Registar položaja i spomenika ranije srednjovjekovne umjetnosti u međuriječju Save i Drave
Gespeichert in:
| 1. Verfasser: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Buch |
| Sprache: | Croatian English |
| Veröffentlicht: |
Zagreb
Inst. za Povijest Umjetnosti
2012
|
| Schriftenreihe: | Studije i monografije Instituta za Povijest Umjetnosti
42 |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Inhaltsverzeichnis Abstract |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
MARC
| LEADER | 00000nam a2200000 cb4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | BV040939784 | ||
| 003 | DE-604 | ||
| 005 | 20161130 | ||
| 007 | t | ||
| 008 | 130411s2012 a||| |||| 00||| hrv d | ||
| 020 | |a 9789536106967 |c pbk. |9 978-953-6106-96-7 | ||
| 020 | |a 9536106965 |c pbk. |9 953-6106-96-5 | ||
| 024 | 3 | |a 9789536106967 | |
| 035 | |a (OCoLC)873379677 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-599)BSZ380967219 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-604 |b ger | ||
| 041 | 0 | |a hrv |a eng | |
| 049 | |a DE-255 |a DE-12 | ||
| 084 | |a 2.2 |2 KUBA2 | ||
| 084 | |a 9,10 |2 ssgn | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Goss, Vladimir Peter |d 1942- |e Verfasser |0 (DE-588)131853104 |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Registar položaja i spomenika ranije srednjovjekovne umjetnosti u međuriječju Save i Drave |c Vladimir Peter Goss |
| 264 | 1 | |a Zagreb |b Inst. za Povijest Umjetnosti |c 2012 | |
| 300 | |a 191 S. |b Ill. |c 24 cm |e 1 Kt.-Beil. u.d.T.: Karta međuriječja Save i Drave s naznačenim položajima i spomenicima ranije srednjovjekovne umjetnosti | ||
| 336 | |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |b n |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |b nc |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 490 | 1 | |a Studije i monografije Instituta za Povijest Umjetnosti |v 42 | |
| 500 | |a Text teilw. kroat., teilw. engl. - Zsfassung in engl. Sprache | ||
| 648 | 7 | |a Geschichte 1000-1300 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf | |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Kunst |0 (DE-588)4114333-4 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf |
| 651 | 7 | |a Zentralkroatien |0 (DE-588)1048174042 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf | |
| 655 | 7 | |0 (DE-588)4188171-0 |a Verzeichnis |2 gnd-content | |
| 689 | 0 | 0 | |a Zentralkroatien |0 (DE-588)1048174042 |D g |
| 689 | 0 | 1 | |a Kunst |0 (DE-588)4114333-4 |D s |
| 689 | 0 | 2 | |a Geschichte 1000-1300 |A z |
| 689 | 0 | |5 DE-604 | |
| 830 | 0 | |a Studije i monografije Instituta za Povijest Umjetnosti |v 42 |w (DE-604)BV040126371 |9 42 | |
| 856 | 4 | 2 | |m Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen 19 - ADAM Catalogue Enrichment |q application/pdf |u http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=025918562&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA |3 Inhaltsverzeichnis |
| 856 | 4 | 2 | |m Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen 19 - ADAM Catalogue Enrichment |q application/pdf |u http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=025918562&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA |3 Abstract |
| 999 | |a oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-025918562 | ||
| 942 | 1 | 1 | |c 709 |e 22/bsb |f 09023 |g 4972 |
| 942 | 1 | 1 | |c 709 |e 22/bsb |f 09021 |g 4972 |
| 942 | 1 | 1 | |c 709 |e 22/bsb |f 09022 |g 4972 |
Datensatz im Suchindex
| _version_ | 1804150241889353728 |
|---|---|
| adam_text | Sadržaj
UVOD
9
REGISTAR
51
Osvrt na izbor literature
52
Spomenici
53
INSTEAD OF A SUMMARY
157
Literatura
179
Popis slikovnih priloga
191
INSTEAD OF A SUMMARY
Instead of a summary here we reprint with minimal changes the article pub¬
lished in the
Starohrvatska prosvjeta,
3rd
ser.
32, 2006., 91-112,
entitled »A
Reemerging World
-
Prolegomena to an Introduction to Earlier Medieval Art
Between the
Sava
and the
Drava
Rivers«. The article is being reprinted with a
kind permission of Professor
Tomislav Šeparović,
Director of the Museum of
Croatian Archeological Monuments in Split, and Editor of the SHP. The article
faithfully reflects the program and methodology of the research described above.
The needed changes and additions refer to results of the project.
A Reemerging World
Prolegomena to an Introduction to Earlier Medieval
Art between the
Sava
and the
Drava
Rivers
This study presents some key issues of research and preservation of earlier medi¬
eval monuments between the
Sava
and the
Drava
rivers, with an emphasis on the
Romanesque. Such issues are: the nature of art in the medieval
Slavonia,
its place
within the culture of the
Pannonian
basin, and of European cultures and subcul¬
tures, with a special reference to the »Reniassanceofthe 12th century«; identification
of existing Romanesque buildings and of the sites of those which have disappeared. It
deals with the reconstruction of territorial organization (cultural landscape), includ¬
ing identification of early units of church and political organization. Furthermore,
it examines the role of sculpture and wall-painting, and that of the architecture in
wood as a potential source of models. Separately, the place of the Pre-Romanesque
monuments is evaluated, and, finally, the questions of preservation, revitalization,
and presentation of monuments.
In conclusion it is stated that the medieval
Slavonia
is not a tabula rasa in terms
of art and culture,
buta
rich segmentof ourcultural heritage, a promised land offur-
157
ther investigation.
This was fully revealed by the list published which has increased
the number of sites from ca.
60
to
565.
Judging from the title a reader might conclude that this study is a prelimi¬
nary report. Although, given the nature of the material, most of our studies of
the material may remain far from complete for some time to come, the above
mentioned conclusion would not be correct. These lines about earlier phases of
medieval art between the
Sava
and the
Drava
are being written as a summary of a
research initiated almost forty years ago with my early studies on the churches at
Bapska, Morović,
and
Brodski Drenovac,
and intensely resumed upon my return
to Croatia after decades spent abroad.1
The medieval
Slavonia
has been a topic of research of many dedicated and
highly competent scholars in archeology, history of art and architecture, and
other historical studies. Why is there an overwhelming sense that we still know
almost nothing about that »sunken world«, to use the words of one of them,
Stanko Andrić?2
One can, of course, blame »technical« factors such as »lack
of coordination« or »lack of funds« but those, as real as they may be, pale in
front of something else; and that is, the problem of attitude, which, in scholarly
terms, translates as the problem of method. The goal of this writing is to try to
present, as candidly as possible, a personal view hoping to initiate a real discus¬
sion among scholars of all disciplines involved; it is high time to do that, as the
memory of monuments and sites has faded to the point of being almost totally
unrecognizable, and acts of most wanton vandalism are still occurring in front of
our very eyes. Or, rather, they are occurring exactly as our eyes have been turned
away focused on something else. If we want to save an extremely rich, and both
in scholarly and esthetic terms exciting segment of our national heritage, we must
act, and we must act now. Results will not come overnight, so while we act, we
must train young scholars to carry on a research which may take decades.
1
GVOZDANOVIĆ
V.
1969.-1970., 15-22;
GVOZDANOVIĆ
V.
1970., 64-68;
GVOZDANOVIĆ
V.
1971., 211-222.
