AKADEMIJA NAUKA I UMJETNOSTI BOSNE I HERCEGOVINE

AKADEMIE DER WISSENSCHAFTEN UND KÜNSTE

VON BOSNIEN-HERZEGOWINA

GODIŠNJAK
JAHRBUCH
Centar za balkanološka ispitivanja
Zentrum für Balkanforschungen
KNJIGA / BAND 47

Urednik / Herausgeber
Blagoje Govedarica

Redakcija / Redaktion
Dževad Juzbašić, Radoslav Katičić,
Lejla Nakaš, Aiša Softić, Aladin Husić

SARAJEVO 2018

ISSN 0350-0020 (Print) ISSN 2232-7770 (Online)

 Štampano uz podršku Federalnog ministarstva obrazovanja i nauke, Evroazijskog odjeljenja
Njemačkog arheološkog instituta u Berlinu, Fondacije za izdavaštvo Federalnog ministarstva kulture
i sporta Bosne i Hercegovine i Münchner Zentrum für antike Welten-LMU München /
Gedruckt mit Unterstutzung des Föderalen Ministeriums für Bildung und Wissenchaft
Bosnien-Herzegowinas, der Eurasien-Abteilung des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts in Berlin,
des Verlagsfond des Föderalen Ministeriums für Kultur und sport Bosnien-Herzegowinas
und Münchner Zentrum für antike Welten-LMU München
 Sadržaj / Inhaltsverzeichnis

Proceedings of the first PeBA Conference

Perspectives on Balkan Archaeology – The Early Iron Age: Methods and Approaches

Preface................................................................................................................................................. 5
Milijan Dimitrijević
Socioeconomic relations and identities in the Southeastern Adriatic Iron Age
Socioekonomski odnosi i identiteti u gvozdenom dobu Jugoistočnog Jadrana........................ 7
Mario Gavranović, Ajla Sejfuli
Early Iron Age in Central Bosnia – an overview and research perspectives
Rano željezno doba srednje Bosne - pregled i perspektive istraživanja...................................... 27
Daniela Heilmann
Visualizing Cultural Diversity
The typology of one-looped bow fibulae with asymmetrical and rectangular plates
Vizualiziranje kulturne razlike
Tipologija jednopetljastih lučnih fibula s asimteričnim i pravougaonim pločama................... 45
Aleksandar Jašarević, Melisa Forić Plasto
The importance of small archaeological finds from Glasinac
Važnost malih arheoloških nalaza sa Glasinca............................................................................... 59
Aleksandar Kapuran
Chronological problems in the continuity of Iron Age cultural groups
in Northeastern Serbia
Hronološki problemi u kontinuitetu kulturnih grupa gvozdenog doba
u severoistočnoj Srbiji ....................................................................................................................... 77
Aleksandra Papazovska
New perspectives of the tumuli burials during the Iron Age in the Republic of Macedonia
Нове перспективе о сахрањивању испод тумула у гвозденом добу Македоније............. 91
Vojislav Filipović
Some Observations on Communications and Contacts in the Central Balkan and
Neighbouring Regions During the 7th to 5th Century BC Based on the Distribution
of Weapons
Neka zapažanja o komunikacijama i kontaktima na srednjem Balkanu i susednim
oblastima na osnovu distribucije oružja tokom starijeg gvozdenog doba................................. 105

3
 II
Članci / Aufsätze

Adnan Busuladžić
Metalwork from Roman doors – examples in Bosnia and Herzegovina
Metalni dijelovi rimskih vrata – primjeri iz Bosne i Hercegovine.............................................. 117
Lejla Nakaš
Pismo natpisa stećaka
The Script of Stećak Inscriptions...................................................................................................... 177
Mehmed Kardaš
Novi listovi Vrutočkog bosanskog četveroevanđelja
New sheets from the Bosnian Vrutok Gospels............................................................................... 193
Aladin Husić
O organizaciji i načinu funkcioniranja sudske vlasti u kadiluku Tešanj u drugoj polovini
18. stoljeća
On the Organization and the Functioning of Judiciary Authority in the Qadha of Tesanj
in the Second Half of the 18th Century............................................................................................ 199
Aiša Softić
Novinske osmrtnice i transnacionalna praksa u Bosni i Hercegovini
Newspaper Obituaries and Transnational Practice in Bosnia and Herzegovina....................... 215

III
Kritike i prikazi / Besprechungen
Adnan Busuladžić, Tragovi antičkog teatra, muzike, gladijatorskih borbi i takmičenja
iz arheoloških zbirki u Bosni i Hercegovini = Evidence of the theatre, music, gladiator
combats and games from ancient Greece and Rome in archaeology collections in Bosnia
and Herzegovina, Zemaljski muzej Bosne i Hercegovine, 2017, 314 str. (Adnan Kaljanac)............... 225

Hronika / Chronik
Izvještaj o radu Centra za balkanološka ispitivanja ANUBiH u 2018. godini...................................... 227

In Memoriam

Orhan Jamaković (1946–2018) ................................................................................................................... 229

Adrese autora / Autorenadressen ............................................................................................................... 231

Uputstva / Richtlinien / Guidelines

Uputstva za pripremu materijala za Godišnjak Centra za balkanološka ispitivanja ANUBiH........... 233

Richtlinien zur Veröffentlichung im Jahrbuch des Zentrum für Balkanforschungen der AWBH..... 235
Guidelines for the article preparation for Godišnjak CBI ANUBiH...................................................... 237

4
 I

Proceedings of the first PeBA Conference

Perspectives on Balkan Archaeology – The Early Iron Age: Methods and Approaches

Preface

The idea of PeBA - Perspectives on Balkan Ar- leagues working on problems of the Early Iron
chaeology was born in 2015 and choosing Sara- Age in this region. This network of scholarly
jevo as the conference venue for the first PeBA exchange between Balkan Scholars which tran-
conference seemed the perfect decision. The scends state and ideological borders is integral to
Conference was held on April 8-9, 2016 in the the concept of PeBA. Of course, those contacts
National Museum of Bosnia and Herzegovina existed before, but sometimes outsiders have a
with the 21 participants from Austria, Bosnia and better starting point in creating a new perspec-
Herzegovina, Czech Republic, Croatia, Republic tive on seemingly familiar matters.
of Macedonia, Germany, Serbia and Slovenia. In The idea to intensify and to re-establish ex-
the meantime, a second conference took place in change among researchers of Balkan Archaeol-
Belgrade in 2017 and a third one is scheduled for ogy from different countries made Sarajevo an
2020. ideal meeting place. As is commonly known,
Daniela Heilmann and Marek Verčík, both of that the city had suffered during the Yugoslav
whom were members of the Munich Graduate Wars, in the course of which the once famous
School for Ancient Studies “Distant Worlds” at National Museum of Bosnia and Herzegovina/
the Ludwig-Maximilians-University at that time, Zemaljski muzej Bosnia i Hercegovina had to
approached me with the idea to organize an in- close, the collections were stored away and were
ternational conference on the Early Iron Age in partly inaccessible for a long time. The enor-
the Balkan lands. This conference about “The mous symbolic value to come together in Sara-
Early Age: Methods and Approaches” was de- jevo, an iconic place evoking the conflicts during
signed to specifically give younger researchers a the Yugoslav Wars, but also the place of renewal
chance and a forum to introduce their work and and recovery was obvious to us. All the more so
discuss their ideas. Aleksandar Jašarević from as the city was once a famous centre of Balkan
the Regional Museum of Doboj, Bosnia and Her- Archaeology - with a long tradition of research
zegovina, enthusiastically supported the idea and starting in the late 19th century and flourishing
with Mario Gavranović from the Institute for under the Habsburg Monarchy right into Yu-
Oriental and European Archaeology (OREA), goslav times. I think it was the impression and
Austrian Academy of Sciences in Vienna, the the feeling of all participants that we were wit-
team was complete. nessing that something new and promising was
I was very impressed by this initiative and about to start. Sarajevo and the vast collections
very happy to see, what positive side effects of the National Museum were once a cradle of
a doctoral dissertation can produce. Daniela Balkan Archaeology; thus, the reopening of a
Heilmann’s travels to various now independent small part of the Iron Age collection during the
countries of former Yugoslavia in the course of PeBA conference held on the 8th-9th April 2016
her efforts to collect information for her doctoral was of great importance and a crucial signal to
dissertation resulted in contacts with many col- the scientific community. I am writing this from

5
the outside perspective of a German archaeolo- pressive was the conference excursion to many
gist and university professor who sees it as one famous sites of the Iron Age Glasinac Culture
part of her obligations to teach students that ar- which showed once more that the autopsy of a
chaeological studies should not be confined by geographical setting is vital for understanding
modern national borders and that it is important cultural, in this case archaeological, phenomena.
to reach out and bring together people and ideas This first PeBA conference was a big success,
from various places and backgrounds. from a scholarly as well as - and perhaps even
I will avoid a discussion of what “Balkan more importantly - from a personal perspective.
Archaeology” actually means at this point, but We owe this experience to many people whom I
would rather like to emphasize that many col- would like to thank again on behalf of the partic-
leagues followed the conference call of the four ipants and for myself. Our thanks go to the or-
organizers. Researchers participated with talks ganizers Daniela Heilmann, Mario Gavranović,
or chaired the various sessions. The wide array Aleksandar Jašarević and Marek Verčík; but also
of topics included research perspectives on the to the colleagues in the NMBiH in Sarajevo, es-
western Balkans with talks about communica- pecially Andrijana Pravidur. Our gratitude also
tion networks, settlement structures in a region- goes to the Munich Graduate School for Ancient
al perspective or studies concerning aspects of Studies “Distant Worlds” and the Südosteuropa
material culture in Bosnia and Herzegovina and Gesellschaft Munich which generously granted
beyond. Another session focused on chronolog- financial support and thus made the conference
ical questions of the Early Iron Age in the south- possible.
ern Carpathian Basin, the Slovenian Dolenjsko Not all participants found the time to hand
or the continuity of Iron Age cultural groups in in their contributions, mainly because for some
northeastern Serbia. The third session was titled time the form in which the conference contribu-
‘Approaching Identities’ in the Iron Age with tions would be published, was unclear. Thanks
contributions on female costumes, theoretical to the initiative and financial as well as editorial
concepts or socioeconomic aspects in areas such support offered by my colleague Blagoje Gove-
as the southeastern Adriatic. A fifth session dealt darica (Eurasienabteilung, German Archaeolog-
with ‘Supra-regional Approaches: Communica- ical Institute, Berlin and the Centre for Balkan
tions and Cultural Dynamics’ such as the distri- Studies, Academy of Sciences and Arts of Bosnia
bution of weapons in the central Balkan region and Herzegovina, Sarajevo) the proceedings of
and surroundings or contacts between southern the first PeBA/Perspectives on Balkan Archae-
Pannonia and the northern Balkans. The final ology conference in Sarajevo held in April 2016
session took a regional focus again, examining are now presented in this volume of Godišnjak/
the burial rights in the Republic of Macedonia, Jahrbuch.
including the contacts to Greece during the Ar-
chaic Period, or a case study about burial cus-
toms in the contact zone of the Vardar and Bre- Carola Metzner-Nebelsick
galnica river valleys. Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, Munich
The large variety of topics offered plenty of
opportunities for fruitful discussions. Most im- Munich, September 2018

6
 Godišnjak / Jahrbuch 2018, 47: 7–26
DOI: 10.5644/Godisnjak.CBI.ANUBiH-47.100

Socioeconomic relations and identities

in the Southeastern Adriatic Iron Age

Milijan Dimitrijević1
Belgrade

Abstract: The focus of this paper is on the connections between socioeconomic relations and collective identities
in the Late Iron Age communities from the Southeastern Adriatic and its hinterland. The aim is to draw attention
to different perceptions of collective identity in the distant past, in contrast to the traditional view that typically
focuses on ethnicity as the main expression of identity in the Late Iron Age Southeastern Adriatic. This interpreta-
tion is based on a constructivist approach to culture and on a re-evaluation of archaeological records that are sig-
nificantly marked with imported artefacts, which remarkably highlight socioeconomic interactions from the past.
By correlating archaeological data and previously proposed theoretical concepts, it will be concluded that the
conceptions of collective identities in this particular social context in the past were considerably embedded in
socioeconomic relations. Such conceptions, partly understood through various social practices including the con-
sumption of material culture, were significantly articulated through socioeconomic interactions (e.g., warfare,
habitation, goods exchange) rather than through notions of ethnic distinctions between individuals and groups
in the past.

Key words: identity, Iron Age, socioeconomic relations, eastern Adriatic, Illyrians

1. Introduction terpretation of collective identities in the central

and western Balkan Iron Age,4 which typically
Following the constructivist reasoning that social was focused on ethnicity and identified a signifi-
structure and “reality” are not predetermined cant part of the prehistoric population in the re-
or fixed but continuously socially constructed, gion as the “ancient Illyrians.”5
together with the notion of a “strong reflexive However, the focus of this paper is on the con-
tie” between social dispositions and produced nections between socioeconomic relations and
knowledge of these arrangements,2 it can be con- identities of people in the Southeastern Adriat-
cluded that our understanding of society in the ic and its close hinterland in the Late Iron Age.6
distant past is inevitably conditioned by contem- This topic principally relates to collective iden-
porary social values. Therefore, as such, this un-
derstanding is a fluid and ambiguous conception. 4
Dzino 2008; Kuzmanović / Vranić 2013.
This phenomenon has been prominently ar- 5
Velimirović-Žižić 1967; Papazoglu 1969; Anamali / Korku-
ticulated through the understanding of identity ti 1970; Korkuti 1972a; 1976; Benac 1972; Bojanovski 1985;
Čović 1987; 1991; Benac 1987; Garašanin 1988; Vasić 1991;
in archaeology and modern historiography.3 And Mirdita 1991; Mikić 1991; Ceka 2005.
it is strikingly clear apropos the traditional in- 6
With regard to the periodization of late prehistory, it has
been suggested that the beginning of the Late Iron Age in
1
B.A. (University of Belgrade), Ph.D. (University of Belgra- the Eastern Adriatic should be dated earlier than in the
de), Project Researcher, Pannonia Project, The University of Central Balkans, probably to the 4th century BC. This ar-
Sydney. The author wishes to thank John Whitehouse of The gument has been based on the cultural interaction with the
University of Sydney for advice in composing this paper. rest of the Mediterranean, intense cultural exchange refle-
2
Berger / Luckmann 1991 [1966]; Bourdieu 1995 [1972]; cted through imported archaeological material, and the in-
Giddens 1984; Ashmore 1989; Bourdieu 1989. fluence of “Hellenization”, argued to have been a crucial cul-
3
Jones 1997; Babić 2010. tural change in this historical and social context. For Iron

7
tities in the past, and it is concerned with social pretations, including our understanding of iden-
and cultural aspects of this phenomenon, bear- tities in the distant past.9 This comes hand in
ing in mind the consumption of material culture hand with the understanding of material culture
within the specific socioeconomic setting;7 it is as a culturally specific sign and a medium within
not concerned with ontological or psychological culture.10
analyses. In archaeology, this idea has originated from
Reflecting on the notion indicated in the first the theory of semiotics;11 especially important
paragraph of this text, I would express prudence are those concepts of Charles Peirce.12 One of
that some of the arguments conveyed here could Peirce’s crucial notions in his theory of contin-
imply doxastic ways of thinking. However, the uous creations of signs and meanings is that
purpose of this paper is to draw the reader’s at- a sign is not isolated but is consistently related
tention to the different perception of collective with other signs, which enable their creation in
identities in the region during the late prehistory, the first place.13 Therefore, in the context of so-
in contrast to the traditional view. cial relations and culture, signs can represent
Considering the types and contextual infor- not just social “reality”, but can also create social
mation of archaeological finds referred to in the “reality” through meanings, which can always be
text, it is noteworthy to point out that collective ambiguously reinterpreted.14 Peirce’s notion of
identifications in the Late Iron Age of the South- cultural construction of identity suggests that it
eastern Adriatic and its hinterland were mate- emerges simultaneously from relations between
rially embedded in socioeconomic interactions signs, people’s interactions, and individual com-
and relationships set in the distant past. These prehension. Hence, identity coexists in the un-
interactions from the past are indicated through derstandings of both a group and a person and is
the archaeological record from sites dispersed therefore constantly fluid and reinterpreted, not
throughout the region. They are overwhelming- fixed.15
ly dominated by imports, which were more in- Accordingly, Fredrik Barth’s understanding
tensely exchanged from the 4th century BC on- of collective identity has underlined the impor-
ward. Some illustrative examples are the sites of tance of social interaction in the construction
Ošanići, Risan, Budva, Lezhë, Zgërdhesh, Mar- of always fluid identities as well as the signifi-
gëlliç, Hekal, Klos, Ploç, and Krotina.8 cance of social processes of inclusion and exclu-
Hence, to test whether socioeconomic inter- sion within a particular social group.16 In other
actions were one of the determining forces for a words, identity is not fixed and primordial, but
creation of collective identities in a given social continuously negotiated through comparisons of
context in the past, it is necessary to explain how self with the other.
material culture and identity of people were in- Furthermore, following Pierre Bourdieu’s
terrelated, while keeping in mind the given ar- Theory of Practice, identity can be understood as
chaeological record. being constantly and recursively (re)constructed
through various social practices and their mean-
ings. Identity is simultaneously one of the caus-
2. Identity – meaning – material es and outcomes of interactions between groups
culture and vice versa and individuals, as well as their perceptions of
these relations in social space, in which notions
The constructivist understanding of culture has of various social practices and positions recur-
had a major influence on archaeological inter-
9
Hodder 1985; Tilley 1994; Olsen 2002 [1997]; Dornan
2002; Hodder / Hutson 2003; Gosden 2005; Meskell 2012.
Age periodization see Garašanin 1988, 120–121; cf. Čović Compare with Bourdieu 1995 [1972]; Giddens 1984.
1987, 633–634. 10
Olsen 2002, 165–182.
7
On material culture consumption in the past see Gosden 11
Ibid. 165; Preucel 2006. Compare with: Eco 1976.
2002, 152–178; 2005; Morely 2007, 36–54. 12
Eco 1976, 15; Preucel 2006, 45.
8
Basler 1969; Anamali 1972; Dautaj 1972; 1975; 1976; Marić 13
Preucel 2006, 49–50. 52–55. 57. 66.
1973a; 1977; 1973b; Papajani 1973; 1975; Prendi 1975a; Ka- 14
Ibid. 89.
raiskaj 1977–1978; Ceka 1990; 2005; Vrekaj 1997; Ujes 1999; 15
Ibid. 79–84.
Dyczek et al. 2004; 2007; Dyczek 2010; Marković 2012. 16
Barth 1969, 9–10.

8
sively produce social identity comprehensions sumption of objects as well as the miscellaneous
and vice versa.17 meanings associated with their usage.20
Keeping in mind all these insights, one can Hence, material culture can be a culturally
conclude that collective identities are fluid cate- specific representation of a hybrid, individual,
gories under constant (re)construction. They are and collective identifications, as well as a sign of
the results of repeatedly constructed perceptions, a mixed and layered notion of social and cultural
which when looked at from a chronological dis- identities.
tance constitute a “tradition” (evocation) that
recursively supports various expressions of these
identities (verbal, behavioural, material, etc.) in 3. Socioeconomic practices and
a particular moment or interval of time during identities (re)constructed
which they are manifested within society. Hence,
social and cultural identity can be understood as Following the conceptions outlined above, one
an awareness of “otherness” of individuals and can argue that the key to understanding the in-
groups in comparison to other individuals or terrelatedness between socioeconomic practices
other groups. This awareness is constructed and and collective identities in the past is the recog-
repeatedly reconstructed through the ongoing nition of specific socioeconomic groups created
interactions with the surroundings. through practices as well as paradigms of class
One’s sense of social and cultural identity is distinctions materialised as a result of actions
conditioned by many different notions or dis- within a particular social context.
tinct understandings related to the perceptions These notions indicate the focal points for so-
and comparisons of self or selves with the others. cial recognition and identification in the past, in-
Cultural elaboration and the awareness of one’s cluding the phenomenon by which the social ac-
age, gender, sex, name, social background and tors compare themselves with others. This can be
position, place of origin, mother tongue, politi- related to their inclusion in, or exclusion from a
cal stance, occupation, economic power, religion, particular group, while being related to concerns
material possessions, and similar are also asso- with one’s status, reputation and wealth, which
ciated with the understanding of the different are constantly weighted against other individuals
interactions between people.18 In human interac- and groups. Such comparisons are partially em-
tion, these complex associations are constantly, bedded in socioeconomic interactions.
both consciously and unconsciously, communi- Being partly (re)constructed in various ways
cated and compared, which then reflectively and of consumption of material culture in the past,
recursively enables the understanding of distinc- identities can be traced in the archaeological re-
tions between individuals and groups of people cord by reconstructing paths of various artefacts
within social space. in the archaeological context. In order to under-
One of many ways of communicating these stand this interrelatedness, it is crucial to relate
ideas is through the usage of material culture. archaeological contexts with the specific past
It has been argued that objects that people use social contexts, by identifying social practices
do not just have their practical function, but also which form the basis for the construction of col-
have culturally specific and varied meanings in lective identities.
human interaction and perception.19 Hence, dif- Following on from this, the study will final-
ferent objects and ways of their usage may reflect ize with conclusions based on relating archaeo-
one’s perception of self in comparison to the oth- logical data to theoretical conceptions and vice
er. The various ways of using material culture in versa.21 Hence, the first step is to provide an over-
prehistory and the permanent psychological and view of the material culture from the Southeast-
social reproductions of mixed identifications ern Adriatic and its immediate hinterland dating
can be related to the different contexts of con- to the 4th–1st centuries BC. Specifically, imports
will be taken into consideration, as they are over-
17
Bourdieu 1995 [1972]; Ibid 1985, 725.
18
Meskell 2012. 20
Gosden 2002, 152–178; Gosden 2005; Morely 2007, 36–54.
19
Olsen 2002, 165–182. 199–200; Dornan 2002, 305–307. 21
Jones 2002, 25. 36–37. 70–71.

9
whelmingly present and are typologically and plain; mostly coins (for an example, Damastion
chronologically more sensitive. Moreover, they coins) and fibulae (identified as various La Tène
are objects that were clearly part of past socioec- types).24 Besides, many local products have been
onomic exchange. labelled as imitations of imports.
This label was especially related to the coins
3.1. Material culture overview attributed to various groups from distinct settle-
Abundance of artefacts, predominantly various ments (Amantia, Byllis, Olympe, Orikos, Daor-
Mediterranean imports, rested within the re- son, Scodra, Lissos, Rhizon, etc.); and signed by
mains of numerous Iron Age fortified settlements individuals – rulers (coins of Monunius, Gen-
and necropoleis in the Southeastern Adriatic thios, Ballaios, etc.).25 In addition, these imita-
coast and its hinterland, highlight socioeconom- tions have been recognized in the abundance of
ic interactions from the region’s late prehistory. fine pottery fragments (cups, oenochoai, etc.)
The consumption of imports in the region can predominantly similar to Gnathia products, re-
be traced throughout the Early Iron Age.22 But flecting stylistic features of imported objects.26
an increase in the quantity of this archaeologi- This emulative aspect has been also more or less
cal material can be dated from the late 5th / early pointed out regarding some of the remains of
4th century BC onward. The change and increase architecture in the region, especially some for-
in their quantity is the consequence of intensifi- tifications – identified as “Hellenistic” (Ošanići,
cation of their consumption and a sign of inten- Risan, Lezhë, Hekal, Krotina, Klos, Triport,
sified socioeconomic interactions in the region Orikos, Ploç, Zgërdhesh, Margëlliç, etc.).27
in the last four centuries of the first millennium Locally produced artefacts also include vari-
BC. Imported objects, in the traditional inter- ous kitchen potteries for everyday use (so called
pretation signified “Hellenised” material culture, “Illyrian” pottery), mostly cups with one or two
predominantly originating from the workshops handles, bowls, pots; pithoi and amphorae; pre-
in the Southern Italy and Sicily but also from the dominantly made without using a wheel (cups,
Aegean Region. pots, etc.) or in some cases produced with the us-
Those artefacts include various metal fibu- age of a wheel (amphorae).28 Among local prod-
lae, buttons, necklaces, earrings, bracelets, rings, ucts are various metal tools, mostly for agricul-
pins and double pins; amphorae (Greco – Italic, tural works, and craftsmanship.29
Corinthian A and B types, Dressel types – 1A, A great number of finds relate to weapons
1B, 2–4, Brindisi, Knidian, Thasian, Laboglia 2, produced locally, but there are also imported
Apollonian, etc.); fine ceramic vessels (skyphoi, ones. Offensive weapons are present in a large
oenochoai, pelike, craters, unguentaria, etc. – quantity (iron long leaf-like spears, curved iron
predominantly Gnathia pottery, also Megarian knives, arrow heads and short swords); defen-
bowls, etc.); metal vessels (oenochoai, cups, etc.); sive weapons were found in small numbers (and
coins (of Philip II, Alexander the Great, Cassand- comprise mostly Illyrian helmets).30
er, Philip V, Demetrius II; Acragas coins, Syra-
cuse coins, Neapolis coins, Corinth coins, Ko- 24
Basler 1969; Popović 1987, 28–29; Batović 1988; Marković
2012.
rkyra coins, Apollonia coins, Dyrrachion coins, 25
Islami 1966; Rendić-Miočević 1965; Basler 1971; Ceka
etc.).23 Among these imported artefacts some 1972; Islami 1972b; Marić 1973b; Papajani 1976b; Popović
originated from the inner Balkans territory and 1987, 8. 87–96; Ujes 2004; Dyczek 2010.
even from the southern rim of the Pannonian 26
Basler 1969, 7; Korkuti 1971, 138; Marić 1977, 42–43; Vre-
kaj 1997, 169; Ujes 1999, 209; Marković 2012 61–62.
22
Prendi 1975b; Čović 1987; Vasić 1987; Палавестра 1989; 27
Islami 1972a; 1972d; 1975b; 1975c; Prendi / Zheku 1972;
Palavestra 1993; Babić 2002; Бабић 2004; Ceka 2005. Papajani 1976a; Suić 1976; Karaiskaj 1981; Dyczek et al.
23
Basler 1969; Korkuti 1971, 138; 1972b; Anamali 1972; 2010; Ceka 1987; 1989; 1990; 1998; 2005; Димитријевић
Dautaj 1972; 1975; 1976; Marić 1973a; 1973b; 1977; Papa- 2015.
jani 1973; 1975; Mano 1975; Prendi 1975a; Karaiskaj 1977– 28
Korkuti 1971, 137; Anamali 1972, 101; Dautaj 1972,
1978; Паровић-Пешикан 1979; Popović 1987, 96–104; Ba- 153; Papajani 1973, 110; Prendi 1975a, 154; Marić 1977, 8;
tović 1988; Ceka 1990; 2005; Kirigin 1994; Vrekaj 1997; Ujes Паровић-Пешикан 1979, 47; Vrekaj 1997, 168–169.
1999; 2010; Katić 1999–2000; 2000–2001; 2002; Dyczek et 29
Prendi 1975a; Паровић-Пешикан 1979; Marić 1979.
al. 2004; Kirigin et al. 2005; Dyczek et al. 2007; Dyczek 2010; 30
Basler 1969; Islami 1972a; Korkuti 1972b; Prendi 1975a;
Marković 2012. Паровић-Пешикан 1979; Batović 1988; Marković 2012.

10
 Bearing in mind overviewed archaeological der, in addition to the other aspects of habitation
finds, crucial questions arise such as how are and occupancy within prehistoric settlements.37
they correlated to particular social practices in Analysing the positions of these fortified set-
the past, and how ideas of collective identities tlements in the Southeastern Adriatic and its
in that particular social context were affected close hinterland, one may conclude that they
through those practices? do not represent points in landscapes that were
connected; neither with roads, nor through their
3.2. Warfare and habitation spatial positioning that would suggest their ar-
A large amount of weapons (for the most part ranged orientation opposing some mutual threat.
offensive ones) found particularly in funer- The micro regional topography of the eastern
ary context, but also within settlements, and in Adriatic and its closest hinterland along with the
stratigraphic layers of destruction (for instance positions of those settlements in the landscapes
in Ošanići),31 indicate the vital importance of indicate that the biggest threat for an Iron Age
warfare in the Southeastern Adriatic and its hin- community in this region was from their neigh-
terland during the Late Iron Age. Remains of a bours.38
great number of fortified settlements that once Bearing all this in mind, it can be conclud-
dominated these landscapes, moreover suggest a ed that socioeconomic practices of warfare and
situation of insecurity and the need for protec- plunder, along with a habitation aspect that was
tion in the distant past. strikingly marked with practices of erecting for-
This is clearly communicated in the ancient tifications and living within a community in a
written sources (books of Polybius and Livy- particular defensible place, resulted in the crea-
);32 and in the works of modern historiography, tion of distinct socioeconomic groups and were
warfare, including piracy, is denoted as a real among focal points for social recognition and
economic activity in this historical context, a identification in the past. These circumstances
so called war economy.33 In relation to this one in that particular social context in the past, re-
should also consider the increase of mercenary cursively influenced the comprehension of group
activities in conflicts in Greece and Hellenistic identities which in turn reinforced these prac-
east from the 4th century BC onward.34 Ancient tices. Some of those local identities were even
authors such as Polybius and Diodorus Siculus explicitly communicated on marked coins pro-
have mentioned Illyrians and groups from the duced in some of the settlements.39
eastern Adriatic in this context.35 As previously mentioned, the finds of mostly
If comprehended within substantivist argu- offensive weapons are in general known from fu-
mentation,36 warfare without doubt was a soci- nerary contexts. This suggests their importance
oeconomic practice in this social context in the in the given social context as objects for conduct-
past; which principally included plunder of the ing important socioeconomic practices – warfare
defeated parties. Furthermore, judging from the and plunder, as well as defence of a distinct group
archaeological remains of fortified settlements or a (fortified) settlement. And even if these ac-
in the Southeastern Adriatic and its hinterland tivities would not have been obligatory or would
dated in the last centuries BC, one may conclude not be obvious for some individuals within those
that habitation in that particular social context communities in the past (examples of finds of
was inextricably interrelated to warfare and plun- weapons in graves of women), those practices
were certainly strongly suggested within that so-
cial context, and those individuals undoubtedly
37
These other aspects concern relations between habitation
31
Marić 1969, 78; 1977, 48. of a community and its practices of common goods produ-
32
Pol. II 6; II 8; V 4; Liv. XLIV 30. ction within householding and reciprocal exchange of these
33
Papazoglu 1988, 180. goods within particular settlements. On this matter see: Po-
34
Miller 1984. lanyi 2001 [1944]; 1977.
35
Pol. II 2; II 10; V 2; V 3; V 4; Diod. XVII 17. 38
Димитријевић 2015.
36
Polanyi 2001 [1944]; 1977; see also: Adams 1974; Compa- 39
Islami 1966; 1972b; Rendić-Miočević 1965; Basler 1971;
re with particular stances regarding ancient economy in the Ceka 1972; Marić 1973b; Papajani 1976b; Popović 1987, 8.
primitivist historiography: Finley 1973. 87–96; Ujes 2004; Dyczek 2010.

11
alluded to on warrior’s appearances through the lar type of artefacts on a particular location at
attributes of clothing. a distance from its production centre, and de-
Sepulchral practice suggests the importance creased concentration of these objects on other
of these objects for social recognition in this sites further away, then this pattern of spread in-
historical context, and indicates significance of dicates their centralised redistribution from that
weapons for differentiation of social status of de- particular place in the past. When the quantity
ceased persons, considering their overwhelming of particular imports to the Southeastern Adri-
presence within burial places but with differenc- atic is evaluated and compared, the pattern ex-
es in their quantity and quality. Status communi- plained above could be recognised at particular
cated in this way, that is through possessing and sites in the region, indicating some of the cen-
using weapons within particular socioeconomic tres of redistribution of various imports, mostly
practices, led to differentiations among social of amphorae (containing wine and olive oil) and
actors which were one of the presumptions for fine pottery (mostly for consumption of wine):
creating ideas of their distinct identities. Ošanići, Risan, Lezhë, Margëlliç, Krotina, Berat,
A customary epilogue of the socioeconom- Hekal, Klos, Ploç, Orikum, Triport.42 Amphorae
ic practice of warfare and plunder apparently are present in largest amounts when compared
was the exchange of looted goods. As one of the to the other objects, and are almost exclusively
practices in this social context, redistribution of found in settlements (and rarely in the funerary
some goods (although not all of them looted), context).
and even redistribution of land, is suggested Bearing in mind that the imported artefacts
by ancient written sources.40 In relation to this, had different origins, their geographical spread
archaeological records suggest socioeconomic over the region in both settlements and necrop-
networking between social actors who commu- oleis suggests that they were redistributed from
nicated different social status through consump- particular places in the Southeastern Adriatic
tion of exchanged material culture in the past. and its surroundings. In addition, the widespread
presence of so called imitations of “Hellenistic”
3.3. Socioeconomic exchange and material, mostly locally produced (“Illyrian”)
networking coins, fine pottery and amphorae suggest their
Socioeconomic practice of exchange of goods local manufacture at distribution places and sub-
and objects in the past can be displayed through sequent redistribution in the past. Considering
distribution analysis of archaeological material. the origins of these products, many of the centres
In this respect, some types of imports like am- mentioned above can be identified as places from
phorae, fine pottery and coins are of particular which these objects had been distributed.
importance because of their well known origins Numerous finds of so called “Illyrian” coins in
and chronology. After being imported to the re- particular support this pattern of exchange43 – if
gion, they had to be exchanged, that is redistrib- their role is understood in substantivist terms as
uted. “special purpose money” in regulating particular
A mathematical model which indicates redis- spheres of exchange.44 Locally produced coins by
tribution of artefacts in the past was previously centres or individuals / groups, were distributed
formulated by C. Renfrew.41 This model shows to many different locations (and hence to oth-
that if there is an increased quantity of particu- er socioeconomic actors) along with imported
40
In ancient Amantia (Ploç in southern Albania) the redis- 42
Korkuti 1971; 1972b; Anamali 1972; Dautaj 1972; 1975;
tribution of olive oil is documented on the epigraphic mo- 1976; Marić 1973a; 1973b; 1977; Papajani 1973; 1975;
nument dated in the 2. century BC: Anamali 1972, 90–93; Mano 1975; Prendi 1975a; Karaiskaj 1977–1978; Паровић-
Strabo in the fifth chapter of the seventh book of his Ge- Пешикан 1979; Ceka 1990; 2005; Kirigin 1994; Vrekaj 1997;
ographica noted periodical redistribution of land between Ujes 1999; Dyczek et al. 2004; Kirigin et al. 2005; Dyczek et
ancient Delmatae (every eight years): p. VII 5, 5; compa- al. 2007; Marković 2012.
re with Šašel-Kos 2008, 623. Additionally, Aristotle in the 43
Islami 1966; 1972b; Rendić-Miočević 1965; Basler 1971;
second chapter of the second book of his Politics also no- Ceka 1972; Marić 1973b; Papajani 1976b; Popović 1987, 8.
ted that among “some barbarians” goods are redistributed: 87–96; Ujes 2004; Dyczek 2010.
Arist. 1263a. 44
Polanyi 1977, 97–121; compare with: Finley 1973, 141–
41
Renfrew / Bahn 1991, 322–325. 142; Morely 2007, 61–64.

12
coins, and these often were deposited together cioeconomic groups and can be correlated with
in the same stratigraphic layers. This pattern ac- their members’ participations within particular
tually shows that exchange and their usage (dis- exchange networks and therefore also their soci-
tribution and redistribution) was centralised by oeconomic identification.
numerous producers, whose regulation of this Hence, these relations constructed through
particular practice overlapped with other pro- practices of exchange – distribution and redis-
ducers each supplying the same socioeconomic tribution of goods and objects – have been one
actors in the past, as well as their socioeconomic of the ways of recognition of self and the other,
influences in general. that is, recognition of participant and non-par-
Bearing in mind all these insights, it can be ticipant in socioeconomic practices. Conse-
concluded that redistribution and distribution quently, it must have been one of the features
of goods and objects were widely accepted soci- of identity regarding that particular group (an
oeconomic practices in the Southeastern Adri- exchange network) within the given social con-
atic in the last centuries BC. Redistribution, as text. Dominant social actors (individuals and/
an institutionalised and centralized form of ex- or groups) constructed their high status within
change,45 apparently included competing socio- these networks through practice of regulation
economic networking in the past. This meant the of exchange, which apparently was in accord-
creation of distinct parts of social structures that ance with other social and identity notions like
regulated the practice of redistributive exchange kin based relations, political dealings, etc. They
– a network of socioeconomic actors, replicating apparently have constructed a distinct identity
through this practice. The distinctions between in comparison to others. In some cases this was
social actors (individuals and smaller groups, for vividly communicated with distinct images and
example families – gentes) within the exchange names minted in coins.47
networks that were formed in this way must have Inclusion of many other social actors as par-
been made in terms of their inclusion in, or ex- ticipants within these networks of exchange
clusion out of, these clusters or groups created is suggested by the presence of previously ex-
through practices. changed artefacts found in different settlements,
These socioeconomic differentiations be- and in great number of burials in the region –
tween social actors can be distinguished by their mostly coins, fine pottery vessels, fibulae and
presence or absence within the practice of ex- jewellery.48 Those finds in a number of graves
change. Consequently, this would lead to their unearthed in the region indicates connections of
mutual recognition and identification. Some of buried individuals to the networks of particular
these collective “socioeconomic” identities were spheres of exchange in the past. Related to that
“locally” (re)produced through exchange prac- is the recognition of some of collective socioec-
tices within a particular settlement and/or with- onomic identities as having been (re)produced
in a group of close settlements. This is indicated through exchange on a regional level, including
with finds of mostly amphorae (redistribution interaction between individuals and groups set-
and distribution of wine and olive oil) and im- tled in a larger area in different settlements but
ported fine pottery (mostly for consumption of connected through the possession and usage of
wine), present in many of mentioned sites and the same type of exchanged objects. In particu-
dispersed in patterns that display centralised lar, this practice refers again to coins of distinct
redistribution of these goods.46 Consequently, types, dispersed widely in the region and far
such patterns can indicate the existence of so- away from the places of their origin, which were
found in funerary context.49
45
Polanyi 2001, 47–48; 1977, 38–39.
46
Basler 1969; Korkuti 1971; 1972b; Anamali 1972; Dautaj 47
Islami 1966; 1972b; Rendić-Miočević 1965; Basler 1971;
1972; 1975; 1976; Marić 1973a; 1973b; 1977; Papajani 1973; Ceka 1972; Marić 1973b; Papajani 1976b; Popović 1987, 8.
1975; Mano 1975; Prendi 1975a; Karaiskaj 1977–1978; 87–96; Ujes 2004; Dyczek 2010.
Паровић-Пешикан 1979; Batović 1988; Ceka 1990; 2005; 48
Basler 1969; Anamali 1972; Marković 2012.
Kirigin 1994; Vrekaj 1997; Ujes 1999; Dyczek et al. 2004; 49
Islami 1966; 1972b; Rendić-Miočević 1965; Basler 1971;
Kirigin / Katunić / Šešelj, 2005; Dyczek et al. 2007; Marko- Ceka 1972; Marić 1973b; Papajani 1976b; Popović 1987, 8.
vić 2012. 87–96; Ujes 2004; Dyczek 2010.

13
 This seems to indicate the importance of which on their ethnogenesis has been traced with
placing artefacts during sepulchral practices for certainty according to archaeological finds clas-
the deceased and for conveying his/her socio- sified as the Glasinac – Mati cultural complex.53
economic connection to the producer within a The Illyrians have been predominantly seen
particular network of exchange during his/her as related, or at least allied tribes, united by their
lifetime. The different socioeconomic status of emphasis on shared ethnic background, which
social actors can be suggested on the basis of was a focal point of their identity. It is believed
the quality and quantity of finds in the graves. that this ethnic bonding culminated in the peri-
All these notions and the constructed mental od from the end of the 4th BC onward, when the
pictures within the minds of social actors in the Southeastern Adriatic and its hinterland became
past, and in-between their (socioeconomic) rela- parts of the so called “Illyrian Kingdom”; just be-
tions (group mind set), would influence ideas of fore the gradual Roman conquest and expansion
identities – deflected through these connections over the Balkans.54
and practices of their (re)construction. This socio-political phenomenon (a creation
of a state) was understood as social evolution,
a gradual social progress through the centuries
4. Some critical remarks on the that came to a crescendo with a creation of a
traditional interpretation of identity kingdom, in which ethnic identity was one of the
most important factors of political and social co-
in the Central Balkans Iron Age hesion. This traditional viewpoint of ethnicity in
The traditional understanding and interpreta- the Balkans during the late prehistory is clearly
tion of group identities regarding central and founded on the normative model of culture, and
western Balkan Iron Age is typically focused on namely on the concept of archaeological culture
ethnicity.50 Some explanations touched upon the and diffusionism.55
questions of vertical social diversification and The archaeological verification of this view is
implicitly suggested different social identifica- undertaken in terms of identifying the supposed
tions in the past.51 Even some political and so- complex correlation of homogeneous artefacts
cioeconomical distinctions between particular (with well-defined characteristics) distributed
communities in the past were put forward.52 through a distinct territory, the specific cultural
All of these notions have been based on differ- norms of particular group of people (e.g., lan-
ent understandings of social and cultural evolu- guage, religion, customs, all described by these
tion; as well as on different concepts and models features of classified material culture), and col-
of the economy in the distant past. In any case, lective identities (that were embodied through
the dominant approach to identity pivots around the use of a distinct material culture by a particu-
Iron Age populations being identified as “ancient lar group of people, who shared the same specific
Illyrians”. cultural norms). That view is really an implicit
projection of modern ideas of ethnicity, the na-
4.1. Establishing “Illyrian” ethnicity tion, and the state is strongly supported by the
The traditional archaeological interpretation contrasting culture-historical interpretations of
describes the ancient Illyrians as the dominant the given subject. The different Balkan archaeol-
population in the Southeastern Adriatic and its ogies that explored and modelled the past of the
hinterland during the last centuries BC. It is the region: Austro-Hungarian, Albanian, Yugoslavi-
widely accepted opinion that this region was in- an, and so on, gave different understandings of
habited with ethnically related Illyrian tribes, at the expansion, cohesion and continuity of cul-
least from the Late Bronze Age, the period from
50
Velimirović-Žižić 1967; Papazoglu 1969; Anamali / Kor-
kuti 1970; Korkuti 1972a; 1976; Benac 1972; 1987; Boja- 53
Čović 1987.
novski 1985; Čović 1987; 1991; Garašanin 1988; Vasić 1991; 54
Islami 1972c; 1975a; 1976; Papazoglu 1988; Cabanes 1988;
Mirdita 1991; Mikić 1991; Ceka 2005. Wilkes 1992.
51
Vasić 1987; Čović 1987; Papazoglu 1988; Бабић 2004. 55
On some critical remarks regarding this matter see: Jones
52
Anamali 1965; Ceka 1984; Dautaj 1986. 1997; Olsen 2002, 32–35; Compare to Babić 2010.

