near Visoko, seems latelyto be receiving another unexpected turn; therefore, until the results of the new ongoing excavations have been published I shall not go intothis issue. For a thorough history of research and complete literatureregarding mediaeval Mila, comp.: Zadro 2004.6 It seems that a signi
cant part of the graves of the Croatian rulers wasdestroyed in the Mongolian incursion, comp.: Archdeacon Thomas,Chronicle, 83, editions of the Split City Museum, Split 1960, translationby V. Rismondo.7 Buli
ć
1898/99, 22; on this issue in more detail: Ibid 1901; Kati
ć
1955.On the inscription of Queen Jelena, in: Rapani
ć
1999-2000, includingall the earlier literature.
Plan 1 Plan grobne kapele (prema An
đ
eli
ć
1973, 68)
Plan 1 Plan of the grave chapel (after An
đ 
eli
ć 
1973, 68)

Activity (10)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 hundred reads
1 thousand reads
Velimir liked this
Velimir liked this
skutorka59 liked this
Mirsad Đulbić liked this
starimost2009 liked this
bero1301 liked this
Elis Bektaš liked this
Tatic Senad liked this

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->