The background for this study has been provided by
projects »Romanesque Art between the
Sava
and the
Drava
River and the European Culture«,
supported by the Ministry of Science, Education and Sport of the Republic of Croatia, and
»Fragments of Romanesque Sculpture in the Museums and Collection between the
Sava
and
the
Drava«,
supported by the Councils for the Arts of the City of Zagreb. The author expresses
his gratitude for this support. We also thank the Croatian State Surveyor Office our permanent
sponsor for cartography.
2
ANDRIĆ2001.
158
1.
Is Croatian art (art on the territory of Croatia, or historically lands
inhabited by the Croats) indeed provincial, peripheral, and frontier art?
In
1963.,
the doyen of Croatian art historians,
Ljubo
Karaman,
has pub¬
lished his well-known thesis about provincial, peripheral and borderland nature
of Croatian art.3 A serious and systematic reassessment of Karaman
s
theories, be¬
yond insightful remarks by my respected teacher, Milan Prelog, is long overdue,
and this is not the place, or a topic, within which it should be undertaken.4 Kara-
man, whose central place in Croatian art history remains unchallenged, meant
well. His intention was, and in that he certainly succeeded, to prove that Croa¬
tian art had a certain genius loci, a differentia
specifica,
as, normally, any artistic
phenomenon tied to a piece of land or a group of people does. In absence of great
monuments, Karaman created a view of positive humility of Croatian art, or, to
quote »freedom to create of a peripheral milieu«.
Decades of involvement with medieval art of Europe and Near East, in partic¬
ular with the Pre-Romanesque and the Romanesque, and with the »low« rather
than »high
«
art (interest for which I surely owe to Karaman himself and his way
of thinking), has, however, led me to realize that, in fact, in any milieu there are
»provincial« and »peripheral« phenomena, that every »segment of art« is, in
fact, »borderland« between something and something else; and that there is,
indeed, in every milieu a duality, maybe one should say, plurality, of expression
ranging from the »high«, cosmopolitan, and sophisticated (urban, courtly), to
the »low«, local, and
»naïve«
(rural). Beginning with his fascination with the
»free-form« architecture of the Croatian Pre-Romanesque, Karaman had his
eyes tuned to the latter; no wonder as the monuments of the former had either
disappeared, or had not yet been discovered or properly interpreted.5
In
Slavonia,
where at the time of
Karamans
writing, the repertoire indeed
consisted of a handful of humble chapels (the humility is also in some cases due
to erroneous or incomplete interpretations),
Karamans
view led to a blatant case
of what
Mislav Ježić
not long ago in a public presentation brilliantly identified
as Croatian »induced despondency«.6 Croatian is humble, rustic, boorish, no
good. This negative view of what is ours, as opposed to »great models« of the
3
KARAMAN
2001.
4
KARAMAN
2001., 181-185
(with comments by Radovan
Ivančević).
5
KARAMAN
1930.;
PRELOG
1954,1-13-
6
JEŽIĆ
2004.
159
In those terms, some indeed relatively humble village churches but not es¬
pecially humbler than those elsewhere in the
Pannonian
(Carpathian) basin, as¬
sume the role of very important historical witnesses. They are a part of a great,
universal, all-European rural subculture which in the twelfth century spread from
the Lower German area to Scandinavia, British Isles, Eastern and South Eastern
Europe.13 Needless to say, a comprehensive report on that subculture has been
barely begun, and it may take a long time to write it in full. But some of the schol¬
ars dealing with the phenomenon of rural Romanesque have been aware of its
existence for many decades, and have furnished us with very valuable typological
studies and terminology.14
4.
How to identify an existing Romanesque church?
Romanesque churches do not just hide underground, they stand, sometimes
almost complete but unrecognized in our towns and villages. In
Markuševec,
near Zagreb, the parish decided to strip the plaster from the »Baroque« nave
of a church with a »late Gothic« sanctuary. The »Baroque« nave turned out
to have Romanesque windows. A similar thing happened many years ago in Vu-
grovec, also at the foot of the Zagreb Mountain.15 At the eastern end of the area in
question, similar occurrences could be observed at
Kneževi vinogradi
and
Luč
in
Baranja,
and at Dragotin near
Đakovo.16
The stripping of the church of St. Mary
Magdalene in
Cazma
has provided a most incredible miracle of the highest qual¬
ity monumental transitional 13th century style building under Baroque and later
accretions }7 Many years ago, a Romanesque window was discovered at St. Marks
in Zagreb. It never claimed enough attention, and the Romanesque church of St.
13
On the entire phenomenon of the »Renaissance of the 12th century«, HASKINS
1927., 3-16
and The Twelfth
1969.
with ample bibliography.
1
More on it below, section
8.
15
DOBRONIĆ
2003., 21-41,71-78.
Restoration work at
Kneževi vinogradi
and Dragotin is still in progress. I thank Profes¬
sor Zvonimr
Bojičić,
then Director of the Preservation of Monuments Office of the Ministry of
Culture of the Republic of Croatia for drawing my attention to those monuments, and for his
precious
collégial
support in general.
17
Exploration phase at
Čazma (Drago Miletić
and
Tomislav Petrinec,
Restoration
Office
of the Republic of Croatia, Zagreb) is now completed, and restoration and presentation are to
follow. I thank both scholars for their information, and Professor
Miletić
for decades of courteous
cooperation.
STOŠIĆ
2001., 69-72.
162
Marks
still remains a mystery.18 Today we either know, or suspect, that sanctuaries
of some Slavonian churches are in fact sections of Romanesque rotundas (Samar-
ica near
Čazma, Orljavac
and
Brestovac
near
Požega).19
How many experts in the
field know that parts of the medieval Cathedral of
Đakovo
are still standing in a
corner of the courtyard behind the Baroque Bishops Palace, including an entire
very fine early Gothic window ?20
In hunting for still standing medieval buildings, we can learn a lot from our
Hungarian colleagues. Some of their publications are true textbooks on how to
pry out a medieval building underneath a later one. The sheer number of such
buildings in Southwestern Hungary is astonishing, and this bodes well for future
investigations in medieval
Slavonia.21
5.
How to find remains of a Romanesque building?
Here also results achieved by our Hungarian colleagues, especially in South¬
western Hungary, can serve as a handbook. Basically, one can sum up by saying that
if the plan of an existing, Gothic or later church, shows an »anomaly«, there is
probably an earlier building underneath. Such anomalies could be of various kinds,
such as odd proportions or relationship between the nave and the sanctuary, a weird
plan of a Gothic, polygonal, sanctuary, oddly placed sacristies or towers, etc.22 In her
pioneering works on the Gothic architecture in
Slavonia
and in
Hrvatsko Zagorje,
Diana
Vukičević-Samaržija
has commented on the absence of the Romanesque
layer of architecture, and lucidly pointed out that there is probably a Romanesque
church underneath most of the buildings she published.23 Indeed, there are very
many buildings in her books with anomalies such as we noted above. None of us is
perfect, and I am tempted to claim many of »her« buildings as Romanesque in my
accountings. The fact is, most likely, that we are both right.24
18
BEDENKO
1992., 33-38.
19
I thank Professor
Dubravka Sokač-Štimac
of the Museum of the
Požega
Valley for her
information and visits to the monuments.
20
Investigation and restoration of those remains is pending.
21
As, for example,
VALTER
2004.
22
Many examples in
VALTER
2004.,
e.g., pi.
41,75, 90,101,103,106,
etc.
23
VUKIČEVIĆ-SAMARŽIJA
1986.
and
VUKIČEVIĆ-SAMARŽIJA
1993.
24
E e
VUKIČEVIĆ-SAMARŽIJA
1986., 100
(Dragotin),
101
(Đurađ),
103
(Glogovica),
109
(Ivánkovo),
128
Požega, St. Lovro),
153
(Zdenci); VUKIČEVIĆ-SAMARŽIJA
1993.,
163
An interesting case of reemerging Romanesque is St.