14
tural norms related to the Illyrian (ethnic) iden- dominant points in the prehistoric landscapes.
tity or identities.56 The traditional explanation is that these struc-
Historical and modern political narratives tures are actually traces of towns and marks of
often were intertwined in the explanation of the urbanisation.62 This argument accords with the
past in which Illyrian ethnic identity was under- theory of social evolution, as gradual progress
stood differently depending on contemporary towards “civilised” way of living and a creation
socio-political circumstances. Considering that of a civilised socio-political structure, a state or
these different explanations emerged from one a kingdom, along with development of the econ-
and the same archaeological data and the very omy especially trade in the ancient Adriatic.
same research methodology;57  these differenc- This point is questionable not just in theoretical
es in the interpretation are obviously paradox- terms, but also when compared to some specific
ical. A comparison of archaeological and writ- examples from the ancient past regarding state
ten records in addition coloured the view and and city formation.
highlighted ethnic distinctions and identities The so called “Illyrian kingdom” could not be
as being crucial in distant past. Arguments in considered a territorial entity;63 or a rechtsstaat,
favour of such reconstructions have references if it were compared to the much more developed
to the writings of ancient authors like Polybius political structures in antiquity (like ancient
and Livy.58 Recently, information regarding the Athens as an example).64 Nor can many of these
Illyrian (proto-)history has been revaluated. It settlements be considered as towns, but rather as
has been shown that not just modern but also fortified villages that were glorified in modern
ancient historiographers communicated ways of historiography and archaeology (for an example,
thinking that were significantly conditioned by the same conclusion was made regarding many
their contemporary social and even political cir- small communities in the Aegean).65
cumstances. In addition, the traditional argument is not
According to these new readings of the writ- consistent with the above mentioned fact that
ten sources, so-called Illyrian territory in the last fortified settlements do not represent points in
centuries of the 1st millennium BC was inhabited landscapes that were connected but detached
by heterogeneous groups, who displayed vari- from one another.66 Communities which sup-
ous socio-political identities and who were not posedly formed compact socio-political groups
firmly socially and politically coherent before the according to the traditional interpretation, pre-
final conquest by the Romans.59 Within the strat- sumably would have been aware of their com-
egy of the conqueror, future socio-political co- mon ethnic identity, and presumably would be-
hesion of the province to be (Illyricum) was im- long to the one and the same political entity, in
plicitly projected in ancient historiography, using reality obviously perceived themselves as adver-
politically coloured descriptions of the eastern saries; being the neighbours separated by high
Adriatic.60 The stance that Iron Age populations walls and occupying positions difficult to access.
in the eastern Adriatic were not socially compact Furthermore, funerary finds in the Southeast-
is indirectly supported even with explicit data in ern Adriatic from the 4th until the1st century BC,
the written sources – books of Polybius and Titus actually depict quite a contrasting picture to the
Livius, who had mentioned numerous conflicts traditional view. Crucial necropoleis are not just
between neighbouring communities in the wake full with various imports, those imports over-
of the Roman conquest.61 whelmingly dominate domestic products.67 The
The complex social relations in the Late Iron traditional response to this fact is that this is a
Age in the Southeastern Adriatic are also indi- 62
Islami 1972a; 1972d; 1975b; 1975c; Prendi / Zheku 1972;
cated by the existence of fortified settlements as Papajani 1976a; Suić 1976; Karaiskaj 1981; Dyczek et al.
2010; Ceka 1987; 1989; 1990; 1998; 2005.
56
Dzino 2008; Kuzmanović / Vranić 2013. 63
Papazoglu 1988, 187.
57
Kuzmanović / Vranić 2013, 251–252. 64
Avramović 1998.
58
Pol. II; Liv. XLIV. 65
Bintliff 2006.
59
Šašel-Kos 2002; 2005; Dzino 2010. 66
Димитријевић 2015.
60
Dzino 2010. 67
Basler 1969; Anamali 1972; Korkuti 1972b; Karaiskaj
61
Pol. II; Liv. XLIV. 1977–1978; Marković 2012.

15
matter of Hellenization; a conception of gradual ancient Greek cultural norms that were diffused
cultural change. This kind of archaeological re- from the Aegean and Ionian colonists to the
cord would actually suggest that alleged “Illyri- eastern Adriatic coast during the last centuries of
an” (domestic or local) cultural norms have not the 1st millennium BC.70 Cultural change as ex-
been emphasised through usage of material cul- plained through the diffusionist model was relat-
ture in the last four centuries BC, at least regard- ed to the intensified profusion of imports, which
ing those particular aspects of social life such as supposedly illustrated the process of accultura-
sepulchral practice, cult and socioeconomic ex- tion. The surplus of imported objects were un-
change. derstood in a formalistic manner;71 as trade op-
One cannot totally discard the argument that erations between two ethnically compact groups,
group identification and recognition of the oth- the Illyrians and the Greeks, intensified in the
er based on a spoken language or on some oth- ancient Adriatic, so the process of Hellenization
er apparent aspect of culture in direct contacts increased.72
between people could have been occurring in Many of these conclusions were founded on
prehistory. But conceptualisation of ethnicity as a comparison of data in written sources and ar-
a crucial collective identity focal point in the Iron chaeological finds in a funerary context. Hence,
Age is a modern construct.68 Bearing in mind its traditional diffusionist and modernist interpre-
political aspect, along with the supposed social tation, based on particular anthropological and
extent or geographical range of this or some sim- (neoclassical) economic models highlight for-
ilar ideas, the traditional model of group iden- eign cultural and economic influence on popu-
tification and recognition could have existed in lations whose collective identity was primarily
the distant past, but in reality on much smaller based on their ethnicity, but was also manifested
social and spatial scales than it is usually thought through economic relations and vertical social
to have been the case. diversification. The following names have been
However, along with the intense focus of ar- used in labelling different class distinctions and
chaeologists and historians on ethnic identity re- identifications in the Balkans during the late pre-
garding the “Illyrian” past, some of the research- history and protohistory. Terms like Principes
es of central and western Balkan Iron Age and (mentioned in the written sources), “princes”,
protohistory, identified social hierarchy as well. “tribal aristocracy” and “warrior aristocracy”
These identifications implicitly suggested the ex- (defined in archaeological and modern histori-
istence of various class identities in prehistory. ographical literature), denote ruling classes in
the given social context.73 Ancient authors also
4.2. Modelling socioeconomic named lower classes of the Illyrian society, which
identifications in the “Illyrian” society have been equally communicated in modern his-
As mentioned above, the modern perception of toriography, namely “dependent peasants” (pros-
collective identities in western and central Bal- pelatai) and “slaves” (servi).74
kan late prehistory was inevitably conditioned Additionally, distinct socio-political and
by evolutionism (ethnogenesis, urbanisation and economical formations were identified within
state formation); or put more precisely, it was the Illyrian society in later periods of their pro-
influenced by different modern conceptions of tohistory. In modern historiography these were
evolution of human society and culture coupled denoted as the koine or smaller alliances within
with the understanding of cultural changes and a particular community centred towards a par-
the economy in distant past.69 ticular big settlement (for an example, the koine
The concept of Hellenization of Illyrians is 70
Suić 1976; Čović 1987; Vasić 1987.
given priority as the explanation of these crucial 71
On the critical considerations of the formalistic view to
cultural change seen in the archaeological re- economy in the past see: Polanyi 1977, 21–24; Morely 2007.
cord. In this (pre)historical context Hellenization
72
Ceka 1972; 1984; 2005; Dautaj 1975; Mano 1975; Prendi
1975a; Čović 1987; Vasić 1987; Papazoglu 1988; Cabanes
was understood as acculturation on the basis of 1988; Kirigin 1994; Ujes 1999; Katić 2002; Kirigin / Katu-
ranić / Šešelj 2005.
68
Hansen 2000, 12. 73
Vasić 1987, 650; Papazoglu 1988.
69
Cf. Olsen 2002. 74
Papazoglu 1988, 189–190.

16
of Amantia, the koine of Byllis, the community in terms of primitive market (capitalistic) eco-
of Dimal, etc.).75 This conclusion was also based nomic relations, but as part of socioeconomic to-
on comparison of written sources and archaeo- tality, in which production, exchange and trade
logical records (finds of particular coins, locally of goods were socially conditioned and bonded.
produced); and were also founded in formalis- In that respect, an interpretation that explains the
tic views on the ancient economy and analogies rich profusion of imports as a mark of developed
with the contemporary Hellenistic institutions. trade in the given (pre)historical context (often
Regarding critics of diffusionism and bearing implicitly understood and described in terms of
in mind that archaeology developed as a disci- market economy) is therefore too simplistic and
pline in the context of modern European so- consequently erroneous. This changed view has
cio-political conditions, the concept of Helleniza- implications for the understanding of vertical
tion should be seen today as a modern construct social diversification in the given prehistorical
that is projected onto the past.76 Although the ac- context. It has impact on identification of social
culturation model originally was conceptualized classes of late prehistory along with comprehen-
as a two-way communication and elaboration of sion of identities that could have been related to
cultural influences, in the case of eastern Adriatic them.
late prehistory it was almost exclusively seen as Socioeconomic relations in the central and
overwhelming one-way Greek influence on Il- western Balkan Iron Age were labelled as chief-
lyrians, and not as both parties’ specific cultural doms – institutionalised kin based relations char-
response to various socioeconomic contacts. acterised by centralised redistribution of goods
Conclusions founded on the archaeological by dominant social actors – chiefs.80 Chiefs are
evidence for the most part regard the extent of considered members of the dominant class, and
economic and military power along with the thus could be aligned with a distinct social iden-
degree of Hellenization. These have been based tity manifested through high social status. This
on the measured quantity and quality of archae- status was founded on their clan relations and
ological finds found in the funerary context. In position, along with their socioeconomic func-
other words, it is an evaluation of luxurious and tion. This aspect was principally demonstrated
imported objects found within burial places, by differences of quality of funerary finds and
comprehended through modern values of one’s their functional explication within modelled
wealth, economic and political power.77 presumptions.
However, economic relations in the distant The inference regarding chiefdoms was de-
past were of particular importance in archaeo- rived from the substantivist view of socioeco-
logical interpretation founded on neo-evolution- nomics in the distant past – conceptions of goods
ary typologies and substantivist conceptions of production, exchange, trade and warfare, chief-
socioeconomics.78 In this respect, explanation of ly conditioned by social structures in the past.81
the emergence of great number of imports in the Therefore, the change of theoretical frameworks
central and western Balkan Iron Age, especially in related to the understanding of the economy in
funerary contexts, was based on a systemic con- the past also slightly changed the focus of archae-
ception of culture and on an application of various ologists with respect to social identifications,
socioeconomic models (ideal or artificial displays from horizontal social diversification to vertical
of society); moreover, archaeological data have diversification, and from ethno-cultural catego-
been attached to supposed theoretical explana- risation of groups to functional explanation that
tion, in attempt to form objective conclusions.79 modelled arrangements of socioeconomic struc-
From substantivists’ point of view, the econo- tures in prehistory.
my in the distant past should not be understood Yet, this interpretation does not offer a com-
plete answer. The apparent complexity, fluidi-
75
Anamali 1965; Ceka 1984; Dautaj 1986. ty and constant chances for alteration of social
76
Бабић 2008.
77
Vasić 1987.
78
Polanyi 2001; Adams 1974; Service 1975; Polanyi 1977. 80
Babić 2002; Бабић 2004; Compare with: Service 1975, 15–
79
Popović 1987; Palavestra 1993; Babić 2002; Бабић 2004. 16. 71–102; Polanyi 2001; Earle 1987; Gosden 2002, 91–92.
Compare with: Olsen 2002, 43–55. 81–95. 123–129. 81
Polanyi 2001; Adams 1974; Polanyi 1977.

17
identities in prehistory just cannot be fully cap- tion not just “Illyrian” identity of the Daorsoi,
tured. Identities in the distant past cannot just be but their tribal identification.86
modelled, but rather need to be comprehended
through social practices, indicated by the ways of 5.1. Archaeological overview of the Late
consumption of material culture. Iron Age settlement at Ošanići
Ošanići is situated in a rough and fragment-
ed landscape, in a hilly and karstic area, called
5. Case study: Socioeconomic Humine. The fortified Iron Age settlement was
practices and identities in the Late the largest in this area by far; it was surrounded
Iron Age Ošanići with contemporaneous, also fortified, but small-
er settlements, like those in Borojevići, Brštanik,
One of the examples of the complex phenome- Dragovija, Prenj, Čapljina, Vid, and many oth-
na described above is the archaeological traces ers.87 The settlement is situated on the Gradina
of Iron Age settlement located in Ošanići, in the Hilltop and on the Banje Plateau; it is elevated
southeastern part of Bosnia and Herzegovina.82 above the Vidovo Plain and the Bregava River, a
The Iron Age settlement was dated between the tributary of the Neretva River, the river valley of
8th and 1st century BC, but a drastic change in the which connects the Adriatic Coast and its hin-
archaeological record at the site in terms of ar- terland.88
chitectural elaboration and increased quantities A necropolis, in which two graves were exca-
of various imported artefacts occurred from the vated, was found to the east of the settlement.89
end of the 4th century BC onward.83 According to The settlement covers at least 20 ha, and it was
written sources and locally produced coins, the gradually enlarged during its existence.90 The
population of that area was identified as the Illy- fortified part of the settlement occupies the hill
rian tribe of Daorsoi, and the complex at Ošanići top and southern / western slopes, and encloses
was identified with the ancient “urban” settle- remains of houses, a cistern, cult structures and
ment of Daorson.84 streets, the directions of which were adjusted to
This particular ethno-cultural identification the terrain morphology.91
has been critically analyzed in terms of research The main fortification structure positioned
methodology which derived from culture-his- between two parts of the settlement, the “Hellen-
torical epistemology, and with regard to the spe- istic” wall dated between ca. 300 to the 2nd centu-
cific, intertwined historical and political narra- ry BC, was gradually constructed; the main gate,
tives (ancient and modern) through which it was rectangular towers, second gate were added, and
constructed in historiography and archaeology.85 both gates were finally made smaller.92 The un-
This well founded criticism, derived from the fortified part extends over the plateau eastward;
post-structuralist point of view, puts into ques- it comprises remains of cisterns, buildings and
large enclosures, and is connected with streets,
the main ones of which have irregular radial ori-
82
Basler 1956; 1971; Marić 1967; 1969; 1970; 1971; 1972;
1973a; 1973b; 1973c; 1973d; 1975; 1976a; 1976b; 1976c;
1976d; 1977; 1979; 1992–1997; 2000; 2004; 2006; Marijano-
vić 1984; Marijan 1991; 2011; Marić / Forić 2005.
83
Marić 1977, 38; Traces of an earlier prehistoric settlement 86
Ibid.; see also: Dzino 2006; 2008.
in Ošanići are dated in the Bronze Age. The destruction of 87
Marić 1975; 1985; 2000; Basler 1988; Marijan 1988; 1989;
Late Iron Age settlement is dated around year 50 BC, and Kirigin 1994; Kirigin et al. 2005, 24; Šalov 2010, 359–360.
it was related to the local conflicts between Daorsoi and Marić identified close to 60 Iron Age settlements in the
Delmatae. After the final Roman conquest of the region, territory of so called Daorsoi, dispersed over a large hilly
from the end of the 1st century BC onward there was just area of Humine, around river of Neretva and its tributaries;
a small military station within ruins of the settlement. On see: Marić 1975, Map 1.
this matter see: Marić 1973b, 237–238; 1976a; 1976d, 247; 88
Basler 1956.
1977, 38; Marijanović 1984, 17–18. 21–22; Marijan 1991, 89
Marić 1973a; Marijan 2011, 183.
103–104; 2011. 90
Marijan 2011.
84
Basler 1971; Marić 1973c; 1975; 1976a; 1976d; 1977; 1979; 91
Basler 1956; Marić 1977; Marijanović 1984; Šašel-Kos
1992–1997; 2004; 2006; Marić / Forić 2005. 2005, Fig. 86; Marijan 2011, 179–182; Fig. 2. 3. 5. 6.
85
Džino 2007. 92
Marijan 1991, 103–104.

18
entation and meet on an open space called “Ago- laios (the 2nd century BC), and pieces of Roman
ra” in front of the main gate.93 Republican coins, as well as coins of Anactorio,
The most numerous finds from the settle- Corinth, Dyrrachium, Pharos, Phocis (mostly
ment are imported amphorae. Several thousands dating between the 4th and the 2nd century BC).102
of fragments were found, dating between the 6th Finds of weapons are known from different
and 1st century BC, but most come from the 4th archaeological contexts. Iron spears were found
to the 2nd century BC and include Greco-Ital- within the settlement in destruction layers, and
ic, Corinthian B, Pharos 2, Lamboglia 2 types, one piece in a grave of a man; almost all of them
as well as some East Mediterranean and other dated to the last four centuries BC, but they are
types.94 Many fragments had scratched graffiti different in origin; the so-called Illyrian piec-
using writing from various alphabets (e.g., Latin, es have parallels with finds in Montenegro and
Greek, Etruscan, Umbrian, Phoenician), proba- Albania, one piece has analogies with finds from
bly denoting the primary owners of transport- northern Bosna, and one is of La Tène (“Celtic”)
ed products (wine and olive oil) or numerical type.103 Several arrowheads were found in the
signs.95 One of them has the name Daorsoi in- settlement; one was described as “Greek”.104 Two
scribed.96 iron knives were found, and both in the grave of
Fine pottery finds include predominantly a woman.105 One iron sword was found in the
Gnathian vessels, mostly skyphoi and oenocho- settlement.106
ai, imported from Southern Italy and Vis;97 many Uncovered fragments of bronze helmets be-
of these vessels’ fragments were found within the long to the so-called Illyrian type were found,
settlement, but excavated graves also contained dating to the 4th/3rd century BC; a fragment of
imported skyphoi, unguentaria and fragments of one of them was found in the fortified part of the
other pots.98 settlement,107 while the second one was excavat-
Around 60 bronze and silver coins of different ed in front of the main gate in the destruction
origins were found at Ošanići, dating between layer.108 It was damaged and signed with three
the 5th and the 2nd century BC; except for a few letters PIN (ΠΙΝ, in Greek), which is an abbre-
coins which were excavated near the main gate viation for the personal name Pinnes.109 Finds
in a destruction layer, almost all were found in of jewelry at Ošanići are known both from the
the settlement close to its highest point and in- settlement and necropolis. They are mostly dat-
side houses.99 Locally minted coins can be dated ed between the 5th and the 1st century BC, and
to the 2nd century BC; they were made of bronze, include local products, like bronze buttons and
on one side with an image of a man (possibly double pins; but imported objects predominate:
the ruler) wearing a hat (petasos or kausia), and La Tène fibulae, imported double pins, one gold-
on the other a ship (lembos) as well as the name en plate with woman’s image, three bronze belt
Daorson (ΔΑΟΡΣΩΝ in Greek).100 So far, 11 plates, and some other Mediterranean imports.110
pieces from different minting series are known.101 The previously mentioned grave of a woman also
Imported coins include 28 pieces of King Bal- contained a golden ring with semi-transparent
stone of Italic origin, a silver omega pin, three La
93
Basler 1956; Marijan 2011, 182–183 Fig. 2. 7.
94
Marić 1967; 1973a, 182; 1977, 40–41; Fig. 2. 3. 4; Pl. 32, 102
Marić 1967, 40; 1969, 78; 1970, 40; 1971, 34–35; Pl. 20; Pl.
1. 4. 6. 11; Pl. 33, 2. 4. 5; 2000, 42; 2004, 194; 2006, 133; 21; 1972, 41; 1973b, 237–250; Pl. 1; Pl. 2; Pl. 3; Pl. 4; 1977, 48;
Marijan 1991; Kirigin 1994, 18; Katić 1999–2000, 49–51; 2000, 44; Vasilj 1992; 2003.
2001–2002, 52. 56. 103
Marić 1973a, Pl. 15; 1977, 46–47; Pl. 27, 1. 2; Pl. 28, 8. 9.
95
Marić 2004, 187–192; 2006, 127–133; Marić / Forić 2005, 10. 14.
185–188. 104
Marić 1973a, Pl. 15; 1977, 46-47; Pl. 27, 1. 2; Pl. 28, 8. 9.
96
Marić / Forić 2005, 182. 10. 14.
97
Marić 1973a, 179–182; Pl. 13, 7; Pl. 16, 3; Pl. 21, 1. 2. 3. 4. 105
Marić 1970, 39; Marić 1973a, 182, Pl. 14, 12.
5. 6; Pl. 22, 1. 3. 4. 7; 1976a; 1977, 43; 2000, 42; 2006, 126. 106
Marić 1970, 39.
98
Marić 1973a, 175–176. 184; Pl. 4; Pl. 13; Pl. 15. 107
Marić 1973a, 179; Pl. 15, 10.
99
Marić 1967; 1969; 1970; 1971; 1972; 1973b; 1976c; 1977; 108
Marić 1969, 78.
2000; 109
Marić 1977, 48; Pl. 26, 48.
100
Rendić-Miočević 1965; Marić 1973b, 237; 2000, 44; 110
Marić 1967, 39; 1971, 35; Pl. 19; 1973a, 175; Pl. 13; Pl. 4;
Kozličić 1981; Popović 1987, 124–125. 1973d, 257, Pl. 1; Pl. 2; 1972, 41; 1976a, 48, 54; Pl. 29, 13;
101
Džino 2007, 71; compare with: Kozličić 1981; Marić 2000. 1977, 47; 48; Pl. 29, 4. 17. 18. 49.

19
Tène fibulae, a part of an earring (a small “ne- widespread with exception of specialized met-
groid” head) of the South Italic origin.111 alwork production. Finds of weapons and their
A significant find from Ošanići is the tools’ contexts additionally suggest that warfare was
depot found in one of the houses of the 2nd centu- a widespread practice. Warrior attributes and
ry BC; it contained 245 objects including agricul- looks emphasized in personal appearance, using
tural, metalworking and woodworking tools, as objects of different origins was not exclusively
well as casts and semi-finished products of jew- related to some local (“Illyrian”) identification,
elry.112 Tool finds in the settlement also include but personalised and even marked with personal
bronze fishing hooks and sewing needles.113 signatures (the helmet of Pinnes).
Personalized appearance was accessorised
5.2. “Daorson” and “Daorsoi” with jewellery and clothing parts of various or-
The above reviewed archaeological material igins, suggesting layered cultural apprehensions
from Ošanići points to some of the crucial socio- and the various status of people. This aspect is
economic practices and consequently to various illustrated especially by the grave of a woman,
socioeconomic and cultural identifications in the which contained locally produced knives, but
past. Practices of warfare and habitation within imported jewellery of various origins and ves-
a fortified and self-sufficient settlement which sels for wine consummation. Personal identifica-
possessed the ability to defend itself (mutual de- tions were to a significant degree communicated
fence) and produce basic goods, are strongly sug- through material and even written reinterpre-
gested by the evidence. tation of predominantly imported values, con-
The settlement at Ošanići was surrounded by sumed through socioeconomic interactions.
other settlements in the landscape with numer- A part of these interactions was the redistri-
ous local settings.114 All the settlements here were bution of goods and objects. This is strongly sug-
fortified,115 but they were not connected and not gested by the distribution patterns of amphorae
oriented towards mutual line of defence. These and fine pottery at Ošanići and its neighboring
facts demonstrate that their inhabitants primar- settlements.117 These vessels were present in larg-
ily defended themselves locally (individually).116 est quantities at Ošanići, but in much smaller
Consequently, those communities must have quantities at other places, despite some of them
been self-sufficient. This is indicated not just being much closer to the respective centers of
through topography analysis, which shows that production.118 This suggests that Late Iron Age
each settlement controlled particular local re- settlement at Ošanići was one of the centers for
sources, but also with finds of various tools. Even redistribution of wine and olive oil, as well as for
the biggest settlement could not rely on import- fine pottery used in wine consumption.119 This
ing basic goods, but had to produce them. All 117
Those other settlements were located in Borojevići, Bršta-
these notions influenced ideas of various local nik, Dragovija, Prenj, Čapljina, Vid, etc. Amphorae and fine
identities within the area. potteries overwhelmingly covered the settlement in Ošani-
Tools found exclusively within the settlement ći. Domestic pottery made by hand, the so called “Illyrian”
had no particular significance for recognition of pottery, was present up to only 10 to 20 percent; see: Marić
1976d, 247.
social positions and rank, and their usage was 118
For Ošanići see: Marić 1967; 1973a, 179–182; Pl. 13, 7;
Pl. 16, 3; Pl. 21, 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6; Pl. 22, 1. 3. 4. 7; 1976a; 1977,
111
Marić 1972, 41; Marić 1973a, 175; Pl. 4. 13. 40–41. 43; Fig. 2. 3. 4; Pl. 32, 1. 4. 6. 11; Pl. 33, 2. 4. 5; 2000,
112
Marić 1979. 42; 2004, 194; 2006, 126. 133; Marijan 1991; Kirigin 1994,
113
Marić 1970, 39; Marić 1977, 46; Pl. 28, 14. 18; Katić 1999–2000, 49–51; 2001–2002, 52. 56; for other
114
Borojevići, Brštanik, Dragovija, Prenj, Čapljina, Vid, etc. settlements see: Marić 1985, 51; 2000, 39; Basler 1988, 183;
See: Marić 1975. Marijan 1989, 66, Pl. 2, 4. 5. 6. 7; 2001, 96; Fig. 16; Kirigin
115
Marić 1975; 1985; Basler 1988; Marijan 1988; 1989. 1994, 18. 20.
116
This kind of locally conceptualised defence in the eastern 119
One could infer that this kind of distribution pattern of
Adriatic in the wake of the Roman conquest is actually su- amphorae and fine pottery actually indicates that smaller
ggested in written sources, in books of Polybius and Livy; settlements needed less wine and olive oil. However, this
not only that defence was not coordinated between different does not explain why a particular settlement became a
communities who have found themselves threaten by the redistribution center with the location far away from the
Romans, they actually were often confronted by one anot- production centers; and some other settlements did not be-
her; see: Pol. II; Liv. XLIV. come the centers for redistribution and stayed small, even

20
network of socioeconomic exchange must have social and cultural identities were significantly
been one of focal points for social recognition embedded in socioeconomic relations, consid-
in the past, which consequently influenced the erably reproduced through practices of warfare,
idea of collective identity of a particular group habitation and socioeconomic exchange, primar-
of socioeconomic actors, centralised through re- ily redistribution and distribution of goods and
distribution practice at the settlement found in objects. These practices conditioned awareness
Ošanići. of particular groups and communities regard-
The finds of various coins at Ošanići and in ing their common identities embedded in these
neighbouring settlements suggest their inhabit- (socioeconomic) interactions, and overlapped
ants’ involvements in various and coexisting ex- in their comprehensions, recursively articulated
change networks. Locally produced coins indi- through their actions (practices).
cate that one of these networks was centralized at The view presented here cannot deny the ex-
Ošanići “Daorson”, organised by the settlement’s istence of ethnic identifications of people in the
elite who signed the coins, and/or the ruler de- late prehistory. Some form of ethnic distinctions
picted in these objects, suggesting his high social must have existed in this social context, namely
status and strong personal, local and probably based on usage of spoken language in the past.
also regional identity reproduced through soci- But such identifications are not clearly docu-
oeconomic practice. mented in the archaeological records, nor did
Redistribution in “Daorson” is even suggested they significantly influence socioeconomic rela-
with Ošanići settlement plan. Open space of the tions, which are strikingly evident in archaeolog-
“Agora” where radially positioned streets meet, ical traces. Surely, those identifications could not
directed the movements of incomers coming have been perceived equally in the distant past as
from beyond the great wall, which protected the they are in the modern era.
locals. This indicates a specifically structurized However, kin based relations as well as cult
(centralized) space; the place of redistribution. practices must have been of great importance
Hence, it is noteworthy to pose the ques- for collective identifications. This was confirmed
tion whether Daorsoi could be perceived as a with existence of group burials and consumma-
socioeconomic network which was repeatedly tion of wine in the documented funerary prac-
reproduced through exchange practices, rather tices.120
than an ethnic group; and whether this group Archaeological materials taken into consider-
was centralized through those practices direct- ation and changed theoretical perspective to ap-
ed at the particular place for exchange, Daorson, proaching identities in the past, imply contrast-
which is identified (stamped) through the medi- ing view to the traditional one. I would like to
um (coins) used in the exchange practices? point that the ideas of collective identities in the
given social context in the past were considerably
(re)produced through socioeconomic practices
6. Concluding Thoughts and relations.
By all appearances, individual and group, social Na engleski jezik preveo autor
and cultural identities in the past communities
were constantly constructed and reconstructed
in various ways through social practices, which
involved communication of miscellaneous
meanings associated with the routines of con-
sumption of different objects and goods. These
objects were predominantly various imports, ex-
changed through socioeconomic relations.
In the Late Iron Age communities in the
Southeastern Adriatic and its hinterland, various
though they were closer to that production center and in
position to be mediators between different communities. 120
Basler 1969; Marković 2012.

21
 Rezime na država u antici, pro et contra, Beograd, 1998,
7–41.
Babić, S. 2002, “Princely Graves” of the Central Bal-
kans – a Critical History of Research. European
Socioekonomski odnosi i identiteti
Journal of Archaeology 5, 2002, 70–88.
u gvozdenom dobu Jugoistočnog Бабић, С. 2004, Поглаварство и полис. Старије
Jadrana гвоздено доба централног Балкана и грчки
свет, Београд 2004.
U fokusu rada je povezanost socioekonomskih odno- Бабић, С. 2008, Грци и други. Античка перцепција
sa i grupnih identiteta društvenih zajednica mlađeg и перцепција антике, Београд 2008.
gvozdenog doba sa prostora jugoistočnog Jadrana i Babić, S. 2010, Arheologija i etnicitet. Етноантропо-
bliskog primorskog zaleđa. Osnovni cilj rada je da se лошки проблеми н. с. год. 5 св. 1, 2010, 137–149.
ukaže na različita razumevanja i percepcije kolektiv- Barth, F. 1969, Ethnic Groups and Boundaries. The
nih identiteta u dalekoj prošlosti, suprotno uobiča- Social organization of culture difference, Oslo
jenom razumevanju u čijem fokusu je etnicitet kao 1969.
ključni izraz grupnih identiteta u mlađem gvozde- Basler, Đ. 1956, Gradina na Ošanićima kod Stoca.
nom dobu jugoistočnog Jadrana. Interpretacija poči- Neki noviji rezultati istraživačkih Radova, Naše
va na konstruktivističkom razumevanju kulture i no- starine. Godišnjak Zemaljskog zavoda za zaštitu
voj evaluaciji date arheološke građe koja je presudno spomenika kulture i prirodnih rijetkosti Narodne
određena prisustvom importa, što bitno ističe socioe- Republike Bosne i Hecegovine 3, 1956, 79–94.
konomske odnose iz daleke prošlosti. Basler, Đ. 1969, Nekropola na Velim Ledinama u Go-
Utvrđivanjem povezanosti arheoloških podataka i stilju (Donja Zeta), Glasnik Zemaljskog muzeja –
predložene teorijske postavke, upućuje se na zaklju- arheologija 24, 1969, 5–107.
čak da je razumevanje grupnih identiteta u datom Basler, Đ. 1971, Novčić plemena Daorsa, Glasnik Ze-
društvenom kontekstu u prošlosti bilo u presudnoj maljskog muzeja – arheologija 26, 1971, 333–336.
meri ukorenjeno u socioekonomskim odnosima. Ta- Basler, Đ. 1988, Konštica 1, In: Čović, B. (ed.),
kva shvatanja grupnih identiteta u dalekoj prošlosti Arheološki leksikon BiH tom 3, Sarajevo 1988.
su delimično reprodukovana kroz različite društvene Batović, Š. 1988, Konavle u prapovijesti, Konavoski
zbornik 2, 1988, 13–148.
prakse, uključujući i korišćenje materijalne kulture.
Benac, A. 1972, Aport à l’étude des processus ethnogé-
Zaključuje se da su reprodukcija i razumevanje gru-
nétiques et à la délimitation territoriale des tribus
pnih identiteta u mlađem gvozdenom dobu jugoi-
illyriennes, Studia Albanica 9, 1972, 173–185.
stočnog Jadrana bitno određeni socioekonomskim
Benac, A. 1987, O etničkim zajednicama starijeg gvoz­
interakcijama kroz ratovanje, stanovanje u utvrđenim
de­nog doba u Jugoslaviji, In: Benac A. (ed.), Pra-
naseljima i socioekonomsku razmenu.
istorija jugoslavenskih zemalja 5, željezno doba,
Sarajevo 1987, 737–802.
Berger, P. / Luckmann, T. 1991, The Social Construc-
tion of Reality. A Treatise in the Sociology of
Knowledge, London 1991.
Bibliography Bintliff, J. 2006, City – Country Relationships in the
“Normal Polis”, In: Rosen, R. / Sluiter, I., City,
Adams, R. 1974, Anthropological Perspectives on Countryside and Spatial Organisation of Value in
Ancient Trade, Current Anthropology 15, 1974, Classical Antiquity, Leiden, Boston 2006, 13–32.
239–258. Bojanovski, I. 1985, Ilirska plemena u istočnoj Her-
Anamali, S. 1965, Le stade d’Amantie, Studia Albanica cegovini i njihov smještaj, Tribunia 9, 1985, 7–23.
2, 1965, 59–64. Bourdieu, P. 1985, Social Space and Genesis of Groups,
Anamali, S. 1972, Amantie, L’ Illyrie 2, 1972, 67–148. Theory and Society 14, 1985, 723–744.
Anamali, S. / Korkuti, M. 1970, Les Illyriens et la Bourdieu, P. 1989, Social Space and Symbolic Power,
gènese des Albanais à la lumière des recherches Sociological Theory 7, 1989, 14–25.
arhéologiques albanaises, Studia Albanica 7, 1970, Bourdieu, P. 1995, Outline of a Theory of Practice,
123–155. Cambridge 1995.
Ashmore, M. 1989, The Reflexive thesis. Writing So- Cabanes, P. 1988, Les Illyriens de Bardylis à Genthios,
ciology of scientific knowledge, Chicago, London IVe–IIe siècles avant J.–C., Paris 1988.
1989, Ceka, N. 1972, Questions de numismatique illyrienne,
Avramović, S. 1998, Elementi pravne države i indivi- Tirana 1972.
dualna prava u Atini, In: Avramović, S. (ed.), Prav- Ceka, N. 1984, Koinoni i bilinëve, Iliria 14, 1984, 61–89.

22
Ceka, N. 1986, Amfora antike nga Margëlliçi, Iliria 16, Dyczek, P. / Kowacevic, V. / Lemke, M. / Lutovac, P.
1986, 71–98. / Recław, J. 2007, Rhizon 2004–2007, Preliminary
Ceka, N. 1987, Arkitekrura e qytezës ilir të Margël- Report on the Excavations of the Center for Ar-
liçit, Monumentet 33, 1987, 5–25. chaeological Research – Novae, Warsaw Universi-
Ceka, N. 1989, Bylis, Iliria 19, 1989, 274–276. ty, Archeologia 58, 2007, 101–118.
Ceka, N. 1990, Bylis, Iliria 21, 1990, 261–262. Dyczek, P. / Kolendo, J. / Łajtar, A. / Plocennik, T. /
Ceka, N. 1998, Fifty Years of Studies on Illyrian Cities, Rzepkowski, K. 2010, Iliryski bóg Medaurus i
Iliria 28, 1998, 127–128. mury Risinium w świetle inskrypcji metrycznej
Ceka, N. 2005, The Illyrians to the Albanians, Tirana z Lambaesis (CIL VIII 2581; F. Buecheler, Carmi-
2005. na Latina epigraphica 1527), Novensia 21, 2010,
Čović, B. 1987, Glasinačka kultura, In: Benac, A. (ed.), 79–134.
Praistorija jugoslavenskih zemalja 5, željezno Dzino, D. 2006, Dalmati, vino i formiranje etničkog
doba, Sarajevo 1987, 575–643. identiteta u predrimskom Iliriku, Vijesnik za ar-
Čović, B. 1991, Die Bronzezeit im “illyrischen” Raum heologiju i povijest dalmatinsku 99, 2006, 71–80.
und das Problem der ethnischen Zuschreibung Džino, D. 2007, Daorsi i “Daorsi”: o metanarativima i
archäologischer Funde, In: Benac, A. / Garašanin, paralelnim narativima prošlosti, Život. Časopis za
M. / Čović, B. / Tasić, N. / Alirejsović, E. (eds.), književnost i kulturu 55 (3), 2007, 63–74.
Tribus palèobalkaniques entre la mer Adriatique Dzino, D. 2008, Deconstructing ‘Illyrians’. Zeitgeist
et la mer Noire de l’énéolithique jusqu’a l’époque Changing Perceptions and The Identity of Peoples
hellénistique, Premier symposium illyro-thrace, from Ancient Illyricum, Croatian Studies Review
Niš – Blagoevgrad, 30 mai au 4 juin 1989, Aca- 5, 2008, 43–55.
demie des sciences et des arts de Bosnie et Her- Dzino, D. 2010, Illyricum in Roman Politics 229 BC–
zegovine, Publication speciale 94, Centre d’études AD 68, Cambridge 2010.
balkaniques, livre 14; Academie Serbe des sciences
Earle, T. 1987, Chiefdoms in Archaeological and Eth-
et des arts, Institut des études balkaniques, Publi-
nohistorical Perspectives, Annual Review of An-
cation speciale 45, Sarajevo, Beograd 1991, 57–72.
thropology 16, 1987, 279–308.
Dautaj, B. 1972, La cité illyrienne de Dimale, L’ Illyrie
Eco, U. 1976, A Theory of Semiotics, Bloomington,
2, 1972, 149–165.
London 1976.
Dautaj, B. 1975, Aspects de la vie économique à Di-
Finley, M. 1973, The Ancient Economy, Berkeley, Los
mal, In: Benac, A. (ed.), Agglomeration fortifiée
Angeles 1973.
illyriens, Colloque international à Mostar, 24 oc-
Garašanin, M. 1988, Formation et origines des Illy-
tobre au 26 octobre 1974, Academie des sciences
riens, In: Garašanin, M. (ed.), Les Illyriens et les
et des arts de Bosnie et Herzegovine, Publication
speciale 24, Centre d’études balkaniques, livre 6, Albanais, Serie de conférences tenues du 21 mai
Sarajevo 1975, 189–200. au 4 juin 1986, Academie Serbe des sciences et des
Dautaj, B. 1976, Dimale à la lumière des données ar- arts, Colloques scientifiues 39, Classe de Sciences
chéologiques, Iliria 4, 1976, 385–409. historiques 10, Beograd 1988, 81–144.
Dautaj, B. 1986, Organizimi politik e shoqëror i bash- Georgiev, V. 1972, Les Illyriens et leurs voisins, Studia
kësisë dimalite në shek. III–II p. e. sonë, Iliria 16, Albanica 9, 1972, 235–239.
1986, 101–111. Giddens, A. 1984, The Constitution of Society. Out-
Димитријевић, М. 2015, Прилог познавања хе- line of the Theory of Structuration, Berkeley, Los
ленистичке фортификације на југоисточном Angeles 1984.
Јадрану, Војноисторијски гласник 1, 2015, 185– Gosden, C. 2002, Anthropology and Archaeology. A
206. Changing Relationship, London, New York 2002.
Dornan, J. 2002, Agency and Archaeology: Past, Pre- Gosden, C. 2005, What Do Objects Want?, Journal
sent and Future Directions, Journal of Archaeolo- of Archaeological Method and Theory 12, 2005,
gical Method and Theory 9, 2002, 303–329. 193–211.
Dyczek, P. 2010, Preliminary remarks on the archaeo- Hansen, M. 2000, Introduction. The Concepts of City
logical context of the discovery of the “great hoard” – State and City – State Culture, In: Hansen, M.
of 4656 coins of King Ballaios in Risan (Rhizon/ (ed.), A Comparative Study of Thrity City – State
Risinium), Novensia 21, 2010, 45–50. Cultures: An Investigation, Comparative Study of
Dyczek, P. / Kowacevic, V. / Lutovac, P. / Martinovic, J. / Thrity City – State Cultures, 5–9th January 1999,
Recław, J. / Stankovic, A. 2004, Rhizon, 2001–2003, Volume 21 of Historisk–filosofiske skrifter, Co-
Preliminary Report on the Excavations of the Cen- penhagen 2000, 11–34.
ter for Archaeological Research – Novae, Warsaw Hodder, I. 1985, Postprocessual Archaeology, Advances
University, Archeologia 55, 2004, 101–118. in Archaeological Method and Theory 8, 1985, 1–26.