Benedikt
at the old (but
still used) cemetery in the wilderness of a Dilj Mountain hill south of the village
of
Oriovčić.
There, a chapel was built in
1926.,
the likes of which can be seen at
many places around
Slavonski Brod.
The mason
s
work was quite sloppy and the
building has turned into a ruin in less than a century. But as it partly collapsed, it
revealed that it was largely built from Romanesque ashlar
(!),
some re-cut to suit
the new construction.25
6.
How to know where to dig, or a question of territorial organization
or cultural landscape.
Of course, much of the material lies underground. How to find it? Here are
a few factors which should help: traces of material remains, documents, place
names, old illustrations. Let us take them up one by one:
a. Material remains.
On the Svetinjski breg, a large
»gradište«
(wallburg, medieval mud and tim¬
ber fort
-
more about them below) near Hlebine there stands a cross erected by
Mr. Peradin, a naive sculptor, owner of one half of the hill commemorating the
church which once stood there. The base of the cross consists of brick brought
from the site, some twenty meters to the East. They are small size Romanesque
bricks.26
142-147
(Belec, St.
Juraj,
and St. Mary),
155
(Kneginec),
171
(Lobor, St. Mary
Gorska),
174
(Lovrečan),
176
(Maruševec),
179
(Očura),
189
(Prigorec),
197
(Tuhclj),
211
(Zajezda),
etc.
Of course, one cannot make any definite statement without a through
archeologica!
and/or
restoration investigation. At Lobor, a Pre-Romanesque and Early Christian churches emerged
underneath the Gothic one, and at Dragotin recent restoration works revealed windows with
Romanesque (or Early Gothic?) characteristics. Recently an entire Romanesque portal has been
revealed.
25
SEKELJ-IVANČAN
1995., 207.
More recently even fragments of Romanesque
decorative sculpture have been found.
The size and color of brick cannot be a definite proof of date. Briefly, both Romanesque
and Gothic bricks can be small, medium and large. However, there is a certain tendency for
Romanesque bricks to be overall smaller (some call them »Hungarian bricks«);
HORVAT
Z.
1972.
and
HORVAT
Z.
2003.a. The Svetinjski breg
was pointed out to me by
Draženka
and
Dražen
Ermečić
of the Museum of the City of
Koprivnica,
for which I hereby express my gratitude.
164
At Gornji Križ
in western
Bilogora,
a medieval church shows two layers of
the Gothic »wrapped« around an earlier building, which is still to be exactly
defined. But there is a nice pile of Romanesque brick next to the church.27 The
same type of brick can be seen in the northern wall of the church at Sv. Ivan
Žabno
nearby, left visible after the restoration. Similar bricks were identified by
Zorislav
Horvat
within the walls of the late medieval church at
Novo Štefanje
near
Čazma.28
In each case, this is an indication of the existence of a Romanesque church,
with a caveat that the size and form of brick is a good indication, but not a defi¬
nite proof as there is no absolute consistency.
Naturally, there are also contours in the ground, sometimes with traces of
building material (Mihalj near
Križevci,
Vetovo), or just indentations where once
walls may have stood
(Kladiščica
in the Eastern
Medvednica).29
b.
Written documents
Medieval texts are of course the major source in identifying positions and
sites of medieval monuments. We have lists of parishes for both Zagreb and
Pécs
bishoprics from the 1330ies, and we may safely assume that a parish which existed
in the 14th century most likely existed in the 13th, and possibly in the 12th century.
The list for Zagreb Bishopric composed by Ivan
Arhidakon Gorički
is easier to
interpret as it was composed by a native, as opposed to that for
Pécs,
composed by
foreigners, collectors of Popes tithe.30 In any case, they are good starting points,
and could be often complemented by information from the 12th and 13th century
documents, or by much later visitations describing old churches or their remains.
On the problems on how to apply what they say to what we encounter in the field
today, a few more words later.
27
For a visit and information on
Gornji Križ
I owe gratitude to Goran
Jakovljević
(Museum
of the City of
Bjelovar),
Vanda
and
Zlatko
Karać,
and Rev. Milan
Kerš
of
Zrinski Topolovec.
28
HORVAT
Z.
2003.a,
154;
HORVAT
Z.
1979., 39-51.
29
TKALČEC
2004., 156-158.
For a visit to Mihalj I am indebted to
Zoran Homen,
Director of the Museum at
Križevci.
For a visit in
2000.
to Vetovo and tracing of medieval
buildings
among the bushes along the Vetovo creek I am indebted to
Dubravka Sokač-Stimac
of the Museum of the
Požega
Valley, and my late mother, Sena
Sekulić-Gvozdanović,
professor
emeritus of the Faculty of Architecture in Zagreb. On
Kladiščica, DOBRONIC
1979., 65-70.
30
BUTURAC
1944.
and BUTURAC
1984.; KOLLER 1782.-1818.
165
с.
Place names
Place names and the names of Saints the churches were dedicated to are ex¬
tremely helpful.
Slavonia
is full of names such as
»Crkvište«, »Selište«, »Gra¬
dina«, »Zidina«, »Klisa«,
etc. (Old Church Place, Old Village Place, Old Fort,
Old Wall, Church Ruin or Place). A list of such place names is far from complete,
and once completed would be extremely helpful.
Consecrations of churches may also indicate their original date, or give some
other valuable information. »Major« saints
-
St. Peter, St. Paul, Virgin Mary,
the Trinity, Holy Ghost, may indicate an early date;
SS. Cosmas
and
Damian
are
known to be saints dear to the period of Justinian s reconquest; so also St. An¬
drew. One of urgent tasks for our ecclesiastical historians would be to compile,
publish, and interpret consecration lists.31
d. Old illustrations
There is an old 18th century drawing of the parish church in
Pregrada.
It
shows a rather dilapidated building with a polygonal (»Gothic«) sanctuary and
a rectangular nave. Beneath the eaves there is a typical Romanesque flat corbel ta¬
ble, known from places not far away (e.g.,
Selo
in Prekomurje). One may be fairly
certain that the nave of the
Pregrada
parish church (listed in the 14th century) was
Romanesque.32
All those indicators, together with the existing, or at least visible monu¬
ments, help us establish an outline of territorial organization, or cultural land¬
scape, in itself, just as urban design, a work of art and the highest form of human
intervention into physical ecology. Thus establishing/reconstructing territorial
organization is an important goal for an art historian, but also an important in¬
vestigative tool.
Simply, establishing territorial organization in an area with substantial writ¬
ten or monumental documentation, may help us look for sites in a not so well-
documented area of similar physical characteristics.33 It would appear that writ¬
ten documents may provide quite a reliable guidance, but it is not exactly so. For
example, knowing that there is a parish of St. Peter in a village A, does not mean
31
SEKELJ-IVANČAN
1992.;
MEZO
2003;
GOSS 2007.b.
32
VUKIČEVIĆ-SAMARŽIJA
1993., 240;
ZADNIKAR
1967.,
fig.
5.
33
See my study GOSS 2006.C.
166
that the contemporary settlement bearing the same name and showing no traces of
historical buildings is at the same place as the medieval one. Indeed, it could have
migrated for a considerable distance. Thus written information becomes sensible
only if strictly checked in the field. If we identify a suspicious spot in the landscape,
a hill, a moat, a ruin, we should try to match it with a name in the documents.34
One phenomenon could be very helpful. This is the
»gradiste«, pi.
»gradišta«
medieval forts usually located on hills or within water protected ar¬
eas. They were mostly surrounded by wooden fences
-
»palisades«
-
in some
cases reinforced with durable material
-
brick or stone. The entire area between
the
Sava
and
Drava
rivers is dotted with old forts, most of them unexplored, or
just minimally explored.