23
Hodder, I. / Hutson, S. 2003, Reading the past. Cur- Korkuti, M. 1971, Fouilles archéologiques 1967–1969
rent approaches to interpretation in archaeology, en Albanie, Studia Albanica 8, 1971, 129–160.
Cambridge 2003. Korkuti, M. 1972a, A propos de la formation de
Islami, S. 1966, Le monnayage de Skodra, Lissos et l’ethnie illyrienne, Studia Albanica 9, 1972, 55–76.
Genthios, Studia Albanica 3, 1966, 225–253. Korkuti, M. 1972b, La nécropole de Gajtan, L’ Illyrie 2,
Islami, S. 1972a, La ville illyrienne à Zgërdhesh de 1972, 451–466.
Kruje, L’ Illyrie 2, 1972, 217–237. Korkuti, M. 1976, De la formation de l’ethnie illyri-
Islami, S. 1972b, Le monnayage de Skodra, Lissos et enne, Iliria 4, 1976, 57–70.
Genthios, L’ Illyrie 2, 1972, 379–408. Kozličić, M. 1981, Prikazi brodova na novcu plemena
Islami, S. 1972c, L’Etat illyrien, sa place et son rôle Daorsa, Glasnik Zemaljskog muzeja – arheologija
dans le monde méditerranéen, Studia Albanica 9, n. s. 35–36, 1981, 163–188.
1972, 77–103. Kuzmanović, Z. / Vranić, I. 2013, On the reflexive na-
Islami, S. 1972d, Naissance et developpment de la vie ture of archaeologies of Western Balkan Iron Age.
urbaine en Illyrie, L’ Illyrie 2, 1972, 7–23. A Case study of Illyrian argument, Anthropologie
Islami, S. 1975a, L’Etat illyrien et ses guerres contre 51, 2013, 249–259.
Rome, Iliria 3, 1975, 5–48. Mano, A. 1975, Le commerce et les atères commer-
Islami, S. 1975b, Zgërdhesh (Krujë), Iliria 3, 1975, ciales en Illyrie du Sud, In: Benac A. (ed.), Agglo-
425–432. meration fortifiée illyriens, Colloque international
Islami, S. 1975c, Problèmes de chronologie de la cité à Mostar, 24 octobre au 26 octobre 1974, Acade-
illyrienne, In: Benac, A. (ed.), Agglomeration for- mie des sciences et des arts de Bosnie et Herze-
tifiée illyriens, Colloque international à Mostar, govine, Publication speciale 24, Centre d’études
24 octobre au 26 octobre 1974, Academie des sci- balkaniques, livre 6, Sarajevo 1975, 165–174.
ences et des arts de Bosnie et Herzegovine, Publi- Marić, Z. 1967, Gradina u Ošanićima kod Stoca – ilirs-
ko utvrđenje, Arheološki pregled 9, 1967, 39–40.
cation speciale 24, Centre d’études balkaniques,
Marić, Z. 1969, Gradina, Ošanići, Stolac – ilirsko
livre 6, Sarajevo 1975, 37–46.
utvrđenje, Arheološki pregled 11, 1969, 77–79.
Islami, S. 1976, L’Etat illyrien, sa place et son role dans
Marić, Z. 1970, Ošanići, Stolac – ilirsko gradinsko
le monde méditterranéen, Iliria 4, 1976, 71–87.
utvrđenje, Arheološki pregled 12, 1970, 36–41.
Jones, S. 1997, The Archaeology of Ethnicity. Con-
Marić, Z. 1971, Gradina u Ošanićima kod Stoca,
structing Identities in Past and Present, London,
Arheološki pregled 13, 1971, 31–35.
New York 1997.
Marić, Z. 1972, Gradina, Ošanić, Stolac – praistorijska
Jones, A. 2002, Archaeological Theory and Scientific
gradina, Arheološki pregled 14, 1972, 40–41.
Practice, Cambridge 2002.
Marić, Z. 1973a, Arheološka istraživanja na gradini
Katić, M. 1999–2000, Uvod u proučavanje keramičkih u Ošanićima kod Stoca 1963. Godine, Glasnik
radionica Farosa, Opuscula archaeologica 23–24, Zemaljskog muzeja – arheologija 27–28, 1973,
1999–2000, 49–58. 173–235.
Katić, M. 2001–2002, Proizvodnja korintskih B amfo- Marić, Z. 1973b, Novčići trećeg i drugog stoljeća sta-
ra u Farosu, Prilozi povijesti umjetnosti u Dalma- re ere sa gradine u Ošanićima kod Stoca, Glasnik
ciji 39, 2001–2002, 51–59. Zemaljskog muzeja – arheologija 27–28, 1973,
Katić, M. 2002, Greeks and the hinterland of We- 237–255.
stern Balkans, In: Cambi N. (ed.), Grčki utjecaj na Marić, Z. 1973c, Daorsoi, Godišnjak Centra za
istočnoj obali Jadrana, Grčki utjecaj na istočnoj balkanološka ispitivanja Akademije nauka i um-
obali Jadrana, Split 24.–26. rujan 1998, Split 2002, jetnosti Bosne i Hercegovine 10, 1973, 109–138.
423–433. Marić, Z. 1973d Ornamentirane pojasne ploče sa gra-
Karaiskaj, Gj. 1977–1978, Një varrezë e shek. III–IV dine u Ošanićima kod Stoca, Glasnik Zemaljskog
në qytetin ilir të Zgrdhëshit, Iliria 7–8, 1977–1978, muzeja – arheologija n. s. 27–28, 1973, 257–260.
201–216. Marić, Z. 1975, Prahistorijska i protohistorijska
Karaiskaj, Gj. 1981, Pesë mijë vjet fortifikime në Sh- utvrđenja na području Daorsa, In: Benac, A. (ed.),
qipëri, Tiranë 1981. Agglomeration fortifiée illyriens, Colloque inter-
Kirigin, B. 1994, Grčko-italske amfore na Jadranu, national à Mostar, 24 octobre au 26 octobre 1974,
Arheološki vestnik 45, 1994, 15–24. Academie des sciences et des arts de Bosnie et Her-
Kirigin, B. / Katunić, T. / Šešelj, L. 2005, Amfore i fina zegovine, Publication speciale 24, Centre d’études
keramika (od 4. do 1. st. Pr. Kr.) iz srednje Dalma- balkaniques, livre 6, Sarajevo 1975, 103–112.
cije – preliminarni ekonomski i socijalni pokaza- Marić, Z. 1976a, Daorsoi (?) na Gradini u Ošanićima
telji, Vjesnik za arheologiju i povijest Dalmatinsku kod Stoca – Ilirski grad, Arheološki pregled 18,
Vol. 1, No. 98, 2005, 7–24. 1976, 55–51.

24
Marić, Z. 1976b, Dva nova primjerka daorsijskog Marijan, B. 1991, Sjeveroistočna vrata u megalitskom
novca sa gradine Ošanići kod Stoca, Godišnjak zidu na Gradini u Ošanićima kod Stoca, Glasnik
Centra za balkanološka ispitivanja Akademije Zemaljskog muzeja – arheologija n. s. 46, 1991,
nauka i umjetnosti Bosne i Hercegovine 13, 1976, 87–112.
253–260. Marijan, B. 2011, Gradina u Ošanićima – transforma-
Marić, Z. 1976c, Novootkrivena obloga pojasne ploče cija prapovijesnoga gradinskog u urbano naselje.
sa Gradine u Ošanićima kod Stoca, Glasnik Ze- Histria Antiqua 20, 2011, 177–187.
maljskog muzeja – arheologija n. s. 29, 1976, 35–40. Marijanović, B. 1984, Završna istraživanja akropole
Marić, Z. 1976d, Ošanići – centar Daorsa – kulturno- na gradini u Ošanićima, Glasnik Zemaljskog mu-
historijske značajke, In: Suić, M. (ed.), Jadranska zeja – arheologija n. s. 39, 1984, 11–22.
obala u protohistoriji, kulturni i etnički problem, Marković, Č. 2012, Antička Budva – Nekropole,
Dubrovnik 19–23. oktobra 1972, Centar za povi- istraživanja 1980–1981, Podgorica 2012.
jesne znanosti Sveučilišta u Zagrebu i Arheološki Meskell, L. 2012, Archaeologies of Identity, In: Hod-
institute, Zagreb 1976, 247–254. der, I. (ed.), Archaeological Theory Today, Cam-
Marić, Z. 1977, Arheološka istraživanja akropole ilirs- bridge 2012, 187–213.
kog grada Daors..a na gradini u Ošanićima kod Mirdita, Z. 1991, Encore une fois sur le problème
Stoca od 1967. do 1972. Godine, Glasnik Zemaljs- d’ethnogenèse des Dardaniens, In: Benac, A. /
kog muzeja – arheologija 30–31, 1977, 5–99. Garašanin, M. / Čović, B. / Tasić, N. / Alirejsović,
Marić, Z. 1979, Depo pronađen u ilirskom gradu Da- E. (eds.), Tribus palèobalkaniques entre la mer
ors.. (2. st. pr. n. e.), Glasnik Zemaljskog muzeja Adriatique et la mer Noire de l’énéolithique
– arheologija 33, 1979, 23–113. jusqu’a l’époque hellénistique, Premier symposi-
Marić, Z. 1980, Helenizam i helenistička umjetnost u um illyro-thrace, Niš – Blagoevgrad, 30 mai au
Hercegovini, In: Tasić N. (ed.), Sahranjivanje po- 4 juin 1989, Academie des sciences et des arts de
kojnika sa aspekta ekonomskih i društvenih kre- Bosnie et Herzegovine, Publication speciale 94,
tanja u praistoriji i antici, Materijali 20, Mostar/ Centre d’études balkaniques, livre 14; Academie
Beograd 1980, 47–53. Serbe des sciences et des arts, Institut des études
Marić, Z. 1992–1997, Unutrašnja vrata akropole ilirs- balkaniques, Publication speciale 45, Sarajevo,
kog grada Daorsona (Ošanići, Stolac), Godišnjak Beograd 1991, 101–110.
Centra za balkanološka ispitivanja Akademije Mikić, Ž. 1991, Über Anthropologie der Illyri-
nauka i umjetnosti Bosne i Hercegovine 30, 1992– er auf dem Boden Jugoslawiens, In: Benac, A. /
1997, 79–95. Garašanin, M. / Čović, B. / Tasić, N. / Alirejsović,
Marić, Z. 2000, Helenistički uticaji na ilirsko pleme E. (eds.), Tribus palèobalkaniques entre la mer
Daorse, Godišnjak Centra za balkanološka ispi- Adriatique et la mer Noire de l’énéolithique
tivanja Akademije nauka i umjetnosti Bosne i jusqu’a l’époque hellénistique, Premier symposi-
Hercegovine 31, 2000, 37–52. um illyro-thrace, Niš – Blagoevgrad, 30 mai au
Marić, Z. 2004, Grafiti sa grčkih posuda iz razore- 4 juin 1989, Academie des sciences et des arts de
nog ilirskog grada Daorsona iznad sela Ošanića Bosnie et Herzegovine, Publication speciale 94,
kod Stoca u Hercegovini, Godišnjak Centra za Centre d’études balkaniques livre 14; Academie
balkanološka ispitivanja Akademije nauka i um- Serbe des sciences et des arts, Institut des études
jetnosti Bosne i Hercegovine 33, 2004, 185–216. balkaniques, Publication speciale 45, Sarajevo,
Marić, Z. 2006, Grafiti sa grčkih posuda iz razorenog Beograd 1991, 111–118.
ilirskog grada Daorsona iznad sela Ošanića kod Miller, H. 1984, The Practical and Economic Back-
Stoca u Hercegovini, dio III, Godišnjak Centra za ground to the Greek Mercenary Explosion, Greece
balkanološka ispitivanja Akademije nauka i um- and Rome, second series 31 (2), 1984, 153–160.
jetnosti Bosne i Hercegovine 35, 2006, 125–144. Morely, N. 2007, Trade in Classical Antiquity, Cam-
Marić, Z. / Forić, M. 2005, Grafiti sa grčkih posu- bridge 2007.
da iz razorenog ilirskog grada Daorsona iznad Olsen, B. 2002, Od predmeta do teksta. Teorijske per-
sela Ošanića kod Stoca u Hercegovini, dio II, spektive arheoloških istraživanja, Beograd 2002.
Godišnjak Centra za balkanološka ispitivanja Палавестра, А. 1989, Модели трговине и друштве-
Akademije nauka i umjetnosti Bosne i Hercegovi- не структуре на централном Балкану гвозде-
ne 34, 2005, 181–198. ног доба, Balcanica 20, 1989, 191–209.
Marijan, B. 1988, Konštica 2, In: Čović, B. (ed.), Ar- Palavestra, A. 1993, Praistorijski ćilibar na central-
heološki leksikon BiH, tom 3, Sarajevo 1988, 183. nom i zapadnom Balkanu, Beograd 1993.
Marijan, B. 1989, Protohistorijski nalazi s gradine u Papazoglu, F. 1969, Srednjobalkanska plemena u pre-
Prenju kod Stoca, Glasnik Zemaljskog muzeja – drimsko doba. Tribali, Autarijati, Dardanci, Skor-
arheologija n. s. 42–43, 1989, 61–71. disci i Mezi, Sarajevo 1969.

25
Papazoglu, F. 1988, Les royaumes d’Illyrie et de Dar- Šašel-Kos, M. 2005, Appian and Illyricum, Ljubljana
danie, In: Garašanin, M. (ed.), Les Illyriens et les 2005.
Albanais, Serie de conférences tenues du 21 mai Šašel-Kos, M. 2008, Peoples on the Northern Fringes
au 4 juin 1986, Academie Serbe des sciences et des of the Greek World: Illyria as seen by Strabo, In:
arts, Colloques scientifiques 39, Classe de Sciences Lamboley, J. L. / Castiglioni, M. P. L’ Illyrie mé-
historiques 10, Beograd 1988, 173–200. ridionale et l’ Épire dans l’ Antiquité 5 (Volume
Papajani, L. 1973, Qyteti ilir në Klos, Studime Histo- 2), Actes du 5e colloque international de Grenoble
rike 27, 1973, 105–112. L’ Illyrie méridionale et l’ Épire dans l’ Antiquité,
Papajani, L. 1975, Klos (Fier), Iliria 3, 1975, 465–471. 10–12 octobre 2008, Grenoble 2008, 617–629.
Papajani, L. 1976a, La cité illyrienne de Klos, Iliria 4, Tilley, C. 1994, A Phenomenology of Landscape.
1976, 411–422. Places, Paths and Monuments, Oxford 1994.
Papajani, L. 1976b, Monedha të zbuluara në qytetin Ujes, D. 1999, Rhizon (Montenegrin Coast) – A Tra-
ilir në Klos, Iliria 6, 1976, 259–273. ding and Staple Town on the Crossroads of Me-
Паровић-Пешикан, М. 1979, Археолошка diterranean and Inland Balkan Routes, Late Clas-
истраживања у Боки Которској, Старинар 28– sical and Hellenistic Pottery Evidence, Quaderni
29, 1979, 19–67. ticinesi di numismatica e antichita’ classiche 28,
Polanyi, K. 1977, The Livelihood of Men, New York, 1999, 203–220.
San Francisco, London 1977. Ujes, D. 2004, Autonomous Coinage of Rhizon in Illy-
Polanyi, K. 2001, The Great Transformation: The Political ria, In: Cabanes, P. / Lamboley, J. L. (eds.), L’ Illyrie
and Economic Origins of Our Time, Boston 2001. méridionale et l’Epire dans l’antiquité 4, Actes du
Popović, P. 1987, Le monnayage des Scordisques. Les 4e colloque international de Grenoble, 10 au 12
monnaies et la circulation monétaire dans le cen- octobre 2002, Paris 2004, 149–168.
tre des Balkans 4e–1e s. av. n. è., Beograd, Novi Ujes, D. 2010, Ancient Greek Coins Finds from Risan,
Sad 1987. In: Lambogley, J. L. / Castiglioni, M. P. (eds.), L’ Il-
Prendi, F. 1975a, Aspects de la vie sociale, economique lyrie méridionale et Epire dans l’antiquité 5, Actes
et culturelle de Lissus, In: Benac, A. (ed.), Agglo- du 5e colloque international de Grenoble, 8 au 11
meration fortifiée illyriens, Colloque international octobre 2008, Paris 2010, 115–132.
à Mostar, 24 octobre au 26 octobre 1974, Acade- Vasić, R. 1987, Kneževski grobovi iz Novog Pazara i Ate-
mie des sciences et des arts de Bosnie et Herze- nice, In: Benac, A. (ed.), Praistorija jugoslavenskih
govine, Publication speciale 24, Centre d’études zemalja 5, željezno doba, Sarajevo 1987, 644–650.
balkaniques livre 6, Sarajevo 1975, 149–163. Vasić, R. 1991, Cultural Groups of the Early Iron Age
Prendi, F. 1975b, Un aperçu sur la civilisation de la in the West and Central Balkans and the Possibili-
première period du Fer en Albanie, Iliria 3, 1975, ties of their Ethnical Identification, In: Benac, A. /
109–138. Garašanin, M. / Čović, B. / Tasić, N. / Alirejsović,
Prendi, F. / Zheku, K. 1972, La ville illyrienne de Lis- E. (eds.), Tribus palèobalkaniques entre la mer
sus son origine et son système de fortifications, L’ Adriatique et la mer Noire de l’énéolithique
Illyrie 2, 1972, 239–268. jusqu’a l’époque hellénistique, Premier symposi-
Preucel, R. 2006, Archaeological Semiotics, Oxford um illyro-thrace, Niš – Blagoevgrad, 30 mai au
2006. 4 juin 1989, Academie des sciences et des arts de
Rendić-Miočević, D. 1965, Prolegomena ilirskoj nu- Bosnie et Herzegovine, Publication speciale 94,
mografiji, Godišnjak Centra za balkanološka Centre d’études balkaniques, livre 14; Academie
ispitivanja Akademije nauka i umjetnosti Bosne i Serbe des sciences et des arts, Institut des études
Hercegovine 3, 1965, 77–94. balkaniques, Publication speciale 45, Sarajevo,
Renfrew, C. / Bahn, P. 1991, Archaeology. Theories, Beograd 1991, 73–82.
Methods and Practice, New York 1991. Vasilj, S. 1992, Novčić Oite s Ošanića, Prilozi instituta
Service, E. 1975, Origins of the State and Civilisation: za arheologiju u Zagrebu 9 (1), 1992, 131–134.
The Process of Cultural Evolution, New York 1975. Vasilj, S. 2003, Novčić Fokide s gradine u Ošanićima
Suić, M. 1976, Problèmes de paléogènese et d’urbani- kod Stoca, Radovi Zavoda povijesnih znanosti
sation des centres illyriens, Iliria 4, 1976, 357–366. Hrvatske akademije znanosti i umjetnosti u Zadru
Šalov, T. 2010, Keramički nalazi sa lokaliteta Popove 45, 2003, 1–5.
bare u Vidu kod Metkovića – antička Narona, Hi- Velimirović-Žižić, O. 1967, Labeati i Dokleati kroz
stria Antiqua 19, 2010, 359–377. izvore i arheološki materijal, Materijali 4, 1967,
Šašel-Kos, M. 2002, Pyrrhus and Illyrian Kingdom(s?), 61–64.
In: Cambi, N. (ed.), Grčki utjecaj na istočnoj obali Vrekaj, B. 1997, Tipare të qeramikës së zbuluar në By-
Jadrana, Grčki utjecaj na istočnoj obali Jadrana, lis shek. IV p. e. s.–I e. s., Iliria 27, 1997, 167–204.
24.–26. rujan 1998, Split 2002, 101–120. Wilkes, J. 1992, The Illyrians, Oxford 1992.

26
 Godišnjak / Jahrbuch 2018, 47: 27–44
DOI: 10.5644/Godisnjak.CBI.ANUBiH-47.101

Early Iron Age in Central Bosnia – an overview and research

perspectives

Mario Gavranović1
Vienna
Ajla Sejfuli2
Travnik

Abstract: This paper discusses the state of the research and general interpretation models of the Early Iron Age pe-
riod in Central Bosnia. The Mid-Bosnian Schist Mountains and the surrounding river valleys of Vrbas, Lašva, and
Bosna together with their tributaries characterise the landscape of this region. In terms of evidence from the Early
Iron Age period (800–500 BC), the majority comes from the long-term excavations in the hillfort site Pod near
Bugojno. The preliminary reports point to well-organised, long lasting and densely built up hillfort settlement
with rectangular houses of similar size. Based on the numerous iron slag finds from recently discovered settle-
ments of Čolaci and Zenepići, it can be inferred that some of the sites in Central Bosnia were intensively involved
in the metal processing activity. Mortuary practices of the Early Iron Age communities are largely unknown since
thus far, not a single intact burial was properly documented.

Key words: Central Bosnia, Early Iron Age, settlement, graves, chronology

1. Introduction First of all, however, issues of terminology,

geography, and chronology need to be addressed
The region of Central Bosnia is situated between briefly. It was not until the Dayton Agreement,
two far more prominent cultural complexes lo- which was signed in 1995, that Central Bosnia
cated to the east (Glasinac) and the west (Japo- appeared as a political and official administra-
des), and has rarely been the focus of the Early tion unit (Central Bosnia Canton). The new po-
Iron Age research in South-eastern Europe. The litical canton, however, has not included some
lack of rich burials and long-used cemeteries has of the territories, which are traditionally regard-
made this area rather an unattractive spot dur- ed as “Central Bosnia” in archaeological terms,
ing the first flourishing period of archaeology in most notably the Basins of the Bosna River be-
Bosnia and Herzegovina between 1878 and 1914 tween Sarajevo and Zenica together with smaller
(during the time of Austrian rule), when some of side valleys of the tributaries Fojnička Rijeka or
the outstanding Early Iron Age finds were first Trstionica. In addition to this section of the Bos-
uncovered.3 na River, the region of Central Bosnia also in-
cludes the entire Lašva valley, upper Vrbas valley
1
Institute for Oriental and European Archaeology, Austrian as well as the area between them, dominated by
Academy of Sciences, Hollandstrasse 11+13, 1030 Vienna. Mid-Bosnian Schist Mountains with the Vrani-
2
Zavičajni muzej Travnik, Mehmed-paše Kukavice 1, 72270 ca mountain range,4 which is the most dominant
Travnik, [email protected]
one (Figure 1).
3
Highlighted among the early discoveries should be the gra-
ves with warrior equipment and imported prestigious bron-
zes from Glasinac area (Benac / Čović 1957), a graveyard temple structure Gorica in western Herzegovina (Truhelka
and pile dwelling settlement in Donja Dolina (Truhelka 1902).
1904), pile dwellings in Ripač (Radimský 1897) and the 4
Jurković / Hrvatović 1957.

27
 come from destroyed graves in Grbavica,10 Nević
Polje,11 Semizovac,12 Gračanica,13 and Košćani.14
The reference point for the Late Bronze and
the Early Iron Age chronology of Central Bosnia
is the stratigraphic sequence of the hillfort Pod,
with level Pod C representing a new settlement
stage at the beginning of the Early Iron Age.15
The level Pod C corresponds to “Schicht III”
from the trench excavated in 1963 at the site.16
Even though the connection with the previous
stage (Pod B) is more than obvious, the level Pod
C witnessed an introduction of a number of new
pottery shapes and ornaments. Based on some
specific jewellery and weapon types, Pod C can
be correlated with Hallstatt C1 phase in terms
of Central European chronology (ca. 800–650
BC).17 Destroyed graves from Semizovac and
Gračanica with grave goods such as a two-loop
fibula with triangular foot18 and bronze pins with
small head and neck torsion are most probably
from the same period.19
The anchor of the next chronological stage of
Early Iron Age is the following stratum D1 in Pod
(Pod D120 or “Schicht II”21). This layer includes a
black, burnt settlement horizon and newly-erect-
ed objects.22 Based on metal finds (two bow fibu-
lae with Boeotian shield plate), the Pod D1 stra-
tum corresponds with stage Ha C2 – Ha D1 of
Figure 1: Central Bosnia and mentioned sites. 1. Pod; Central European chronology (mid-7th to early
2. Gorica; 3 Košćani; 4. Čolaci; 5. Varvara; 6. Zenepići; 6th century BC).23 The pottery spectrum shows a
7. Tarabovac; 8. Klaonica; 9. Nević Polje; 10. Grbavica; clear break, with very few forms and ornaments
11. Alihodže; 12. Vrh Negraje; 13 Kopilo; 14. Hadžići; related to the older settlement horizons.24 Fibu-
15. Gračanica; 16. Semizovac; 17. Debelo Brdo. lae with Boeotian shield plate, one of the most
popular Early Iron Age jewellery forms in the en-
The basic knowledge about the Early Iron tire Southeastern Europe,25 also occur among the
Age in Central Bosnia in terms of characteristic
pottery repertoire was established first with the 10
Sielski 1931, Tab. 10.
excavations of the hillfort sites Pod5 and Kopilo6
11
Čović 1987; Gavranović 2011, Tab. 21.
12
Mandić 1933, 3–4; Korošec 1942, 56.
between 1960 and 1990, accompanied by smaller 13
Čović 1984, 31–48.
investigations in Alihodže7 and Hadžići near Vi- 14
Gavranović 2011, Tab. 74.
soko.8 Recent investigations in Čolaci near Don- 15
Čović 1965; 1987.
ji Vakuf confirmed that this hillfort also existed 16
Gavranović 2010, Fig. 150.
17
Čović 1987, 483; Metzner-Nebelsick 2002; Trachsel 2004.
throughout the Early Iron Age.9 The same applies 18
Gabrovec 1970, Fig. 1–5; Bader 1983, 71; Gergova 1987,
to the site at Zenepići near Novi Travnik, briefly 36; Vasić 1999, 48.
presented in this paper. Most of the metal finds 19
Vasić 2003, 97.
20
Čović 1987.
21
Gavranović 2011, 268.
5
Čović 1965; 1987. 22
Čović 1987, 485.
6
Trajković 1971; Gavranović 2011. 23
Gavranović 2011, Fig. 1.
7
Benac 1950. 24
Čović 1987; Gavranović 2011, Tab. 55–62.
8
Perić 1987. 25
Gabrovec 1970, 4; Vasić 1999, 65; Čović 1987a, 608; Heil-
9
Pravidur 2015. mann 2016, 9.

28
 Figure 2: Plateau of the settlement Pod with trenches excavated between 1959 (Rov 1) and 1963. Profiles of Rov 1
and trench from year 1963.

finds from the disturbed graves from Nević Polje 2. Settlements

and Grbavica in the Lašva valley.
Characteristic for the time between the late
Topography and structure
6th and the late 5th century BC (Ha D2/3) are set-
tlement layers labelled as Pod D2–D3,26 which Major cultural change in Central Bosnia that
are equivalent to “Schicht I” from the trench ex- induced the emergence of new settlements took
cavated in 1963.27 The pottery reveals a clear re- place in the advanced stages of the Late Bronze
semblance with “Schicht II”, with a limited num- Age (Ha A2 – Ha B1), spanning the late 12th and
ber of new types and decorations.28 One of the the 11th centuries BC.32 The most noticeable ar-
new characteristic forms are jugs with spout and chaeological manifestations of the new develop-
small spherical kantharoi, both found also at the ment are the appearance of pottery with incised
site of Zenepići indicating contemporary occu- geometric ornaments on a massive scale and the
pation with Pod D2–D3 (Figure 8). Metal finds foundation of new hillfort settlements.33 Apart
belonging to this period of Pod’s occupation sug- from foundation layers of new hillforts (such as
gest a wide communication network in which at Pod), the distinct decorated pottery occurs also
the settlement participated, including the central in the contemporary layers of the already existing
Balkans (e.g., double pins with Omega-shape settlements, like Varvara, located in the neigh-
head), Glasinac (e.g., fibulae with crested bowl), bouring valley of the river Rama (Figure 1).34
Northern Italy and the Southeastern Alps (e.g., It seems that the erection of the fortifications
two or three knobbed fibulae) and the Mediter- at Pod was a part of a new settlement concept
ranean (e.g., imported bronze vessels).29 Dated from the very beginning of construction.35 How-
to this period are also some of the burials from ever, it was in the Early Iron Age (Pod C phase)
Gračanica with fibulae of type Arareva Gomila, a that both the wall and the dich were significantly
specific jewellery form of the late 6th and 5th cen- extended.36 Furthermore, it is interesting that the
turies BC in the area of the central Balkans (Fig- massive, semi-circular wall around the plateau in
ure 9, 1–5).30 A same dating can also be assumed Varvara dates to the last phase of the Late Bronze
for a bronze helmet of the so-called Illyrian type Age settlement (Varvara C3 phase) correspond-
(Variant IIIa) from Putičevo near Travnik, found ing to the time when new decorated pottery ap-
in an uncertain archaeological context.31 peared.37

26
Čović 1987, 480. 32
Čović 1983, 437; Gavranović 2012, 103.
27
Gavranović 2011, 27. 33
Čović 1986, 57; Gavranović 2011, 249.
28
Ibid., Tab. 63–73. 34
Čović 1978; 1983a, 390.
29
Čović 1987, 500. 35
Čović 1991.
30
Teržan 1987, 19; Vasić 1999, 96. 36
Čović 1986, 60.
31
Teržan 1995; Blečić Kavur / Pravidur 2012, Fig. 7. 37
Čović 1983a, 395.

29
 Figure 3: Topographic position of sites (Google maps)

With the current state of investigation, it In terms of their topographic positions, the
is more than speculative to make any kind of hillforts are located on prominent, elevated spots
statements regarding the settlement density or over the river valley (Figure 3). Yet, the distance
population dynamics during the Early Iron Age from the lowland and accessibility seems to differ
in central Bosnia. The last systematic survey re- significantly. While Pod, Gorica, and Zenepići
vealed around 120 hillforts with finds suggesting are situated on low terraces just above the river
an Early Iron Age or a Late Bronze / Early Iron valleys, Čolaci, Kopilo, and Vrh Negraje stand
Age occupation.38 It is clear that some of the ex- on high, difficult to access plateaus with steep
cavated sites like Kopilo near Zenica started to slopes, which control a large part of the river
be occupied later than Pod, but for the majority valley (Figure 3). The chronology, function, and
of sites there is still no clear diachronic indica- social organization of the different sites and the
tion that would enable assessment in terms of choice of their position is hard to estimate. Both
settlement intensity at different stages of the Late Kopilo und Čolaci (on high plateaus) appear to
Bronze and Early Iron Age. Furthermore, recent have begun 150–200 years after the establish-
investigations in Čolaci39 and Tarabovac40 as well ment of Pod (positioned on a low terrace), but
as some smaller surveys41 have indicated that the there are also sites contemporary with the first
number of known sites is certainly not definite. horizons at Pod (e.g., Vrh Negraje near Zenica),43
In addition, open flatland settlements were reg- which are placed on extremely high ground in
istered in several locations, but these have not the local landscape (Figure 3). Conspicuous is
been investigated.42 also the fact that the size of the known hillforts
tends to vary between 5000 m² and 7000 m² with
no major size difference between the higher and
38
Pravidur 2015, 9. the lower positioned sites.44
39
Ibid. The long-term excavations at Pod provided
40
Small scale excavations were conducted by one of the au-
thors, Ajla Sejfuli from the Museum in Travnik, which are
valuable information about the interior structure
unpublished. of the hillfort. Since no other contemporary sites
41
In the area of Zenepići near Novi Travnik and Gradac near
Travnik conducted in 2016 by the authors. 43
Gavranović 2011, 19; Bujak 2012.
42
Čović 1987, 510. 44
Čović 1987, 506.

30
have been investigated in more detail, it is un- just as in the case of the previously published
certain if the configuration of Pod represents a Early Iron Age horizons. Beside the specification
special case or a regular settlement pattern. One that the plan published by B. Teržan represents a
should also keep in mind the well-preserved part of the settlement on the eastern half of the
stratigraphy of Pod with cultural layers that are plateau dating to around 1000 BC, no further
almost 3 m deep, starting in the Late Bronze Age information is available so far. The rectangular
and ending during the last phase of the late 3th houses have been described as blockhouses or
century BC.45 Thus, the fortified plateau (5500 log cabins that were placed on a stone base (with-
m²) was continuously occupied throughout the out vertical posts) and had earthen floor.50 Judg-
period of at least 700 years. ing by the large amounts of burned daub with
The published plans of the excavated areas wooden imprints often decorated with geomet-
demonstrate dense and regular arrangement of rical ornaments on the frontal side, some kind of
rectangular houses (5–7 x 8–12 m) with narrow wattle and daub construction was applied inside
lanes between. Because of the war in Bosnia and the houses (e.g., on the separating walls or on the
Herzegovina (1991–1995) and the death of the interior side of the wooden beams).
principal investigator B. Čović (1995), the se- One of the crucial developments during the
quence and the duration of individual settlement Early Iron Age at Pod is represented by the so-
horizons are still not definitely clear.46 Howev- called “burnt horizon”, a black layer documented
er, the general settlement organisation with two in most parts of the plateau, stratigraphically di-
diagonal lanes dividing the area in four sectors viding phases Pod C and Pod D (Figure 2). The
can be determined.47 Three successive horizons black burnt layer can be dated to the end of 7th
from the north-western part of the site, dating century BC due to several diagnostic bronze finds
to 650–500 BC, have been published. The plans (fibulae with Boeotian shield plate) and three ra-
show several houses (ca. 7 x 12 m) of the same diocarbon dates.51 Even though the settlement
W-E orientation with a gradual enlargement of continued to exist, this catastrophic event clearly
an open space at the crossing of the two main left its mark on the material culture, as it was fol-
diagonal lanes. In 1987, the mid-horizon was lowed by a significant change in pottery shapes
published again, now including a more detailed and decoration. A structure on the western part
drawing but without accompanying legend of the of the plateau, described as a settlement temple,
different features (e.g., floors, oven, fireplaces and was also destroyed by the fire.52 Although it had
stone pavements).48 In 1995, B. Teržan published the same rectangular construction as the other
a section of a horizon from the Late Bronze Age houses, this structure (5 x 6 m) stands out due to
with attached legend.49 Rectangular clay house the lack of regular inventory (such as ovens and
floors (ca. 6 x 10 m), elevated benches along lon- pottery sets) and the occurrence of extraordi-
gitudinal walls, U-shaped oven structures (with nary clay columns (of 1–1,5 m preserved height)
cupolae), smaller fireplaces, and stone pavement with stylized human faces (perhaps representing
between the houses can be recognized. However, masks). Altogether, twelve columns, including
the orientation of objects is clearly not uniform one with a solar disc ending, were found inside
the structure (Figure 4). All of them had incised
45
The site was also occupied in the Chalcolithic period and
hatched ornaments on the front, probably sym-
the Early Bronze Age (see Čović 1991, 10). There is a hia-
tus of at least 500 years between the abandonment of the bolizing garments, and wooden imprints on the
Early Bronze Age site and the onset of the Late Bronze Age back, indicating attachments on some wattle-like
occupation. construction positioned most probably along
46
Čović (1987; 1991), the principal investigator of the pro- the back wall (Figure 4). Another peculiarity
ject, repeatedly used the term “settlement horizon” in his
publication without providing a clear definition and, above
of this structure is the elevated platform (ca. 40
all, not mentioning the criteria for separating one horizon cm above the regular floor) with a circular stone
from another (e.g., by house floors, debris change). Accor- fireplace located in the back. Unfortunately, this
ding to Čović, the layer Pod C included two and layer Pod
D ten successive horizons.
47
Čović 1987. 50
Čović 1987, 505.
48
Ibid. 508. 51
Ibid. 494.
49
Teržan 1995a, 348. 52
Ibid. 518.

31
 2 2a

1 1a 3 3a

10 cm

Figure 4: Simple reconstruction of the object with clay idols, Pod late 7th – early 6th century BC

exceptional building with a unique material funnelled rims decorated on the inside (Figure
manifestation of Early Iron Age religious beliefs 5a, 4–5), half-spherical cups with high handles
of the western Balkans is still unpublished. All and small vessels with S-profile (Figure 5a, 7. 10).
provided information comes from preliminary New diagnostic forms of the Early Iron Age are
reports. Similarly, the objects associated with the bowls, cups, and kantharoi with biconical body
“burnt horizon” as well as the structures built on (Figure 5b, 3), as well as shallow cups/ladle (Fig-
the debris of burnt horizon remain unpublished. ure 5b, 13) and smaller jugs (Figure 5b, 12). The
most frequent ornaments from the Late Bronze
Finds Age such as rows of incised crescents or rows of
Finds from Pod are crucial for the evaluation angle shaped stitches still exist in the following
of characteristic Early Iron Age ceramic reper- period, although mostly on the pottery forms
toire in Central Bosnia, as it is the only site with that continue from the older settlement phases
documented stratigraphic sequence. A relative- (e.g. bowls with facetted rims). Decoration mo-
ly small selection of previously published finds tifs characteristic of the first Early Iron Age lay-
from the layers Pod C and Pod D in the form of er are a row of triangles with one vertical line in
preliminary reports53 was extended in 2010 by the middle, long, extended rhombuses and tri-
the processing of the material from the 1963 ex- angles, Maltese cross-shaped symbols, and rows
cavations.54 of stamped or incised triangles. The metal finds
The juxtaposition of the typical pottery from this settlement period include a pin with
shapes from late Pod B level (“Schicht IV”– Ha torsion on the neck and an iron spearhead, both
B3) and new layer Pod C (“Schicht III”– Ha C1) forms well-known from Early Iron Age contexts
reveals clear continuity of forms and decora- in the surrounding regions.55
tion (Figure 5). Typical of both phases are wide Based on parallels in pottery shapes and sty-
bowls with inverted, thickened and often dec- listic comparison of decoration, contemporary
orated rims (Figure 5a, 1–3), vessels with wide occupation with Pod C (“Schicht III”) can be as-
sumed at the site Gorica, located on a low terrace
53
Čović 1965; 1987. just some 800 m southeast of Pod (Figure 3)56
54
Gavranović 2011, Tab. 49–73. The finds from the 1963 ex- and at the hillfort of Čolaci near Donji Vakuf,
cavations were recorded in the National Museum in Saraje- approximately 12 km downstream on the Vrbas
vo in 2006. The boxes in the depot, however, contained only
diagnostic sherds (rims, bottoms, and decorated fragments
of each stratigraphic feature). The preselection was under- 55
Vasić 2003, 97.
taken by principal investigator B. Čović. 56
Čremošnik 1951.

32
 1 4
7 10

5 8 11

3 6 9 12

1
5 8 11

6 9 12

4 7 10
13

Figure 5: Characteristic pottery from Schicht IV (late Pod B – Ha B2/3) and Schicht III (Pod C – Ha C1)

River (Figure 3).57 In the neighbouring Lašva val- of the rivers Vrbas63 and Bosna64 and at the site
ley, the corresponding material was thus far con- of Korita in Duvno field in the south-western
firmed only at Alihodže.58 In the section of Bos- Bosnia.65 Although several authors repeatedly
na River between Sarajevo and Zenica, indicative quoted that pottery from Central Bosnia – and
ceramic finds of the Early Iron Age are found at from Pod especially – “influenced” the adjacent
hillforts of Debelo Brdo,59 Semizovac,60 Hadžići territories,66 the nature of relationships between
near Visoko,61 and Kopilo near Zenica.62 Outside the sites in the region is still largely unexplained.
of Central Bosnia, some of the distinctive orna- A clear shift in the pottery spectrum can be
ment types and shapes from Pod C (“Schicht III”) observed in the next chronological stage at Pod
also appear at sites located in the middle course (Pod D1 – Ha C2 / Ha D1), represented through
finds from the “burnt horizon” and the follow-
57
Pravidur 2015.
58
Gavranović 2011, Tab. 11.
59
Fiala 1897. 63
Jamaković 2010, Tab. 28.
60
Korošec 1942. 64
Marić 1961, Tab. 3–4.
61
Perić 1987. 65
Govedarica 1982, Tab 7, 7–10.
62
Gavranović 2011, Tab. 7. 66
Čović 1987, 505; Pravidur 2015, 24.

33
 1 1 5

8 11

3 6

9 12

4 7 10 13

Figure 6: Characteristic pottery from Schicht II (Pod D1 – Ha C2 – Ha D1)

ing horizon upon the debris (Figure 6). A num- bodies, bigger jugs with high handles, amphorae
ber of ceramic forms and decoration styles that with wide rims and cylindrical necks (Figure 6).
existed in the Late Bronze Age horizons until Chronological connection between level Pod D1
beginning of the Early Iron Age disappeared at (“Schicht II”) and other regions of the Central
this time, with only a few elements pointing to and Western Balkans is based on the presence
connections with previous stages. In Pod D1 of fibulae with Boeotian shield plate (Figure 6,
(“Schicht II”), bowls with facetted and thickened 13),68 pointing to a date of the late 7th to early 6th
rims, cups with short rims, and S-profile as well century BC.69
as half-spherical cups vanished. Even more dras- Analogous ceramic finds can be found most-
tic is the transformation, or rather a reduction, ly at hillforts that were occupied in the preced-
of decorative elements. Rows of crescents, sev- ing periods like Debelo Brdo, Semizovac or Al-
eral variations of hatched triangles, angle stitch ihodže.70 However, they all lack clear context.
rows, vertical zigzag lines, and all types of in- The youngest layer of the hillfort Kopilo71 is also
cised arch motifs disappeared in this period, too. parallel with the stage Pod D1 and probably the
Dominant ornaments of the second Early Iron settlement in Varvara as well, which seem to
Age layer in Pod are rows of simple oval stitch- have been occupied again during this period (ca.
es, often between two lines, and loose bundles 650–550 BC).
of vertical straight lines (Figure 6, 1–2. 10–11), The final stage of the Early Iron Age com-
whereas more complex incised motifs (e.g., op- prises phases Pod D2 and D3, while the young-
posing rows of hatched triangles) occur only est settlement traces (Pod D4) date to the La
sporadically.67 Representative for this phase are Tène period.72 In the profile section from 1963,
flat flutes or wider rills, which are, judging by the this stratigraphic sequence was summarized as
material sample excavated in 1963, used mainly “Schicht I,” comprising several different eroded
for the decoration of semi-spherical bowls (Fig- layers with no clear distinction between them
ure 7, 3). Typical ceramic spectrum of this stage (Figure 2). The pottery repertoire is similar to
also includes biconical bowls, semi-spherical the previous layer, and includes semi-spherical
and calotte-shaped bowls, smaller vessels with and biconical bowls, often decorated with a two
cylindrical necks and biconical lower bodies, 68
Čović 1987, Tab. 52, 15–16.
kantharoi and beakers with longer cylindrical or 69
Vasić 1999, 6; Heilmann 2016.
slightly funnel-shaped necks and spherical lower 70
Gavranović 2011, 268.
71
Ibid., Tab. 7.
67
Gavranović 2011, Diagram 4. 72
Čović 1987, 496.

34
 5
1

12 13
6

2
7 14
15

8 16
3 17

18
4 10 11

Figure 7: Characteristic pottery from Schicht I (Pod D2/3 – Ha D2/3)

rows of lentil shaped stitches below the rim and (as outlined above), this Pod D2/D3 can be cor-
along the vessel kink shallow cups/ladles, vessels related with the late 6th and the 5th century BC.75
with curved S-profile and kantharoi with spher- Imported finds of a Mediterranean provenance,
ical or biconical lower bodies (Figure 7). One of such as painted wheel-made pottery and pieces
the very few forms that continued from the older of bronze vessels, corroborate this dating and
strata of occupation are small three-handle ves- indicate the integration of Pod into the exten-
sels (Figure 7, 13) that had first appeared already sive exchange network between the Adriatic Sea,
in the Late Bronze Age (early stage of Pod B – Southern Europe and the western Balkans.76 An
“Schicht V”).73 Newly introduced in “Schicht I” outcome of these international relationships can
are jugs with spout and shallow bowls with rims be seen in the form of a semi-spherical, locally
with plastic decoration and one-handled perfo- made bowl with incised inscription, identified as
rated cylindrical pedestals (Figure 7, 4.7). Most an imitation of Etruscan or Umbrian letters.77
of the decorations are made of incised lines Based on stray finds, the hillforts Debelo
and stitches with very few complex ornaments Brdo78 and Čolaci79 still existed throughout the
(hatched triangles or two inverted triangles sand 6th and the 5th centuries BC. The published pot-
glass). Plastic decoration, most notably different tery from these two sites shows clear similarities
finger impressions, is more frequently used in with the finds from the corresponding layers at
comparison to older layers74 (Figure 7. 10–11).
Thanks to a number of diagnostic jewellery types 75
Čović 1987, 500, Tab. 53.
76
Čović 1983a.
77
Šalabalić 1965, 12.
73
Gavranović 2011, 77. 78
Fiala 1893; Fiala 1897; Čović 1965.
74
Ibid. 110. 79
Pravidur 2015, Fig. 9.

35
 1 2

10 cm

Figure 8: Vessels from site Zenepići

Pod (D2/D3). Hence, the intensive connectivity found there, one can assume that the iron slag is
between the hillforts of Central Bosnia appears also of the same age. Among collected finds from
to continue unabated also in the developed Early Zenepići are also well-known forms from the lat-
Iron Age. est Early Iron Age layer in Pod (D2/D3):81
Analogous pottery of the late 6th and the 5th 1. A small three-handled vessel with a spher-
centuries BC has also been recently found in the ical lower part and a slightly concave neck. The
site Zenepići, located in the small side valley of lower part is decorated with incised slanted lad-
Lašva basin near Novi Travnik (Figure 3).80 The der motifs and unregularly dispersed lines (Fig-
area is densely forested, but the ramparts and ure 8, 1).
two circular terraces around the small plateau 2. A small jug with a spout, a cylindrical neck,
(30 x 40 m) are still recognizable. The site yielded and a spherical lower part. The incised decora-
abundant iron slag, distributed all over the sur- tion is located on the upper half of the spherical
face. Since no other than Iron Age pottery and lower part and consists of three lines of different
diagnostic finds from earlier periods have been motifs (branch-like ornaments, slanting lines,
80
The pottery was found in 2014 during the construction of
a forest road that leads to the plateau. The finds were sub-
mitted to the Museum in Travnik. The authors have visited 81
Čović 1965, 55; 1987, Fig. 28: Tab. 52, 21; Gavranović
the site in August 2016. 2011, Tab. 67, Tab. 72.

36
and a singular line accompanied by a row of len- hornbeam) can be linked to human activities in
til shaped stitches (Figure 8, 2). the river valleys surrounding the Mid-Bosnian
3. A cup with a biconical body and a short cy- Mountains.
lindrical neck. The handle is placed between the Thanks to the arcaeozoological85 and archae-
body break and the rim and reaches over the rim obotanical86 analyses of the remains from Pod,
in the middle part. The decoration (vertical in- some basic information regarding subsistence,
cised lines with relatively big distances between husbandry and hunting preferences can be men-
them) spans between the neck and the body tioned here. The published archaeobotanical re-
break (i.e., on the upper half of the biconical sults point to storage of wild oat (Avena serilis)
body) (Figure 8, 3). in several pits dating to the Early Iron Age, while
4. A kantharos with a spherical lower part and common oat (Avena sativa) clearly prevails in the
a concave neck (Figure 8, 4). Two handles reach- Late Iron Age layers.87 Identified in the Early Iron
ing above the rim spread between the rim and Age layers are also lentil (Lens culinaris), broad
the body break. Both handles have a sharp break bean (Vicia Faba) and pea (Pisum Sativum).88
(kink). The handles are decorated with groups of Among analysed animal bones from the
diagonal incised lines. The decoration of the up- Late Bronze Age layers (Pod B), domestic ani-
per body of the kantharos includes dense vertical mals (46% sheep/goat, 36% pig, 11% cattle, 1.5%
incised lines intermittent with columns of short- horse, and 2.5% dog) clearly dominate compris-
er slanted lines and rows of lentil stitches in the ing in total 98% of the sample, while game (2%)
branch-like array (Figure 8, 4). is represented by wild pig and dear.89
The hillfort Zenepići represents the fourth In the Early Iron Age (Pod C and Pod D1),
site in Central Bosnia – together with Pod, Čol- the ratio of game increased to 10% (40% dear,
aci and Debelo Brdo – with clear evidence for 20% bear, 20% doe, and 10% wild pig). The hus-
occupation in the final stages of Early Iron Age. bandry structure changed too, with a significant
Judging by certain characteristic metal finds increase of cattle (20%) and a slight decline of
(Early La Tène fibulae, fibulae of Certosa type, sheep/goat (43%) and pig (34%).
and double pins with Omega-shaped head), both In the youngest settlement stage (Pod D2–
Pod and Čolaci as well as Debelo Brdo existed D4) the portion of game is again reduced to 5%
continuously throughout most of the Late Iron of the total assemblage (of which 41% dear, 23%
Age, with the earliest finds dating to the 3rd cen- doe, 17% wild pig, 17% bear, 1% rabbit, 1% bea-
tury BC.82 ver, as well as lynx, marten, fox and wolf). Char-
acteristic for the domestic animals is a signifi-
Subsistence and environment cant increase of sheep/goat (56%) and decrease
While pottery and metal finds provide a basic of pig (24%) bones in the assemblage, while the
understanding of material culture, any assess- percentage of cattle (17%) remained more or less
ment of the socio-economic background of the stable.90
Early Iron Age communities in Central Bosnia is, The finds of iron slag from Čolaci, Kopilo, Pod,
with the current research status, still difficult to Varvara, and Zenepići demonstrate metallurgical
make. The pollen record from the Prokoško Jeze- activities in each of these sites, with earliest finds
ro in the Mid-Bosnian Schist Mountains is the dating to the 9th century BC (at Kopilo).91 Often
first evidence of environmental changes in this mentioned, but never fully published, is a vessel
region in last 18,000 years.83 A strong decrease with limonite chunks from the late stage Pod B
of fir and pine trees and an increase of hazel and (9th century BC),92 pointing to a prospection of
grasses are significant for the Early Iron Age.84 85
Palavestra 1984.
However, there is still no clear indication if any 86
Kučan 1984.
of these changes in forest composition (also in- 87
Ibid.
cluding a continued decrease of elm and oriental 88
Ibid.
89
Palavestra 1984; Čović 1987, 515.
90
Palavestra 1984.
82
Čović 1987, 504; Pravidur 2015, 22. 91
Čović 1980; 1987, 505; Gavranović 2011, Tab. 82; Pravidur
83
Dörfler 2013, 311. 2015, Fig. 12.
84
Ibid. 327, profile section: LPAZ N. 92
Čović 1980, 74.

37
the nearby iron ore sources in the Mid-Bosnian struction characteristic of the Early Iron Age in
Schist Mountains.93 However, while the signs of Central Bosnia.97
the iron working are numerous, solid evidence The grave finds from the initial stage of the
documenting the reconstruction of chaîne opéra- Early Iron Age (8th century BC) were unearthed
toire including mining, smelting and processing in Klaonica near Travnik98 and Nević Polje99 on
is rare. The first trace element analyses of the slag the banks of rivers Lašva, Gračanica (Figure 9),100
and iron objects form the sites of Čolaci and Pod and Semizovac101 in the Bosna Basin between
point to magnetite as the initial exploited ore and Sarajevo and Visoko and near Košćani,102 in the
technological differences in the ore smelting pro- upper Vrbas valley between Bugojno and Don-
cess between these two sites.94 The sampled four ji Vakuf. Bronze jewellery prevails among the
slag pieces from Čolaci contained higher amount finds, while weapons appear in Košćani (an iron
of iron oxide (FeO) when compared to the four spearhead) and Semizovac (a decorated bronze
slag samples from Pod, which could be an indi- spearhead). Characteristic regional jewellery
cation of a more advanced smelting technologies types of the 8th century BC are two loop bow fib-
at Pod. Furthermore, the comparison between ulae with triangular foot (from Semizovac and
two iron objects from Čolaci (a knife and an un- Gračanica), bracelets with ends positioned one
defined tool, probably a chisel) showed that both above the other (from Gračanica, Nević Polje,
were likely produced at Pod.95 It is thus obvious and Klaonica) and conical decorated belt buckles
that hillforts of Central Bosnia had strong mu- (from Gračanica and Klaonica).103 The pins with
tual relationships in terms of iron metallurgy, a small head and a neck torsion from Gračanica
but it is still hard to evaluate whether the iron and Nević Polje corroborate the chronological
production was oriented toward local needs or, cross-connection of the destroyed graves with
as previously assumed,96 towards generating sur- layer Pod C (“Schicht III”), in which the same
plus for exchange. The geological and natural pin type occurs. Less chronologically significant
preconditions with abundant and well accessible are bronzes from graves, such as anklets, arm
ore deposits and dense forest (utilised for fuel) spirals, and bronze sheet diadems, which all ap-
could point in favour production beyond average pear already during the Late Bronze Age as parts
local needs, the tangible evidences are however of traditional, presumably female, funerary attire
still to deliver. sets in central Bosnia and in adjacent regions.104
The continuous occupation into the next
stage of the Early Iron Age (the late 7th – early 6th
3. Burials century BC) can be assumed only for the burial
place in Nević Polje. Characteristic for this pe-
In contrast to the settlement activity, which was riod is a two-loop fibula with Boeotian shield
long-lasting, as settlements were occupied over plate, found in one of the disturbed burials.105
several centuries, the cemeteries discovered to The same type of fibula is documented also in
date are all short-termed and contain just a lim- Grbavica near Vitez, some 3 km west from Nević
ited number of interred individuals. The dis- Polje (Figure 9).106 Thus, in terms of chronology
crepancy between the relatively small number both burials can be linked with settlement stage
of graves and the intensive settlement activity Pod D1 (burnt horizon in “Schicht II”). Accord-
leaves the question of standard burial practices ing to the initial reports, the finds from Grbavi-
between the 8th and the 5th centuries BC more or
less open. Furthermore, none of the discovered 97
Čović 1987, 511; Perić 2002, 179; Gavranović 2011, 265.
graves represents an actual closed context with 98
Gavranović / Sejfuli 2015.
preserved human remains. Hence, at the current 99
Gavranović 2011, Tab. 21.
stage of research, it is difficult to make any gener-
100
Čović 1984.
101
Mandić 1933.
al statements regarding burial rites or grave con- 102
Gavranović 2011, Tab. 74, 6.
103
Gabrovec 1970; Vasić 1999, 48; Čović 1987a, 586; Gavra-
93
Ramović 1973, 12; Hrvatović 1999. nović 2011, 219.
94
Olovčić et al. 2014. 104
Gavranović 2016, Fig. 2.
95
Ibid. 868–869. 105
Čović 1987, 483.
96
Čović 1987, 516. 106
Sielski 1931.

38
 1 2

3
5 cm 1 2
4 5 3

6 7 8 9 4
10 5 6 7
11

Gračanica, older graves (Ha C1) Grbavica near Vitez (Ha C2 – Ha D1)

1 2 6

3 4 5 7 8 9

5 cm 10
Gračanica, younger graves (Ha D2/3)

Figure 9: Grave finds from Central Bosnia

ca (a fibula, twisted torques, an arm spiral, two or two knives and a sword) and imported bronze
bracelets, and a small spiral) originated from a vessels, typical for Donja Dolina but also for the
tumulus containing cremations. Later studies, Glasinac area during this period,109 are entirely
however, labelled these finds as coming from a absent in central Bosnia. Various finds of Med-
flat inhumation grave.107 A further indication iterranean provenance at Pod suggest, however,
that ensemble from Grbavica (the fibula with a that the Iron Age communities in Central Bos-
Boeotian shield plate, twisted torques, and two nia were part of a contact network that import-
bracelets) could actually represent a funerary ed objects to the western Balkans, but unlike at
attire set is supported by an occurrence of the Glasinac or Donja Dolina these objects were not
same combination in several graves of this peri- deposited in graves.
od in necropolis of Donja Dolina on the Bosnian Stray finds from the site Gračanica, used as
Bank of the Save River.108 However, while the a burial place already in the initial stages of the
jewellery types from Grbavica and Nević Polje Early Iron Age (Figure 9), are the only evidence
point to intra-regional connectivity the graves from graves that chronologically correspond to
equipped with distinct warrior attributes (sets the settlement stages Pod D2–D3 (“Schicht I”).
of iron weapons containing two spearheads, one Five fibulae of the Arareva Gomila type point
107
Čović 1988, 199.
108
Čović 1961. 109
Ibid.; Čović 1987a.

39
to the existence of earlier burials in Gračanica al culture and territory”115 inevitably implies a
in particular, as they are one of the important biological and ethnic affinity between the Early
chronological markers of the late 6th century BC Iron Age communities in central Bosnia, thus
in central and western Balkans.110 Assigned to overriding “collective identity.” This statement,
same context are an iron spearhead and bronze however, is not supported by any valid evidence.
sheet fragments (from a belt) with ornament in The insufficient data from burial practices and
repoussé technique (Figure 9, 6). the general absence of Early Iron Age human re-
In summary, it can be concluded that the Ear- mains make the theories about potential biolog-
ly Iron Age grave finds from Central Bosnia can ical connectivity between individuals and com-
be connected to no more than 10 or 15 individu- munities appear highly speculative. A striking
als, who were interred during a period over 300 resemblance of material culture between differ-
years, which is by far not a representative sample ent hillforts situated in the river valleys around
for any kind of general assessment. On the other the Mid-Bosnian Schist Mountains together with
hand, it is not probable that there still remain ex- their topographical and structural similarities
tensive undiscovered Early Iron Age cemeteries, (e.g., location, fortification style, size) neverthe-
especially considering the intensive archaeologi- less indicate a high-level of mutual communi-
cal surveys and increasing construction activities cation and exchange. In terms of classification,
of the last 150 years. Thus, the difference between the abovementioned sites undoubtedly represent
the population prosperity signalled through con- a specific archaeological group. Their common
tinuity of settlements like Pod, with stable devel- features, however, do not reveal much about
opment of several centuries, and the absence of the identity of Early Iron Age communities. The
corresponding burial sites cannot be explained long-term use of same resources and adaption to
merely by poor state of research. One should take similar natural and social environments could
into consideration that burial practices might eventually lead several communities to merge
not be traceable by archaeological means.111 into larger groups with a higher organisation lev-
el. Nevertheless, in case of the Late Bronze and
Early Iron Age in central Bosnia, there are still no
4. Conclusion and outlook arguments that would support any kind of aggre-
gation beyond the settlement level.
The Early Iron Age developments in Central Bos- In case of central Bosnia, further striking is
nia, are undoubtedly rooted in the transforma- that the introduction and expansion of working
tions that took place in the advanced phase of the of new metal – iron – did not significantly affect
Late Bronze Age. The sudden appearance of new cultural development or caused major breaks in
specific types of pottery with no analogies to the the settlement patterns. When compared to the
older periods and the emergence of well-organ- adjacent regions of western Balkans where the
ised hillforts during the 12th and 11th centuries transition between the Late Bronze and Early
BC have led to the assumption that certain new Iron Ages brought comprehensive changes in all
population groups could have important part in archeologically traceable aspects,116 the modifi-
the formation of the specific cultural phenom- cations in central Bosnia seems to be marginal.
enon, commonly known as “Central Bosnian The geographic isolation in terms of limited ac-
group of the Late Bronze and Early Iron Age”.112 cess to the valleys of Vrbas and Bosna from the
However, the concept established in the 1980s,113 north (Carpathian Basin) and the south (Adri-
and to a certain extent still applied today,114 that atic coast) combined with favourable resources
this archaeological manifestation was a “distinct, (especially fertile land, forest, and metal ores)
cultural-ethnic group with own specific materi- are certainly conducive to uninterrupted devel-
opment. However, the elaborated fortifications
around settlements also confirm the existence
110
Čović 1984; Teržan 1987. or at least awareness of potential danger. At least
111
Weiss-Krejci 2013.
112
Čović 1987.
113
Čović 1983; 1987. 115
Čović 1983, 434.
114
Pravidur 2015. 116
Teržan 1987; Pare 1998; Potrebica 2013.

40
at Pod, it is obvious that there was no hostile or Sažetak
violent event for 700 to 800 years. There is no in-
dication that the fire that destroyed most of the
settlement at the end of the 7th century BC (the Rano željezno doba srednje Bosne
“burnt horizon” dividing phases Pod C and Pod – pregled i perspektive istraživanja
D) was caused by outside influence. This event
definitely triggered certain changes in the lives Regija centralne Bosne, situirana između dva značaj-
of the inhabitants as visible in a major change of na kompleksa na istoku (Glasinac) i zapadu (japodska
pottery repertoire; yet, there is also a clear unin- regija), nije zauzimala značajno mjesto u istraživanju
terrupted settlement continuity. Despite the lack ranog željeznog doba jugoistočne Europe. Usljed ne-
of direct evidence for external danger, the fortifi- dostataka nalaza, prije svega bogatih grobnih cjelina
cations were constantly enlarged and optimized, i grobalja koja su se duže vremena koristila, ova je
regija bila neprivlačna za istraživanja koja su se od-
most notably at the beginning of the Early Iron
vijala u periodu između 1878. i 1914. godine. Admi-
Age. nistrativne i političke granice centralne Bosne koje su
In contrast to the argument of geographical definirane Dejtonskim sporazumom nisu obuhvatile
isolation is the evidence of metal finds, which određene geografske dijelove koji su tradicionalno
clearly indicate that the Early Iron Age commu- ulazili u sastav centralne Bosne u arheološkim okvi-
nities in central Bosnia were fully incorporated rima, posebno dolinu rijeke Bosne između Sarajeva
into the regional and inter-regional exchange i Zenice, uključujući i doline Fojničke rijeke i Trsti-
networks. From the late 7th century BC, the ob- onice. Centralna Bosna danas obuhvata dolinu rijeke
jects of Mediterranean origin also started to ap- Lašve, gornji tok rijeke Bosne, kao i područja između
pear more frequently at Pod, pointing to indirect spomenutih rijeka. Najvažniji podaci o ranom želje-
znom dobu centralne Bosne prikupljeni su prilikom
or possibly also direct contact with the Adriat-
istraživanja gradinskog naselja Pod i Kopilo koja su
ic coast, Central Italy and Northern Greece.117 se odvijala u periodu između 1960. i 1990. godine te
However, in contrast to neighbouring Glasi- u toku manjih istraživanja na lokalitetima Alihodže i
nac,118 Kaptol,119 or Central Europe,120 where Hadžići kod Visokog. Posljednja istraživanja na gra-
the appearance of imports is regarded either as dini Čolaci kod Donjeg Vakufa potvrdila su da je ovo
a consequence or cause of social differentiation naselje egzistiralo tokom ranog željeznog doba. U
and emergence of social and economic elite, radu su prezentirani i nalazi s lokaliteta Zenepić kod
signs of evident social stratification are thus far Novog Travnika te metalni nalazi iz uništenih gro-
lacking in central Bosnia. Moreover, it is even bova u Grbavici, Nević Polju, Semizovcu, Gračanici
more remarkable that there are no archaeological i Košćanima. Za proučavanje ranog željeznog doba
centralne Bosne posebno je značajno gradinsko na-
indications of socioeconomic elite either in set-
selje Pod, s horizontom Pod C i naseljem osnovanim
tlements (indicated by functional separation of početkom ranog željeznog doba.
areas or the presence of exceptional objects) or
by abundantly equipped graves, if one assumes Naselja
intensive iron production and surplus. In order
Najveće kulturološke promjene na prostoru central-
to elucidate the processes that led to this unique ne Bosne odigravaju se u periodu kasnog brončanog
regional development, it is essential to increase doba (Ha A2 – Ha B1) kada dolazi do razvoja novih
first data (e.g., from archaeology, archaeomet- naselja i pojave keramike s urezanim geometrijskim
allurgy, archaeobiology, and geology) and then motivima. Posljednja sistematska rekognosciranja
provide more exact results. otkrila su oko 120 utvrđenih naselja s nalazima koji
ukazuju na njihovu egzistenciju tokom ranog želje-
Na engleski jezik preveo Mario Gavranović znog doba, odnosno kasnog brončanog doba. Položaj
ovih gradinskih naselja nije uvijek isti – dok su Pod,
Gorica i Zenepići smješteni na niskim terasama iznad
dolina rijeka, Čolaci, Kopilo i Vrh Negraje nalaze se
na visokim, teško dostupnim platoima s kojih se kon-
117
Čović 1988. trolira dolina rijeke. Imajući u vidu nedovoljnu istra-
118
Čović 1987a; Babić 2002; Govedarica 2002. ženost spomenutih naselja teško je govoriti o njihovoj
119
Potrebica 2013. kronologiji, društvenoj organizaciji i funkciji. Naselja
120
Pare 1991. Čolaci i Kopilo osnovana su 150–200 godina nakon
osnivanja naselja Pod, dok je naselje Vrh Negraje, Ukopi
koje je smješteno na izrazito visokom terenu, paralel-
Za razliku od do sada otkrivenih i istraženih naselja
no s prvim horizontom naselja Pod. Najviše podataka
na prostoru centralne Bosne, a koja pripadaju peri-
pružila su sistematska iskopavanja naselja Pod s nje-
odu ranog željeznog doba, ukopi su relativno slabo
govom bogatom stratigrafijom i slojevima koji su na
zastupljeni, stoga pogrebna praksa stanovnika u pe-
nekim mjestima dosezali dubinu od 3 m obuhvatajući
riodu između 8. i 5. stoljeća pr. Kr. ostaje nepoznata.
period od kasnog brončanog doba do kraj 3. stoljeća
Grobni nalazi s lokaliteta Klaonica blizu Travnika i
pr. Kr. Utvrđeni dio naselja kontinuirano je bio nase-
Nević Polja, Gračanice, Semizovca mogu se datirati u
ljen najmanje 700 godina.
početnu fazu ranog željeznog doba (8. stoljeće pr. Kr.).
Pokretni arheološki nalazi Nakit preovladava među nalazima, dok se oružje po-
javljuje u Košćanima i Semizovcu. Repertoar nakita
Zahvaljujući pokretnim nalazima pronađenim u toku karakterističan je za širu regiju: dvopetljaste fibule s
istraživanja naselja Pod moguće je donekle rekon- triangularnom nogom (Semizovac i Gračanica), na-
struirati keramički repertoar ranog željeznog doba rukvice s preklopljenim krajevima (Gračanica, Nević
centralne Bosne s obzirom na to da je to jedini po- Polje i Klaonica) i konične ukrašene pojasne kopče
uzdano dokumentovan materijal. Posude kasne faze (Gračanica i Klaonica). Igle s malom glavom i uvr-
Pod B sloja i novog Pod C sloja pokazuju kontinuitet nutim vratom javljaju se u grobovima iz Gračanice i
forme i dekoracije. Za obje faze tipične su široke zdje- Nević Polja, kao i u naselju Pod C. Za sljedeći period
le s izvrnutim i često ukrašenim obodima, posude sa ranog željeznog doba (kasno 7. i rano 6. stoljeće pr.
široko izvraćenim ukrašenim obodima, poluloptaste Kr.) veže se grob iz Nević Polja u kojem je pronađena
zdjele s visokom ručkom i male posude S profila. U dvopetljasta fibula sa završetkom u obliku beotskog
ranom željeznom dobu pojavljuju se također i zdje- štita koja je karakteristična za ovaj period. Isti tip fi-
le, posude i kantarosi s bikoničnim tijelom, ali i male bule pronađen je i na nedalekom lokalitetu Grbavica
plitke čaše. Od ukrasa na keramici najčešći su motivi kod Viteza. Oba ukopa mogu se povezati s fazom Pod
polumjeseca raspoređeni u redove koji su naslijeđe- D1. Nalazi unutar grobova u Gračanici jedini odgova-
ni iz starije faze, dok su motivi trougla raspoređeni u raju fazi Pod D2–D3. Pet fibula tipa Arareva Gomila
redu s jednom vertikalnom linijom i različiti simboli ukazuju na postojanje ukopa u Gračanici s obzirom
u obliku malteškog križa karakteristični za stariju fazu na to da je ovaj tip fibula važan kronološki marker 6.
ranog željeznog doba. Materijal sličnih karakteristika stoljeća na prostoru centralnog i zapadnog Balkana. U
zabilježen je na lokalitetima Gorica (udaljen oko 800 konačnici, do sada otkriveni grobovi mogu se poveza-
metara od naselja Pod), Čolaci, Alihodže, Semizovac, ti s 10 do 15 individua koje su ukopane u periodu od
Hadžići kod Visokog, Debelo Brdo i Kopilo. Na osno- preko 300 godina. Ovaj broj otkrivenih grobova nije
vu nalaza može se dati okvirna kronološka granica dovoljan za donošenje nekih zaključaka o pogrebnim
egzistiranja spomenutih naselja te stoga slijedi da su praksama ranog željeznog doba centralne Bosne.
naselja Pod, Debelo Brdo i Čolaci egzistirala sve do
kasnog željeznog doba, odnosno sve do 3. stoljeća pr.
Kr. Nedavno prikupljeni nalazi s gradine Zenepić kod
Novog Travnika imaju svoje analogije s najmlađim
slojem ranog željeznog doba na Podu. To su dobro
poznate i učestale forme: male posude sa sferičnim
References
donjim dijelom i tri ručke, mala zdjela s izljevkom i Babić, S. 2002, “Princely graves” of the Central Bal-
cilindričnim vratom, posuda s bikoničnim tijelom i kans – a critical history of research, European
kratkim cilindričnim vratom te kantaros sa sferičnim Journal of Archaeology Vol. 5 (1), Cambridge
donjim dijelom i konkavnim vratom. Zajedno s nase- 2002, 70–88.
ljima Pod, Čolaci i Debelo Brdo, naselje u Zenepići- Bader, T. 1983, Fibeln in Rumänien, Prähistorische
ma predstavlja lokalitete centralne Bosne na kojima Bronzefunde XIV, Band 6, Stuttgart 1983.
je zabilježen život tokom posljednjih faza ranog že- Benac, A. / Čović, B. 1957, Glasinac II – Eisenzeit. Ka-
ljeznog doba. Metalurška djelatnost na ovim naselji- talog prethistorijske zbirke Zemaljskog muzeja u
ma zabilježena je kroz nalaze željezne troske, a koja Sarajevu, Sarajevo 1957.
se najranije može datirati u 9. stoljeće pr. Kr., i to na Benac, A. 1950, Istraživanja prehistorijskih nalazišta
naselju Kopilo. Bez obzira na nalaze koji upućuju na u dolini Bile, Glasnik Zemaljskog muzeja, Nova
ovu vrstu djelatnosti u naseljima, i dalje nedostaju va- serija Arheologija 4/5, Sarajevo 1950, 4–55.
lidni dokazi o rudarstvu i topljenju rude, kao i njenoj Blečić-Kavur, M. / Pravidur A. 2012, Illyrian helmets
obradi. from Bosnia and Herzegovina, Glasnik Zemaljs-

42
 kog muzeja, Nova serija Arheologija 53, Sarajevo Mitteilungen aus Bosnien und Herzegowina 5, Sa-
2012, 35–137. rajevo 1897, 124–130.
Bujak, E. 2012, History of Gradišće from prehistory to Gabrovec, S. 1970, Dvoznakaste ločne fibule,
the end of Middle Ages, Gradina 1, Zenica 2012, Godišnjak Centra za balkanološka ispitivanja 8,
9–31. Sarajevo 1970, 5–44.
Čović, B. 1961, Donja Dolina. Nécropole de l’ âge du Gavranović, M. 2011, Die Spätbronze- und Frühei-
fer, Inventaria Archeologica Jugoslavica, Facs 3, senzeit in Bosnien, Universitätsforschungen zur
Y21–Y30, Bonn 1961. prähistorischen Archäologie (UPA) 195, Bonn
Čović, B. 1965, Einleitung in Stratigraphie und Chro- 2011.
nologie prähistorischer Gradinen in Bosnien, Gavranović, M. (in Press), No group, no people? Ar-
Glasnik Zemaljskog muzeja, Nova serija Arheolo- chaeological record and creation of the groups in
gija 20, Sarajevo 1965, 27–145. the Western Balkans, In: Gimatzidis, S. / Pieniążek,
Čović, B. 1979, Kneževski grobovi glasinačkog pod- M. / Votruba, S. (eds.), Archaeology across past
ručja, In: Garašanin, M. (ed.), Sahranjivanje kod and present borders. Fragmentation, transforma-
Ilira. Zbornik radova prikazanih na naučnom sku- tion and connectivity in the North Aegean and
pu Srpske akademije nauka i umetnosti i Balkano- the Balkans during the Late Bronze and Early Iron
loškog instituta, Beograd 1979, 43–61. Ages (in Press).
Čović, B. 1980, Počeci metalurgije željeza na sje- Gavranović, M. / Sejfuli, A. 2015, Unpublizierte Bron-
verozapadnom Balkanu, Godišnjak Centra za zefunde aus dem Lašvatal in Zentralbosnien,
balkanološka ispitivanja 18, Sarajevo 1980, 63–81. Godišnjak Centra za balkanološka ispitivanja 44,
Čović, B. 1983, Srednjobosanska grupa, In: Benac, A. Sarajevo 2015, 67–94.
(ed.), Praistorija jugoslovenskih zemalja (PJZ) IV, Gergova, D. 1987, Früh- und ältereisenzeitliche Fibeln
Bronzano doba, Sarajevo 1983, 433–461. in Bulgarien, Prähistorische Bronzefunde XIV,
Čović, B. 1983a, Importation of bronze vessels in the
Band 7, Stuttgart 1987.
Western Balkans, In: L’ Adriatico tra Mediterraneo
Govedarica, B. 1982, Prilozi kulturnoj stratigrafiji
e peninsola balcanica nell’ antichità, Lecce-Matera
praistorijskih gradinskih naselja u jugozapadnoj
1983, 147–153.
Bosni, Godišnjak Centra za balkanološka ispi-
Čović, B. 1984, Najstarija prošlost visočkog kraja – ba-
tivanja 20, Sarajevo 1982, 111–188.
karno, bronzano i željezno doba, Visoko i okolina
Govedarica, B. 2002, Zwischen Hallstatt und Grie-
kroz istoriju I, Visoko 1984, 31–37.
chenland: die Fürstengräber in der frühen Ei-
Čović, B. 1987, Srednjobosanska grupa, In: Benac, A.
senzeit des Mittelbalkans, Godišnjak Centra za
(ed.), Praistorija jugoslovenskih zemalja (PJZ) V,
balkanološka ispitivanja 30, Sarajevo 2002, 317–
Željezno doba, Sarajevo 1987, 487–528.
Čović, B. 1987a, Glasinačka kultura, In: Benac, A. 329.
(ed.), Praistorija jugoslovenskih zemalja (PJZ) V, Hrvatović, H. 1999, Geological guide through of Bos-
Željezno doba, Sarajevo 1987, 575–644. nia and Herzegovina, Geološki glasnik 24, Saraje-
Čović, B. 1988, Die Wallburg Pod und ihre panno- vo 1999, 1–203.
nisch-adriatische Beziehungen, In: La Venetia Heilmann, D. 2016, Contextualizing bow fibulae with
nell’ area Padano-Danubiana, Convegno interna- Boeotian Shield plates: Cultural Transfer Proces-
zionale, Venezia 1988, 487–501. ses during Early Iron Age in the Central Balkan
Čović, B. 1991, Pod bei Bugojno, eine Siedlung der Area, Starinar LXVI, Beograd 2016, 9–26.
Bronze-und Eisenzeit in Zentralbosnien, Heft 1: Jamaković, O. 2010, Gradine na području srednjeg
Die Frühbronzezeit, Sarajevo 1991. toka Vrbasa / Hillforts in the middle river Vrbas
Dörfler, W. 2013, Prokoško Jezero. An environmental region, Glasnik Zemaljskog muzeja u Sarajevu 52,
record from a subalpine lake in Bosnia-Herzego- Sarajevo 2010, 67–225.
vina, In: Müller, J. / Rassmann, K. / Hofmann, R. Korošec, J. 1943, Nekoliko novih nalaza sa gradine
(eds.), Okolište 1– Untersuchungen einer spätneo- “Grad” iznad Semizovca, Glasnik Zemaljskog mu-
lithischen Siedlungskammer in Zentralbosnien, zeja 54, Sarajevo 1942 (1943), 56–59.
Universitätsforschungen zur prähistorischen Ar- Kučan, D. 1984, Kulturpflanzenfunde aus Pod bei
chäologie (UPA) 228, Bonn 2013, 311–341. Bugojno, Zentralbosnien (Hallstatt- u. La Tène-
Fiala, F. 1893, Prähistorische Wohnstätten in Soubu- Zeit), In: Zeist, W. / Casparie, W. A. (eds.), Plants
nar bei Sarajevo, Wissenschaftliche Mitteilungen and ancient man. Studies in palaeoethnobotany,
aus Bosnien und Herzegowina 1, Sarajevo 1893, Proceeding of the sixth symposium of the Interna-
39–53. tional Work Group for Palaeoethnobotany, Gro-
Fiala, F. 1897, Ausgrabungen auf dem Debelo brdo ningen, 30 May – 3 June 1983, Rotterdam–Boston
bei Sarajevo im Jahre 1894, Wissenschaftliche 1984, 247–256.

43
Mandić, M. 1933, Praistorijski nalazi prilikom reko- Ramović, M. 1999, Nalazišta ruda zlata, bakra, kalaja,
gnosciranja u okolici Kaknja, Semizovca i Novog željeza, srebra, olova, žive, antimona i arsena u SR
Šehera kod Žepča, Glasnik Zemaljskog muzeja BiH, In: Radovi sa simpozijuma rudarstvo i me-
Bosne i Hercegovine 45, Sarajevo 1933, 1–6. talurgija Bosne i Hercegovine od prahistorije do
Marić, Z. 1961, Vis kod Dervente, naselje kasnog bron- početka XX vijeka, Zenica 1999, 9–20.
zanog doba, Glasnik Zemaljskog muzeja, Nova se- Sielski, S. 1931, Arheološki nalazi u okolici Travnika i
rija Arheologija 15/16, Sarajevo 1961, 151–171. Žepča, Glasnik Zemaljskog muzeja Bosne i Herce-
Metzner-Nebelsick, C. 2002, Der “Thrako-Kimmer- govine 43, Sarajevo 1931, 7–12.
siche” Formenkreis aus der Sicht der Urnenfel- Teržan, B. 1987, The early Iron Age chronology of
der- und Hallstattzeit im südöstlichen Pannonien, the Central Balkans, Archaeologia Iugoslavica 24,
Vorgeschichtliche Forschungen 23, Rahden-West- Beograd 1987, 7–29.
falen 2002. Teržan, B. 1995, Stand und Aufgaben der Forschun-
Olovčić, A. / Memić, M. / Žero, S. / Huremović, J. / gen zur Urnenfelderzeit in Jugoslawien, In: Schau-
Kahrović, E. 2014, Chemical analyses of iron slags er, P. (ed.), Beiträge zur Urnenfelderzeit nördlich
and metallic artefacts from Early Iron Age, Inter- und südlich der Alpen, Monographien des Rö-
national Research Journal of Pure and Applied misch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums 35, Mainz
Chemistry 5(6), 2014, 859–870. 1995, 323–372.
Perić, S. 1987, Hadžići – praistorijska gradina, Teržan, B. 1995a, Handel und soziale Oberschich-
Arheološki Pregled, Beograd 1987, 25–27. ten im früheisenzeitlichen Europa, In: Hänsel, B.
Perić, S. 2002, Zum Problem der Bestattungsweise im (Hrsg.), Handel, Tausch und Verkehr im bronze-
oberen Lauf des Flusses Bosna in der Bronze- und und früheisenzeitlichen Südosteuropa, Prähistori-
Eisenzeit, Godišnjak Centra za balkanološka ispi- sche Archäologie in Südosteuropa 11, München–
tivanja 30, Sarajevo 2002, 179–199. Berlin 1995, 81–161.
Palavestra, M. 1984, Tierknochenfunde aus Pod bei Trachsel, M. 2004, Untersuchungen zur relativen und
Bugojno, einer befestigten Siedlung der Bronze- absoluten Chronologie der Hallstattzeit, Universi-
und Eisenzeit in Zentralbosnien, München 1984. tätsforschungen zur prähistorischen Archäologie
Pare, Ch. F. E. 1991, Swords, wagon-graves and the (UPA) 104, Bonn 2004.
beginning of the Early Iron Age in central Europe, Trajković, Č. 1971, Kopilo, Zenica – praistorijska gra-
Kleine Schriften Vorgeschichtlicher Seminar Mar- dina, Arheološki pregled 13, Beograd 1971, 26–27.
burg 37, Marburg 1991. Truhelka, Ć. 1902, Zwei prähistorische Funde aus
Pare, Ch. F. E. 1998, Beiträge zum Übergang von der Gorica / Dva prethistorijska nalaza iz Gorice (Be-
Bronze- zur Eisenzeit in Mitteleuropa I, Grund- zirk Ljubiški), Wissenschaftliche Mitteilungen aus
züge der Chronologie im östlichen Mitteleuropa Bosnien und Herzegowina 8, Sarajevo 1902, 3–47.
(11. – 8. Jh. v. Chr.), Jahrbuch des Römisch.-Ger- Truhelka, Ć. 1904, Der vorgeschichtliche Pfahlbau
manischen Zentralmuseums 45/1, Mainz 1998, im Savabette bei Donja Dolina (Bezirk Bosnisch-
293–433. Gradiška), Wissenschaftliche Mitteilungen aus
Pravidur, A. 2015, Hillfort Čolaci above Donji Vakuf Bosnien und Herzegowina 9, Sarajevo 1904,
in central Bosnia – new research and new findings 3–171.
in the central Bosnian cultural group through the Vasić, R. 1999, Die Fibeln im Zentralbalkan (Vojvodi-
typology of ceramic pottery, In: Gutjahr, C. / Tie- na, Serbien, Kosovo und Makedonien), Prähisto-
fengraber, G. (eds.), Beiträge zur Hallstattzeit am rische Bronzefunde XIV, Band 12, Stuttgart 1999.
Rande des Südostalpen, Akten des 2. Internatio- Vasić, R. 2003, Die Nadeln im Zentralbalkan (Vojvo-
nalen Symposiums am 10. und 11. Juni 2010 in dina, Serbien, Kosovo und Makedonien), Prä-
Wildon (Steiermark/Österreich), Rahden–West- historische Bronzefunde XII, Band 11, Stuttgart
falen 2015, 9–29. 2003.
Potrebica, H. 2013, Kneževi željeznog doba, Zagreb Weiss-Krejci, E. 2013, The unburied dead, In: Tarlow,
2013. S. / Nilsson Stutz, L. (eds.), The Oxford handbook
Radimský, W. 1897, Der prähistorische Pfahlbau von of the archaeology of death and burial, Oxford
Ripač bei Bihać, Wissenschaftliche Mitteilungen handbook in archaeology, Oxford 2013, 281–301.
aus Bosnien und Herzegowina 5, Sarajevo 1897,
20–123.

44
 Godišnjak / Jahrbuch 2018, 47: 45–57
DOI: 10.5644/Godisnjak.CBI.ANUBiH-47.102

Visualizing Cultural Diversity

The typology of one-looped bow fibulae with asymmetrical
and rectangular plates

Daniela Heilmann1
München

Abstract: The category of one-looped fibula type with asymmetrical plate has been discussed since the late 1980s,
especially with regard to their connection with Greek “geometric” models. The aim of the paper is first to sup-
plement the previous studies about the fibula type by re-examining the typological details and to propose several
variants. The integration of one-looped bow fibulae with square/rectangular plate into the discussion as well as the
spatial distribution of the proposed variants shall complete the study. The heterogeneity of the type and even the
variants lead to chronological problems regarding the exact dating within the first horizon of the Early Iron Age
(8th/7th century BCE). Therefore, the chronological position of the fibulae variants is discussed based on existing
relative chronological systems taking into account the local contexts in which the fibulae in question occur.

Key words: Iron Age, fibulae, female attire, central balkan chronology, contacts

Research History – Between South Therefore, fibulae of the type “Radanje” are in
general dated to an early phase of the Iron Age,
and East
between the 8th and 6th centuries BCE. Examples
In 1987 D. Mitrevski2 and R. Vasić3 distinguished showing typological characteristics which are di-
independently of each other a group of fibulae rectly comparable to examples known from Cen-
from the spectrum of Balkan one-looped bow tral Greece have been generally dated earlier as
fibulae with an asymmetrical plate due to their later, local developments.5 Most of the examples
shape and time of origin. Since 1999 these are are considered as products of local workshops
classified as fibula type “Radanje”, mainly dis- situated in the Vardar and Bregalnica Valleys,
tributed in the region of Valandovo/Gevgelija where they occur in graves as part of the attire.
as well as the Bregalnica Valley.4 In general, the However, the impulse for the design and style of
constructions of the fibulae are comparable, but the fibulae derives from Greek-geometric mod-
at the same time, they differ from each other in els known from Central Greece6, whereby atten-
the form of the plates, bows and decoration. The tion has already been drawn to the chronological
examples of the type show a great heterogeneity hiatus between the appearance in Greece and the
when compared to each other, which can be re- Balkans.7 In their studies of this particular fibula
garded as an expression of chronological depth.
5
Ibid. 73; Mitrevski 1987, 38; D. Mitrevski regards the ear-
1
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Institut für ly representatives as Greek imports and as evidence for the
Vor- und Frühgeschichtliche Archäologie und Provinzia- opening of the north to the south.
lrömische Archäologie, PhD candidate. 6
Vasić 1987a; Mitrevski 1987; in general fibulae known from
2
Mitrevski 1987. Thessaly and Western Chalkidike are used as points of compa-
3
Vasić 1987a. rison, as are finds from Attic graves from the 9th century BCE.
4
Vasić 1999, 72-74; 1987a; R. Vasić nevertheless distinguis- 7
Vasić 1987a, 41; see Pabst 2008 for the dating of especially
hed single examples and points to chronological differences the fibulae from Milci grave 31/35 to the 9th/8th century BCE
within the fibula type. and the implications for Balkan chronology.

45
type, R. Vasić and D. Mitrevski focused both on variant 2 corresponds to type A II 2. In addition,
the Central Balkan Region and the Vardar Val- a third variant shall be introduced that encom-
ley. As a result, the focus of the discussion was passes all one-looped fibulae with a square/rec-
on fibulae distributed within this area. However, tangular footplate, which are locally produced
this fibula type is distributed also in the Rhodope but show typological connections to Attic-Boe-
Mountains, which led K. Kilian to discuss it in otian fibulae. (Figure 1)
the context of his “Thracian fibulae”.8 When deal-
ing with fibulae from Bulgaria, D. Gergova clas- Variant 1 / “Type Radanje”
sified the fibulae with asymmetric plate into her Variant 1 incorporates examples which are char-
types A II 1 and 2. Due to their formal charac- acterized by a sloping, knee-shaped plate, which
teristics, she associates them with fibulae known can be either slightly concave or straight on one
from the Greek islands (“Inseltypen”). How- side of the plate. Based on the length of the fibu-
ever, due to the design of the plates she assumes lae as well as the design of the bow, two sub-var-
a local development and compares them with iants can be described.
examples from the Bregalnica Valley.9 While Representatives of variant 1a have dimensions
the distribution of the type “Radanje” within between 8.5 and 14.7 cm (median 10.5 cm). The
the region of the Rhodope Mountains was not- bow is generally round-shaped in section, only
ed also by D. Mitrevski and R. Vasić,10 a further the fibulae known from the eponymous location
discussion about the mutual connection of these of Radanje are rhombus-shaped in section.11 Oc-
two regions was not initiated but rather margin- casionally, the bow is decorated with grooved
alized in order to emphasize the relations with lines.12 The stem is rhombus-shaped in section,
the South. It is certainly true that the fibula type which is characteristic for finds known from the
“Radanje” is not comprehensible without Greek Bregalnica and Vardar Valleys. A further local
models. However, this fact should not lead one to characteristic is the decoration in Tremolierstich,
disregard stylistic influences from the Rhodope which occurs exclusively in the region of the Bre-
Mountains. As such, the following discussion of galnica and Vardar Valleys.13
typological details, the variants proposed and According to the observations of D. Gergova,
their spatial distribution aims to supplement the these fibulae are generally comparable to Greek
earlier studies in this account. fibulae of the so-called “island types”. However,
the characteristic feature of the sloping, knee-
shaped plate is not found on the Greek fibu-
Detailed typology lae, which led D. Gergova to consider this as a
characteristic of “Thracian” fibulae.14 The fibula
It has already been stated that the fibulae grouped
known from the burial mound of Čepelare could
under the type “Radanje” are less homogenous
be classified as a relatively early representative
and it is possible to further subdivide them based
of a fibula with sloping plate, which is associated
on some details. For an analysis, 31 published
with an iron bow fibula type B I 1 (Gergova) and
objects are available, distributed in two different
seems to date the find to the Early Iron Age.15 The
regions. On the one hand, they can be found in
feature of the sloping plate that appears on fib-
Macedonia along the Vardar and the Bregalnica
ulae found in the Bregalnica and Vardar Valley
(20 pieces), on the other hand, they have been
can therefore possibly be associated with Rhodo-
registered in the mountainous landscape of the
pian examples. In contrast, fibulae of this variant
Rhodopes (11 pieces). In general, the fibulae can
found at locations in the Rhodope Mountains
be subdivided into several variants based on the
rarely show a rhombus-shaped stem which is
shape and design of the plate, their measure-
more typical for “geometric” fibulae known from
ments and the design of the bow. Variant 1 com-
prises fibulae corresponding most closely to type
“Radanje” and D. Gergovas type A II 1, whereas 11
Vasić 1999, nr. 544.
12
Ibid. nr. 544. 545; Damyanov 2005, Fig. 4.
8
Kilian 1975, Tab. 81. 108. 13
Vasić 1999, nr. 544. 545. 546. 562.
9
Gergova 1987, 27. 14
Gergova 1987, 27.
10
Mitrevski 1987, 31, Fig. 2; Vasić 1987a, 42. 15
Ibid. 38.