Whereas it is impossible to date an old fort without a thorough archeologi-
cal investigation
-
going down to the lowermost layer
-
in some of the cases the
logic of their positioning may at least provide some indication as to their date. For
example, the forts on the northern slopes of the
Bilogora
and on the hills along
the
Drava
river had their logic before
1102.,
the date of the personal union of
Hungary and Croatia. Those on the southern slope of the same mountain could
be as late as the time of Turkish incursions starting in the 15th century.
A recent master thesis has brought at least some order to our view of the
»gradišta«
in Northwestern Croatia.35 A careful reading
ofthat
study by
Tatjana
Tkalčec
allows, in my opinion, establishing links between them, and earlier medi¬
eval settlements and parishes, a phenomenon known from other parts of the Pan-
34
The already mentioned site of
Oriovčić
is a good example. The church, cemetery and
the old settlement was on a hill some two kilometers to the south of the current village which
has no historical building. The old core of
Brodski Zdenci
with the church of St. Peter is almost
inaccessible from the current village in a valley to its north; the only marginally negotiable
road leads from the south, the opposite side of the mountain from Sibinj, a detour from the
contemporary village ofca.
30
kilometers!
Identifying a building in historical sources does not mean that it would be found.
Stanko
Andrić (ANDRIĆ
2001., 89)
has brilliantly identified two medieval churches from durable ma¬
terial (probably pre-Gothic) at Tomasanci to the north of
Đakovo.
So far we have failed to find
them.
35
TKALČEC
2004.
The research contained in this publication seems to indicate that
indeed there are no rules in the use of the term. In our current opinion, as we have proposed
above, the term
»gradište«
should be reserved for forts showing elements of human settlement.
Thus we do not recommend using the term indiscriminately for any old fort. Indeed we prefer
to use the words »old fort« for strongholds not showing elements of human settlements. This
distinction is reflected in this reprint.
167
nonian
basin.36 I would cautiously suggest that some of them indeed seem to be
the backbone of old territorial units, both secular
»župas«
(districts, »counties«),
and religious
»župas«
(parishes). This may be especially true in the case of double
(»No.
8«)
or multiple forts, or series of forts
(0+0+0
etc.).37 In the former case,
one of the circles may have contained a church, as traces of ruins in durable mate¬
rial indicate
(Gornje Predrijevo),
and the other the seat of political power usually
constructed from wood; in some cases
(Nijemci, Nova
Rača), archeological
inves¬
tigations have established early, possibly Pre-Romanesque traces underneath a later
church on a single fort.
A gradište
may also grow a feudal castle, but there is no way
to tell which
gradište
or fort would »grow« a church, and which a castle.38
At Komarnica (todays
Novigrad Podravski
area) there is a string of old sites
along the Komarnica river
-
forts at Poljangrad and
Pavetićev mlin,
an early me¬
dieval settlement at
Poligačev mlin,
plus another fort-like entity, the
Novigrad
cemetery hill with a church the foundations of which may go to a fairly distant
past. Komarnica would claim a considerable distinction in the later Middle Ages
as a seat of an extensive archdeanship of Zagreb Bishopric. The center of the arch-
deanship alone had three or more parishes. All this may confirm that Komarnica
was an old territorial unit, an early Croatian
»župa«,
and, in terms of organi¬
zation, a series of scattered villages.39 A similar string can be seen somewhat to
the northwest. Starting at Rasinja, the string continues along the
Gliboki potok
toward the
Drava
with old parishes at
Gorica
(traces of old moats), Kuzminec
(church in a fort), Imbrijovec, and Delekovec (an old fort nearby).40 Another
model for old nuclei seems to emerge in central Slavonian mountains, where old
36
See, for example, FABINI H.
-
FABINI A.
1991., 155-157.
37
Double or multiple
gradišta: TKALČEC
2004.
Nos.
7
(Čepelovac),
19
(Gudovac),
57
(Puričani),
60
(Rasinja
-
Opoj
grad),
62
(Selište
-
Kutinec grad),
63
(Severin),
71
(Stara Ploščica
-
Greda),
78
(Šandrovac).
They make about
12%
of Ms.
Tlačec s
list. Adjacent
gradišta:
19
and
20
(Gudovac),
26
and
27
(Kraljeva Velika),
29, 30, 31
(Kutina),
35
and
36
(Narta),
38
and
39
(Mikleuška),
52
(Pavlovac),
70
and
71
(Stara Ploščica),
78
and
79
(Šandrovac),
87
and
88
(Veliki
Poganac). From personal observation I would add
Gradina
(fig.
9),
Gornje
Predrijevo, and
Turbina,
to the east of the area covered by Ms.
Tkalčec.
Some fine initial work on
gradištas
in eastern
Slavonia
has been done by
Zlatko
and
Vanda
Karač.
See also
SEKELJ-IVANČAN
1995., 155, 223,224.
38
JAKOVLJEVIĆ
-
ŠLAUS
2003.,
with earlier references. I am indebted to Goran
Jakovljević
for our visit to Nova
Rača,
and to
Ivana Iskra Janušić
and
Marko Dizdar
for information
on
Nijemci.
39
BUTURAC
1984., 76-77;
TKALČEC
2004.,
Nos.
23
and
45.
40
BUTURAC
1984., 75-76;
TKALČEC
2004.,
Nos.
14, 32, 60.
168
cemeteries often still in use (Pavlovac on the
Požega
Mountain;
Oriovčić
and
Zdenci
on the Dilj) are found on a ridge overseeing at least two valleys. The fact
that next to the church and cemetery at
Oriovčić
one finds place names such as
»Gradina«
and »Okrugljak«, point to old fortifications. Names such as
»Kru¬
ge«,
»Kruzi«, »Okrugljak« are sometimes related to Avar settlements, an at¬
tractive idea which needs more research.41
A very interesting case is that of
Lovčič,
also on the Dilj, where an old cem¬
etery with a well-preserved Romanesque church on a fort (more about the church
later) sits at a spot controlling^/^ valleys; the church may have been overseen by
another fort on a slightly higher hill nearby, and is still accompanied by traces of
an old, almost cyclopean wall.
Lovčić
imposes itself as a center of an old parish
(unfortunately we do not know which, as there are several parishes of St. Martin
in the
Požega
archdeanship which cannot be securely located), as well as a center
of an early territorial unit. 42
However, excavated cemeteries of the
Bijelo Brdo
culture, a fair number of
which has been explored in the Croatian part of
Pannonia,
have not provided
much help to our picture. They are either pre-Christian, and while providing valu¬
able information on early settlements, they cannot tell us anything about church
architecture, or, if they are Christian, and accompanied by a building, we have that
information independently of the cemeteries themselves (Zagreb, Lobor,
Sisak).43
Another form o£ territorial organization is based on the
»greda«
(beam).
These are often rather long stretches of higher grounds within essentially flat land¬
scape (e.g.,
Denkovačka greda, Đakovačka
greda
in Eastern
Slavonia,
or
a greda
that runs from the eastern outskirts of Zagreb to the slopes of the
Bilogora
and the
Kalnik).
Old settlements recorded in documents or crowned by medieval churches
4
Position of
Oriovčić
is especially interesting, although cannot be fully appreciated as the
top of
che
hill is nowadays heavily forested. However, the site should have had a view of at least
three valleys, and that it was a dominant nucleus is also shown by the fact that the area to the
south, along the major road linking the
Sava
river valley and the
Požega
area, is known as Podcr-
kavlje, i.e., land below the church. On
»Kruge«
etc.
VINSKI
I960., 52-53.