46
 Variant 1a Variant 1b

1 2 3

Variant 2 Variant 3

4 5 6

7 8

Figure 1: Variants of one-looped bow fibulae with asymmetrical plate

1. Radanje (Kilian 1975, pl. 46,5), 2. Progled (Gergova 1987, nr. 38), 3. Gevgelija (Vasić 1999, nr. 536), 4. Suva
Reka, Gevgelija (Vasić 1999, nr. 550), 5. Agrosykia, Giannitsa (Chrysostomou 2007, pl. III.B.1), 6. Almopia
(Chrysostomou 1995, fig. 4), 7. Milci 31/35 (Vasić 1999, nr. 539–540), 8. Early fibula type of Attic-Boeotian
fibulae (DeVries 1972, Fig. 1)

the Central Greece.16 The different characteris- mat fibulae they are considered close to variant
tics refer to the hybrid character of representa- 1a. Due to the smaller format of the fibulae, the
tives assigned to variant 1a. sloping edge of the plate is only weakly defined.
Fibulae designated as variant 1b show a The height of the footplate encompasses about
smaller format in general with measurements half of the total fibula height.
between 3–13 cm (median: 7.9 cm). Because of Only three representatives can be assigned to
the sloping, knee-shaped plate of the small-for- this variant. Those fibulae known from Geveglija
show single bead mouldings on the bow, which
16
DeVries 1972.

47
distinguish the bow from the plate as well as the Besides the fibulae known from the cemetery
bow from the stem. The fibula from Bukri (Fig. of Radanje, the fibulae from the grave Milci 31/35
2, nr. 10) is decorated with grooved lines on the are to some extent regarded as the “prototype” of
bow. All fibulae are round-shaped in section the type “Radanje”. However, it is hardly possible
while the stem is rhombic in section. to clearly link it to any of the proposed variants.
Due to the design of the plate, which can be The size and design of plate brings them close
described as sloping and knee-shaped, the vari- to the variants 1. However, the plate is strictly
ant is ascribed to type “Radanje” in general, but speaking not sloping but arched, and the spring
with significant regional specifications. is relatively small by comparison with the repre-
sentatives from variant 1. Also the bead mould-
Variant 2 / Type A II 2 ings with fillet above as well as below, as well as
Representatives of variant 2 show long, narrow the widely spread bow are not characteristic for
plates with no or hardly any slope. The bows are variant(s) 1 or type “Radanje”, but correspond
round-shaped in section und not decorated.17 to representatives of variants 3. In contrast, the
Because of the distribution within the Rhodope fibulae known from Milci 31/35 are typological-
Mountains this could be interpreted as a regional ly close to fibulae from Central Greece.22 Even if
type. models from Thessaly are consulted, the compar-
According to D. Gergova, this variant corre- ison with Attic-Boeotian types is most likely pos-
sponds to the variant A II 2,18 which is directly sible.23 Decisive reasons are especially the wide
compared to bow fibulae known from the Greek spread of the bow, the bead mouldings as well as
islands. Based on the design of the plate as well the rhombic-shaped stem. The rather rectangu-
as the undecorated bow, which is round-shaped lar plate might indicate a direct import24 but a lo-
in section, this variant can also be compared to cal imitation seems more likely. Therefore, these
type II b (Sapouna-Sakellaris), distributed on fibulae shall be assigned to variant 3.
Chios, Crete, Rhodes, Thera and Samos. There,
these fibulae occur within Late Geometric/Ar-
chaic contexts.19 Distribution of the variants
Variant 3 / “Attic-Boeotian variant” Variant 1a seems to connect the regions along
the Vardar and the Bregalnica Valleys and the
Clearly distinguishable is variant 3 with its nearly Rhodope Mountains as represented in both re-
square plate, which is not sloping, but straight. gions. (Figure 2)
Variants characterized by larger measurements The small-scale variant 1b can be regarded
known from Suva Reka, Vinica and Agrosykia as a local derivate of the larger variant 1a. Due
show bows which are round-shaped in section. to the quantitative focus within the Rhodope
The stem is mainly rhombic in section. The fibula Mountains variant 2 appears to be specific for
of the smaller variants known from the cemeter- this region. A genetic connection to variant 1 is
ies of Agrosykia and Almopia have a spread bow not sufficiently clear. Variant 3 is also region-spe-
which seems to be thin and hollowed. The sec- cific and restricted to the area west of the Vardar.
tion of the stem is round-shaped. (Figure 3)
In contrast to the narrow, long-rectangular
plates of the “island types”,20 (nearly) square plates
tend to be more typical for the Greek mainland.21
The spread bow is also found in connection with
Attic-Boeotian types of fibula (see below).

17
Exceptions are Vasić 1999, nr. 550 (Suva Reka) as well as 22
Pabst 2008, 618–620; Mitrevski 1987, 30; Vasić 1999, 73.
Damyanov 2005, Fig. 6 (Gela). 23
Blinkenberg 1926, 147–185.
18
Gergova 1987, 27. 24
Gavranović 2016, 126, Fig. 2; with the exception of the
19
Sapouna-Sakellaris 1978, 45–47. fibula known from Rakitno (Ljubuški) direct imports of
20
DeVries 1972, 112. one-looped fibulae with asymmetrical or rectangular plate
21
Sapouna-Sakellaris 1978, 73. are hardly to locate within the Southern Balkan region.

48
 Figure 2: Variant 1 / “Type Radanje”
Star: 1. Radanje (Kilian 1975, pl. 46,5; Vasić 1999, nr. 544–547), 2. Valandovo (Vasić 1999, nr. 552), 3. Almopia
(Chrysostomou 1998, Fig. 4), 4. Nea Philadelphia (Misailidou-Despotidou 1998, pl. 224.a), 5. Draginovo
(Katincharova 2002, Fig. 1.2), 6. Grohotno, Devin (Damyanov 2005, Fig. 1), 7. Gela, Smoljan (Damyanov 2005,
Fig. 4), 8. Progled (Gergova 1987, nr. 38), 9. Madan (Damyanov 2005, Fig. 3)
Circle: 10. Bukri (Popov 1918, Fig. 4), 11. Milci (Vasić 1999, nr. 537), 12. Gevgelija (Vasić 1999, nr. 536)

The context of the fibula variants and rites are comprehensible. Altogether, D. and M.
Garašanin described five grave constructions /
their chronological position
low tumuli, which have been paved with stone
slabs.27 Stone material of different sizes as well as
Variants 1 / “Type Radanje” stone slabs in the cultural layer suggests that the
Due to at least four examples of bow fibulae with constructions were once covered with them. The
asymmetrical footplate from the cemetery of remains from grave 1, 2 and 4 indicate single in-
Kunovo Čuki – Radanje, R. Vasić denominated humations. A total of four individuals have been
them as type “Radanje”.25 The entire cemetery is registered in grave construction 5. Individuals 1,
located near a small river in a plain setting. The 3, and 4 are oriented north-west while individual
original structure of the necropolis is difficult to 2 was laid out in the opposite direction.28 One of
reconstruct due to agricultural use of the area. the fibulae was found in grave number 4 beneath
The site itself was discovered by chance and no the left shoulder of the deceased individual.29
structures were visible on the surface.26 How- According to the interpretation of the excavation
ever, due to several sections the stratigraphy of 27
Ibid. 15.
the location, grave constructions as well as burial 28
Ibid. 19–23.
29
Ibid. 19–23; Kilian 1975, Tab. 46; Vasić 1999, 73 menti-
Vasić 1999, 72–74.
25
oned three more fibulae of this type from the necropolis
26
Venedikov 1948a, 90–91; Garašanin / Garašanin 1959, Kunovo Čuki – Radanje, which are not included in the re-
10–12; D. and M. Garašanin assumed low, irregular mo- port of Venedikov I. Venedikov also mentioned a grave con-
unds, but could not rule out the possibility that the mounds taining several identical fibulae made of bronze (Venedikov
may have been higher and broader originally. 1948b, 91).

49
 Figure 3: Variants 2 / 3
Triangle white: 1. Agrosykia, Giannitsa (Chrysostomou 2007, pl. III.B.1; III.Γ.4–5), 2. Almopia (Chrysostomou
1995, Fig. 4), 3. Suva Reka, Gevgelija (Vasić 1999, nr. 551), 4. Vinica (Museum Vinica, unpublished)
Triangle black: 5. Almopia (Chrysostomou 2000, Fig. 9), 6. Suva Reka, Gevgelija (Vasić 1999, nr. 550),
7. Devin (Damyanov 2005, Fig. 5), 8. Gela, Smoljan (Damyanov 2005, Fig. 6),
9. Pamporovo (Damyanov 2005, Fig. 7), 10. Čepelare (Damyanov 2005, Fig. 2)

report, grave 2 is stratigraphically above grave three identically constructed graves occurred:
4, which contained the fibulae type “Radanje” as An inhumation in supine and outstretched po-
well as a vessel decorated with D-shaped impres- sition was bedded in a burial pit, surrounded by
sions (Nagelzier).30 It is further worth noting that amorphous stones and covered with stone slabs.33
grave number 2, the later one, contains a pyxis Besides bi-conical pendants and an armlet, grave
pendant, whereas the fibula type “Radanje” is 3 contained two fibulae type “Radanje”, found to-
not combined with certain characteristic types of gether as a pair under the left shoulder of the in-
Macedonian bronzes, which are otherwise abun- dividual. The grave further contained a jug with
dant at the site.31 D- shaped impressions around the neck.34
During recent excavations of the tumulus ne- Another fibula which can be ascribed to var-
cropolis “Kokolov Rid” near the modern town iant 1a due to its sloping plate has been recog-
of Vinica, several graves from the Iron Age were nized within the cemetery of Nea Philadelphia.
discovered.32 In the southern part of tumulus 1, Nea Philadelphia is known for its settlements
which is encircled by a stone ring (diam. 8 m), dating to the Bronze and Iron Age as well as for
its extended flat cemeteries dating to the 9th–7th
30
Kilian 1975, 91.
31
Unfortunately, in almost all cases the context of the Mace-
century as well as to the 6th–3rd century BCE.35
donian Bronzes from Radanje is unclear. Only grave 2, whi- The cemetery with the earlier graves is dated
ch is overlapping grave 4, is recorded with a pyxis pendant to the “Iron Age” and differs from the “archa-
(Kilian 1975, 91, Tab. 46–51).
32
I would like to thank Blagica Stojanova and Julijana Iva- 33
Stojanovska / Ivanova 2015, 135.
nova (Muzej “Terakota” Vinica) for their hospitality and for 34
Displayed at the museum Vinica; Stojanovska / Ivanova
presenting the site as well as the objects displayed in the mu- 2015, Abb. 8,4.
seum with such gusto and patience. 35
Misailidou-Despotidou 2008.

50
 Figure 4: Chronological systems regarding the Macedonian Iron Age

ic” cemetery less by grave construction or bur- preceding horizon with tumuli.39 However, with-
ial rite36 but rather by the material culture. The in the area of the flat cemetery no traces of a tu-
bow fibula was found in the “Iron Age” cemetery, mulus have been recorded. Even if grave distur-
which is mainly characterized by inhumations in bances are usually documented, destructions of
pit-graves or stone cists as well as local types of graves within the Iron Age are not typical for the
pottery and attire. The context of the fibula is not burial communities of the Lower Vardar Valley.
published. Therefore it is most likely that one-looped bow
Also the example from Suva Reka (Gevgelija) fibulae of this type occurred in the context of flat
comes from the context of a flat cemetery, mainly cemeteries, as they did at Nea Philadelphia.
with stone cist graves. Together with handmade The chronological position of the graves of
pottery it was found beneath grave 41.37 In gen- Radanje is not sufficiently clear. The material
eral within the cemeteries in the Gevgelija/Val- from the cemetery of Radanje was initially as-
andovo regions, ritual grave openings are well signed to the “Kumanovo phase”, which repre-
documented as well as the deposition of bones sents the first phase of M. Garašanin’s “Mace-
and furnishing of primary burials outside the donian Hallstatt Period” and which was at that
graves.38 The group of objects near grave 41 is to time parallelized with Reinecke’s phase Ha C.40
interprete also in this context. In contrast, D. Mi- Towards the end of the 1950s, M. and D. Garaša-
trevski argues for a destroyed grave, suggesting a nin conducted further excavations within the ne-
cropolis of Radanje. In discussing the chronolog-
36
In both of the cemeteries inhumations in an outstreched
position in pit-graves or stone cists prevail. Cremations in ical classification, they once more insisted upon
urns are indeed registered within the “Iron Age” cemetery, the proposal to separate an earlier Hallstatt phase
but to a much lesser extent (see Misailidou-Despotidou
2008).
37
Pašić 1978, 26, Fig. 13. 39
Mitrevski 1987, 31.
38
Georgiev 1980. 40
Garašanin 1956, 40.

51
from a younger one41 in Macedonia, analogous clearly separate the cemeteries chronologically.47
to the situation in Central Europe. By compar- As such, at this point it hardly seems possible to
ing mainly Macedonian Bronzes with examples date the necropolis and the fibulae from Radanje
from the Mediterranean, they confirmed the dat- exactly and confine them to a certain phase.
ing in the Ha C period.42 In the meantime sev- The tumuli known from Kokolov Rid near Vi-
eral tumuli from the necropolis of Orlova Čuka nica have been erected in the Early Bronze Age
have been investigated, which were also assigned and re-used in the Iron Age. The grave with the
to Garašanin’s (Macedonian) Iron Age II.43 On fibulae is dated to the 8th/7th century,48 which co-
the one hand, a chronological differentiation of incides with the general dating of the Iron Age
the graves from Radanje and Orlova Čuka is as- cemetery of Nea Philadelphia.49
sumed, because typical Macedonian Bronzes are
completely absent from the monumental tumuli “Attic-Boeotian” variants
of Orlova Čuka. On the other hand, it was not Two pairs of fibulae with asymmetrical plate have
possible to argue for a further subdivision of the been registered in grave 31/35 within the ceme-
Iron Age II in the Bregalnica Valley because of tery Milci-Gevgelija. Because of the tumular ar-
the comparable pottery style known from both chitecture, the grave has been identified as one of
sites.44 However, in the course of describing the earliest within the cemetery.50 The small, oval
central and eastern Macedonia within the fifth mound of measures 2.50–2.80 m (diameter) and
volume of the “Prehistory of Yugoslav lands”, R. is filled up with river stones. In the western part
Vasić undertook the chronological classification of the low mound an inhumation in stretched
of the finds made until 1987. He mainly used the position was registered.51 The attire is found in
system established by M. Garašanin but he also functional position, whereas the affiliation of the
observed some differences in the ornamentation pottery to the buried individual remains unclear.
of the pottery. Vessels from Orlova Čuka were As per the drawing of the grave, the large bow
mainly decorated with grooved lines and oval fibulae with asymmetrical plates were positioned
pricks, whereas vessels from Radanje are addi- below the right and left shoulder.52
tionally characterized by rectangular impres- Fibulae of this type were also found in the
sions. He also pointed to an earlier beginning of region of Almopia, Northern Greece. At Xiri-
the Orlova Čuka necropolis in comparison to the ka (Pella prefecture) a cemetery consisting of at
graves of Radanje. In his view, the first burials in least 40 tumuli, with diameters between 8–14 m,
Orlova Čuka were made at the end of the 8th ct. has been registered. Tumulus 5 contained a grave
BCE, while the graves known from Radanje had chamber with a dromos leading towards the
been laid out at the earliest from the 7th ct. BCE grave. According to the position of the skeletons
on.45 Within the spectrum of the pottery of the in chamber of tumulus 2 several individuals were
mentioned cemeteries, K. Kilian distinguished probably successively buried inside. The bronze
two phases, separating jugs with sloping rim (ME fibula with the large asymmetrical foot plate
II A) from channeled jugs with horizontal rims originates from mound 5, and was found outside
(ME II B). This is according to him supported by the stone chamber between the stones forming
the stratigraphy of overlapping graves.46 How- the tumulus, and is dated to the 8th/7th century by
ever, by comparing pottery and analyzing attire, A. Chrysostomou.53
he assigns graves from Orlova Čuka and Radanje Several fibulae designated as variant 3 are
to his ME II A as well as ME II B and does not known from Agrosykia. The cemetery has been
largely destroyed by agricultural activities. In the
41
Ibid.; Garašanin / Garašanin 1959, 59; the younger “Tre-
benište phase”, parallelized with Ha D, differs in terms of
years 1990/1 it was possible to document remains
numerous Greek imports from the phase before, which the
authors argue shows a social and economic development 47
Ibid. 91. 93.
within the Iron Age. 48
Stojanovska / Ivanova 2015, 135.
42
Ibid. 49
Misailidou-Despotidou 2008.
43
Garašanin 1975, 16–17. 50
Husenovski 1999, 92; Mitrevski 1991.
44
Ibid. 16. 51
Georgiev 1982, 66.
45
Vasić 1987b, 694. 52
Ibid. pl. 1.
46
Kilian 1975, 57. 53
Chrysostomou 1998, Fig. 4, 165.

52
of at least 10 graves. It is not sufficiently clear if study of the Attic-Boeotian fibulae. In fact, the
a – today completely leveled – tumulus covered fibulae from Milci 31/35 mainly correlate with
the graves – a hypothesis made plausible due to the Attic variant dating to the 9th century.61 The
the orientation of the graves – or if these graves traditional craftsmanship specific for this type is
were part of a flat cemetery.54 Although the bones however still visible when it comes to the Boeoti-
are badly preserved, it is assumed that the graves an variants, described as “Early Stage”, which can
contained inhumations in an outstretched posi- be recognized at least up to the middle of the 8th
tion and were once covered by long-rectangular century.62
stone material. The furnishings reveal a differ- D. Mitrevski dated this context to his Iron
entiation by gender, with the fibulae appearing Age Phase I (750–700 BCE), which is interpret-
exclusively in graves of adult women. Well doc- ed as “tumulus horizon” preceding the horizons
umented is grave Δ. Besides the bow fibula, the characterized by flat cemeteries with stone cist
grave contained a golden hair ring, a torque, a graves.63 The main reason for differentiating
pair of ear-rings, an amber bead as well as jug phases I and II are the grave constructions them-
and kantharos.55 As for the date of the context, A. selves. As such, the tumulus-shaped grave of
Chrysostomou followed the proposal of R. Vasić Milci 31/35 is pointed out as an example for this
and D. Mitrevski, dating the grave in the 8th/7th phase.
century.56 The following phase II (700–650 BCE) in-
The dating of the fibula variants depends cludes fibulae of the type “Radanje” with sloping
mainly on the fibulae known from the grave plate which indicates that they are supposed to
Milci 31/35, published initially by Z. Georgiev be younger. The same phase contains the classi-
at the beginning of the 1980s. He dated the con- cal canon of “Macedonian Bronzes”.64
text to the 1st half of the 7th century due to the According to this, phase II in Milci can be
comparison of the metal finds with those from connected with the Macedonian Iron Age IIA or
the tumular necropolis of Orlova Čuka as well Chauchitsa II (Kilian). Phase I can be synchro-
as Chauchitsa.57 However, the dating of the grave nized with Macedonian Iron Age I B 3, which K.
continues to be controversial. Kilian regarded as a Transitional Phase between
Although R. Vasić 1987 referred to the pro- the Early Iron Age and the developed Iron Age.65
posed chronological dating, he noticed that it Following K. Kilian, D. Mitrevski further includ-
cannot be verified with absolute precision58 due ed a certain type of falera as indicative of his
to the fact that the further attire within the grave Phase I.66 However, the published grave context
is characteristic for the whole 7th century.59 of Marvinci 15 – better known as the “priestess
S. Pabst also noted the divergence of the fib- grave” – shows the combination of this type of
ulae from grave 31/35 from the other represent- falera with a pyxis pendant, which is typical for
atives of the type and compares them with Attic ME IIA / Phase II.67
and Euboean examples.60 By identifying certain For Phase I after Mitrevski also (iron) flange
typological characteristics that corresponds to hilted swords are described as a diagnostic form.
fibulae dating to the middle of the 9th century, Within the region of Gevgelija/Valandovo two
S. Pabst proposed the dating of the fibulae from iron swords are known, both found in the cem-
Milci within the 9th century. This would solve the
problem of the already earlier observed chron- 61
see DeVries 1972, 114, in contrast to fibulae of DeVries’
ological hiatus between the Greek and Macedo- Boeotian groups, where bow and stem are clearly set apart
nian fibulae. It is possible, however, to minimize from each other, the bow and stem of Attic fibulae form a
the chronological differences with the help of a continuous curve.
62
Ibid. 114–115.
63
Mitrevski 1991, 153.
54
Chrysostomou 2007, 213. 64
Ibid. Tab. 1; Vasić 1999, 73, also Vasić implied a chrono-
55
Ibid. 220–221. logical priority of the fibulae from Milci 31/35 before those
56
Chrysostomou 1998, 158–159. from Radanje.
57
Georgiev 1982, 67. 65
Kilian 1975, 82–83.
58
Vasić 1987a, 60. 66
Mitrevski 1991, Tab. 1; Kilian 1975, 75; Kilian assigned
59
Ibid. 23. open-worked falera to Chauchitsa.
60
Pabst 2008, 617–619. 67
Videski 1999.

53
etery of Milci. One example was decovered out- number of objects which can be exclusively as-
side a stone cist, more specifically on the north- signed to Phase 1, it is difficult to argue for a sep-
western edge of grave 7, together with a jug and a arate phase.76 On the other hand, clearly estab-
kantharos.68 The second example originates from lished diagnostic forms are absent from the grave
a single grave, covered with amorphous stone context of Milci 31/35, which prohibits us from
material. Besides the sword, the grave contained clearly assigning the assemblage to ME IIA. In
only a Schälchenkopfnadel (bowl-head needle), order to tackle this problem, further parts of the
which is not typical for this region and therefore assemblage shall be discussed in the following.
cannot be used as a marker for the local relative The double-looped bow fibula with round
chronology.69 plate is a diagnostic form of horizon 1 accord-
At least one other iron flange hilted sword is ing to the chronological system of R. Vasić, but
known from the necropolis of Agrosykia (Gi- this fibula type is distributed mainly in Northern
annitsa). The cemetery is generally dated to the Macedonia / Kosovo.77 In order to gain a better
Early Iron Age.70 The richly furnished female understanding of the relation between the grave
grave Θ, can be linked to local contexts. It con- assemblage and its local context, the bronze hair-
tained among others an anchor-shaped attach- ring as well as the threefold buckle (“proto-astra-
ment as well as protome-shaped attachments. gal”) shall be discussed. The hair-ring consists of
These types are known from Chauchitsa a spiral wire, with one end turned back to form
where they are combined with pyxis pendants.71 eight-shaped loops.78 Hair-rings of this type are
The early archaic grave LXV AA from Vergina known from Chauchitsa as well as Vergina. In
also contained an anchor-shaped attachment.72 Vergina, mound I, grave B, the hair-ring is found
Consequently, the grave from Agrosykia can be together with a skyphos, dated not before the
dated to Kilian’s phases Chauchitsa IIA / Vergina middle of the 8th century.79 In Chauchitsa grave
IV / ME II A.73 In Agrosykia male graves typically 12 (1922) a hair-ring of this type is found togeth-
contained spear heads as well as swords, though er with a cup which is in grave 9 (1922) com-
only the example from grave Γ can be identified bined with a pyxis pendant and therefore dated
as an iron flange hilted sword.74 Given the differ- to ME IIA.
ences in furnishing, a systematic chronological Threefold buckles (“proto-astragal”) are
correlation of the female and male graves from known particularly from graves assigned to Ho-
Agrosykia is not possible. However, due to the rizon 2 (Vasic)80 or stone cists graves which are
spatial proximity of the graves as well as the com- dated to the 7th/6th century in general.81 Only the
parable grave construction,75 a certain chrono- grave Marvinci 15, with several buckles of this
logical proximity of the graves is to be assumed. kind, can be ascribed to ME IIA.
Therefore, it is probable that the iron swords As already stated, the grave context Milci
from Agrosykia also date to ME II A. However, 31/35 doesn’t provide explicit diagnostic forms
these contexts do not permit us to determine for a dating to ME IIA. However, several objects
with certainty if iron flange hilted swords can be with direct local comparisons as well as typo-
restricted to Phase I. logical details finally leave the option to connect
Nevertheless, the relative chronological po-
sition of Milci 31/35 and its contextualization 76
Pare 1999, 336–339; in discussing the beginning of the
within local environment are still difficult to Iron Age in Macedonia, Chr. Pare also noticed that both
determine. On the one hand, due to the limited of Kilian’s phases, I  B3 and II  A [which correspond to D.
Mitrevskis Phases I and II], include material which is com-
68
Pašić et al. 1987, 78. parable to material representing his phase Glasinac I B. This
69
Mitrevski 1991, pl. 1; the Schälchenkopfnadel from Milci is makes it possible to suggest a combination of the two initia-
hardly comparable to Central European examples (see Vasić lly separated phases.
2003, 94–95). 77
Vasić 1999, 54-55
70
Chrysostomou 1994. 78
Bräuning / Kilian-Dirlmeier 2013.
71
Casson 1925, 9-11, grave 13; Kilian 1975, pl. 34, grave C 79
Ibid. 64; however, the authors did not assign the grave to
72
Bräuning / Kilian-Dirlmeier 2013, Fig. 153. any of the Vergina phases.
73
Kilian 1975, 75–76. 84. 80
Filipović / Mladenović 2017, 155.
74
Chrysostomou et al. 2007, 218, pl. III A 2. 81
Dedeli Graves 1, 14, 25, 29; Marvinci Grave 13; Suva Reka
75
Chrysostomou 1994, Fig. 1. (Gevgelija) Grave 33.

54
grave Milci 31/35 with contexts which can be forms however oscillate between northern and
dated to ME IIA. Therefore, at the current state central Macedonia. Such diversity in the compo-
of research, it seems plausible to integrate Phase sition of assemblages has been recently used as
I and II to one chronological horizon – though an argument for the outstanding position of cer-
this may have to be revisited once further mate- tain female individuals within the society.84 The
rial is published. phenomenon of richly furnished women bear-
Nevertheless, the unique character of the ing a certain social role is in fact also discussed
grave construction, the assemblage as well as the for the regions of the Vardar Valley. The main
unique design of the fibula set has usually led to focus is however put on the so-called “priestess
a differentiation regarding the chronological po- graves” – which are so far best illustrated by the
sition of the context. However, until now it is not well-known grave Marvinci 15. Of particular in-
at issue if the social position of the individual – terest are in this case the “Macedonian Bronzes”,
and not the chronological position – led to the which are thought to have had a cultic function.
unique character of the grave. Because of this and the exceptional attire set, this
The furnishing of the individual with 2 pairs female individual is regarded to have had a reli-
of armrings and in total six bow fibulae as well gious/cultic function within the society. Due to
as a spectacle fibula is remarkable in a compar- the fact that the individual known from grave
ison with other graves within the region in this Milci 31/35 was not furnished with “Macedoni-
period. Indeed, given the smaller quantitative an Bronzes” it is not regarded as “priestess” and
occurrence of fibulae in graves of the Gevgelija/ therefore so far not included in the discussion
Valandovo region they can be considered as an of richly furnished women and their social po-
attire component which does not regularly occur sition.
in graves of adult individuals.82 Male individuals
usually receive a single bow fibula. Graves denot-
ed as women’s graves are usually furnished with Summary
either a pair of spectacle fibulae or a set of bow
fibulae, usually of the same type. By comparison The survey of the single-looped bow fibulae with
with other compositions, the set of fibulae from asymmetrical plate clearly reveals their hetero-
grave Milci 31/35 is thus remarkably diverse geneous character as well as the difficulties re-
and comprises various different types, making it garding their chronological position and cultural
standing out within the region. affiliation. So far, this type of fibula occurs main-
Worth noting is also the furnishing with a ly along the Vardar as well as in the Rhodope
single hair-ring. In the graves of the tumulus Mountains, though the regions of the Bregalnica
necropolis of Vergina, the golden hair-rings are and Vardar Valleys have been the main concern
part of female graves with opulent headdresses. of this paper. It is hardly possible to date the fib-
An argument has been made for their represent- ulae exactly. For that reason they are only clas-
ative character.83 Golden hair-rings are also part sified to the first horizon of the Early Iron Age,
of the richly furnished graves of Agrosykia (Gi- which can be described with the help of Horizon
annitsa). Even if the hair-ring known from the 1 (Vasić) as well as ME II A (Kilian). This first
grave of Milci is not made of precious metal, a horizon of the Early Iron Age of the Vardar and
symbolic character of the object should not be Bregalnica Valleys has certain difficulties of both
excluded. a chronological and a cultural nature, which im-
In considering the attire composition set of pede a clear understanding of the cultural devel-
grave Milci 31/35, the diversity of types should be opment of the region. The understanding of the
noted. The fibula set of type “Radanje” is clearly region is mainly based on grave findings, with
linked to Central Greece by its design. The local different kinds of tumuli architecture as well as
flat graves showing a diverse picture of burial
82
On the basis of 136 graves known from the Valandovo / rituals and material culture. This diversity leaves
Gevgelija region, which can be denoted as graves of adult us with a cultural picture which appears almost
individuals, only 18% are furnished with one fibula or a set
of fibulae.
83
Bräuning / Kilian-Dirlmeier 2013, 54–55. 84
Gavranović 2016, 131. 139–140.

55
fragmentary, making it difficult to understand većinom u fragmentima, otežavajući tako shvaćanje
the connections between the burial communities povezanosti između ukopa zajednica i njihovih inte-
and to integrate them into a larger entity like an gracija u veći entitet kao (arheološke) grupe. U kon-
(archaeological) group. In contrast to younger trastu s mlađim fazama ranog željeznog doba, gdje se
phases of the Early Iron Age, where types of bow tipovi lučnih fibula distribuiraju na nadregionalnoj
razini, tipovi prvog horizonta ranog željeznog doba
fibulae are distributed on a supra-regional level,
su više ograničeni na lokalno okruženje, s lokalnim
the types of the first horizon of the Early Iron
primjesama koje dominiraju nad nadregionalnim
Age seem to be much more restricted to local trendovima.
surroundings, with local tastes dominating over Rasprava oko konteksta fibula pokazuje da su jed-
supra-regional trends. nopetljaste lučne fibule s asimetričnom pločom pove-
The discussion of the contexts of the fibulae zane s pojedincima, arheološki definirane kao žene.
indicates that single-looped bow fibulae with Na temelju malog broja publiciranih sadržaja grobova
asymmetrical plate are linked to individuals ar- teško je otkriti da li su ti artefakti namijenjeni ženama
chaeologically determined as women. Based on koje su imale određenu ulogu u zajednicama. Iako na
the small number of published grave contexts it ovo ukazuje grob Milci 31/35, samo dalja sistematska
is difficult to discover if those artifacts were re- istraživanja mogu dati odgovor na ovo pitanje.
served for women bearing a certain role within
the communities. While this is indicated by grave
Milci 31/35, only further systematic research can
provide an answer to this question.
Bibliography
The author Blinkenberg, C. 1926, Fibules grecques et orientales,
Copenhagen 1926.
Bräuning, A. / Kilian-Dirlmeier, I. 2013, Die eisenzeit-
lichen Grabhügel von Vergina, Die Ausgrabungen
von Photis Petsas 1960–1961, Monographien des
Sažetak Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums 119,
Mainz 2013.
Casson, S. 1925, Excavations in Macedonia, Annual of
Vizualiziranje kulturne razlike the British School at Athens 26, Cambridge 1925,
1–29.
tipologija jednopetljastih lučnih Chrysostomou, A. 1991, Νεκροταφειοο τησ Σιδρου
fibula s asimteričnim στιν Αγροσυκια Γιαννιτσων, To archaiologiko
i pravougaonim pločama ergo stē Makedonia kai stē Thrakē 5, Thessalonikē
1991, 1994, 127–136.
Istraživanje jednopetljastih lučnih fibula s asimetrič- Chrysostomou, A. 1995, Το νεκροταφειο τωμ τυμβων
nim pločama jasno pokazuje njihov heterogeni ka- εποχησ σιδηρου στιν Κωνσταντια Αλμωπιασ
rakter, kao i poteškoće u pogledu njihove hronološke νομου Πελλασ, To archaiologiko ergo ste Make-
pozicije i kulturne afilijacije. Ovaj tip fibule se do sada donia kai ste Thrake 9, Thessalonikē 1995, 1998,
pojavljivao većinom oko Vardara, kao i na Rodopima, 155–166.
iako su tematika ovog rada područja oko Bregalnice Chrysostomou, P. / Aslanis, I. / Chrysostomou, A. (eds.)
i Vardarske doline. Teško je sasvim precizno datirati 2007, Αγροσυκια. Ενασ οικισμοσ των προιστορι-
fibule. Iz tog razloga klasificirane su u prvi horizont κων και ιστορικων χρονων, Veroia 2007.
ranog željeznog doba, što se može odrediti pomoću Chrysostomou, A. 2007, Ο οικισμός και τα νεκροταφεία
Horizonta 1 (Vasić), kao i ME II A (Kilian). Prvi hori- της Εποχής του Σιδήρου, In: Chrysostomou, P. /
zont ranog željeznog doba Vardara i doline Bregalnice Aslanis, I. / Chrysostomou, A. (eds.), Αγροσυκια.
ima nejasnoće i kod hronologije i kulture, što spre- Ενασ οικισμοσ των προιστορικων και ιστορικων
čava jasno razumijevanje razvitka kulture na ovom χρονων, Veroia 2007, 211–282.
području. Razumijevanje kulture ove regije bazirano Damyanov, D. 2005, “Ладиевидни” фибули в
je na predmetima iz grobova s različitim tipovima tu- Родопитуе, Studia Archaeologica Universitatis
mulske arhitekture, kao i ravnim grobovima koji daju Serdicensis 6, Sofia 2005, 206–213.
različitu sliku ukopnih rituala i materijalne kulture. DeVries, K. 1972, Incised Fibulae from Boeotia, For-
Različitost nam daje kulturnu sliku koja se pojavljuje schungen und Berichte 14, Berlin 1972, 111–127.

56
Filipović, V. / Mladenović, O. 2017, Contribution to Mitrevski, D. 1987, Bow Fibulae from the Iron Age si-
the Study of Astragal Belt Segments from the Ter- tes in the Vardar Valley, Archaeologia Iugoslavica
ritory of Central and Southeastern Europe, Prilo- 24, Beograd 1987, 29–42.
zi instituta za arheologiju u Zagrebu 34, Zagreb Mitrevski, D. 1991, Prilog kon vrednuvanjeto na
2017, 143–183. dolnovardarskata-pajonska grupa na železnoto
Garašanin, M. 1956, Razmatranja o makedonskom vreme, Macedoniae Acta Archaeologica 12, 1991,
Halštatu, Starinar 5–6, Beograd 1956, 29–41. 145–161.
Garašanin, M. 1975, Nekoi problemi na makedonska- Pabst, S. 2008, Zur absoluten Datierung des ersten
ta praistorija, Macedoniae Acta Archaeologica 1, früheisenzeitlichen Horizontes auf dem nördli-
Prilep 1975, 9–22. chen Zentralbalkan, Germania 86 (2), Frankfurt
Garašanin, M. / Garašanin, D. 1959, Arheološka isko- 2008, 591–654.
pavanja u selu Radanju, na lokalitetu “Krivi Dol”, Pare, C. F. E. 1999, Beiträge zum Übergang von der
Zbornik na štipskiot naroden muzej 1, 1959, 9–60. Bronze- zur Eisenzeit in Mitteleuropa. Teil I
Gavranović, M. 2016, Zwischen Glaube und Prestige Grundzüge der Chronologie im östlichen Mittel-
– mediterrane Importe in der westbalkanischen europa (11.-8. Jahrhundert v. Chr.), Jahrbuch des
Früheisenzeit, In: Großmann, A. / Gediga, B. / Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums Mainz
Piotrowski, W. (eds.), Europa w okresie od VIII 45, 1, Mainz 1999, 293–433.
wieku przed narodzeniem Chrystusa do I wieku Pašić, R. 1978, Arheološki istražuvanja na lokalite-
naszej ery, Biskupin 2016, 123–146. tot Suva Reka vo Gevgelija, Zbornik Skopje 8–9,
Georgiev, Z. 1980, Karakterot i značenjeto na von- Skopje 1978, 21–52.
grobnite naodi vo južnopovardarskite nekropoli Pašić, R. / Vinčić, Z. / Ivanovski, M. u. a. 1987, Nekro-
od železno vreme, Macedoniae Acta Archaeologi- polata „Milci“ kaj Gevgelija, Kulturno nasledstvo
ca 6, 1980, 37–54. 10–11, 1987, 75–84.
Georgiev, Z. 1982, Grobot 31/35 od nekropolata Milci Popov, R. 1918, Découvertes sépulcrales de l’époque
kaj Gevgelija, Zbornik Skopje 10–11, Skopje 1982, de Hallstatt, Spisanje na Bulgarskata Akademia na
66–72. naučnik 16, Sofia 1918, 105–116.
Gergova, D. 1987, Früh- und ältereisenzeitliche Fibeln Sapouna-Sakellaris, E. 1978, Die Fibeln der griechi-
in Bulgarien, Prähistorische Bronzefunde XIV, 2, schen Inseln, PBF XIV, 4, 1978.
Stuttgart 1987. Stojanovska S. / Ivanova, J. 2015, Conservation, Re-
Husenovski, B. 1999, Milci 1997, Zaštito iskopavanje, storation and Reconstruction of Iron Age Pottery
Macedoniae Acta Archaeologica 16, 1999, 89–116. Intended for Exhibition from the Kokolov Rid Ar-
Katincharova, D. 2002, Колективна находка от ран- chaeological Site in Vinica, R. Macedonia, Antro-
ножелязната епоха от с. Драгоново, Велин- pe 3/2015, Tomar 2015, 121–140.
градско, Rhodopica 1–2, 2002, 93–97. Vasić, R. 1987a, Prilog proučavanju lučnih fibula sa
Kilian, K. 1975, Trachtzubehör der Eisenzeit zwischen pravougaonom nogom na Balkanu, Arheološki
Ägäis und Adria, Prähistorische Zeitschrift 50, vestnik 38, Ljubljana1987a, 41–68.
Berlin 1975, 9–140. Vasić, R. 1987b, Srednja istočna Makedonija, In: Prai-
Misailidou-Despotidou, V. 1998, Ανασκαφή στη Νέα storija jugoslavenskih zemalja V, Željezno doba,
Φιλαδέλφεια το 1995, To archaiologiko ergo ste Sarajevo 1987b, 690–700.
Makedonia kai ste Thrake 9, 1998, 311–320. Vasić, R. 1999, Die Fibeln im Zentralbalkan, Prähisto-
Misailidou-Despotidou, V. 2008, Oικιστικές εγκα- rische Bronzefunde 14, 12, Stuttgart 1999.
ταστάσεις και νεκροταφεία στην ενδοχώρα της Venedikov, I. 1948, Bargala, Razkopki i pročuvanija 1,
Θεσσαλονίκης, Archaiologikes trochiodromiseis 1948, 82–98.
2008. Videski, Z. 1999, Lisičin Dol – Marvinci. Nekropola
od železnoto vreme, istražuvanja 1997, Macedo-
niae Acta Archaeologica 15, Prilep 1999, 91–112.

57
 Godišnjak / Jahrbuch 2018, 47: 59–76
DOI: 10.5644/Godisnjak.CBI.ANUBiH-47.103

The importance of small archaeological finds from Glasinac

Aleksandar Jašarević1
Doboj
Melisa Forić Plasto2
Sarajevo

Abstract: This paper presents unpublished finds from the Glasinac area, which became part of the museum’s
collections in the last couple of years. Most of them are chance finds of pottery and ornaments or finds from
small-scale excavations undertaken recently. The large quantity of stratified pottery from the hillfort of Gradac in
Sokolac provides a chronological frame for the activities at the site and exhibits a good correlation with the finds
from the previously excavated nearby tumulus. Systematic research of the medieval site of Crkvina at Glasinac
plain also revealed the existence of an older hillfort settlement dating to the Late Bronze Age. This recent discov-
ery increases the number of the known hillforts in the Glasinac area from 54 to 55. In the vicinity of this site, we
discovered a tumulus necropolis, probably connected to the Crkvina hillfort. One of these tumuli was excavated
during 2014 campaign and is described in this contribution.