42
For the visit and information my sincere thanks to
Josip
Lozuk of the Museum of
Sla¬
vonski Brod.
43
On
Bijelo Brdo
culture see copious contributions by
Željko Tomičić,
e.
g.,
TOMIČIĆ
1992.
or
TOMIČIĆ
2OOO.b.
I warmly thank Dr.
Tomičić
for his continuous support and advice.
Even in case of such sites where one would be fully justified to expect remains of a church, e.g., at
Stenjevec, systematic exploration of an
11
th
-
12th century cemetery failed to discover traces if
architecture.
SIMONI
2004.
169
stand
on those
gredas
which often also serve as directions of both old and con¬
temporary communications
(Nuštar, Borinci, Jarmina, Ivánkovo, Vodinci,
Novi
Mikanovci on the
Denkovačka
greda; Sesvete,
Prozorje, Brckovljani,
Vrbovec, Gra¬
dec
on that near Zagreb; all of those places were parishes in the 14th or 15th cen¬
tury, and
Nuštar,
Borinci,
Ivánkovo,
Novi
Mikanovci, Prozorje, Brckovljani, and
Vrbovec
have either visible or recorded traces of medieval architecture, or preserved
medieval churches).441 must emphasize that without a thorough study of territorial
organization we will never fully understand what was happening in the medieval
Slavonia.
This is an area where interdisciplinary cooperation of all disciplines in¬
volved is a must, and the only way toward new discoveries and conclusions.
7.
Role of sculpture
Works or fragments of stone sculpture found at or built into the walls are a
secure way of assigning dates to the sites. In museums and collections between the
Sava
and the
Drava
river, there are around
100
fragments of stone sculpture bear¬
ing decorative, floral, animal, or human forms from Pre-Romanesque, Roman¬
esque, and Transitional style periods, as well as numerous purely architectural
fragments.45 Once the investigations at Lobor are completed and published, the
collection of decorated fragments would increase by about
50
or more pieces.
Staying with the Pre-Romanesque, it was a discovery of interlace fragments at
Sisak/Siscia that pointed to Pre-Romanesque architectural activity, confirmed by
written sources.46 Two such fragments were a lead to the astonishing discoveries
at Lobor in recent years.471 believe we have been able to identify two pieces in the
storage of the
Požega
Valley Museum as belonging to the lost parish church of St.
Paul, confirming its Romanesque dating.48
Unfortunately, most of the fragments are not in situ, and even if they are,
their testimony may be ambiguous. There are simple, rustic portals (Martin,
Koska, Lovčić, Zdenci, Križovljan)
which may be Romanesque, partly Roman¬
esque, or much later inspired by the Romanesque. In Glogovnica, five important
GOSS
2003.a,
6
(on the positioning of St.
Bartol
in
Novi
Mikanovci).
45
This material has been presented in
2007.
See GOSS 2007.C.
46
GOSS 2OO3.a;
HORVAT
A.
1954.
47
STAHULJAK
1950.;
FILIPEC
2002.
48
On a visit to the storage of the Museum of the
Požega
Valley in Spring
2005,
for which I
am indebted to
Dubravka Sokač-Štimac.
170
figured fragments in the walls of the parish church of St. Mary, the Parish Home,
and the house at
Gornja Glogovnica,
No.
61,
all part of a remarkable sculpted
cycle, can be at best tied to some church in the area, as it is far from certain that
they originally belonged to the repeatedly rebuilt St. Mary, usually associated
with the Order of the Canons of the Holy Sepukher.49 The »Stone from Belec«
I recently published cannot be with absolute certainty related to the place where
it was found
-
the Church of Our Lady of the Snow.50
Still, stone sculpture is a great and irrefutable voice in favor of existence of
churches in durable material, and those which can be related to certain sites or
monuments are precious witnesses indeed. In the Historical Museum in Zagreb,
there is in the storage a badly mutilated (probably Gothic) architectural fragment
from
Zelina
-
a sole witness of existence of a substantial medieval stone church in
that important township of Croatia
Cismontana
(Prigorje).31
By now we have a fairly accurate corpus of the Romanesque sculpture be¬
tween the
Sava
and the
Drava.
The main problem is that what we have appears
mostly as membra disiecta. There is, for example, no similarity between the two
largest Slavonian Romanesque sculpture groups
-
Glogovnica and
Rudina.
And
whereas Glogovnica could be provisionally attached to some southern Hungarian
trends, the style of
Rudina
is, in my opinion, absolutely unique in the Carpathian
basin. Which should lead to conclusion that it originated at
Rudina,
from mod¬
els which are gradually being identified.52
8.
Role of Wall-Painting
A Romanesque painting on a wall, definitely makes the wall Romanesque.
In Continental Croatia there are, according to my latest estimates, around
50
wall-painting groups on record
-
reasonably preserved, fragmentary, relegated
49
DOBRONIĆ
1998., 79-85.
50
GOSSZ
51
My thanks to
Lada
Pòster
who draw my attention to that piece. Subsequently a head of a
Lamb of God was discovered in the Museum St. Ivan
Zelina,
datable to the first half of the 13th
ct.,
it was established that the tower was probably an originally free standing fort, and that the church
could be reconstructed as a short aisleless building with a rounded apse and a tower, the Lamb of
God being possibly a fragment of a portal. The church is dedicated to St. John the Baptist.
52
All of this is superseded by my book on
Rudina, GOSS
2010*.
The most interesting
discovery is identification of Celtic models.
171
to museum collection, known from records or descriptions. A fraction of those
are pre-Gothic (Zagreb,
Lovčić, Dolac, Rudina, Medvedgrad, Hraščina
-
the list
does not pretend to be complete). Serious investigation
ofthat
entire segment
of our cultural heritage has barely begun, and I see it as one of the top desid¬
erata of Croatian medieval studies. The fragments from
Rudina
and
Dolac
in
the Museum of
Požega
Valley, reconfirm Romanesque date of the buildings. The
stunning and fairly copious fragments at
Lovčić,
two high quality layers (Roman¬
esque and Gothic) indicate what we have lost by losing the wall-decoration of
medieval churches. If a small chapel lost deep in the wilderness of the Dilj could
afford such painted luxury, what about big parish or monastery churches, to say
nothing of Cathedrals (Zagreb Cathedral luckily has substantial remains of both
late Romanesque and Gothic frescoes). It is also stunning that
Lovčić
is still wait¬
ing for a representative monograph.53
9.
The place and role of architecture in wood
It is quite certain that timber was the key building material of domestic ar¬
chitecture well into the
1
5th century, and dominant even beyond.54 It was very im¬
portant in fortification architecture and castles in durable material are believed
to be very rare before mid-13th century. If we declare that the known history of
Croatian medieval architecture in Continental Croatia starts with investigations
at Lobor made by
Krešimir Filipec,
far from being completed and published, we
could say that in religious architecture, stone and wood appear side by side. Fil¬
ipec has discovered, at Lobor, a spacious Pre-Romanesque building in stone, and,
to the south of it, a smaller one in wood. The same scholar has investigated, with
Ivo Pavlovic,
a medieval settlement in
Đakovo
(expected to be published soon),
also with a wooden church.55
53
But it is, fortunately, now being expertly restored. Opening up
Lovčić
and the rest of
the Dilj Mountain should be a top priority in cultural policy in
Slavonia.
The date of the
Rudina
fresco fragments is somewhat questionable.
54
55
I am extremely grateful to Dr. Filipec for generously sharing with me information on
his excavations, and whatever is said here is in no way meant to anticipate copious reports we
expect from him in the future. I am also grateful to
Ivo Pavlovic
of the Museum of
Đakovo
for
information, visit to the site, and access to his manuscript,
PAVLOVIC
2002., 1-5.
172
Thus timber surely existed as a material worthy of religious architecture. We
bow, for example, that the Gothic church at Mali Raven near
Križevci
succeed¬
ed an earlier wooden building.56 But timber was not the only material, not even
material of choice. The church was very frequently built from durable material,
as those of Pre-Romanesque period at
Sisak
and Lobor, or even small scale rural
buildings still standing at
Bapska, Novi Mikanovci, Morović, Koprivna, Martin,
Koska, Lovčić, Gojio, Orljavac, Brestovac, Podgorje, Kamešnica, Novo
Mesto
Zelinsko, Markuševec,
etc. clearly testify.
With this, the issue of architecture in wood is not put to rest. A bothersome
question remains: to what extent wood may have influenced forms and plans of
everyday Romanesque (and Gothic) churches in Central Europe? We all know
that stone tolerates, even likes, curves, but curving walls in wood, except in cases
of some unusual, and probably
non
existing
stabbau
(or in case of palisades built
in circles from upright timber) could hardly be imagined. David Buxton, the in¬
defatigable explorer of wooden architecture of Eastern and Central Europe has
provided dozens of plans, standard plans, of aisleless buildings
-
with rectangular,
polygonal
-
narrower or of the same width as the aisle
-
and pointed sanctuar¬
ies.57 In some cases under obvious influence of architecture in durable materials,
the builders in wood have tried to approximate even rounded apses.58
That rectangular presbytery was used by both wood and stone has been dem¬
onstrated by Dr. Filipecs extraordinary discoveries. Indeed, a wooden church
with such a presbytery stands at the very source of architecture in Continental
Croatia. It was certainly used by
bonafide
Romanesque buildings
(Koska, Novo
Mesto
Zeiinsko), and also by a number of similar buildings considered Gothic.
The form is also familiar from Southwestern Hungary.59 The issue does not end
there, as there are stark differences in the from, and impact, of the rectangular
sanctuary. It can be longer or shorter, wider or narrower, slimmer or bulkier. In
one case at least
-
at
Kamešnica
on the
Kalnik
-
it was demonstrated that the rec¬
tangular »Gothic« sanctuary, was in fact a nave of a Romanesque church which
lost its rounded apse, either by accident, or by intention
-
to make the church
56
Križevci
1993., 358.
The village of
Trg
near Ozalj consisted still forty years ago of
wooden homes only (today mostly gone), but the church (Romanesque) was built from stone.
See
GVOZD ANO VIĆ
S.
1969.
57
BUXTON
1981., 190,218.
58
BUXTON
1981., 204
(e.g.,
Vrba
near
Kraljevo
in Serbia).
59
VALTER
2004,
pl.
50,78, 86,87,95,
etc.
173
look more Gothic.60 How many similar cases there are one simply cannot tell
without archeology.
Existing, and fairly recent, timber church buildings (presumably retaining
the shapes of older structures, and consistent with the requirements of construc¬
tion in wood), e.g., St. Barbara at
Velika Mlaka
near Zagreb, show a polygonal
sanctuary of equal width as the nave.61 This plan also seems to be in the spirit
of timber construction, but it is also present in medieval architecture in dura¬
ble material in
Slavonia
(Crkvari, Lučica
-
both believed to be Gothic in their
present form).62 The polygonal shape could be simplified to a point (triangular
sanctuary). This rare form is translated into stone in at least two cases in Conti¬
nental Croatia, at Klenovec, and Humac near
Brinje (Lika;
both believed to be
Gothic).63 In case of the latter, Z.
Horvat
has pointed out analogy with forms of
fortification architecture, i.e., the chapel of the castle at
Brinje
(and a building
within the
Komić
castle, if to be identified as a chapel), which just shows how
difficult it is to make conclusions in the area we are dealing with. This leaves us
with the model with a sanctuary narrower than the nave, comparable, in that
very respect, to rectangular sanctuaries, describable also as two rectangles, the
narrower one having a polygonal ending. And also directs us into at least a brief
consideration of the typology of Romanesque rural churches in general.
Major contributions to that problem have been made by research work of the
scholars from the Lower German/Dutch area, which was, as already stated, one
of the heartlands of the migrations of »The Renaissance of the 12th Century«.64
The types include, from simple to more complex: a rectangular chamber, a rectan¬
gular nave with a rectangular sanctuary, a rectangular nave with a rounded apse, a
rectangular nave with a presbytery consisting of a square area plus a rounded apse
60
OKROŠA ROŽIĆ
2003., 80-83,
and
OKROŠA ROŽIĆ
2004., 9-Ю.
For the state
before excavations,
Križevci
1993. 346-348.
61
CVITANOVIĆ
1974., 7-18;
STRZYGOWSKI
1927.,
figs. 56a, 56b.
62
VUKIČEVIĆ-SAMARŽIJA
1986., 98,
111.
63
VUKIČEVIĆ-SAMARŽIJA
1993., 154;
HORVAT
Z. 2OO3.b,
50-52.
The chapel of
St. Matthew at
Johi
(Croatian Highlands) has a sanctuary which in fact might be described as
rather pointed polygon outside and semicircle inside.
HORVAT
A.
1984.-1985., 75.
64
GOSS 2003.a,
8,
and GOSS 2004.a,
11-12.
Among useful sources on the topic of rural
Romanesque I would list
ROGGE
1943.,
VAN
DER MOLEN - VOGT 1981.;
REITSCHEL
- LANGHOF 1968.,
TUULSE
1955.,
and, of course, the monumental German
Handbuch der
Deutsche
Kunstdenkmäler,
initiated in
1905.
by
Georg Dehio,
and continued, with new editions
and additions through the present time.
174
(the
»Zusammengesetzter Raum«);
there are also more complex models such as
a rectangular nave with a transept, and a rectangular presbytery with or without a
rounded apse, but they do not concern us here. The naves can be both vaulted or
not, the latter form predominating. In case of the
»Zusammengesetzter Raum«
the area in front of the apse is usually vaulted. In front of the church you may add
a tower, square, polygonal or rounded, in the case of square ones sometimes as
wide as the facade.65
What transpires is a keen sense of separation of the sanctuary (raised higher,
vaulted) and the nave, the area of the ritual and the area for the faithful, the scene
and the audience, Heaven and Earth, Sacred and Profane. In that scenery the
rounded apse surely surpasses in terms of its celestial symbolism and terrestrial
sense of direction a straight termination
-
which rectangular presbyteries try to
make up for by being vaulted, often by plastically more pronounced rib-vaults. If
we were to select one clear case of each relevant form on our territory, we could
list
Novo Mesto Zeíinsko
(rectangular nave with narrower rectangular presby¬
tery),
Lovčić
(rectangular nave with a rounded apse), and
Morović
(»Zusam¬
mengesetzter Raum«).66
The case of a polygonal presbytery narrower than the church could be, in my
opinion, dealt as an improvement of the last mentioned model (giving it sense
of direction) but in the vocabulary of a new, Gothic style. The will-to-Gothic
assumed sometimes rather unusual forms, as when the apse of the Romanesque
church at
Turnišče
was »shaved« in such a way that from a rounded it became
polygonal!67 Our model is, in fact, a three-unit solution (nave, presbytery, po¬
lygonal
chevet),
thus a variant, or derivation, of the
»Zusamnengestzter Raum«.
But is it an exclusively »Gothic« development? Would it be fair to assume that
polygonal eastern ends existed also before the Gothic in wooden architecture
?
Pos¬
sibly, but at this point it cannot be proven.
However, there are indications, both in our area and in Hungary of polygo¬
nal endings being applied to buildings believed to be consistently Romanesque.