Key words: Glasinac, Late Bronze Age, Early Iron Age, hillforts, tumulus

Introduction 1950s, A. Benac and B. Čović re-examined the

Glasinac material from early excavations and
More than one century after the initial discovery, created the basic chronological division of the ar-
Glasinac is still one of the most important ar- chaeological material into five phases,4 Glasinac
chaeological areas in the Balkans. In some ways, I–V, which, with some additional changes in
it became a paradigm of Bosnian prehistoric certain types of objects,5 is still applied today. In
archaeology. Large quantity of material, mainly the 1980s, B. Govedarica created a new approach
from burial mounds, challenged archaeological to the study of the material culture of Glasinac
interpretations for many generations. The main with an emphasis placed on the research of the
focus of research was, and still is, the interpreta- hillforts.6 With a new methodological approach
tion of already existing material that come from and in collaboration with other disciplines,7 the
more than a thousand tumuli. In addition, the results – at least those that have been published
archaeological research has been unable to chal- – were extraordinary.8 This promising research
lenge many of the traditional approaches due to was interrupted with the outbreak of the war in
a lack of new research and new data.3 During the Bosnia and Herzegovina in the early 1990s. After
that, research has never continued to the same
1
Regional Museum in Doboj, Bosnia and Herzegovina. degree. In spite of the wealth of studies con-
2
Faculty of Philosophy, University of Sarajevo, Bosnia and
Herzegovina.
3
Still, the material from old excavations gives an inexhau- 4
Benac / Čović 1956, 25–38; 1957, 26–54.
stible amount of data, which can be used in new studies of 5
Čović 1987b, 582.
the material culture (e.g., Teržan 1995; Babić 2002, 79–80; 6
Govedarica 1985, 15–24.
Blečić Kavur 2012, 59–60; Blečić Kavur / Pravidur 2012; Ja- 7
Говедарица / Бабић 1992, 56–62.
šarević 2015, 39–42; Heilmann 2016, 20–21). 8
Kučan 1995; Greenfeld 2005.

59
 Figure 1: Map showing the Late Bronze Age hillforts mentioned in the text

cerned with the material culture from Glasinac, with a possible church structure from the same
a great deal is still unknown. This applies in par- period.10 The settlement was built on an elongat-
ticular to the study of the archaeology of the liv- ed hilly plateau, loosely connected in its western
ing. Nevertheless, despite numerous gaps in the part to the neighbouring mountain. The plateau
earlier research, we have a large database, which is oriented east-west with a clear view of Glasinac
can help us with current interpretation. plateau and other hillforts in its surroundings.
The hillfort can be classified as a so-called lin-
gulate hillfort, according to classification of B.
Crkvina Govedarica.11 On the eastern and northern sides,
there were no traces of fortifications due to the
During the rescue excavations of the medieval very steep terrain. The fortification wall is likely
necropolis at the site of Crkvina on the Glasinac to have stood on the western and southern sides,
plateau in 2013–2014 we were able to detect the where the approach was the easiest. During the
existence of older cultural layers dating to the Late Middle Ages, the whole plateau was used as a
Bronze Age (Br D – Ha B).9 In published reports, necropolis and churchyard. Therefore, any trac-
this site is known as a large medieval necropolis
10
Стратимировић 1891, 331–332.
9
Jašarević / Antić 2017, 225. 11
Govedarica 1985, 17.

60
es of the prehistoric architecture were destroyed. Debelo Brdo,19 Soukbunar,20 and Fortica.21 Ac-
The layers with cultural materials are very thin cording to the B. Čović’s revised chronology, this
and disrupted by very deep burial pits that were type of pottery dates Phase Glasinac IIIa-b, al-
cut into the bedrock. The central part of the pla- though the shapes occurred throughout all phas-
teau was destroyed during the construction of es of Late Bronze Age.22 In Gradina in Sovići this
the medieval church. Despite these unfavourable type of handels is typical for the second phase of
circumstances, we were able to collect some finds this settlement,23 which can be dated broadly
that helped to define the chronology of the site from the Middle to the Late Bronze Age.24 Pot-
and its cultural stratigraphy. Most of the material tery from Gradina in Kreće has been dated to
comprised the remains of animal bones, main- the same period based on the comparison with
ly small mammals, sheeps and goats. Game was the abovementioned sites.25 More precise dating
present in small numbers.12 has been provided by M. Gavranović. According
Ceramic finds, which are rather fragmentary, to him, the dating between the 14th and the 12th
are most important for constructing chronology century BC (corresponding to the Debelo Brdo
and stratigraphy of the site. A group of diagnos- Phase B-C) can be proposed.26 Same pottery type
tic vessels with a single high round handle attest from sites like Prispu near Livno in Western Bos-
occupation of the site during the Bronze Age. A nia has also been dated to the end of the Middle
major problem that we encountered, however, Bronze Age and the Late Bronze Age.27
was the absence of reliable absolute dates and One of the pottery shapes from Crkvina that
a lack of stratigraphic context for pottery finds were partially reconstructed are bowls with flat-
from Glasinac. The basic chronological frame- cut wide rims. This type occurs over a wide ter-
work for most prehistoric periods in different ritory and had a long tradition of use.28 At Var-
regions of Bosnia is in most cases based only on vara, they were found associated with Phases B
the development of pottery styles.13 Particularly and C1,29 while at Pod near Bugojno they were
in areas where metal finds are absent or where characteristic of Phase B and often had decorated
metals finds are not well preserved, the pottery, rims.30 Finds from Debelo Brdo have been dated
as the most common category of finds, serves as to the same period.31 In the Glasinac area, bowls
a primary source of information.14 All ceram- of this type belong to Phases Glasinac IIIa-b.32
ic material from Glasinac and the surrounding During fieldwork in 2014 we were able to lo-
area, however, comes primarily from early exca- cate a necropolis with tumuli in Crkvina, which
vations without clear descriptions of the strati- is probably directly related to settlement on the
graphic context and the relationships to the plateau, located some 500 m to the east. About 10
metal finds. B. Čović discussed this problem in tumuli of different diameter and height are locat-
his doctoral dissertation and suggested how to ed at the site. This broad meadow on a hill slope
define diagnostic ceramic forms of certain peri- does not have a specific name and the site is usu-
ods.15 According to his chronology, vessels with ally called Brdo above Crkvina. Most of the tu-
a single high round handle (Fig. 2, 3) or a crest muli are relatively small, around 5 m in diameter
handle, sometimes with perforation, date to the and around 1 m in height. The largest tumulus
Middle or Late Bronze Age.16 This is one of the
common ceramic types at the Glasinac hillfort 19
Fiala 1894, 109, Tab. I, 4. 6; Čović 1965, Tab XX, 4.
and at hillforts around the Glasinac area.17 The 20
Čović 1965, Tab. XX, 6.
same pottery can be found at sites of Kusače,18 21
Ibid., Tab. XIX, 6.
22
Čović 1983c, 422.
12
We wish to express our gratitude to dr. sc. Jelena Bula- 23
Kosorić 1983, 78, Tab VII, 6.
tović from the Laboratory  for Bioarchaeology at Belgrade 24
Ibid. 81.
University for conducting preliminary osteoarchaeological 25
Косорић 1994, 11-12 Tab. II, 26. III, 34.
analysis. 26
Gavranović 2011, 27. Teil 2.
13
Čović 1965b, 35–39; Gavranović 2011, 40–111. 27
Marijan 1995, 39. 42.
14
Horejs 2010, 15. 28
Čović 1965b, 79.
15
Čović 1965b, 78–79. 29
Ibid. 79; Gavranović 2011, 188, Teil 2.
16
Ibid. 79. 30
Čović 1965b, 79; Gavranović 2011, 99, Abb. 127, Teil 2.
17
Ibid. 79; 1983c, 431. 31
Čović 1965b, 79, Tab. XX, 14–15.
18
Ibid., Tab. XXII, 2–4. 32
Čović 1983c, 423.

61
 1 2

0 10 cm

Figure 2: Pottery fragments from the Crkvina hillfort

62
 Figure 3: Cross-section of Tumulus I, Crkvina

was located on the west side of the necropolis. It the form of these remains may simply be due to
had a diameter of 12–13 m and preserved height a damage caused by looting of the tumuli in the
up to 1 m. This is the only tumulus at the ne- ancient times.
cropolis that has been excavated during the 2014 The necropolis near Crkvina has been known
campaign. since F. Fiala excavated four tumuli at this lo-
The tumulus was formed from earth and stone, cation in 1895.35 Three excavated tumuli were
with no traces of any funerary construction. It empty, while the fourth, which was the largest,
is interesting that the naturally elevated terrain contained burnt bones and dislocated remains
was selected for the erection of the tumulus, as it of the deceased. In this Tumulus IV, Fiala found
added an appearance of a bigger and higher con- fragments of iron knives, bronze tweezers, a
struction. Under the upper layer of the tumulus, fragment of probably some kind of boat-shaped
almost at its centre, a part of a human mandible fibula, an amber bead, and pottery sherds.36 It
and small fragments of human bones were found is thus interesting that in both cases, the larger
(Figure 3). The remains were piled up together Crkvina tumuli yielded dislocated remains of the
with fragments of pottery and animal bones. The deceased.
concentration of the finds shows that it is not a
regular, or normative, burial similar to that found
in the other excavated tumuli in Glasinac.33 There Gradac, Sokolac
was no trace of cremation on the bones, but we
cannot confirm an inhumation burial either, as Over the last few years, the Museum in Doboj
the bones were not in an anatomical position. We received a collection of pottery from the site of
further do not know whether the deceased was Gradac in Sokolac.37 These finds are important
placed in some sort of a burial pit. not because of their quantity, but because of the
Fragments of pottery and animal bones were variety of individual pottery shapes. Gradac has
also found scattered in this central area. Because been known for a long time as the place where
of fragmentation, it is impossible to reconstruct Ć. Truhelka began his archaeological excavations
precisely the form of the vessels. Based on the on the Glasinac plateau.38 His interest focused on
composition and small details of design, we can the excavation of tumuli around the hillfort of
confirm that they are prehistoric, most likely a Gradac. Much of the central part of the prehis-
beaker with two handles and several bowls with toric settlement had been destroyed by the con-
slightly cut rims (Figure 4), which we encoun- struction of the Church of St. Elijah in the late
tered also in the Late Bronze and Early Iron Age 19th century and by the levelling of the surround-
phases at Glasinac.34 Therefore, to sum up, the ing terrain for outbuildings and an access road
finds of dislocated human bones mixed with ce- to the churchyard.39 The site is located on a small
ramics and animal bones suggest that it is a sec- 35
Fiala 1895, 552–553.
ondary burial, or perhaps the remnants of some 36
Ibid. 553.
kind of a ritual activity, which took place in the 37
They were donated by a local priest, who had gathered
Late Bronze Age or Early Iron Age. Alternatively, them from the area of modern cemetery around the church
in Sokolac.
33
Čović 1959, 78-79; Govedarica 1978, 28–30. 38
Truhelka 1889, 25–26.
34
Čović 1983c, 422–423; Čović 1987b, 590. 39
Truhelka 1891, 309; Čović 1965a, 57; Govedarica 1985, 18.

63
 1 2

3 4

6 7
0 10 cm

Figure 4: Pottery fragments from Tumulus I, Crkvina

64
natural rise and strategically dominates over the from Glasinac and Sarajevo area date apparently
valley of River Rešetnica and the western part of somewhat later.53
the Glasinac plateau. The north and east side of More precise dating can be offered by draw-
the hillfort is rocky with a steep descent towards ing on the stratigraphy of the settlement of Pod
the river.40 The other two sides of the settlement near Bugojno. Bowls with small vertical exten-
were probably fortified by a stone wall. The col- sion on the handles, seen in the ceramic rep-
lection of pottery finds at the museum comes ertoire from Gradac in Sokolac (Tab. 1, 4), are
either from the area of the modern cemetery or characteristic of Phase Pod B or Hallstatt B1-B2
from the east side of Gradac hillfort.41 of the Central European periodisation.54 More
Most pottery collected from Gradac in Sokol- specifically, two ceramic types found in Gradac
ac contains fragments of handles and rims be- also appear in Phase Pod B. First is a fragment of
longing to different type of bowls and cups. a bowl with a faceted rim (Tab. 2, 1). Although
Among the chronologically diagnostic objects it is quite typical of the ceramic material of this
are finds of high rounded handles with per- period from Central Bosnia,55 it is the first such
foration (Tab. 1, 1). Handles of the same type find from Glasinac. The bowls emerged under
were found at hillfort of Kusače as well.42 Due the influence of the Urnfield culture from the
to a lack of metal finds from Kusače compara- southern edge of the Pannonian Plain, and be-
ble with those from the Glasinac area, the pot- came one of the favourite ceramic types in a wide
tery was dated very widely from the end of the area of Northern and Central Bosnia.56 In the late
Middle Bronze Age throughout the Late Bronze stages of the Late Bronze Age, they occur in far
Age.43 In his revised chronology, B. Čović dated wider territory. According to B. Čović, it is likely
the material from Kusače to phases Glasinac II- that such a wide distribution was influenced by
Ia-b, although it could span all phases of the Late the exchange with the settlements from Central
Bronze Age.44 Bosnia.57 Therefore, it is not a surprise that the
Two handles from Gradac are the so-called same type of bowl with a faceted rim was found
small crested handles (Tab. 1, 2. 5). In addition to at the hillfort of Korita in Southwestern Bosnia.58
the Glasinac area, they were found in the ceram- Furthermore, there is no doubt that the influence
ic assemblages from sites of Gradina in Sovići45 from Central Bosnia, and particularly from the
and Gradina in Kreće.46 Usually, they are char- region around the Sarajevo plain, was strongly
acteristic of hillfort settlements around Sarajevo. felt at Glasinac in terms of the selection of ce-
Similar finds from Debelo Brdo,47 Fortica,48 and ramic forms and their local production.59 This
Kotorac49 are all dated to Debelo Brdo Phase C is supported by a discovery of a bowl from Gra-
(12th to 9th century BC).50 According to A. Benac, dac with one horizontal plastic strip modelled
pottery with small crested handles from Kotorac around its body and a vertical strip modelled
can be dated between the 9th and the 8th centu- from its rim to its body, in addition to decora-
ry BC,51 as it was found together with handles of tion of zigzag lines (Tab. 2, 2). The same bowl was
the ansa bifora type.52 This type of handles oc- found at Debelo Brdo and was dated to Debelo
curs also in Varvara Phase C-2 (Ha A1), but finds Brdo Phase C.60
In conclusion it can be stated that the chron-
ologically diagnostic pottery pieces from Gradac
40
Truhelka 1889, 25; Čović 1965a, 57. point to the occupation of this site during the ad-
41
All findings come from a modern burial pit. vanced stages of Late Bronze Age.
42
Čović 1965b, Tab. XXII, 3; 1983c, 422.
43
Čović 1965b, 79-80.
44
Čović 1983c, 422.
45
Kosorić 1983, 78. 53
Čović 1983c, 422.
46
Косорић 1994, 11. 54
Čović 1965b, 51; Gavranović 2011, 98, Teil 2.
47
Fiala 1894, 109; Gavranović 2011, 27, Teil 2. 55
Gavranović 2011.
48
Ćurčić 1908, 377. 56
Ibid. 47.
49
Korošec 1940, 77–82. 57
Čović 1965b, 87; Govedarica 1982, 176.
50
Gavranović 2011, 27, Teil 2. 58
Govedarica 1982, 177, Tab. XI, 11.
51
Benac 1963, 29–30. 59
Čović 1983b, 404. 406.
52
Gavranovic 2011, 27, Teil 2. 60
Fiala 1894, 110, Tab. III, 3; Gavranović 2011, 27–28, Teil 2.

65
Čajniče different forms of single-looped bow fibulae with
a trapezoidal foot.69
The archaeological collection of the Tolisa Fran- The beginning of the use of this fibula at
ciscan Monastery Museum holds an interesting Glasinac is well documented from Rusanovići
find from the area of Eastern Bosnia.61 According Grave LXXXXIV/1, which gave the object its
to the museum inventory, a bronze fibula from name.70 According to B. Čović, these fibulae are
the vicinity of the town of Čajniče is a chance one of the main characteristics of Glasinac Phase
find gifted to the monastery from an unknown IVc-2.71 Their use was not just limited to the 6th
donor. The fibula belongs to the widespread type century BC, but they also occurred during the
of boat-shaped Rusanovići type fibula, as identi- first decades of the 5th century BC.72 At Donja Do-
fied by B. Teržan.62 The fibula has a boat-shaped lina, they were used during Phase 2b (6th centu-
full cast bow with a small horizontal crest at the ry BC),73 along with other forms of boat-shaped
top with two lines of perforated dots and with a fibulae. A fibula from Tolisa can be classified as
trapezoidal foot with vertical shallow grooves at a specific variant of fibulae with trapezoidal foot,
each end. Part of the foot is damaged and only a according to the typology of N. Lucentini.74 The
section of the ring is preserved. The ring is dec- main characteristic of this variant is a promi-
orated with hanging pendants characteristic for nent crest on the bow. Comparative examples are
this type of fibula (Figure 6, 1). known from graves at Gosinja (Grave XXIII/6),75
According to B. Teržan, the boat-shaped Ru- Plješevica (Grave III),76 and Okruglo (Grave
sanovići type fibulae originated from the South- III/1),77 all belonging to Glasinac Phase IVc-2.
eastern Alpine boat-shape fibulae of the so-called Fibulae of this type are often decorated with pen-
Šmarjeta type.63 On the Glasinac plateau, howev- dants and almost exclusively with three rings.
er, they received various innovative designs and Comparative examples can be found in assem-
forms,64 and became part of a recognizable local blages from Plješevica (Tumulus III),78 Okruglo
fashion.65 Comparative examples to this type of (Grave III/1),79 Brankovići (Grave II/3),80 Osovo
fibulae are numerous, especially in the Glasinac (Grave XXIII),81 all in the area of Glasinac, and
area, but they also appear widely in the adjacent furthermore from Karagač (Kosovo),82 Godlje-
region of Western Serbia (Figure 5).66 Bronze fib- vo,83 Kriva Reka,84 and Kosjerić85 in Western Ser-
ulae of this type can be found in female graves, bia. Individual finds of Rusanovići type fibulae
often as part of rich attire, as for example in from Donja Dolina in Posavina and Banoštor in
Grave 1 at Karagač,67 but some examples are also Srem provide the limit of their distribution in the
known from male graves, such as Grave LXXXX- north, while finds from Ljubuški and Ljubomir
IV/1 at Rusanovići.68 Fibulae of Rusanovići type in Herzegovina and Shtoj in Northern Albania
occur both in pairs and individually as well as in
association with other types of fibulae. The most
common combination is with the so-called spec- 69
Vasić 1999, 91; Heilmann 2016, 16.
tacle fibulae, double-looped bow fibulae with 70
Benac, Čović 1957, Tab. XXV, Fig. 1–7; Teržan 1987, 19.
Boeotian shield plate and with a characteristic 71
Čović 1987b, 619; Vasić 1999, 91; Gavranović 2011, 195.
“V” ornament, double-looped bow fibulae with 72
Vasić 1999, 91.
rectangular foot and two symmetrical holes, and
73
Marić 1964, 39; Čović 1987a, 246.
74
“Fibula con staffa ad anello terminale ed arco crestato”
(Lucentini 1981, 75).
75
Lucentini 1981, Tab. V, 15. 17.
76
Fiala 1895, 541.
61
The authors would like to thank Pero Matkić from the 77
Lucentini 1981, Tab. X, 5.
Tolisa Franciscan Monastery Museum for the access to and 78
Fiala 1895, 541.
information about the material. 79
Lucentini 1981, Tab. X, 5.
62
Teržan 1987, 19. 80
Ibid., Tab. I, 20.
63
Ibid.; Gavranović 2011, 195. 81
Fiala 1895, 558.
64
Vasić 1999, 91. 82
Srejović 1973, 55, Pl. IV–V; Vasić 1999, 90, Tab. 44, 672–
65
Васић 2004, 42-43. 673.
66
Vasić 1999, 90. 83
Zotović 1985, 76; Vasić 1999, 90, Tab. 44, 667.
67
Srejović 1973, 55, Pl. IV–V. 84
Гарашанин 1967, 47, Fig. 11.
68
Benac / Čović 1957, Tab. XXV, Fig. 1–7. 85
Булић 2016, 195.

66
 Figure 5: Distribution map of Rusanovići type fibulae (modified after Teržan 1987; Vasić 1999)

represent their southern boundary of distribu- part of the site named Abri II.88 The fibula belongs
tion in the Balkans.86 to the group of bronze crossbow Certosa type
fibulae, variant XIII, according to B. Teržan.89
Construction of the preserved piece consists of a
Pećina pod lipom leaf-shaped bow, but it lacks a foot, one spiral coil
and a part of a separate rectangular construction
One of the few objects that came from Glasinac that is attached with its lateral ends to the ends of
in the last few decades is a fibula from the rock the spiral coil (Figure 6, 2). The closest analogy
shelter site of Pećina pod lipom, near the site of the type XIII fibula has been documented at
of Kadića brdo. Pećina pod lipom is primarily Ćavarine (tumuli II and IV) at Glasinac, dated to
known as a complex Paleolithic site, with a thick Glasinac Phase Va.90
cultural layer dating to the later Prehistoric and
historical periods.87 The bronze fibula was found
during archaeological excavation in 2015 in the 88
Results of the archaeological research have not been publi-
shed. Material is stored in the Regional Museum in Doboj.
89
Teržan 1976, 380; Vasić 1999, 101.
86
Vasić 1989, 104; 1999, 92; Gavranović 2011, 195. 90
Fiala 1892, 412; Teržan 1976, 378; Čović 1987b, 631, Pl
87
Kujundžić-Vejzagić 2001, 39. LXIV, 13.

67
 2

0 10 cm

Figure 6: Fibulae from 1. Čajniče; 2. Pećina pod lipom

This type of fibulae demonstrates cultural and were found mostly in female, but were also
links between the territories of Glasinac, North- known from male, graves.94
ern Bosnia, and Slavonia with the Eastern Al- This is also confirmed by the discovery of
pine, Transdanubian, and Danubian cultural cir- numerous fibulae of the same type from the Sz-
cles,91 undoubtedly along the so-called Posavina entlőrinc cemetery in Hungary, where various
Corridor. These fibulae are more specific for the types of Certosa type XIII fibulae appeared in
territory of Donja Dolina and Sanski Most cul- many female graves.95 Bronze fibulae of this type
tural complex, where they were often discovered have also been recorded in the region of Syrmia,
as part of grave goods of Phase 3b (the second at sites such as Zemun, Adeševci, Sotin, Sremska
half of the 5th century BC).92 At graveyards in Mitrovica, as well as in female graves from Inđi-
Donja Dolina and Sanski Most, several varieties ja and probably Noćaj.96 Two fibulae of the same
of Certosa type XIII have been found as prod- type have also been found in the well-document-
ucts of local workshops, most probably inspired ed female grave G–2 at Beljnjača near Šid.97
by foreign models.93 They became a recognizable The distribution of Certosa type XIII fibulae
element of fashion in the 5th and 4th century BC south of the Posavina region can be traced in the

91
Teržan 1976, 380. 94
At Čarakovo cemetery, a fibula type XIII was found in a
92
Čović 1987a, 262; Jašarević 2017, 11–12. male warrior Grave 3 (Čović 1956, 188).
93
The best example is the emergence of Certosa XIIIh type 95
Jerem 1968, 184–189.
(Fiala 1896, 236. 261; Truhelka 1902, 263–264. 520; Teržan 96
Vasić 1999, 101–102; Dizdar 2015, 46–47.
1976, 380; Čović 1987a, 262; Dizdar 2015, 47). 97
Коледин 2012, 109.

68
 Figure 7: Distribution map of the Certosa type fibulae variant XIII
(extended, after Teržan 1976; Vasić 1999; Dizdar 2015)

valley of the River Bosna, a well-known prehis- Conclusion

toric communication corridor (Figure 7). This is
testified by the finds from the Vratnica tumulus After more than a century since the discov-
near Visoko in Bosna Basin between Visoko and ery of Glasinac and the initial suggestion that it
Sarajevo.98 is some kind of a sacrum Illyricum, many gen-
Certosa fibulae with a crossbow construction erations of archaeologists have worked on the
begin to appear during the second half of the 5th deconstruction of the myth of Glasinac as an
century and continue in the 4th century BC.99 exclusive place of death. The number of known
Certosa fibula from Pećina pod lipom can most tumuli is actually not as great as initially thought,
likely be associated with a nearby hilltop settle- and all the necropolises can be linked to nearby
ment of Kadića brdo with a documented Late hillforts.101 Still, the number of investigated tu-
Iron Age occupation.100 muli, 1234 in total, is impressive. It has provided
a large database of materials from different pre-
historic periods, which ultimately resulted in the
98
Čović 1984, 43; 1987c, 504–505.
99
Vasić 1999, 101–102; Dizdar 2015, 47. Govedarica 1978, 32; 1985, 16–17; Čović 1987b, 578;
101

100
Govedarica 1990, 86–88. Васић 2003, 7–8; Jašarević 2015, 42.

69
definition of the Glasinac cultural complex.102 Rezime / Sažetak
The study of the material culture from the tumuli
has always been the focus of research at Glasinac
ever since the first basic systematisation of mate- Važnost malih arheoloških nalaza
rials by A. Benac and B. Čović in 1956–1957.103 sa Glasinca
In the end, this has created a problem how to
link the places of the living with the places of the U ovom se radu predstavljaju neobjavljeni nalazi sa
burials. Chronological and cultural sequence of područja Glasinca, koji su posljednjih nekoliko godi-
settlements in the Glasinac area is poorly docu- na postali dio različitih muzejskih zbirki. Većina od
mented,104 and we have not been able to compare njih su slučajni nalazi keramike i sitnih ornamenata,
periodisation based on grave finds with the ma- ili je pak riječ o nalazima koji dolaze sa arheoloških
iskopavanja u poslednjih nekoliko godina. Velika ko-
terial remains from the hillforts. Primarily, this
ličina keramike sa lokaliteta Gradac u Sokocu daje
issue refers to pottery, which is usually the most
hronološki okvir za naseobinske aktivnosti i pokazuje
common find, and which gives us the most infor- dobru korelaciju s nalazima sa prethodno iskopanih
mation about the way of life, traditions, influenc- okolnih tumula. Sistematska istraživanje srednjovje-
es, and innovation. kovnog lokaliteta Crkvina na Glasinačkom polju ot-
Finds of fibulae from Čajniče and Pećina pod krilo je i postojanje starije faze naseljavanja iz perioda
lipom are both chance finds lacking stratigraph- kasnog bronzanog doba. Ovo nedavno otkriće pove-
ic context, but they nonetheless provide some ćava broj poznatih gradina na području Glasinca. U
information about the influences that reached blizini ovoga lokaliteta otkrivena je i nekropola pod
Glasinac especially during the final stages of the tumulima, vjerovatno povezanu s gradinskim nase-
ljem na Crkvini. Jedan od tih tumula iskopan je to-
Early Iron Age. Archaeologically most visible in-
kom kampanje 2014. godine i opisan je u ovom radu.
novations in Glasinac come from the Early Iron Lokalitet Crkvina lociran je na istoimenom brdu
Age, when foreign elements were adopted and uz magistralni put Sokolac–Rogatica u selu Bjelosa-
either integrated into the prevailing local cultur- vljevići u zapadnom dijelu Glasinačkog polja na koti
al code or transformed and adjusted to fit local 865. m n. v. Lokalitet ima dominantnu poziciju i vidlji-
needs.105 vu komunikaciju nad čitavim prostorom Glasinačkog
The ceramic finds from Gradac in Sokolac polja. Prilaz je moguć sa istočne i južne strane, dok
provide a little insight into the ceramic spectrum strm i oštar usjek u brdu sa sjevera i zapada nije dopu-
in Glasinac. Typologically most sensitive finds štao lak prilaz lokalitetu. Nivelacija terena djelimično
link this spectrum to assemblages from hillforts je urađena tokom kasnog bronzanog doba kada je na
platou formirano gradinsko naselje.Ostaci keramike i
around the Sarajevo plain, such as Debelo Brdo,
životinjskih kostiju iz ovoga perioda pronalaženi su u
Fortica, and Kotorac. In fact, this is not too sur- slojevima nasipa oko srednjovjekovne crkve i pri isko-
prising. If we look at the metal finds, especially pavanju grobova ispod stećaka. Najveći dio praistorij-
ornaments (for example, belts of the Mramorac skog naselja uništen je intenzivnim sahranjivanjem i
type) from the tumuli in Glasinac and the finds gradnjom srednjovjekovne crkve. Keramički nalazi,
from the abovementioned hillforts,106 we can see koji su prilično fragmentarni, najvažnija su kategorija
a connection that was active throughout the Early za hronološko opredjeljenje i stratigrafiju lokaliteta.
Iron Age. The similarities in the ceramic repertoire Skupina dijagnostičkih posuda sa visokom
are also evident in assemblages from the hillforts okruglom, krestastom, ručkom potvrđuje naseljavanje
at Gradina in Sovići and Gradina in Kreće, which tokom kasnog bronzanog doba. Osnovni hronološki
okvir za većinu praistorijskih razdoblja u različitim
show a rather uniform tradition that was not only
dijelovima Bosne najviše se temelji samo na razvoju
characteristic of the inner circle of Glasinac hill- keramičkih stilova. Posebno u područjima gdje nema
forts, but of a broader cultural area. metalnih nalaza ili gdje metalni nalazi nisu dobro
očuvani. Keramika, kao najčešća kategorija nalaza,
Na engleski jezik preveo Aleksandar Jašarević služi kao primarni izvor informacija. Cjelokupan ke-
ramički materijali sa Glasinca i okolice, međutim, do-
102
Čović 1987b, 579–580.
103
Benac / Čović 1956; 1957; Heilmann 2016, 20–21. laze prvenstveno sa ranih iskopavanja bez preciznih
104
Govedarica 1985. stratigrafskih detalja i odnosa sa metalnim nalazima.
105
Heilmann 2016, 21. B. Čović raspravljao je o ovom problemu u svojoj dok-
106
Fiala 1894, 120. torskoj disertaciji i predložio kako definirati dijagno-

70
stičke keramičke oblike određenih razdoblja. Prema novići najvjerovatnije nastaju prema modelima fibula
njegovoj hronologiji, posude sa visokom okruglom, sa prostora jugoistočnih alpi poput tzv. Šmarjeta tip
krestastom, ručkom, ponekad sa perforacijom, datu- fibula. Na Glasincu, međutim, dobile su razne inova-
je se u srednje ili kasno bronzano doba. To je jedan tivne forme, te su postali dio prepoznatljive lokalne
od uobičajenih keramičkih tipova na gradinama sa nošnje. Komparativni primjerci za ove vrste fibula su
Glasinca i na gradinama oko Glasinca. Ista kerami- brojne, osobito na glasinačkom području, ali one se
ka može se naći na lokalitetima Kusače, Debelo Brdo, također pojavljuju i u susjednim regijama zapadne
Soukbunar i Fortica. Prema revidiranoj hronologiji Srbije i Kosova. Fibule tipa Rusanovići dolaze u pa-
B. Čovića, ova vrsta keramike datira iz faze Glasinac rovima ili pojedinačno, kao i u kombinaciji s drugim
IIIa-b. Preciznije datiranje pruža tipologija M. Gavra- vrstama istovremenih fibula.
novića koji nalaze datuje između 14. i 12. vijeka BC Jedan od rijetkih predmeta koji je dolazio sa Gla-
(što odgovara fazi Debelo Brdo B-C). Ista vrsta ke- sinca u zadnjih nekoliko desetljeća je fibula sa nala-
ramike iz mjesta Prispu kod Livna u zapadnoj Bosni zišta Pećina pod lipom, u blizini mjesta Kadića brda.
također je datirana od kraja srednjeg bronzanog doba Pećina pod lipom prvenstveno je poznata kao kom-
i u kasnog bronzanog doba. pleksno paleolitsko nalazište, ali i lokalitet sa kultur-
Na lokaciji Brdo nad Crkvinom tokom 2014. go- nim slojem iz kasnijih praistorijskih i istorijskih raz-
dine izvršeno je iskopavanje najvećeg tumula na ne- doblja. Bronzana fibula pronađena je tokom arheološ-
kropoli. Tumul je formiran od zemlje i kamena, bez kog iskopavanja 2015. godine u dijelu lokaliteta pod
tragova bilo kakve kamene konstrukcije. Zanimljivo nazivom Abri II. Fibula spada u skupinu bronzanih
da je prirodno uzvišeni teren odabran za formiranje samostrelnih Certosa tip fibula, varijanta XIII, prema
tumula, jer je davao izgled monumentalnosti. Pod tipologiji B. Teržan. Najbliža analogija tipa XIII fibule
gornjim slojem tumula, gotovo u njegovom središtu, je dokumentirana na Ćavarinama (tumuli II i IV) u
pronađen je dio ljudske mandibule i manji fragmenti Glasincu, datiranoj Glasinac Va faza. Ova vrsta fibu-
ljudskih kostiju. Ostaci su bili koncetrisani zajedno s la pokazuje kulturne veze između područja Glasinca,
ulomcima keramike i životinjskih kostiju. Koncentra- sjeverne Bosne i Slavonije s istočno alpskim, Transda-
cija nalaza pokazuje da nije riječ o standardnom ili nubijskim i Podunavskim kulturnim krugovima, ne-
normativnom pokopu, sličan onima koji su se nalazili sumnjivo duž tzv. Posavinskog koridora. Ove fibule su
u drugim iskopanim tumulima u Glasincu. Nije bilo specifičnije za područje kulturnog kompleksa Donja
tragova kremiranja na kostima, ali ne možemo potvr- Dolina - Sanski Most, gdje su često otkriveni kao dio
diti ni inhumiranje, jer kosti nisu bile u anatomskom grobnih cjelina iz faze 3b (druga polovica 5-4. stoljeća
položaju. Nadalje, ne znamo je li pokojnik bio smje- prije n.e.).
šten u neku vrstu grobne jame. Fragmenti keramike
i životinjskih kostiju također su bili koncetrisani u
ovom središnjem dijelu tumula. Zbog fragmentacije,
nemoguće je tačno rekonstruirati oblik keramičkih
posuda. Na temelju sastava i malih detalja u dizajnu,
možemo potvrditi da se radi o praistorijskim nala- Bibliography
zima, najvjerovatnije pehara s dvije ručke i nekoliko
zdjela sa zasječenim rubovima. Babić, S. 2002, ‘Princely graves’ of the Central Balkans
Većina keramike sakupljena sa Gradca na Sokocu – critical history of research, Journal of European
sadrži ulomke ručki i oboda koji pripadaju različitim archaeology V (1), Cambridge 2002, 70–88.
vrstama zdjela i pehara. Među hronološkim dijagno- Булић, Д. 2016, Археолошка истраживања локали-
stičkim objektima nalazimo velike zaobljene ručke s тета Гробљице у Косјерићу, Гласник Српског ар-
perforacijom. Ručke istog tipa pronađene su i na gra- хеолошког друштва 32, Beograd 2016, 183–199.
dini Kusače. Keramika ovoga tipa bila je vrlo popular- Benac, A. / Čović, B. 1956, Glasinac I – Bronzano
na od kraja srednjeg bronzanog doba i tokom kasnog doba, Zemaljski muzej, Sarajevo 1956.
bronzanog doba. U njegovoj revidiranoj hronologiji, Benac, A. / Čović, B. 1957, Glasinac II – Željezno
B. Čović materijal sa Kusača datuje u Glasinac IIIa-b doba, Zemaljski muzej, Sarajevo 1957.
fazu, iako je mogao obuhvatiti i sve faze kasnog bron- Benac, A. 1963, Gradac Ilinjača kod Kotorca, Prilozi
zanog doba. za proučavanje istorije Sarajeva I, Sarajevo 1963,
Arheološka zbirka Muzeja franjevačkog samo- 25–32.
stana u Tolisi posjeduje zanimljiv nalaz s područja Blečić Kavur, M. / Pravidur, A. 2012, Ilirske kacige s
istočne Bosne. Bronzana fibula iz okoline Čajniča je područja Bosne i Hercegovine, Glasnik Zemaljs-
slučajni nalaz poklonjen samostanu od nepoznatog kog muzeja u Sarajevu 53, Sarajevo 2012, 35–122.
donatora. Fibula pripada raširenoj vrsti fibula tip Ru- Blečić Kavur, M. 2012, Ukrašene brončane falere s
sanović, prema tipologiji B. Teržan. Fibule tipa Rusa- trnom: ornament kao amblem, Godišnjak Cen-

71
 tra za balkanološka ispitivanja 41, Sarajevo 2012, Gavranović, M. 2011, Die Spätbronze- und Frühei-
43–66. senzeit in Bosnien, Bonn 2011.
Čović, B. 1956, Ilirska nekropola u Čarakovu, Glasnik Govedarica, B. 1978, Novi arheološki prilozi
Zemaljskog muzeja u Sarajevu, 11 (n. s.), Sarajevo istraživanju tumula na glasinačkom području,
1956, 187–204. Godišnjak Centra za balkanološka ispitivanja 18,
Čović, B. 1959, Glasinac 1957. Rezultati revizionog Sarajevo 1978, 15–36.
iskopavanja tumula glasinačkog tipa, Glasnik Ze- Govedarica, B. 1982, Prilozi kulturnoj stratigrafiji
maljskog muzeja u Sarajevu XIV (n. s.), Sarajevo praistorijskih gradinskih naselja u jugozapadnoj
1959, 53–85. Bosni, Godišnjak Centra za balkanološka ispi-
Čović, B. 1965a, Novi nalazi sa nekropole “Gradac” tivanja 20/18, Sarajevo 1982, 111–188.
u Sokocu i neka pitanja glasinačke hronologije, Govedarica, B. 1985, O istraživanju glasinačkih gradi-
Članci i građa za kulturnu istoriju istočne Bosne na, Materijali Saveza arheoloških društva Jugosla-
VI, Tuzla 1965, 57–80. vije XX, Beograd 1985, 15–27.
Čović, B. 1965b, Uvod u stratigrafiju i hronologiju Govedarica, B. 1990, Klisura / Kadića Brdo, Prehi-
praistorijskih gradina u Bosni, Glasnik Zemaljs- storic Hillfort, Arheološki Pregled 29, Ljubljana
kog muzeja u Sarajevu XX (n. s.), Sarajevo 1965b, 1990, 85–88.
27–145. Говедарица, Б. / Бабић, С. 1992, Методологија
Čović, B. 1987a, Grupa Donja Dolina – Sanski Most, истраживања градинског насеља Клисура у
In: Praistorija jugoslavenskih zemalja V, Sarajevo Кадића Брду, Гласник Српског археолошког
1987, 232–286. друштва 8, Бeoгpaд 1967, 53–63.
Čović, B. 1987b, Glasinačka kultura, In: Praistorija ju- Greenfeld, H. 2005, The zooarchaeological remains
goslavenskih zemalja V, Sarajevo 1987, 575–643. from Early Iron Age hill-top fortress at Klisura-
Čović, B. 1987c, Srednjodalmatinska grupa, In: Prai- Kadića Brdo, Eastern Bosnia: a taphonomic as-
storija jugoslavenskih zemalja V, Sarajevo 1987, sessment, Godišnjak Centra za balkanološka ispi-
442–481. tivanja 32, Sarajevo 2005, 84–107.
Čović, B. 1984, Bakreno, bronzano i željezno doba, Heilmann, D. 2016, Contextualising bow fibulae with
In: Anđelić, P. / Bojanovski, I. / Čović, B. / Boeotian shield plates: cultural transfer processes
Marijanović, B. (ed.), Visoko i okolina kroz histo- during Early Iron Age, Старинар LXVI, Бeoгpaд
riju 1, Visoko 1984. 2016, 9–26.
Čović, B. 1983b, Prelazna zona, In: Praistorija jugosla- Horejs, B. 2010, Possibilities and limitations in ana-
venskih zemalja IV, Sarajevo 1983, 390–421. lysing ceramic wares, In: Horejs, B. / Jung, R.
Čović, B. 1983c, Glasinačka kulturna grupa, In: Prai- / Pavúk, P. (eds.), Analysing pottery: proces-
storija jugoslavenskih zemalja IV, Sarajevo 1983, sing, classification, publication, Bratislava 2010.
413–433. Jašarević, A. 2017, Zaboravljeni grobovi iz Donje Do-
Ćurčić, V. 1908, Prehistoričke utvrde oko Sarajeva, line, Glasnik Zemaljskog muzeja u Sarajevu 54 (n.
Glasnik Zemaljskog muzeja u Sarajevu XX (s. s.), s.), Sarajevo 2017, 7–30.
Sarajevo 1908, 363–386. Jašarević, A. 2015, Imported bronze vessels from
Dizdar, M. 2015, Late Hallstatt female grave from Glasinac: long-distance exchange with Pre-Ro-
Belišće – group of Late Hallstatt finds in the Lo- man Italy and Greece, In: Deschler-Erb, E. / Della
wer Drava Valley, In: Gutjahr, C. / Tiefengraber, Casa P. (eds.), New research on ancient bronzes,
G. (ed.), Beiträge zur Hallstattzeit am Rande der Acta of the XVIIIth international congress on an-
Südostalpen, Verlag Marie Leidorf, Rahden/ cient bronzes, Zurich studies in archaeology, Vol.
Westf. 2015. 10, Zurich 2015, 39–42.
Fiala, F. 1892, Rezultati prehistoričkog ispitivanja na Jerem, E. 1968, The Late Iron Age cemetery of
Glasincu u ljetu 1892, Glasnik Zemaljskog muzeja Szentlőrinc, Acta Archaeologica Academiae Sci-
u Sarajevu IV (s. s.), Sarajevo 1892, 389–444. entiarum Hungaricae 20, Budapest 1968, 159–208.
Fiala, F. 1894, Jedna prehistorička naseobina na Debe- Коледин, Ј. 2012, О једном новијем налазу из
lom brdu kod Sarajeva, Glasnik Zemaljskog mu- гвозденог доба у Срему, Старинар LXII,
zeja u Sarajevu VI (s. s.), Sarajevo 1894, 107–140. Бeoгpaд 2012, 107–112.
Fiala, F. 1895, Rezultati pretraživanja prehistoričkih Korošec, J. 1940, Bericht über bisher unveröff entli-
gromila na Glasincu godine 1895., Glasnik Ze- chen, vorgeschichtlichen Funde auf der Gradina
maljskog muzeja u Sarajevu VII (s. s.), Sarajevo “Gradac” bei Kotorac, Glasnik Zemaljskog muzeja
1895, 533–565. u Sarajevu LII (s. s.), Sarajevo 1940, 77–81. 
Гарашанин, Д. 1967, Ражана, Крива Река и Гласи- Kosorić, M. 1983, Praistorijsko naselje Gradina u
начки комплекс, Зборник Народног музеја V, Sovićima kod Šekovića, Glasnik Zemaljskog mu-
Бeoгpaд 1967, 41–50. zeja u Sarajevu 38 (n. s.), Sarajevo 1983, 73–94.