Could it be that this type of »revision» of the
«Zusammengesetzter Raum«,
or of the building with a rectangular presbytery, was already accomplished, or
65
For an excellent and very thorough survey of all those types, see
ROGGE
1943.,
passim.
66
GVOZDANOVIĆ
V.
1969.-1970.;
GVOZDANOVIĆ-GOSS
1980.;
GOSS
2003.Ы
HORVAT
A.
1984.-1985., 69;
AZINOVIĆ
2002.
67
ZADNIKAR
1959., 141-144.
175
at least initiated within the Romanesque as a take-over from the architecture in
wood?68
10.
The Pre-Romanesque
In as much as the architecture and sculpture in durable material are con¬
cerned there are only three firm points of the Pre-Romanesque (Lobor,
Sisak),
and one of (very) early Romanesque (the capital in Zagreb).69 At the other end of
Southern
Pannonia,
along the Danube and beyond the current Croatian border
there are Pre-Romanesque/Early Romanesque pieces at
Banoštar
and Rakovac,
as well as elsewhere in
Vojvodina,
i.e., Southern Hungary
(Titel, Aracs).
These
»flechtband«
works
»aus Sirmien«,
have a long history of attracting (and baf¬
fling) scholars, and may continue to do so for another while. Their Byzantine
source of inspiration was (almost) proven, yet some other possible sources have
been suggested more recently
-
including the Dalmatian coast.70
In Croatia their equivalent are two pieces from
Beli Manastir
in the Museum
of
Slavonia
in
Osijek,
and as a possibly somewhat later offshoot, the Lamb of God
pilaster from
Ilok
in the Archeological Museum in Zagreb.71 All of them are wit¬
nesses to a robust building activity in durable materials at the eastern end of the
Sava-Drava-Danube area.
Shall we find more
?
After Lobor, everything is possible. Which means, re¬
verting to the issue of territorial organization and identifying the oldest centers
of political and religious power.
11.
Protection and Presentation
Scholarship does not exist in a vacuum. Art Historians should see them¬
selves as keepers, for their active lifetime, of a certain section of cultural heritage
they chose to study. Their task is to pass it on to succeeding generations with
new insights and broader understanding, and in at least as good a shape as when
they received it. The history of art history of Continental Croatia is a long story
68
I am dealing with that issue also GOSS
2007.Є.
On Hungarian examples,
VALTER
2004,46,79.
69
HORVAT
A.
1954.;
GOSS
1996., 36-37;
FILIPEC
2002.;
GOSS 2003-b.
70
HORVAT
A.
1959;
TAKÁCS
M.
1997.;
TAKÁCS
M.
2000.;
TÓTH
2000.
71
VUKIČEVIĆ-SAMARŽIJA
2000., 480-482.
176
of struggle for salvaging monuments in the midst of an almost total public and
scholarly neglect along the lines of »induced despondency« we outlined be¬
fore. It is no wonder that many outstanding historians of the art of Continental
Croatia were also preservation experts. Without the work of
Đuro Szabo, Ljubo
Karaman,
Ándela
Horvat, Zorislav Horvat,
Drago Miletić..
we might not have
anything to study.
Situation today is much better, but far from satisfactory. Monuments still
disappear in front of our eyes. The public, general and even scholarly, is not aware
of what we have, and what it means. We must make the survival of our national
heritage in between the
Sava
and the
Drava
a public issue. This means that monu¬
ments themselves must go public. They must become known, appreciated, vis¬
ited, used. Only when a Japanese tourist clicks his camera at your local ruin, the
locals become all of a sudden aware of its value. In
Dalmaţia,
tourism has created
many problems, but also saved an endless number of monuments.
The project which is described in the preface to the list published above, en¬
titled »The Romanesqaue between the
Sava
and the
Drava
Rivers and European
Culture«, financed by the Ministry of Science, Education and Sports of the Re¬
public of Croatia, and also sponsored by the Croatian State Surveyor Office, has
brought about considerable changes in the evaluation of the material. First of all,
the sheer number is stunning
-
from ca.
60
to
565
sites, in fact many more sites as
many sites contain more than one monument. Next, the total picture the outline
of which has started to emerge indicates that the medieval
Slavonia
was on par
with the surrounding countries in terms of artistic production in the period of
the Romanesque. Importantly, appreciation for the role of the cultural landscape
has led to developing of new methodologies complementing standard methods
of art history. And this has also enabled us to start discovering outlines of an even
more ancient cultural landscape, that of the early Slavic immigrants. Writing in
2005
there was nothing to report on that topic. By now we have a solid handful
of publication listing at least some very exciting preliminary insights, recorded
also in the preface to the list. In our opinion, the project should unfold in that
direction.
We live in a period when developed countries
-
and the number of those is
growing
-
have more and more leisure money. Art, travel, culture, looking for
roots, search for contemporary equivalents of the »good savage«, briefly having
a good time, an experience, a sense of active participation in some stimulating
event, place or activity, is a growth industry. Croatia will never export comput¬
ers or fighter jets, but her big export item could be impressions and memories
177
-
of the wonderful Adriatic coast, of its fairytale underwater life, of still largely
pristine areas of Croatian hinterland, of clear water, of real (not staged) wilder¬
ness, of untouched flora and fauna, of an old culture which still in some ways
actively impacts the people and the environment. Of an ecology, both cultural
and physical which is, compared to that in the »developed« world, still fairly
well-preserved. Preservation of our cultural ecology is not just a »cultural« but
an economic issue. The more we invest in the study of our monuments, in their
preservation, revitalization, and incorporation into contemporary contents, the
bigger the payoff would be. Ivan
Rogić
Nehajev in his remarkable book
Samostal¬
nost i tehnologija
(Autonomy and Technology) convincingly argues that Croatia
should be a »clean country with beautiful people«, »clean« and »beautiful«
being more than just mere physical characteristics.72 To the extent we preserve our
physical and cultural environment, so much we will be able to retain our identity,
autonomy, and our own well-being within the new Europe, and the world com¬
munity in general. We have a choice between standing up as a confident, success¬
ful nation, or dissolving into a bunch of despondent peddlers of Coca-Cola.
There is a long way from identifying
a »gradište«
to making it a meaningful
stop on biking, hiking, or mushroom picking trail. This process cannot be even
begun without rigorous exploration, research, preservation, and presentation ac¬
tivity. So we are back where we started, and this is exactly where we should be
-
in
the world of scholarship.
I hope that these lines have shown both an urgent need for and a great po¬
tential in studying earlier phases of medieval art between the
Sava
and the
Drava.
The study should be systematic, long-term, and interdisciplinary. Scholars should
know what their colleagues are doing, we should insure continuity by training,
as we go, our young colleagues; and we should cooperate on either one-on-one
basis, or in teams, with scholars in other disciplines involved. The land between
the
Sava
and the
Drava,
and Continental Croatia in general, are not a cultural
»tabula rasa«. Rather, a big »white spot« of our culture which, with some ef¬
fort and good will could
reemerge
as a promised land for art history and other
historical sciences. The list and its preface published here is a major step in that
direction.
72
ROGIĆ
2000., 589-590.
178
|
| any_adam_object | 1 |
| author | Goss, Vladimir Peter 1942- |
| author_GND | (DE-588)131853104 |
| author_facet | Goss, Vladimir Peter 1942- |
| author_role | aut |
| author_sort | Goss, Vladimir Peter 1942- |
| author_variant | v p g vp vpg |
| building | Verbundindex |
| bvnumber | BV040939784 |
| ctrlnum | (OCoLC)873379677 (DE-599)BSZ380967219 |
| era | Geschichte 1000-1300 gnd |
| era_facet | Geschichte 1000-1300 |
| format | Book |
| fullrecord | <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>02417nam a2200493 cb4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">BV040939784</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-604</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20161130 </controlfield><controlfield tag="007">t</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">130411s2012 a||| |||| 00||| hrv d</controlfield><datafield tag="020" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">9789536106967</subfield><subfield code="c">pbk.</subfield><subfield code="9">978-953-6106-96-7</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="020" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">9536106965</subfield><subfield code="c">pbk.</subfield><subfield code="9">953-6106-96-5</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="024" ind1="3" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">9789536106967</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(OCoLC)873379677</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)BSZ380967219</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-604</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">hrv</subfield><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="049" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-255</subfield><subfield code="a">DE-12</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">2.2</subfield><subfield code="2">KUBA2</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">9,10</subfield><subfield code="2">ssgn</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Goss, Vladimir Peter</subfield><subfield code="d">1942-</subfield><subfield code="e">Verfasser</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)131853104</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Registar položaja i spomenika ranije srednjovjekovne umjetnosti u međuriječju Save i Drave</subfield><subfield code="c">Vladimir Peter Goss</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Zagreb</subfield><subfield code="b">Inst. za Povijest Umjetnosti</subfield><subfield code="c">2012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">191 S.</subfield><subfield code="b">Ill.</subfield><subfield code="c">24 cm</subfield><subfield code="e">1 Kt.-Beil. u.d.T.: Karta međuriječja Save i Drave s naznačenim položajima i spomenicima ranije srednjovjekovne umjetnosti</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">n</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">nc</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="490" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Studije i monografije Instituta za Povijest Umjetnosti</subfield><subfield code="v">42</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text teilw. kroat., teilw. engl. - Zsfassung in engl. Sprache</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="648" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Geschichte 1000-1300</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1="0" ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Kunst</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4114333-4</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="651" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Zentralkroatien</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)1048174042</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="655" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4188171-0</subfield><subfield code="a">Verzeichnis</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd-content</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Zentralkroatien</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)1048174042</subfield><subfield code="D">g</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Kunst</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4114333-4</subfield><subfield code="D">s</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">Geschichte 1000-1300</subfield><subfield code="A">z</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="5">DE-604</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="830" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Studije i monografije Instituta za Povijest Umjetnosti</subfield><subfield code="v">42</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-604)BV040126371</subfield><subfield code="9">42</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="m">Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen 19 - ADAM Catalogue Enrichment</subfield><subfield code="q">application/pdf</subfield><subfield code="u">http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=025918562&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA</subfield><subfield code="3">Inhaltsverzeichnis</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="m">Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen 19 - ADAM Catalogue Enrichment</subfield><subfield code="q">application/pdf</subfield><subfield code="u">http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=025918562&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA</subfield><subfield code="3">Abstract</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="999" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-025918562</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="942" ind1="1" ind2="1"><subfield code="c">709</subfield><subfield code="e">22/bsb</subfield><subfield code="f">09023</subfield><subfield code="g">4972</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="942" ind1="1" ind2="1"><subfield code="c">709</subfield><subfield code="e">22/bsb</subfield><subfield code="f">09021</subfield><subfield code="g">4972</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="942" ind1="1" ind2="1"><subfield code="c">709</subfield><subfield code="e">22/bsb</subfield><subfield code="f">09022</subfield><subfield code="g">4972</subfield></datafield></record></collection> |
| genre | (DE-588)4188171-0 Verzeichnis gnd-content |
| genre_facet | Verzeichnis |
| geographic | Zentralkroatien (DE-588)1048174042 gnd |
| geographic_facet | Zentralkroatien |
| id | DE-604.BV040939784 |
| illustrated | Illustrated |
| indexdate | 2024-07-10T00:35:48Z |
| institution | BVB |
| isbn | 9789536106967 9536106965 |
| language | Croatian English |
| oai_aleph_id | oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-025918562 |
| oclc_num | 873379677 |
| open_access_boolean | |
| owner | DE-255 DE-12 |
| owner_facet | DE-255 DE-12 |
| physical | 191 S. Ill. 24 cm 1 Kt.-Beil. u.d.T.: Karta međuriječja Save i Drave s naznačenim položajima i spomenicima ranije srednjovjekovne umjetnosti |
| publishDate | 2012 |
| publishDateSearch | 2012 |
| publishDateSort | 2012 |
| publisher | Inst. za Povijest Umjetnosti |
| record_format | marc |
| series | Studije i monografije Instituta za Povijest Umjetnosti |
| series2 | Studije i monografije Instituta za Povijest Umjetnosti |
| spelling | Goss, Vladimir Peter 1942- Verfasser (DE-588)131853104 aut Registar položaja i spomenika ranije srednjovjekovne umjetnosti u međuriječju Save i Drave Vladimir Peter Goss Zagreb Inst. za Povijest Umjetnosti 2012 191 S. Ill. 24 cm 1 Kt.-Beil. u.d.T.: Karta međuriječja Save i Drave s naznačenim položajima i spomenicima ranije srednjovjekovne umjetnosti txt rdacontent n rdamedia nc rdacarrier Studije i monografije Instituta za Povijest Umjetnosti 42 Text teilw. kroat., teilw. engl. - Zsfassung in engl. Sprache Geschichte 1000-1300 gnd rswk-swf Kunst (DE-588)4114333-4 gnd rswk-swf Zentralkroatien (DE-588)1048174042 gnd rswk-swf (DE-588)4188171-0 Verzeichnis gnd-content Zentralkroatien (DE-588)1048174042 g Kunst (DE-588)4114333-4 s Geschichte 1000-1300 z DE-604 Studije i monografije Instituta za Povijest Umjetnosti 42 (DE-604)BV040126371 42 Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen 19 - ADAM Catalogue Enrichment application/pdf http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=025918562&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA Inhaltsverzeichnis Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen 19 - ADAM Catalogue Enrichment application/pdf http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=025918562&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA Abstract |
| spellingShingle | Goss, Vladimir Peter 1942- Registar položaja i spomenika ranije srednjovjekovne umjetnosti u međuriječju Save i Drave Studije i monografije Instituta za Povijest Umjetnosti Kunst (DE-588)4114333-4 gnd |
| subject_GND | (DE-588)4114333-4 (DE-588)1048174042 (DE-588)4188171-0 |
| title | Registar položaja i spomenika ranije srednjovjekovne umjetnosti u međuriječju Save i Drave |
| title_auth | Registar položaja i spomenika ranije srednjovjekovne umjetnosti u međuriječju Save i Drave |
| title_exact_search | Registar položaja i spomenika ranije srednjovjekovne umjetnosti u međuriječju Save i Drave |
| title_full | Registar položaja i spomenika ranije srednjovjekovne umjetnosti u međuriječju Save i Drave Vladimir Peter Goss |
| title_fullStr | Registar položaja i spomenika ranije srednjovjekovne umjetnosti u međuriječju Save i Drave Vladimir Peter Goss |
| title_full_unstemmed | Registar položaja i spomenika ranije srednjovjekovne umjetnosti u međuriječju Save i Drave Vladimir Peter Goss |
| title_short | Registar položaja i spomenika ranije srednjovjekovne umjetnosti u međuriječju Save i Drave |
| title_sort | registar polozaja i spomenika ranije srednjovjekovne umjetnosti u medurijecju save i drave |
| topic | Kunst (DE-588)4114333-4 gnd |
| topic_facet | Kunst Zentralkroatien Verzeichnis |
| url | http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=025918562&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=025918562&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA |
| volume_link | (DE-604)BV040126371 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT gossvladimirpeter registarpolozajaispomenikaranijesrednjovjekovneumjetnostiumeđurijecjusaveidrave |