72
Косорић, М. 1994, Насеље и хумке на локалитету Teržan, B. 1987, The Early Iron Age chronology of the
Градина у Крећи – Горње Подриње, Зборник за Central Balkans, Archaeologia Iugoslavica XXIV,
историју БиХ 1, Бeoгpaд 1994, 5–20. Beograd 1987, 7–27.
Kučan, D. 1995, Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der Kul- Teržan, B. 1995, Handel und soziale Oberschichten
turpflanzen in Bosnien mit neuen Funden aus im früheisenzeitlichen Südosteuropa, In: Hänsel,
der früheisenzeitlichen Wallburg Klisura Kadića B. (eds.), Handel, Tausch und Verkehr im bronze-
Brdo bei Sokolac, Probleme der Küstenforschung und früheisenzeitlichen Südosteuropa, Südost-
im südlichen Nordseegebiet 23, Oldenburg 1995, europa-Schr. 17, Prähist. Arch. Südosteuropa 11,
153–173. München/Berlin 1995, 81–160.
Kujundžić-Vejzagić, Z. 2001, Pećina Pod lipom – pa- Truhelka, Ć. 1889, Gromila na Glasincu, Glasnik Ze-
leolitsko stanište na Glasinačkoj visoravni, Glas- maljskog muzeja u Sarajevu I (s. s.), Sarajevo 1889,
nik Zemaljskog muzeja u Sarajevu 48/49 (n. s.), 23–35.
Sarajevo 2001, 33–89. Truhelka, Ć. 1891, Prehistorička gradina na Glasincu,
Lucentini, N. 1981, Sulla cronologia della necropoli Glasnik Zemaljskog muzeja u Sarajevu III (s. s.),
di Glasinac nell eta del ferro, Studi di protostoria Sarajevo 1891, 307–315.
adriatica 1, Quaderni di cultura materiale 2, Roma Vasić, R. 1989, Jedan prilog proučavanju sremske gru-
1981. pe, Godišnjak Centra za balkanološka ispitivanja
Marić, Z. 1964, Donja Dolina, Glasnik Zemaljskog 25, Sarajevo 1989, 103–113.
muzeja u Sarajevu 19 (n. s.), Sarajevo 1964, 5–83. Vasić, R. 1999, Die Fibeln im Zentralbalkan, PBF
Marijan, B. 1995, Naselje brončanog doba u Prispu XIV/12, Stuttgart 1999.
kod Livna, Opvscvla archaeologica 19, Zagreb Васић, Р. 2003, Белешке о Гласинцу – хронолошка
1995, 39–49. и територијална питања, Balcanica XXXII–
Srejović, D. 1973, Karagač and the problem of the eth- XXXIII, Бeoгpaд 2003, 7–36.
nogenesis of the Dardanians, Balcanica IV, Beo- Васић, Р. 2004, Белешке о Гласинцу – Аутаријати,
grad 1973, 39–89. Balcanica XXXV, Бeoгpaд 2004, 7–36.
Стратимировић, Ђ. 1891, Опис поља Гласинац, Zotović, M. 1985, Arheološki i etnički problemi bron-
Glasnik Zemaljskog muzeja u Sarajevu III (s. s.), zanog i gvozdenog doba zapadne Srbije, Savez
Sarajevo 1891, 323–334. arheoloških društava Jugoslavije, Beograd 1985.
Teržan, B. 1976, Čertoška fibula, Arheološki vestnik
27, Ljubljana 1976, 317–443.

73
 2

0 10 cm

Table I: Pottery fragments from Gradac, Sokolac

74
 1

3 4

0 10 cm

Table II: Pottery fragments from Gradac, Sokolac

75
 1 2

3 4

5 6

7 8

0 10 cm

Table III: Pottery fragments from Gradac, Sokolac

76
 Godišnjak / Jahrbuch 2018, 47: 77–90
DOI: 10.5644/Godisnjak.CBI.ANUBiH-47.104

Chronological problems in the continuity of Iron Age

cultural groups in Northeastern Serbia

Aleksandar Kapuran1
Belgrade

Abstract: During the last three decades, only four Late Bronze and Iron Age necropolises have been discovered
on the territory of Northeastern Serbia. As a result of increased knowledge, there is a certain divergence from the
established chronologies. Based on the new findings, this paper aims to point out the existing problems related to
the changes in the chronological framework of activities of specific cultural groups.

Key words: Late Bronze Age, Early and Late Iron Age, necropolis, burial rites

Introduction itably faces the problem of differences between

the established chronologies and the actual sit-
Changes to chronological classifications are in- uation on the ground. This problem particular-
evitable and reflect the development of archaeol- ly surfaces when a new necropolis or settlement
ogy as a science, on the one hand, and the num- from the 1st millennium BC is discovered. In Ser-
ber of new archaeological discoveries, on the bian archaeology, several chronological systems
other hand. Representative of such chronological of the Iron Age are currently in use. Rastko Vasić
adjustments is the situation in the Northeastern is deemed among the foremost experts for the
Serbia (Map 1). Although ancient historiogra- study of this period. He divided the Iron Age in
phers provide direct and indirect testimonies Serbia into following stages:3
for the end of the Early and the entire Late Iron – Early Iron Age (Ha B3 – Ha C1: 950/900–
Ages, in certain cases such accounts create many 800/750 BC)
problems in interpreting the archaeological ev- – Older Iron Age (Phases I – to IV: 800/750–
idence.2 This issue is further amplified by geog- 300 BC)
raphy, specifically the link between Eastern Ser- – Younger Iron Age (La Tène: 300 – until the
bia and the Danube River valley, which was for beginning of the 1st century AD).
millennia in the midst of numerous movements However, a different division of the Iron Age
of prehistoric communities between Central to chronology is used for the purposes of this paper,
Southeastern Europe. which deals with the territory of Northeastern
Every archaeologist studying the Early Iron Serbia. This chronology is based primarily on M.
Age in the territory of the Central Balkans (Ser- Garašanin’s sequence, as described in his Prehis-
bia, Kosovo and Macedonia) at some point inev- tory on the territory of Serbia:4
– Iron Age I (Belegiš II – Gava and horizon
1
Institute of Archaeology, Belgrade of hoards: 1200–1000 BC)
2
This is especially related to the testimonies of Herodotus – Iron Age II (Insula Banului – Kalakača and
and Thucydides and their use of geographic terms in the Basarabi: 1000–600 BC)
territory inhabited by the Triballi, which can be related to
various regions in the Central Balkans. Similar can be said
for the theories about the origin of Dardanians (see Papa- 3
Vasić 1997, 343; Капуран et al. 2014, 74.
zoglu 2004, 47–48; Лазић 2008, 55–56). 4
Гарашанин 1973, 408; Капуран et al. 2014, 74.

77
 – Iron Age III (Zlot and Ferigile groups:
600–350 BC)
– Iron Age IV (La Tène Culture: 350 BC –
100 AD).

Late Bronze Age / Early Iron Age

Differences in the chronological systems used in
classifying prehistoric cultures in Northeastern
Serbia emerged in the investigation of necrop-
olises dated to the end of the Late Bronze Age
in the territory covering the confluence of the
Mlava and Tumanska Rivers with the Danube,
the entrance into the hinterland around the Iron
Gates, and area of Ključ, located downstream
from the Iron Gates before the Wallachian plain.
As the number of systematic and rescue excava-
tions increased, it became clear that graves and
finds from the Žuto Brdo – Girla Mare and Gava
cultures appeared side by side also in the sites the Figure 1: Map of sites mentioned in text. 1. Pećine, 2.
right bank of the Danube River. Veliki Gradac, 3. Konopište, 4. Vajuga, 5. Ljubičevac,
Moreover, it has been assumed that the Žuto 6. Mokranjske Stene, 7. Signal
Brdo – Girla Mare culture emerged on the terri-
tory of Serbia during the later phases of the Mid- manner of pottery, the burials of the Gava cul-
dle Bronze Age, influenced by Transdanubian in- ture contained a greater number of bronze ob-
crusted pottery.5 It is interesting that the sites of jects. The relevant sites with finds of both Žuto
the Žuto Brdo – Girla Mare culture in Serbia are Brdo – Girla Mare and Gava cultures discussed
identified only in Southern Banat, exclusively on in this paper are Veliki Gradac, Konopište, Vaju-
the banks of the Danube, while no settlements or ga – Pesak, and Ljubičevac – Selo (Figure 1).
burial places have been found in the river’s hin- During the rescue excavations connected to
terland. According to the current chronologies, the building of Đerdap I power station in the Ro-
the Žuto Brdo – Girla Mare culture lasted until man castrum at Veliki Gradac, located in the area
the beginning Late Bronze Age (14/13th century where the Paprenica Brook flows into the Dan-
BC) although there are some isolated arguments ube (around 2 km downstream from Milanovac),
in favour of its end in the late 12th century BC.6 three prehistoric graves were discovered (Figure
Contrary to the situation with the Žuto Brdo – 2). The finds from these graves were documented
Girla Mare culture, the Gava culture complex, by a pure chance, during the review of the prehis-
identified through the presence of the channelled toric collections in the depot of the Museum of
and burnished pottery, is in the Serbian archae- Krajina in Negotin.8 Detailed information about
ology considered as the trigger of the transition the state of these graves could not be obtained
from the Late Bronze to the Early Iron Age. It is, from the existing archaeological documentation.
however, important to underline that in sever- However, it could be determined that the finds
al rescue excavations of cremation necropolises from Graves 2 (Figure 2, 3–4) and 3 (Figure 2,
discovered in the Serbian part of the Danube 5–8) are diagnostic, especially those in Grave 3,
River valley and around the Iron Gates the strati- in which ceramics typical for the Gava complex
graphic division the two cultures has not been and Žuto Brdo – Girla Mare culture appear in the
obvious.7 In addition to the completely different same context. Grave 2 included two finds, both
representing characteristic finds of the Gava cul-
5
Гарашанин 1973, 338; Tасић 1983, 84–85. ture, a miniature biconical vessel decorated with
6
Jevtić / Vukomanović 1996, 287.
7
Тасић 1983, 104. 8
Булатовић et al. 2013, 82.

78
 5

8
2 4 7

Figure 2: Necropolis at Veliki Gradac. 1–2. Grave 1, 3–4. Grave 2, 5–8 Grave 3 (after Bulatović et al. 2013)

horizontal flute on the upper body (Figure 2, 4)

typical of the Gava complex.11 As the burial pits
and a cup with a highly protruding handle (Fig-
had originally been cut into a sand terrace and
ure 2, 3). Grave 3 contained a vessel on a foot
the upper layers of the site were levelled by con-
decorated with characteristic Žuto Brdo – Girla
struction in course of the Roman dominion, it
Mare ornaments (Figure 2, 6), two bowls with in-
is not possible to detect differences between the
verted rim (Figure 2, 7–8) and a cup with a high-
levels from which the burials were dug into the
ly protruding handle (Figure 2, 5). The finds of
substrate. According to the information from the
pottery of different origins and production tech-
last excavations at the necropolis of Konopište
niques in a burial point to exchange of objects
during 2015, it is only clear that graves of Gava
and techniques between the two groups, which
culture were dug somewhat deeper than the bur-
is not an isolated case in the Iron Gates region.
ials assigned to Žuto Brdo – Girla Mare culture.12
The co-occurrence of the ceramic finds from
As the later burials did not disturb the earlier
these two cultures was also noticed in the stra-
ones, there are only two possibilities: either the
tigraphy of the Livade – Mala Vrbica site as well
supposedly older Žuto Brdo – Girla Mare graves
as the necropolis in Konopište (located 9 km east
were marked on the surface, or people from both
of Kladovo) (Figure 1, 3). During the first phase
groups were buried simultaneously at the same
of archaeological investigations at the prehistoric
place.
settlement of Livade in 1980, it was impossible
A similar pattern demonstrating the coexist-
to separate stratigraphically the finds of Žuto
ence of the Žuto Brdo – Girla Mare and Gava el-
Brdo – Girla Mare and Gava cultures in the cul-
ements at the same site are documented at Vaju-
tural layers (Figure 3).9 During the excavations,
ga – Pesak necropolis, located on the right bank
however, archaeologists managed to single out
of the Danube downstream from the Iron Gates
finds belonging to the Gava complex inside pit
(Figure 1, 4). This site is important because of its
features, most probably belonging to mud huts.10
burial continuity, which extends from Bronze
In the necropolis located at Konopište, some 200
Age to the Late Iron Age and Medieval period.
m southeast of the Livade site, it was also not
The horizon with the Late Bronze and Early Iron
possible to separate the graves by the means of
Age cremation burials represents the earlier
stratigraphy. It is nonetheless obvious that thir-
teen graves belonged to the Žuto Brdo – Girla 11
Popović et al. 1988, 82–83.
Mare couture while seventeen graves had finds 12
The information was provided by the custodian Aca Đor-
đević, the director of research at the site of Konopište, exca-
9
Вукмановић / Поповић 1984, 86–87. vated by the National Musem in Belgrade. The report from
10
Ibid. 12, Fig. 11. these excavations is in press.

79
 3
1 2

4 5

7 8

Figure 3: Finds from Livade. 1–5. Žuto Brdo – Girla Mare group, 6–8. Gava style pottery (after Vukmanović /
Popović 1986)

phase of the necropolis. The chronological divi- a polished surface without incrustation (Figure
sion is based not on the stratigraphy but rather 5, 8–10).14 Chronologically most important finds
on the stylistic and typological characteristics are a bronze fibula with a violin bow and bur-
of grave finds.13 According to the excavators of nished pottery, typical for the Gava culture com-
the Vajuga – Pesak necropolis, two burials date plex (Figure 5, 21).15
to the period of Late Bronze Age or Br D (Žuto Relatively small-scale excavations near the
Brdo – Girla Mare culture ) (Figure 5, 5–10. Ljubičevac village, toward the Selo settlement (2
11–16), while three remaining graves belong to km downstream from Ljubičevac), were carried
the Gava culture complex or Ha A period (Fig- out in 1970 by Z. Žeravica, who was the curator
ure 5, 1–4. 17–21). In terms of decorative tech- of the Museum of Krajina in Negotin at the time
nique of pottery, the typical Žuto Brdo – Girla (Figure 1, 5).16 The stratigraphy at the Selo site
Mare style (Figure 5, 5–7) started to change from corresponded mostly to the stratigraphy at the
the intensive application of white incrustation to 14
Ibid. 112–113; Jevtić / Vukmanović 1996, 287.
15
Премк et al. 1984, Fig. 98–100.
13
Премк et al. 1984, 112-113. 16
Žeravica 1970, 30–31.

80
 Figure 4: Necopolis Konopište – Livade. Gava pottery finds (after Popović 1998)Popović 1986)

1 2
6 9

3 4 7
10

11 12 13
17 18 19

20 21
14 15 16

Figure 5: Finds from Vajuga – Pesak necropolis. 1–4. Grave 2, 5–10. Grave 3 and 4, 11–16. Grave 5, 17–21.
Grave 1 (after Premk et al. 1984)

81
 b

Figure 6: Vajuga – Pesak necropolis. a) Distribution of the finds, b) Kalakača finds,

c) Basarabi finds (after Popović / Vukmanović 1998)

a 3

5
b 6 7

Figure 7: Signal necropolis. a) Distribution of burials, b) skeletal remains, 1–3. Kalakača pottery, 4–7. bronze finds

82
 Ia
Ic Ib
Id

Ie

II c

III a II b II a
III d

III c III b

0 10 20 m

Figure 8: Necropolis Pećine (after Jovanović 1992)

site of Livade.17 Although the author of the study channelled and burnished ceramics of the Gave
suggested that the cultural layer was homoge- culture.18
nous and exclusively associated with the Žuto The last example of a close relationship be-
Brdo – Girla Mare culture, after a recent review tween the Žuto Brdo – Girla Mare and Gava
of the finds in the Museum of Krajina, we dis- finds is demonstrated in the necropolis of Pećine
covered that some ceramic vessels from this site in the vicinity of Kostolac (Figure 1, 1).19 The ex-
are also typical of the Gava culture, spanning the cavator D. Jacanović observed that in all undis-
initial phase of the Early Iron Age. Downstream turbed contexts (or stratigraphic units) the Žuto
from Ljubičevac, the site of Ušće Slatinske Reke Brdo – Girla Mare, Hügelgräber and Gava typical
was also excavated. M. Jevtić and M. Vukmano- ceramic forms were found together.20 This par-
vić reported that one pit yielded an unorna- ticularly applies to the four cremated burials with
mented anthropomorphic figurine of Žuto Brdo incrusted and burnished pottery found together
– Girla Mare type and a lot of incrusted pottery in same context. A similar mix was documented
was found together with a larger amount of in 13 pits, most probably dedicated to ritual at
this site. These instances caused some archaeol-
ogists to classify the last phase of the Žuto Brdo
– Girla Mare culture in the territory of the Iron
Gates as belonging to the period of Ha A1, which
17
According to a report from 1970, this site yielded rema- according to chronology of M. Garašanin covers
ins of Žuto Brdo – Girla Mare settlement, with remains of
burnt houses and with objects still in situ. A later analysis of
the archaeological data was done in 2013 by the Museum of
Krajina in Negotin by A. Kapuran and A. Bulatović. A con-
siderable amount of finds from the older levels of the Iron 18
The authors informed me that this material is still unpu-
Age was found in addition to the finds Žuto Brdo – Girla blished (but see Jevtić / Vukmanović 1996, 286).
Mare culture. This pottery was most probably omitted from 19
Pećine Necropolis consists of burials belonging to the Late
analysis by the author of excavations (Bulatović et al. 2013, Bronze Age, Early La Téne, and Late Antiquity.
137–139). 20
Јацановић 1991; 1997, 249–250, Pl. I.

83
 G3 985
G3 1201

G3 987 G3 986

Figure 9: Necropolis Pećine. G 985–987 Burials of domestic communities, G 1201 Celtic Burila
(after Jovanović 1992)

the transitional period between Late Bronze and necropolis (No 17). In its surroundings, several
Early Iron Ages.21 groups of pottery characteristic of the Kalakača
phase (Figure 6, b) were discovered, while the
rest of the pottery in and around the graves ex-
Early Iron Age II clusively belonged to the Basarabi complex (Fig-
ure 6, c).24 It should be stressed that the all metal
In this paper, the Vajuga – Pesak necropolis on finds from these graves have been dated to the
the bank of Danube in the Ključ region, located Basarabi phase.25 This closely related co-occur-
downstream of the Iron Gates (Figure 1, 4),22 is rence of two culturally and chronologically dif-
not considered as a case that requires a revision ferent pottery styles correlates with the change in
of its Early Iron Age chronology. It is, however, burial rites as there is a shift from flexed inhuma-
noted here as a specific example of cultural over- tion, which prevailed during the Kalakača phase,
lapping, which will be demonstrated by the spe- to inhumation in extended position, characteris-
cific case of the Signal necropolis. tic of the Basarabi culture.
The excavators dated the Vajuga – Pesak ne- Another example of the complex chronolog-
cropolis between Ha B3 stage, the very end of the ical and cultural relations is to observe in the
Kalakača phase, and the beginning of the Basara- Signal necropolis near Svrljig in Eastern Serbia
bi phase.23 In this necropolis, the deceases were (Figure 1, 7).26 The site is situated near the vil-
buried on platforms made of river pebbles. The lage of Palilula, on a natural terrace by the right
eastern part contained the oldest burial of the bank of the Trstenica River. The necropolis most
21
Стојић / Јацановић 2008, 55. 64. 24
Ibid. 81. 104.
22
Popović / Vukmanović 1998. 25
Ibid. 105.
23
Ibid. 103. 26
Filipović / Bulatović 2010.

84
 3

1 2 4

6 7

Figure 10: Mokranjske stene. 1–6. Pottery from the grave, 7. Ideal reconstruction of the burial
(after Popović / Kapuran 2011)

probably belonged to the nearby hillfort of Oblik, Western and Central Serbia can be dated to the
located just above it. Excavations revealed four 5th century BC.28 In Signal, therefore, chronolog-
skeletal burials. The deceased were inhumed and ically later metal finds appear together with the
eventually covered with a layer of stones (Fig- considerably earlier ceramics, which could indi-
ure 6, a–b). Stray finds of jewellery, which were cate that some small conservative communities
probably grave goods, namely iron bracelets with retained their burial rituals from the developed
banded cross-section, have parallels among finds stages of the Early Iron Ages (Kalakača phase)
from the necropolis of Vajuga – Pesak (Figure 7, until the very end of the Early Iron Age.
4. 6–7), belonging to Basarabi phase of 8th and 7th
century BC.27 Yet, the ceramic vessels from Sig-
nal are characteristic of the Insula Banului and Iron Age III/IV
Gornea – Kalakača cultural complexes of Ha B3
stage in the Danube River valley. The terminus The final phase of the Early Iron Age in the re-
ante quem in Signal is represented by a double gions south of the Sava and Danube Rivers is
pin with an “M”-shaped head (Figure 7, 5). Ac- represented by the cultural phenomenon de-
cording to R. Vasić, this type of double pin from fined as Rača – Ljuljaci horizon. Finds from
tumuli indicate that the deceased were buried
27
Popović / Vukmanović 1998, 19, Fig. 10, Pl. 4, 8–18. 28
Vasić 2003, 126.

85
with weapons and a special type of the ceramics with the Danube as well as those through the
goods – cylindrical beakers with a three-leafed Wallachian plain to the east.
foot, a slanted rim, and a single highly elevated This burial was found unexpectedly in 2011
banded handle – considered characteristic of the inside of a test trench (Figure 10, 7).32 Inside the
ancient Triballi, with whom the Rača – Ljuljaci grave, an unusual burial custom of the Late La
culture in Central Serbia is generally associated Tène communities in this region was noted. In
during 6th/5th centuries BC.29 However, the strati- the northern part of the burial pit, skeletal re-
graphic sequence of the early La Tène phase of mains of a 1.5 year old infant were covered with
the necropolis of Pećine near Kostolac (Figure 8) a single large amphora fragment and one mis-
points to some incompatibilities with the already shaped turned fructiera, typical of the late La
established chronological and cultural connec- Tène pottery (Figure 10, 3. 7). In the southern
tions. The necropolis dates to the second half of part of the grave fragments of one complete and
the 4th century BC and has material culture that one ritually broken vessel were found together
shows close relationship to the Iron Age com- (Figure 10, 1–2. 4–5). It was somewhat surpris-
munities both in the Central Balkans and in the ing to see that this ceramic ensemble was com-
Pannonian plain.30 In addition, the widespread posed of pottery bearing characteristics of the
cremation burials, which are generally connect- latest phases of the La Tène period in Pannonia
ed to the new Celtic populations, a group of bur- and the Danube basin (Figure 10. 3–5) and of
ials from Pećine reveals local traits related to the pottery typical of local communities a few centu-
Rača – Ljuljaci culture (Figure 9, 985–987). To ries earlier, at the end of Early Iron Age (Iron Age
mention a few, the pottery shapes include the al- III), (Figure 10, 1–2). It is important to underline
ready-mentioned beakers with a single high han- that the amphora fragment (Figure 10, 2) shows
dle, a slanted rim and a three-leafed foot, which obvious similarities with the finds from the ne-
are believed to have been used in Triballi com- cropolis Ferigile in Oltenia where such vessels
munities during the 5th century BC.31 This also have been found whole as a part of pottery spec-
holds true for pins with the double “M” heads trum until 2nd century BC.33
(Figure 9, 987). However, as an example from
Pećine reveals, the Celtic population was bur-
ied together with the local one. The finds from Conclusion
Pećine indicate that the Rača – Ljuljaci horizon
certainly lasted up to the end of the 4th century At the end, we can conclude that outlined exam-
BC, as suggested by finds from the graves attrib- ples demonstrate how the established chronolo-
uted to the Celtic population. gies of the Early Iron Age in Northeastern Serbia,
The last example of the presence of what have which are based on stylistic-typological identi-
been considered chronologically diverse finds fication of finds, require certain corrections in
found in the same context in Eastern Serbia also light of the latest discoveries. These adjustments
belongs to the La Téne period. A solitary infant should also be considered from an extended ge-
burial from the Mokranjske Stene site discovered ographical point of view, especially considering
in the hinterland of the Iron Gates in a vicinity that this region situated between from Central
of Negotin must be mentioned. The multi-lay- Europe to the Mediterranean had experienced
ered site is located on an elevation surrounded different cultural shifts. Certain discrepancies in
by cliffs on three sides, above the deep canyon of stylistic and typological characteristics of finds
the Sikolska River, just before the section where from burial contexts are the most vivid example
it flows into Timok River. From here, it is pos- how some older traditions obviously remain to
sible to control communication routes that lead exist as a part of the ritual practice of following
through the Timok River valley to its confluence Iron Age customs. With respect to Northeastern
Serbia and the specific cultural manifestation in
this part of the Balkan Peninsula, following con-
clusions can be made.
29
Срејовић 1991, 149; Jevtić 1983.
30
Jovanović 1987; 1992, 87; 2010, 164; Sladić 1998. 32
Popović / Kapuran 2011, 297.
31
Jevtić 1983, 38. 42–43. 33
Ibid. 301.

86
 First, the span of the Žuto Brdo – Girla Mare necropolis of Mojsinje, point to certain chang-
culture which, according to the established chro- es of burial tradition. The deceased now begin
nologies, disappears during the Late Bronze Age to be placed in extended position lying on their
(Br D),34 should be broadened to include the back, with arms parallel to the body.41 The most
Ha A stage or the time of the 12th century BC, significant find from this necropolis is a dou-
as proposed by M. Jevtić and M. Vukmanović,35 ble-looped iron fibula from Grave 4, the oldest
and as previously indicated by M. Garašanin.36 fibula of this type in Serbia, which R. Vasić dated
The publication of the mentioned unornament- to 9th/8th centuries BC.42 The Early Iron Age ne-
ed figurines from the site of Ušće Slatinske reke, cropolis at Mojsinje also represents the hallmark
which remain unavailable to the scientific public of changing burial rites, which took place during
despite having been excavated five decades ago, the temporal span of the Vajuga – Pesak necrop-
would doubtlessly help in presenting a clearer olis, at the very transition to the Basarabi horizon
argument in favour of the certain chronologi- (ca. 800 BC). Skeletal burials at Vajuga – Pesak
cal overlap of incrusted and burnished pottery. site are all also in extended position on back and
Moreover, the publication of the finds would also dated between 775–725 BC.43 Judging by the pot-
clarify the mutual relationships between groups tery and some jewellery (e.g., fibulae with a foot
with richly ornamented incrusted pottery (Žuto in shape of hourglass),44 this necropolis can be
Brdo – Girla Mare) and groups with burnished, assigned to the early stage of Basarabi culture.
channelled pottery (Gava cultural complex). One Another important change are the iron objects
can assume that the mentioned examples from that appear in much greater numbers. If we take
the sites of Livade, Konopište, Vajuga – Pesak, into account the similar phenomenon at Mo-
Selo, and Pećine also present evidence in support jsinje, we can assume that the appearance of the
of this hypothesis. precious new metal – iron – and new burial rite
Second, in course of the developed Iron Age are closely connected. It is thus obvious that the
or Iron Age II in the territory of Serbia, only a introduction of the iron is related to the contacts
small number of inhumation burials has been with Basarabi culture. The close relationship of
discovered. The burials suggest the transition previous Kalakača phase and following Basarabi
from cremation of the deceased, characteristic horizon is attested also in the eastern part of Va-
for the Late Bronze Age (Belegiš I, Žuto Brdo – juga – Pesak site where pottery characteristic of
Girla Mare cultures) and the following Gava cul- both groups was clearly intermixed. P. Popović
tural complex. In the subsequent Kalakača phase and M. Vukmanović were right to suggest that
(9th/ 8th century BC),37 inhumation burials prevail, these finds do not change the precise chronologi-
most often with the deceased resting on the side, cal dating of the Vajuga – Pesak necropolis,45 but,
with grave goods comprising whole or ritually as previously suggested, rather expose the strong
broken vessels (for example, at Pećine near Vrd- influence of the preceding, older local traditions.
nik, Jaša Tomić and Asfaltna baza in Zemun),38 Third, in case of the Signal necropolis, lo-
while at some other necropolises grave goods cated deep inside the mountainous region of
of iron artefacts occur (for example, at Mojsinje Eastern Serbia near the town of Svrljig, there is
near Čačak, Mound V, Grave 4).39 Two collective a pronounced paucity of grave goods (although
(mass) burials at the site of Gomolava I and II the same graves are tied to the stray finds of iron
are not common custom and can be described bracelets), but the tradition of older cultural tra-
as an exception caused by extraordinary circum- ditions persisting can also be observed. Specifi-
stances.40 However, a newly discovered graves of cally, the deceased were positioned in an extend-
the the Kalakača phase from Mound V from the ed position on their back, but their arms were
crossed on their chest, as it is also the case of
34
Гарашанин 1973, 349; Тасић 1983, 85; Крстић 2003, 118. Graves 1, 5 and 6 at the site of Sutbarlija assigned
35
Jevtić / Vukmanović 1996, 290.
36
Garašanin 1983, 522. 41
Никитовић et al. 2002, 51–52, Fig. 21.
37
Medović / Medović 2011, 272. 42
Vasić 2014, 207.
38
Медовић 1984–1985, 5. 8; 1999; Поповић 2010, 223–231. 43
Popović / Vukmanović 1998, 106.
39
Никитовић et al. 2002, Тab, 3, 1. 44
Vasić 1999, 55–56; Popović / Vukmanović 1998.
40
Tasić 1972. 45
Popović / Vukmanović 1998, 106.

87
to the Srem group of the Early Iron Age,46 which 2nd century BC.51 This particular example shows
P. Medović has dated to Phase IIIa of the Bosut that funeral traditions are at times difficult to
culture (500–250 BC).47 One further example change and that the desire to distinguish indi-
of the grave from the final stage of Iron Age II vidual identity is sometimes stronger than the
(7th–6th century BC) comes from Moštanica near actual technological and socio-economic chang-
the town of Vranje in southern Serbia.48 Accord- es of the society (or way of life), brought along
ing to the author of the study, M. Jovanović, the with the emergence of the ancient Scordisci. The
interred deceased was put on his/her back and importance of this find is also suggested by the
held an iron spear point in one hand on his/her observation that from this period onward there
chest. The grave contained also an iron fibula.49 are almost no burials that can be clearly assigned
The pottery finds in Grave 4 from the Signal to the indigenous societies (the Triballi, Darda-
necropolis were modest goods of vessels, most nians or Autariates). Child graves, furthermore,
probably ritually broken, with characteristics of are exceptionally rare. The grave from Mokranje
the Pšeničevo – Babadag and the Insula Banului shows that in addition to the prevailing custom
groups, and the Kalakača horizon.50 There was of cremation, a part of the indigenous society
also an iron pin with a, “M”-shaped head, which still practiced inhumation in graves supplement-
has been dated to the 6th century BC. Because of ed by goods of pottery that demonstrated the
this combination of finds, the Signal necropolis strong traditional elements characteristics of late
should gain importance, as great caution is need- phase of the Early Iron Age.
ed when defining absolute and relative chronol-
ogies of the Early Iron Age sites in the Central Na engleski jezik preveo Stefan Milošević
Balkans. The following dilemma remains. Should
the span of the Kalakača phase in these remote
regions be extended to the end of 7th and start
of 6th centuries BC or are we simply dealing with
more conservative societies in a mountainous Rezime
area that retain certain cultural traditions even
after these traditions disappear in areas along the
main communication routes? Hronološki problemi u kontinuitetu
And finally, the case of the chronological kulturnih grupa gvozdenog doba u
discontinuity at the Early La Tène necropolis severoistočnoj Srbiji
of Pećine points to a need to change the lower
chronological boundary of the Rača – Ljuljaci Arheolog koji se bavi gvozdenim dobom na područ-
group from the Early Iron Age (Iron Age III) to ju centralnog Balkana morao se suočiti sa određenim
the end of 4th century BC. Burials with local in- odstupanjima na relaciji postojećih hronoloških si-
digenous characteristics at Pećine can be dated stema i situacije na terenu. Problem se naročito ak-
rather precisely by the finds from the contem- tuelizuje u momentu kada dođe do otkrića neke nove
porary Celtic graves. With regards to the burial nekropole ili naselja sa kraja II i u I milenijumu pre n.
rites, it would be an oversimplification to state e. Mada se za kraj starijeg i celokupno mlađe gvozde-
no doba mogu naći posredna i neposredna svedoče-
that indigenous populations influenced their
nja antičkih istoriografa, čini se da nam ona u nekim
Celtic allies, as both communities practiced cre- slučajevima više odmažu nego pomažu da tumačimo
mations and inhumations. Contrary to the situ- arheološke zapise. Promene u hronološkim sistemima
ation at Pećine, a completely different arrange- su neminovan proces i u skladu su sa razvojem arhe-
ment can be observed in a child burial from the ologije kao nauke sa jedne i količine novih arheološ-
rock shelter of Mokranjske stene, dated to the kih otkrića sa druge strane. Ovo se vidi i na primeru
kontinuiteta kultura gvozdenog doba severoistočne
Srbije. Problem produbljuje i geografska povezanost
46
Medović 2007, 10–11. 16–19. istočne Srbije sa Podunavljem, koje se tokom mileni-
47
Medović / Medović 2011, 272. juma nalazilo na udaru pomeranja praistorijskih za-
48
Jovanović 1969, 72–74; Булатовић 2007, 104–108. jednica od centralne do jugoistočne Evrope.
49
Jovanović 1969, 73.
50
Filipović / Bulatović 2010, 77. 51
Popović / Kapuran 2011, 301.

88
 Prvi slučaj koji izaziva određene nedoumice pred- Garašanin, M. 1983, Dubovačko-Žutobrdska grupa,
stavljaju istraživanja lokaliteta i nekropola sa prelaza In: Benac, A. (ed.), Praistorija jugoslovenskih ze-
iz bronzanog u gvozdeno doba na ušću Mlave u Du- malja IV, Bronzano doba, Sarajevo 1983, 520–535.
nav, Velikog Gradca, Konopišta, Male Vrbice, Pesak Filipović, V. / Bulatović, A. 2010, An Early Iron Age
– Korbovo i Ljubičevac selo u Đerdapu i nizvodno od necropolis in Eastern Serbia, Гласник Српског
njega. U ovim slučajevima radi se o prisustvu nalaza археолошког друштва 26, Београд 2010, 73–83.
kultura Žuto Brdo – Girla Mare zajedno sa nalazima Јацановић, Д. 1991, Нове статуете Дубовачко-
Gava kulturnog kompleksa u istom kontekstu. Sle- Жутобрдске културе и прилог тумачењу
deću hronološku nedoslednost pokazuje zajedničko статуета као божанства смрти, Viminacium 6,
prisustvo hronološki starijih elemenata Kalakača i Београд 1991, 5–30.
elemenata Basarabi, kao hronološki mlađe keramike, Јацановић, Д. 1997, Нови прилози о касном брон-
u kontekstu grobova na nekropoli Vajuga – Pesak kod заном и раном гвозденом добу у Браничеву, In:
Korbova. Slična je situacija zatečena na nekropoli Si- Лазић, М. (еd.) Археологија источне Србије,
gnal kod Svrljiga, gde je u skeletno sahranjenim gro- Београд 1997, 249–258.
bovima otkrivena keramika tipa Kalakača zajedno sa Jevtić, M. 1983, Keramika starijeg gvozdenog doba
hronološki dosta mlađim bronzanim iglama sa “M” na centralnom balkanskom području, Centar za
glavom. Tokom VI–V veka pre n. e. na tribalskoj ne- arheološka istraživanja, Beograd 1983.
kropoli Ljuljaci otkriveni su gotovo identični pogreb- Jevtić, M. / Vukmanović, M. 1996, Late Bronze and
ni prilozi kao i u ranolatenskoj nekropoli Pećine, koja Early Iron Age in the Danube valley from V.
je precizno datovana u sredinu IV veka pre n. e. Po- Gradište down to Prahovo, In: Tasić, N. (ed.), The
slednji primer hronoloških neslaganja predstavljao bi Yugoslav Danube Basin and the neighbouring
grob jednog deteta iz Moranja kod Negotina. Zajedno regions in the 2nd millennium B. C., Belgrade –
sa keramikom karakterističnom za mlađu fazu laten- Vršac 1996, 283–293.
ske kulture u Srpskom podunavlju, javljaju se kera- Jovanović, M. 1969, Slanište, Moštanica, Vranje – ne-
mički oblici koji imaju karakteristike starosedelačkih kropola gvozdenog doba, Arheološki pregled 11,
zajednica sa kraja starijeg gvozdenog doba ili Ha C. Beograd 1969, 72–74.
Kao zaključak izlaganja treba napomenuti da na- Jovanović, B. 1987, Istočna grupa, Keltska kultura
vedeni primeri pokazuju kako postojeće stilsko-tipo- u Jugoslaviji, In: Benac, A. (ed.), Praistorija ju-
loške i hronološke determinacije kultura gvozdenog goslovenskih zemalja V, Svjetlost i ANUBIH, Sa-
doba u severoistočnoj Srbiji zahtevaju izvesne korek- rajevo 1987, 815–854.
cije i prilagođavanja na koja ukazuju nova otkrića. Jovanović, B. 1992, Dolazak Kelta na Balkan, In: Tasić,
Ove korekcije treba sagledati ne samo hronološki već N. (ed.), Skordisci and the native population in the
i u okviru geografskih celina koje pokazuju različitosti middle Danube region, Balkanološki institut, Po-
u kulturnim kretanjima od centralne Evrope do Me- sebna izdanja 48, Beograd 1992, 83–94.
diterana. Јовановић, Б. 2010, Походи Источних Келта на
Хеленистичку Грчку и Малу Азију, Глас Српске
академије наука и уметности CDXIV, Београд
2010, 161–172.
Капуран, А. / Булатовић, А. / Јовановић, И. 2014,
Bibliography Бор, културна стратиграфија праисторијских
локалитета између Ђердапа и Црног Тимока,
Булатовић, А. 2007, Врање, Културна стратигра- Археолошка грађа у Србији IX, Београд – Бор
фија праисторијских локалитета у Врањској 2014.
регији, Археолошка грађа Србије III, Београд Крстић, Д. 2003, Гламија, некропола бронзаног
– Врање 2007. доба у Крбову, Народни музеј у Београду,
Булатовић, А. / Капуран, А. / Јањић, Г. 2013, Него- Београд 2003.
тин, културна стратиграфија праисторијских Лазић, М. 1985, Ко су били Дарданци?, In: Лазић,
локалитета у Неготинској Крајини, Археолош- М. (ed.) Архаика 2/2008, Београд 2009, 53–76.
ка грађа Србије VIII, Београд – Неготин 2013. Медовић, П. 1984, Скелетни гроб старијег гвозде-
Вукмановић, М. / Поповић, П. 1984, Ливаде, Мала ног доба са локалитета Пећине у Врднику, Рад
Врбица, извештај о сондажним ископавањима војвођанских музеја 29, Нови Сaд 1984–1985,
у 1980. години, Ђердапске свеске II, Београд 5–8.
1984, 85–91. Medović, P. 1999, Skelettgrab der frühen Eisenzeit
Гарашанин, М. 1973, Праисторија на тлу СР Ср- bei der Sieldung Jaša Tomić (Banat), Старинар
бије, Српска кљижевна задруга, Београд 1973. XLXI/1998, Београд 1999, 39–48.

89
Medović, P. 2007, Stubarlija, nekropola naselja Feud- у 1980. години, Ђердапске свеске II, Београд
var, Muzej Vojvodine, Novi Sad 2007. 1984, 111–124.
Medović, P. / Medović, I. 2011, Gradina na Bosutu, Срејовић, Д. 1991, Трибалски гробови у Љуљацима,
naselje starijeg gvozdenog doba, Herausgreber, Старинар XL–XLI, Београд 1991, 141–153.
Pokrajinski zavod za zaštitu spomenika kulture i Стојић, М. / Јацановић, Д. 2008, Пожаревац, кул-
Platoneum d. o. o., Novi Sad 2011. турна стратиграфија праисторијских локали-
Никитовић, Л. / Стојић, М. / Васић, Р. 2002, тета у Браничеву, Археолошка грађа Србије IV,
Мојсиње, некропола под хумкама из бронзаног Београд – Пожаревац 2008.
и гвозденог доба, Народни музеј Чачак, Чачак Tasić, N. 1972, An Early Iron Age collective tomb at
2002. Gomolava, Archaeologia Iugoslavica XIII, Beo-
Papazoglu, F. 2004, Srednjobalkanska plemena u pre- grad 1972, 27–38.
drimsko doba, Equilibrium, Beograd 2004. Тасић, Н. 1983, Југословенско подунавље од Ин-
Поповић, Б. 2010, Асфалтна база у Земуну, Насеље доевропске сеобе до продора Скита, Мати-
старијег гвозденог доба, Музеј града Београда, ца Српска и Балканолошки институт САНУ,
Београд 2010. Нови Сад – Београд 1983.
Popović, P. 1998, Problem of cult features in the Late Vasić, R. 1997, Gvozdeno doba, In: Srejović, D. (ed.),
Bronze Age cemetery at Konopište, In: Shuster, Arheološki leksikon, Savremena administracija,
C. (ed.), Die Kulturen der bronzezeit in dem ge- Beograd 1997, 342–343.
beit des Eisernen Tores Kolloquium in Dobreta Vasić, R. 1999, Die Fibeln in Zentralbalkan, Prähi-
– Turnu Severin (November 1997), Rumänisch- storische Bronzefunde Abteilung XIV, 12. Band,
Jugoslawische Kommission für die Erforschung Stuttgart 1999.
der Region des Eisernen Tores, Archäologische Vasić, R. 2003, Die Nadeln im Zentralbalkan, Prähi-
Abteilung 2, Bukarest 1998, 147–153. storische Bronzefunde XIII, Band 11, Stuttgart
Popović, P. / Kapuran, A. 2011, La Tombe de Mokran- 2003.
je, In: Magureanu, D. et al. (eds.) Archaeology: Vasić, R. 2014, Ein Nachtrag zu den PBF-Bänden; Die
making of and practice, Studies in honor of Mir- den Zentralbalkan Betreffen, Старинар LXIV,
chea Babes at his 70th anniversary, Pitesti 2011, Београд 2014, 205–217.
297–304. Vukomanović, M. / Popović, P. 1986, Recherches ar-
Popović, P. / Vukmanović, M. 1998, Vajuga – Pesak, chéologiques sur la localité “Livade” près Mala Vr-
nekropola starijeg gvozdenog doba, Arheološki bica, Ђердапске свеске III, Београд 1986, 7–26.
institut, Beograd 1998. Sladić, M. 1998, Mlađe gvozdeno doba na teritoriji Sr-
Popović, P. / Vukmanović, M. / Radojčić, N. 1988, Mala bije, Unpublished PhD thesis.
Vrbica / Konopište, Praistorijske i srednjovekov- Žeravica, Z. 1970, Selo Ljubičevac – naselje bronza-
na nekropola i antička arhitektura, Arheološki nog doba, Arheološki pregled 12, Beograd 1970,
pregled 29, Beograd 1988, 82–83. 30–31.
Премк, А. / Поповић, П. / Бјелајац, Љ. 1984, Вајуга
– Песак, извештај о сондажним ископавањима

90
 Godišnjak / Jahrbuch 2018, 47:91–104
DOI: 10.5644/Godisnjak.CBI.ANUBiH-47.105

New perspectives of the tumuli burials during the Iron Age

in the Republic of Macedonia

Aleksandra Papazovska1
Skopje

Abstract: The Early Iron Age in R. Macedonia (10th to the beginning of the 8th century BC) was a period of unclear
and undefined cultural values for these communities which were influenced by the new waves of the Transition-
al period. Yet, besides these influences, local communities also developed their own specific and characteristic
appearances in the material culture. There is the obvious influence of the local Bronze Age culture, mixed with
the northern elements of Hallstatt cultures from the western Balkan regions. Some of these elements existed for
only a short time during the Transitional period and disappeared leaving no trace of their further development.
The elements that were accepted were adapted to the local tastes (and needs) of the Iron Age communities, thus
becoming incorporated into and recognizable parts of the local Iron Age culture. All of these elements present
specific manifestations of the Early Iron Age culture in R. Macedonia, bringing it closer to the northern and
north-western Iron Age cultures in the Balkan Peninsula. One of the most specific cultural phenomena of the
Early Iron Age is the burial under tumuli. This was a new burial practice derived from the new way of life and new
social relations in society. In this way, these burials, known as clan tumuli, played a major role in the appearance
and the development of the Early Iron Age in Macedonia.

Key words: tumuli burials, Early Iron Age, tumular cemeteries, burial practice, burial rituals, “clan” tumuli, “fam-
ily” tumuli, central grave, cist grave, matt painted pottery

Introduction well as openness towards the Aegean. Warrior

burials have not been discovered, and the lack of
The Late Bronze Age development on the territo- weapons in the wider context of the Ulanci cul-
ry of the R. of Macedonia is a unique phenome- tural group speaks for the absence of destructive
non, where the southern, i.e. Mycenaean, and the processes until its end,4 which is associated with
northern Balkan influences are clearly visible, invasions from the north. This indicates that
as they were incorporated in many segments of the local communities along the valley of River
the material culture, such as the pottery, jewel- Vardar were not affected by the first wave of the
lery, and weaponry (Figure 1). These influences so-called “Great Aegean migrations”, which hap-
were especially manifested in the regions’ main pened at the end of the 13th through the early 12th
communication route, such as the Vardar River century BC. After the fall of the Mycenaean civi-
Valley. While the southern influences assisted lisation in the south, many of Bronze Age cultur-
in the establishment of, for instance, the Ulan-
ci (Povardarie) cultural group,2 the influences
coming from the north caused its destruction.3
The Ulanci group was characterised by deeply 4
Videski 2004, 90–97. In general, male burials at Dimov
canonised burial rites and material culture as Grob, Ulanci were presented with a unified personal set
consisting of a knife, a needle, and a sharpener, but there
1
Archaeological Museum of Macedonia – Skopje was no single grave with weapons. First weapons (four soc-
2
Videski 2004, 43–46; Митревски 2013. keted axes and head of a spear) appeared at the very end of
3
Mitrevski 2007, 444–445. the 12th century BC at Manastir, Čaška near Veles.

91
al elements continued to exist in the mainland to 11 and 12), Vardino, and Vardarophtsa, with the
the north of the Mycenaean core.5 stratigraphy that included up to four layers dam-
The peaceful life of the communities in the aged by fire followed by signs of recovery of the
Late Bronze Age was disturbed by turbulent settlement.12 At the same time as the destruction
events associated with migrations from the north of the settlements, the necropolises of Ulanci
to the south in the second half of 12th century BC, group fell out of use. New necropolises and new
and the territory of the R. of Macedonia played way of burials utilising cremation appeared at
an important role during these movements.6 The that time in the area from Hipodrom near Skop-
best evidence for these turbulent times comes je and Mali Dol – Tremnik up to Gynaikokastro
from the settlements along the Vardar River near Kilkis.13 The new cultural elements from
valley, which suffered large and frequent confla- the north (e.g., pottery, terracottas, and the use
grations as well as total destruction, including at of cremation as burial ritual that will have sur-
sites of Manastir near Veles7 and Vardarski Rid vived in the Protogeometric period), can be eas-
near Gevgelija.8 The strong foreign influence is ily traced in the area of the Danube, through the
detectable by the appearance of new finds in the Moravian and the Vardar regions down south to
burnt layers at the settlement of Stolot near Ul- the Peloponnese.14
anci or Manastir – Čaška, unknown till then in
the material culture. Excavated material at these
sites fits chronologically and typologically to the Late Bronze and Early Iron Age
latest burial phase at the necropolis of Dimov tumuli burials
Grob near Ulanci or the older horizon of burials
at Mali Dol in Tremnik.9 It can be confirmed that
the same situation seems to be applicable at Var- 1. General information about the tumuli in
darski Rid near Gevgelija, where the community Macedonia
moved to a safer location at the neighbouring hill The appearance and the development of tumu-
Kofilak after the destruction of the original set- lus cemeteries on the territory of the R. of Mac-
tlement.10 One further illustration of the devasta- edonia is one of the most distinctive phenome-
tion can be found at Manastir, Čaška near Veles, na of the Early Iron Age. They appeared during
where in the ruinous layer four bronze socketed the transitional period from the Late Bronze to
axes (typical objects with northern origin dated the Early Iron Age, representing the societal and
to the 12th century BC) were found.11 The de- social complexities of the Early Iron Age com-
struction of the Late Bronze age settlements was munities. In general, the appearance of tumuli
best documented by the burnt layers at low-ly- in Macedonia is a novelty, although this type of
ing Vardar settlements, such as Kastanas (layers funerary practice has been known in the Balkans
since the Early Bronze Age (BrA according to
5
Mitrevski 2007, 447. Reinecke’s chronology), having originated in the
6
Ibid. Caucasus and the Eastern European steppes.15
7
Papazovska 2015, 63–65; Jovcevska 2008, 14–15. 23. The Their development in different regions indicates
investigator in her published results determined the site to
different values, which depended on the particu-
be a necropolis from the transitional period from the Bron-
ze to the Iron Age. By coordinating the stratigraphy and the lar level of the social and economic development
description of the layers in the monograph, we can conclu- of each community. According to some authors,
de that the excavated layers belonged to a settlement. Some their appearance was considered to coincide
attributed of the published material suggests the type of the with the so-called third wave of the Aegean mi-
settlement and the manner of manufacture of the objects.
All elements show that Manastir – Čaška was a single peri-
grations.16 However, on the territory of Macedo-
od settlement from the end of the Late Bronze Age, which
was then burnt and destroyed completely. 12
Papazovska 2015, 72–73. See also Hochstetter 1984, 345–
8
Videski 2005, 19–22. 350; Hänsel 1989, 363–367.
9
Mitrevski 1997, 44; Papazovska 2018, in print. More infor- 13
Savvopoulou 1988, 306–312; Mitrevski 1994, 115–124;
mation about the necropolis of Mali Dol in Tremnik will be Papazovska 2018.
published in Macedoniae Acta Archaeologica 21. 14
Diamond 1988, 153–159; Mitrevski 2007, 448.
10
Videski 2005, 91–113. 15
Garašanin 1983, 264–266.
11
Ibid.; Jovcevska 2008. 16
Mikulčić 1966, 21; Mitrevski 1997, 63–64.

92
 Figure 1: Cultural influences from the north and the south (Aegean) in the Late Bronze Age
in R. of Macedonia (map by author)

nia and in South Epirus we encounter an earlier is also a presence of local matt painted pottery
appearance of the tumuli during the transition- of the Ulanci group from the Late Bronze Age or
al Late Bronze to Early Iron Age period.17 Finds the spectacle fibulae, which have been found in
typical for the transitional period are Liburnian the earliest burials.
fibulae18 and a Pesciera type fibula from Demir Another problem related to tumulus cemeter-
Kapija,19 phalerae or flange hilted swords20, all ies is the question of their character and develop-
pointing to 11th century BC. Besides these, there ment. Tumuli are a new burial practice, condi-
tioned by the new lifestyle and societal and social
17
The earlier appearance of tumuli was during the transi- relations. A very important feature of the tumuli
tional Late Bronze to Iron Age period, namely the central
is their position in relation to the environment.
grave in the tumulus at Visoi near Bitola, the central grave
in the tumulus at Strnovac near Kumanovo, and the newly In particular, special attention was given to the
excavated tumulus in Kršla near Vinica. selection of dominant locations in the area.21
18
Mitrevski 1997, 306. 316, Cat. No. 50–51. 67. We found
several finds of this type of fibulae on the territory of Ma- 21
Their position was the main reason for re-using the tumu-
cedonia in Popadin Dol, Prilepec, Trojaci, Demir Kapija, li as burial grounds in the later periods, especially during
Lakavica, Karanka – Rapeš, Vergina, and Pateli. the Roman period and sometimes even in the Middle Ages,
19
Korošec 1956, 104–105. such as in the case of the tumuli at Stragata in Krushevit-
20
Finds from tumulus in Beranci; Mikulčić 1966. sa – Prilep or the Tumulus I in Visoi, Beranci. This may

93
 ly, and culturally distinguished as a group of the
so-called “clan” or “tribal” tumuli, while tumuli
cemeteries of the later type are associated with
the Late Iron Age, and are typologically, chrono-
logically, and culturally distinguished as a group
of the so-called “family” tumuli.26
The clan or tribal tumuli are characterised by
multiple burials under a single mound, enclosed
with single circular wall made of relatively large
stones. The most characteristic feature of this
type of tumuli is the division of the central space
with an additional ring of stones covered with an
earthen mound as a separate tumulus, which in-
dicates the central grave. In most cases, the burial
in the central grave was the oldest one, as was the
case of the tumuli at Strnovac, Visoi – Beranci,
Petkov Dol, and Mojno, for example. The burial
Figure 2: Tumulus I, Visoi, Beranci rite in the central grave, a crouched inhumation,
(Mitrevski 1997, Fig. 26) differs from the secondary burials within the
mound. The central burial from the tumulus at
This paper is a result of the analysis of buri- Visoi dates to the Submycenaean period,27 and
al rituals at the end of the Bronze Age and dur- the secondary burials in this tumulus were radi-
ing the Early Iron Age with an emphasis on the ally arranged around the central grave, with their
tumulus cemeteries. The data for the analysis heads turned towards it. It is believed that the
came from ten tumuli excavated during the last deceased in the central grave was the founder or
fifty years on the territory of R. of Macedonia,22 the father of the community. This type of tumu-
and include information on their structure and lus with a mound formed first over the central
archaeological finds.23 To stress the underlying grave followed by the rest of the graves covered
premise again, the development of the tumuli with a larger mound is called “double tumulus”.
necropolises on the territory of the R. of Mace- To this type belong the mounds at Visoi – Beran-
donia, as well as in South Epirus24 and Northwest ci and the newly discovered tumuli at Čanishte
Greece25 reflects societal and social relations at and Kruševica in Mariovo as well as the tumuli
that time. in Strnovac near Kumanovo.28
In terms of the character and the manner The tumulus at Visoi – Beranci (Figure 2)
of construction, two types of tumulus cemeter- shows certain similarities with the mounds in the
ies can be distinguished. The cemeteries of the famous cemetery at Vergina, including architec-
earlier type are associated only with the Early ture and grave customs. At the same time, Visoi –
Iron Age, and are typologically, chronological- Beranci tumuli represent one of the oldest Early
Iron Age tumuli in Macedonia of the so-called
clan or tribal type. On the other hand, it is clear
be associated with the appearance of the cult of ancestors
among the local populations, but this suggestion remains that the features and the manner of construction
unclarified due to the low level of research. of the tumuli reveals multiple elements of the
22
Visoi – Beranci, Karanka – Rapeš and Petkov Dol – Moj- Mycenaean grave architecture, such as the use
no near Bitola, Orlova Čuka – Štip, Stragata – Caniste and of grave circles and cist graves. These elements
Barata in Mariovo, Strnovac and Vojnik near Kumanovo,
Ograda – Orešani, Przali – Varvara near Skopje.
deeply influenced not only the character of the
23
The analysis was made during the research for the author’s Iron Age tumuli, but also their social, societal,
doctoral thesis entitled “The Early Iron Age in Macedonia”
defended at the University of St. Cyril and Methodius in 26
Митревски 2013, 220–224.
Skopje on December 25, 2015. 27
Mikulčić 1966, 14–15; Andronikos 1969; Mitrevski, 1997,
24
Andrea 1976; 1985; Korkouti 1981; Bejko 2002, 171–198; 103; Papazovska Sanev 2014, 15, Fig. 6.
Aliu 2004. 28
Mitrevski 1997, 88–110; Mitkoski 1999; Stankovski 2006,
25
Andronikos 1969; Vokotopoulou 1982; 1986. 93–114; Mitkoski 2010, 60–62.

94
 which the so-called tribal or clan type played a
significant role in the establishment and devel-
opment during the Early Iron Age. This type of
necropolis contained one to three tumuli, each
with more than ten burials, mainly in cists and
always with a central grave around which all oth-
er graves were organised. The whole tumulus was
enclosed with stones and the mound was made
by piling mixed earth and stones. Sometimes
the central grave had a separate mound and a
stone ring, and the burials in this central grave
comprised the so-called “double tumulus type”,30
which were the earliest burials. The appearance
of double tumuli in Macedonia might be due to a
cultural breakthrough or alternatively according
to some authors due to population movements
from Southeast Albania, where this type of burial
practice was used during the Bronze Age.31 The
later opinion, however, does not seem to hold,
as previously outlined. These reasons primari-
ly include the manifestations typical of the Late
Bronze Age culture known as the Ulanci group.
The matt painted pottery (Figure 3, 4) and the
burials in crouched inhumation are common
for the group and point to the continuity of the
traditions of communities from the Bronze into
the Iron Age, even though the communities
adopted some new elements into their burial
customs, such are the burying under low earthen
or stone mounds. This consistency is evident in
the material culture, especially in pottery, which
shows continuity from the Late Bronze Age with
some changes with gradual introduction of new
shapes.
Figure 3: Local matt painted pottery, Ulanci, Gradsko It is interesting to note that some grave goods
(drawing by Z. Videski) provide significant data for the typological,
chronological and cultural identification of the
and religious meaning. In the Late Bronze Age, central graves. One of such examples is a frag-
the inhumation in a cist was established as a sole ment of a matt painted kantharos of the Ulanci
grave form in the tumuli and cremation van- type found in the central grave (Figure 4) of Tu-
ished from the entire region of Macedonia down mulus I at Strnovac. This type of pottery dates in
to Thessaly. The reappearance of cists with other to the Bronze Age or 12th century BC. The other
forms of individual burials in the Early Iron Age finds from this tumulus include e monochrome
(10th–9th centuries BC) indicates the strengthen- pottery and fragments of channelled wares, both
ing of the local values of the Bronze Age.29 typical for 11th century BC.32
The tumuli in the R. of Macedonia are a so-
cial category and a cultural phenomenon, in

29
First use of cists as a grave construction on the territory of 30
Hammond, 1976, 77–105; 1982, 625. 644.
Macedonia can be traced to the Late Bronze Age necropo- 31
Ibid. 77–105.
leis of Ulanci Group. 32
Stankovski 2006, Appendix 1. 97.

95
 stage Ha A with the main distribution in central
Europe while its ending in the form of a fish tail
resembles the bronze swords of type Auheim.36
Based on a comparison to the samples from the
museum in Athens, they are dated to the LH
IIIB–C, or the 13th–12th centuries BC.37
The bronze pendant in the shape of a dou-
ble axe (Figure 5, 3) has parallels with the sam-
ples from the Protogeometric graves at Vergina
and Pateli.38 A very important find for dating is
a wheelmade skyphos (Figure 5, 1) with linear
matt painted decoration. It belongs to the group
Figure 4: Matt painted pottery – central grave, of the Protogeometric pottery imported from the
Tumulus I, Dolinac, Strnovac south at the end of the 10th century BC, with pos-
(Stankoski 1999, Tab. I, 9) sible influences from Thessaly.39 Based on finds
from the central graves and on analogies from
other sites we can conclude that the tumuli of the
2. A discussion of the best examples of the clan type in Visoi – Beranci appeared at the end
so-called clan tumuli and their significant of the 13th or in the 12th century BC and reached
burials their final phase during the 10th century BC.

Visoi – Beranci, Bitola Dolinac, Strnovac – Staro Nagoričane near

Kumanovo
The site of Visoi is located round 3 km south
of the village Beranci on the shore of the Crna The archaeological site of Dolinac was discovered
Reka, or the Black River, in the antiquity known as part of the international project at Pirajhme
as River Erigon. All together nine round tumuli in 2000, when two tumuli (I and II) were regis-
were registered at a distance of around 300 to 500 tered.40 The site is located in the village of Strno-
m apart. First archaeological excavations here vac, around 400 m east of River Pčinja. Tumulus
were held in the 1954 by the Museum of Bitola I was well preserved with a mound of 20 m in
as the biggest tumuli with the diameter of 23 m diameter and 1.71 m in height made by earth and
was investigated, in which 24 burials were found small stones and an enclosed circle made of big
organised in radially laid-out lines around the stone blocks and smaller stones filling the space
central grave. Of special importance is the cen- between the blocks (wall thickness ca. 0.20–0.30
tral burial in form of a crouched inhumation in m).41 In the central part of the tumulus, a central
a cist, while the remaining burials were extended grave was discovered. The deceased was placed
inhumations.33 in a crouched position in a pit, surrounded by a
The central grave (Тomb III) in this large stone ring with a smaller mound of stones (Fig-
tumulus at Visoi – Beranci contained an iron ure 6).42 It is interesting to mention the presence
sword, a bronze amulet in the shape of a labrys of another burial in a crouched position in the
and a skyphos.34 (Figure 5, 1. 3. 5) The iron sword central grave. The form of this additional grave,
has a flat double-sided blade and tongue-shaped however, could not be precisely defined (it might
handle resembling a fish tail. The swords of this
type have been found in two earlier burials at the 36
Schauer 1971, 125; Mikulčić 1966, 16.
Vergina cemetery.35 In terms of its length, this 37
Аthens National Archaeological Museum 1017, 323, type
sword is similar to the bronze swords from of the Naue II.
38
Rey 1932, Fig. 11; Andronikos, 1952, 211.
39
Mikulčić, 1966, 16–17.
33
Mikulčić 1966, 14. Archaeological finds and documentati- 40
National Museum of Kumanovo organized the archaeolo-
on are located in the National Museum of Bitola. gical excavations held in 2001.
34
Ibid. 16, Tab. IV, 8a–c. 41
Stankovski 2008, 135.
35
Andronikos 1952, 263–264, Fig. 102. 42
Stankovski 2006, Tab. 1. 97; Papazovska Sanev 2014, 15–16.

96
 1

4 5

Figure 5: Finds from the central grave in the tumulus I, Visoi, Beranci I. (Mikulčić 1966, Tab. IV)

have been a pit), but it was orientated NW–SE Similar situation with the tumulus used
just as the first grave.43 A matt painted kantha- throughout a longer period of time can also
ros (Figure 4) of the Ulanci type from the central be observed in at Stragata near the village of
grave of Tumulus I has been dated to the end of Kruševica (Figure 7). During the 2001 excava-
Bronze Age or to the transitional period (second tions, in the middle of a tumulus with a diameter
half of the 12th century BC). The grave offerings of 15 m a central burial in a cist grave and sever-
in the other burials in Tumulus I date later, as al younger graves in cists graves located radially
they are typical for the more developed stages of around it were excavated.45
the Iron Age (8th century BC).44
Stankovski 2008, 135–140.
43

44
Ibid. Three more graves can be noticed in this tumulus century BC.
and based on the grave goods they can be dated to the 8th 45
Mitkoski 1999, 27, Pl. 1–2.

97
 Figure 6: Tumulus I, Dolinac, Strnovac (Stankoski 1999, Fig. 1)

Barata, Čanište that the tumulus in Čanište was in use until the
developed Iron Age (8th century BC).47
The excavations in 1994 at the site of Barata lo-
cated 2 km northwest of the village of Čanište
revealed three tumuli. The largest one (with a Przali – Varvara, Skopje
mound of a diameter of 15 m and a height of The archaeological site of Przali is located in the
1.25 m) included nine cist graves placed radially village of Varvara, 14 km south of Skopje on the
around the central grave (Figure 8).46 While in left bank of the Markova River.48 The necropolis
Strnovac and Kruševica the central grave was was investigated in years 1995 and 2000 by the
clearly distinguished, the burial in the central
grave in Čanište represents a distinct construc- 47
Ibid. 58–62, Pl. 3–4. In both tumuli, new burials were per-
tion with a separate mound of stones. These formed in the following periods.
graves date between 11th and 10th century BC or
48
The archaeological excavations were conducted by the
Museum of City of Skopje, but the results have not been pu-
at the beginning of the Early Iron Age. Based on blished yet, except from an MA thesis of Kiro Ristov defen-
the finds from other graves it can be assumed ded in 2004 at the Faculty of Philosophy in the Department
of Archaeology in Skopje entitled “Prehistoric necropoleis
in Varvara and Orešani – a picture of protohistory in the
46
Mitkoski 2010, 58-60, Pl. 3. Skopje region”.

98
 Figure 7: Tumulus, Stragata, Kruševica – Mariovo (Mitkoski, 2010, plan 3.)

Skopje city museum.49 The limited excavations followed the social and economic changes in the
revealed a tumulus of clan type with 53 burials community, which was reflected in the structure
dating from Early Iron Age till the Roman time.50 of the tumuli.
The tumulus was consisting of an earthen mound The stabilisation of the Iron Age culture and
with a wreath of stones of a diameter of 13 m.51 the emerging social relations during the devel-
oped Iron Age contributed to the growth of com-
3. Conclusion munities, resulting in the population abandon-
It can be concluded that during the Iron Age tu- ing the old burial custom of the so-called clan
muli became the favourite mode of burial prac- or tribal tumuli. New organisation within the tu-
tice. The development of cemetery organisation mulus cemeteries saw new spacious necropolises
with several hundred tumuli.52 These tumuli had
49
Ristov 1999, 7–12, Fig. 1–2; 2006, 16. I would like to thank the same characteristics as the earlier clan tumu-
Kiro Ristov for pointing it out to me.
50
Ristov 2006, 20-21.
51
Ristov 2004, 54. 52
Митревски 2013, 220–224.

99
 Figure 8: Tumulus, Barata, Čanište – Mariovo (Mitkoski, 2010, plan 4.)

li, but were of smaller dimensions and contained these communities, especially with respect to the
fewer burials. The fencing stone ring consisted of identification of the individual with the commu-
an ordinary circle of stones in a single row, and nity. With the collapse of the tribal system and
there was no central burial occupying the inner the appearance of new social differentiation in
space of the tumulus. In short, the clan or tribal the 6th century BC, tumulus cemeteries fell out
type of the tumulus was abandoned and the new of use.
tumuli of the so-called family character, such as In line with this conclusion, we can discard
at Dabici – Sopot near Veles (Figure 9), occur the earlier interpretations, which associated the
through the entire 7th and 6th centuries BC.53 tumulus burials and their appearance in Mace-
Some authors have linked this type of tumu- donia with foreign ethnic communities and the
lus with the communities of conservative and idea that tumulus burials appeared during the
livestock breeding regions, as this custom was new and turbulent period of transition from the
practiced for a longer period of time there.54 The Late Bronze to the Early Iron Age. There are no
graves of ancestors had great importance for special signs that the burials under tumuli be-
longed to people who were ethnically different
53
Митревски 1997, 93-96. from the others or who practiced this “Indo-Eu-
54
Bejko 2006, 203; Митревски 2013, 220–224.

100
 Figure 9: “Family” tumuli (Mitrevski 1997, Fig. 23)

ropean” way of burial. The developments in the observe carefully the map of distribution of the
period of the transition into the Early Iron Age so-called clan tumuli, we can see that the fam-
as presented here, accompanied with the results ily tumuli are absent in this area and vice ver-
from the research conducted in the last decades, sa. The family type of tumuli is more common
can help us to draw out a number of key elements in the Middle Vardar Valley and in the region of
included in the formation of the Early Iron Age Bregalnica. Moreover, they date to a much later
in the Republic of Macedonia. Specifically, it re- period, the Developed Iron Age (the 7th to the
lies on two basic elements. First, the Early Iron first half of the 6th century BC) (Figure 10). At
Age was formed based on the preceding local that time, new settlements were established as
Bronze Age traditions that are strongly recog- a result of the growing economic power of the
nisable in the local cultural group of the Vardar communities and the development of metallurgy
Valley. This cultural group (the Povardarie – Ul- and the use of iron in particular. As communities
anci group) followed even earlier traditions, but had greater possibilities for the development of
also incorporated influences stemming from the crafts and trade, there was a new development
strong relationships with the Mycenaean culture. in spiritual culture and beliefs. The events of the
Thus, some of the elements that are noticeable in Early Iron Age created conditions for a greater
the burial tradition are the use of cist graves and progress of the developed Iron Age, evident in
the multiple burials, which can be considered to the increased population, especially in the Lower
bear Mycenaean influences.55 The inhumation Vardar Valley. It eventually led to the establish-
burials that had emerged in Macedonia in the ment of strong communities and first proto-ur-
Late Bronze Age continued to develop in the Ear- ban centres. These centres opened a new page
ly Iron Age as well. and paved way for new historical development.
The research on the phenomenon of tumu-
lus cemeteries in the last decades has shown that Na engleski jezik prevele
they are a reflection of the social and econom- Aleksandra Papazovska i Daniela Heilmann
ic character of the Iron Age communities. The
earliest appearance of the clan tumuli can be
found in the regions of Pelagonia and Skopje –
Kumanovo (in the region of the Upper Vardar
Valley), where they are most concentrated. If we

55
Snodgrass 1971, 180.

101
 Figure 10: Tumuli burials in R. of Macedonia (map by autor)

Резиме становништва, а касније су постали неодвојиви

и препознатљиви дио локалне културе гвозденог
доба. Сви ови елементи дају специфичне мани-
Нове перспективе сахрањивања фестације културе раног гвозденог доба у Маке-
донији, приближавајући јужне и сјеверозападне
под тумулима у гвозденом добу културе на Балкану.
Македоније Сахрањивање испод тумула је посебан култур-
ни феномен који се појављује у Македонији у ра-
Рано гвоздено доба у Македонији (од Х до почетка ном гвозденом добу, а који ће се развијати у току
VIII века пре нове ере) је период неоспорне кул- гвозденог доба. Дуго се сматрало да се ова појава
туре са нејасно дефинисаним културним вред- поклапа са такозваним трећим таласом миграција
ностима, на које утичу последице транзиционог Егеја, према Милојчићу и Мејеру, али на терито-
периода. Гвоздено доба је специфичан феномен рији Македоније, чак и у јужном Епиру, пронала-
који се развија под различитим утицајима, али зимо њихову ранију појаву, током транзиционог
са својим специфичностима и карактеристикама периода у XI век пре н. е.
које га разликују као развој локалне заједнице. Тумули представљају нови начин сахране, који
У његовом формирању евидентни су утицаји из је условљен новим начином живота, односно но-
бронзаног доба, као и продор нових елемената вим друштвеним односима. Али, оно што је кон-
халштатске културе са севера у транзиционом пе- станта или барем има континуитет јест сигурно
риоду. Неки од ових елемената су кратко задржа- материјална култура, где су неизбежне нове фор-
ни (током транзиционог периода), без проналаска ме, нови утицаји, нови предмети, где керамика
основе за њихов даљи развој. Други су прихваће- као централни елемент указује на континуитет из
ни и прилагођени локалном укусу и потребама касног бронзаног доба. У сваком случају, тумули

102
у Македонији представљају друштвену категорију Diamond, S. 1988, Mycenaean origins: infiltration
и културни феномен, где кључну улогу игра та- from the north?, In: French, E. B. / Wardle, K. A.
козвани “клановски” тип тумула који је одиграо (eds.), Problems in the Greek Prehistory, Papers
важну улогу у формирању и развоју старијег гвоз- presented at the centenary conference of the Bri-
деног доба. tish School of Archaeology at Athens, Manchester,
Стабилизацијом нових друштвених односа у April 1986, Bristol 1988, 153–159.
гвозденом добу, дошло је до пораста броја зајед- Garašanin, M. 1983, Razvijeno bronzano doba i pre-
ница чије је становништво оставило стари оби- lazni period (gvozdeno doba I) Makedonije, PJZ
чај сахрањивања у клановским тумулима. Одатле IV, Sarajevo 1983.
ће се формирати нова пространа и организова- Hammond, N. G. L. 1976, Tumulus-burials in Alba-
на тумуларна некропола са стотинама тумула. У nia and problem of ethnogenesis, Iliria IV, Tirana
суштини, ти тумули су имали исте конструктивне 1976, 77–105.
карактеристике као и тумули старијих кланова, Hammond, N. G. L. 1982, Illyris, Epirus and Mace-
али са мањим димензијама и мањим бројем сахра- donia in the Early Iron Age, CAH Vol. III/1 1982,
на. Прстенасти зид био је обичан круг камења у 619–656.
једном реду, без централног покопа, испуњавајући Hänsel, B. 1989, Ausgrabungen in einem Siedlungs-
цео унутрашњи простор тумулуса. Тако је туму- hügel der Bronze- und Eisenzeit Makedoniens
лус изгубио клановски карактер и добио нову ко- (1975–1979), Prähistorische Archäologie in Süd-
нотацију породице (на пример некропола Дабици osteuropa 7, 1, Berlin 1989.
код Сопота у Велесу, која је била у употреби око Hochstetter, A. 1984, Kastanas. Die handgemachte Ke-
VII и VI пре н. е.). ramik: Schichten 19 bis 1, Prähistorische Archäo-
Овaj тумуларни карактер некропола неки ау- logie in Südosteuropa 3, 2, Berlin 1984.
тори везују углавном за конзервативне и сточар- Jovcevska, T. 2008, Manastir, necropolis from the
ске регионе где је реално обичај сахрањивања Transitional period from Bronze to Iron Age,
испод тумула био у пракси дуго времена. Гробови Veles 2008.
њихових предака били су им веома значајни, по- Kourkouti, M. 1981, Le tumulus de Patos, Iliria 1,
себно у идентификацији појединца са заједницом. Tirana 1981, 7–55.
Са распадом племенског система и са појавом из- Korošec, J. 1966, Заштитна истраживања у Демир
разито изражене друштвене диференцијације, у Капији 1948, ЗАМ 1, 1956, 90–107.
VI веку пре нове ере тумуларне некрополе су ван Mikulčić, I. 1966, Pelagonija u svetlosti arheoloških
употребе. nalaza, Beograd 1966.
Mikulčić, I. 1999, Železno vreme vo Mariovo, Tumulot
I od Barata kaj Čaniste, Makedonsko nasledstvo 9,
Skopje 1999.
Mitkoski, A. 2010, Mariovo in the Praehistory, Maced.
acta archaeol. 19, 2010, 49–84.
Bibliography Mitrevski, D. 1994, A Brnjica Type Necropolis near
Skopje, Starinar XLIII–XLIV/1992–1993, Beo-
Andrea, Zh. 1976, La civilisation tumulaire du Bassin grad 1994, 115–124.
de Korçë et sa place dans les Balkans du Sud Est, Mitrevski, D. 1997, Proto-historical communities in
Iliria IV/1, Tirana 1976, 133–155. Macedonia through burials and burial manifesta-
Andrea, Zh. 1985, Kultura Ilire e Tumave në Pellgun e tions, Skopje 1997.
Korçës, Akademia e Shkencave e RPSSH, Qendra Mitrevski, D. 2007, The beginning of the Iron Age in
e Kërkimeve Arkeologjike, Tiranë 1985. Macedonia, In: Todorova, Ch. (ed.), The Struma /
Andronikos, M. 1952, Vergina, Praktika, Athens 1952. Strymon River Valley in prehistory: proceedings
Andronikos, M. 1969, Vergina I, The cemetery of the of the International Symposium “Strymon Praehi-
tumuli, Athens 1969. storicus”, Kjustendil – Blagoevgrad (Bulgaria) –
Aliu, S. 2004, Tuma e Luarasit, Tirana 2004. Serres – Amphipolis (Greece), 27. 9. – 1. 10. 2004,
Bejko, L. 2002, Mycenaean presence and influence Sofia 2007, 443–450.
in Albania, In: Cambi, N. / Čače, S. / Kirigin, B. Митревски, Д. 2013, Протоисторија на Република
(eds.), Greek influences along East Adriatic coast, Македонија, Македонија – Милениумски кул-
Proceedings of the International Conference, Split турно-историски факти, Том 1, Скопје 2013,
14–26 September 1999, Split 2002, 9–24. 83–266.
Bejko, L. 2007, Expression of identities in the Late Papazovska Sanev, A. 2014, Funerary practices in the
Bronze Age and Early Iron Age Southeastern Al- Early Iron Age in Macedonia, Nova antička Dukl-
bania, Aegaeum 27, 2007, 203–209. ja V, 2014, 7–18.

103
Papazovska, A. 2015, The Early Iron Age in Macedo- Snodgrass, A. M. 1971, The Dark Age of Greece: An
nia, unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of St. Archaeological Survey of the Eleventh to the
Cyril and Methodius, Skopje 2015. Eighth Centuries BC, Edinburgh 1971.
Rey, L. 1932, Bohemica, Albania IV, Paris 1932. Stankovski, J. 2006, Tumulus II at Dolinac, v. Strnovac,
Ristov, K. 1999, Нови праисториски наоди од Staro Nagoricino, Maced. acta archaeol. 17, 2006,
скопско, Kulturno Nasledstvo 24–25, 1997–1998, 193–114.
1999, 7–19. Stankovski, J. 1999, Tumulus I from the tumuli ne-
Ристов, К. 2004, Утврдени пајонски населби во cropolis near village Strnovac, Staro Nagoricane,
Долно Повардарје, Скопје 2004. Maced. acta archaeol. 18, 1999, 135–151.
Ристов, K. 2006, Праисториските некрополи во Videski, Z. 2004, Late Bronze Age necropolis Dimov
Варвара и Орешани – слика на протоисторијата Grob – Ulanci, Unpublished MA Thesis, Universi-
во Скопско, Скопје 2006. (unpublished Master ty of St. Cyril and Methodius Skopje, 2004.
thesis) Videski, Z. 2005, The Bronze Age at Vardarski Rid,
Savvopoulou, Th. 1988, Ένα νεκροταφείο Πρώιμης In: Mitrevski, D. (ed.), Vardarski Rid. Foundati-
Εποχής Σιδήρου στο Παλιό Γυναικόκαστρο του on Vardarski, Rid – Skopje Institute for History
Κιλκίς, AEMΘ 1, 1988, 305–311. of Art and Archaeology – Faculty of Philosophy
Schauer, P. 1971, Die Schwerter in Süddeutschland, – Skopje, Skopje 2005, 91–114.
Österreich und der Schweiz, Prähistorische Bron- Vokotopoulou, J. 1982, L’Epire ou 8 et 7 siècle av JC,
zefunde IV, 2, München 1971. ASAAMIO, Vol. LX, n. s. XLIV, Athens 1982.
Vokotopoulou, J. 1986, Βίτσα. Τα Νεκροταφεία μίας
Μολοσσικής Κώμης, Athens 1986.

104
 Godišnjak / Jahrbuch 2018, 47: 105–115
DOI: 10.5644/Godisnjak.CBI.ANUBiH-47.106

Some Observations on Communications and Contacts in the Central

Balkan and Neighbouring Regions During the 7th to 5th Century BC
Based on the Distribution of Weapons1

Vojislav Filipović2
Belgrade

Abstract: This paper will discuss main Central Balkan communication routes as well as the distribution of weap-
ons and defensive equipment of the 7th–5th centuries BC. It will also provide a general picture of the main cultural
groups and Paleo-Balkan tribes, as based on the historical sources, and compare their geographical spread with
specific archaeological material. Frequently used communications routes based on some additional observations
will be pointed out, too. In the earlier periods, the main Balkan communication routes had certainly led through
the Morava – Vardar axis and the Morava – Nišava – Isker – Marica road, but during the 7th–5th centuries BC,
these routes gradually faded out use and Drim, Ibar, Western Morava and Drina River valleys become the main
corridors of north-south communications.

Key words: natural communications, contacts, routes, Central Balkan, Iron Age, weapons, defensive equipment

Contacts, communications, and mutual rela- R. Vasić,5 and A. Palavestra.6 While these works
tions of Paleo-Balkan populations have been presented selected contacts and tried to establish
the topic of studies of many prominent archae- their directionality, the authors usually consid-
ologists from the former Yugoslavia.3 Yet, some ered only several types of artefacts distributed
questions remain unclear, and we still do not over smaller territories. Without doubt, however,
have enough archaeological data that could help these pioneering works are an exceptional basis
us to understand better the communities of the for further investigations on the topic, this short
Early Iron Age of the Central Balkan region and contribution included.
adjacent areas. In this context, communication From the Neolithic the central parts of the
routes undoubtedly represent one of the less well Balkan Peninsula were positioned on the main
known and less frequently discussed topics; how- communication routes between Asia and Europe
ever, some interesting studies have been done in in east-west direction and also between Central
the past, especially those by M. Parović-Pešikan,4 and Northern Europe and Mediterranean region
in north-south direction. Certain parts of this
1
This paper is the result of the project Archaeology of Serbia: area such as Danube plain had a primary com-
cultural identity, integrational factors, technological processes munication role, while, in contrast, some smaller
and the role of the central Balkans in the development of the regions within the Balkan mountain range stood
European prehistory (no. 177020), funded by the Ministry out as isolated areas. Natural conditions and ge-
for Education, Science and Technological Development
of the Republic of Serbia. I am deeply grateful to Daniela ographical circumstances allowed some of the
Heilmann and Marek Verčík for reading, commenting and communication routes to be more suitable, but
correcting this paper. the frequency of use also depended on other fac-
2
Institute of Archaeology, Belgrade, Serbia.
3
Mikulčić 1966; Papazoglu 1969; Čović 1976; Benac 1987;
Vasić 1987a-h; Garašanin 1988; Tasić 1998. 5
Vasić 1982.
4
Parović-Pešikan 1960; 1986; 1994. 6
Palavestra 1989; 1993, 281-283.

105
 Fig. 1. Central Balkan road network with main rivers (italics) and crossroads (bold)

tors such as, for example, the relations among historically.8 Certainly, the Central Balkans had
local populations, road safety, and natural causes best connections with the Pannonian Plain, as
such as floods, landslides, and so on. According the northern extent is wide open to the Danube
to J. Cvijić,7 because the central part of the Bal- and Sava River valleys, originating in Central Eu-
kan Peninsula is clearly separated from the coast- rope, as well as rivers on the northern borders of
al part by high mountain ranges, its character is the Balkans, such as the Drava or Tisza.9 How-
more continental than Mediterranean, although ever, although open to the north, the communi-
it is geographically much closer to the coastal ar- cation lines of the Central Balkans in the south
eas than, for example, to Central Europe. Cvijić direction became more dispersed, and concen-
called the present-day Greek part of the penin- trated only on a few primary roads. Two of them
sula “secondary”, considering that it is separated are the most important natural routes: Morava
from the north by high mountain ranges, which – Vardar (Fig. 1 / Road II) and Morava – Niša-
orient it toward the eastern coast and to the Ae- va – Isker – Marica (Via Militaris) (Fig. 1 / Road
gean Sea. Furthermore, this part had quite poor I). Cvijić has believed that the Morava – Vardar
connections with the trans-Balkan road network

8
Ibid. 92.
7
Cvijić 2000b, 87-89. 9
Cvijić 2000a, 26.

106
route was more traversable,10 although has also certainly the most important and fundamen-
he mentioned that Via Militaris was of a great- tally strategic crossroad of the Central Balkans.
er importance.11 K. Jireček, the famous Czech Crossroads in the areas of Thessaloniki, the con-
historian and Balkanologist, on the other hand, fluence of the Morava-Danube Rivers and Lip-
considered Via Militaris to be the main Balkan ljan are also of particular importance.16 Parallel
communication route.12 to the main roads, there was a contemporary
In addition to these two roads, one should network of secondary roads – often shortcuts –
mention a route that connects the Central Bal- but their existence and significance can be only
kans with the Adriatic coast. This road was of reconstructed based on the historical, military,
almost equal importance to the two above-men- and ethnographic sources: additional pathways
tioned roads and it was also the shortest and fast- of note are located between the Ohrid Lake
est route from the Lower Danube and Oltenia re- and Kuks River valley by the Black Drim valley,
gions to the Mediterranean. This is the Lješ – Niš which connected Via Egnatia and the Lješ – Niš
– Archar / Radujevac road (Fig. 1 / Road III).13 – Archar / Radujevac route. Another shortcut led
Starting at the present-day Lezhë in Albania, the from the Ohrid Lake toward Skopje by the Vard-
road follows the Drim River valley and at one ar River valley to connect to the Morava – Vardar
point, before entering the Mountain Prokletije, route. The road from Skopje toward the Vranje
it diverges from the river gorge and ascends to- valley by the Preševo Watershed connected with
ward the mountainous region of Albanides, from the valley of the South Morava River. There was
where it then descends to the confluence of the also a route from the Vardar River valley that led
Ljuma, Black, and White Drim Rivers. From that toward the Strimon and the Dorjan lake, from
point on, the road enters the White Drim Can- which the road continued further east, follow-
yon and continues toward modern-day Peć and ing the route of Via Egnatia.17 Likewise, another
further on to the Sitnica River valley and Lipl- road led north along the Strimon River valley to-
jan, where it reaches the Morava – Vardar com- ward the Sofia plain, where it reached Via Milita-
munication route.14 Both routes then continue ris. There was a road from Skadar Lake towards
along the Lab River valley towards present-day Podgorica, which then separated into two differ-
Kuršumlija. By the Toplica River valley, they ent roads.18 One road led north toward the Lim
reach the confluence of the Nišava and South River and the area of p
​​ resent-day Višegrad. From
Morava Rivers. The fourth major Balkan com- that point, one route perhaps continued west, but
munication route was the so-called Via Egnatia there was also another one that went eastward
(Fig. 1 / Road IV), which is the only road that along the Đetinja River valley and further to the
cuts across the Balkans in east-west direction West Morava River valley.
and connects its western and eastern shores. This Significant additional communication routes
route begins at the present-day Durrës and con- went through the Ibar River valley and connect-
tinues towards the southeast, where it reaches the ed this route with the Drim and Vardar routes at
Shkumbin River valley and continues to Ohrid a crossroad near modern-day Lipljan.19 From the
and Prespa Lakes. Continuing through the pres- west Morava River valley, one could go north to
ent-day Bitola and Voden, it reaches Thessaloniki the Valjevo plain, where the route continued ei-
and eventually merges with the Morava – Vardar ther further to the Sava River, along the Kolubara
route.15 From that point on, the road continues River valley, or toward the Drina River valley by
towards the Strymon River delta and along the the Jadar River valley. The road that led to the
Aegean coast to Constantinople and Asia Minor. point where the Sava flows into Danube Rivers
All of these four primary trans-Balkan routes followed the foothills of Mountain Rudnik in the
had their own crossroads. Today's Niš area is Šumadija region. The most important route in

10
Ibid. 27. 16
For area of Thessaloniki cf. Hammond 1972. For the re-
11
Cvijić 2000b, 100. gion around Danube and Morava confluence see Cvijić
12
Jireček 1959, 73. 2000b, 29.
13
Petrović 2007, 87; 2008, 31-40. 17
Cvijić 2000a, 28-29.
14
Cvijić 2000b, 96-97. 18
Cvijić 2000b, 96.
15
Ibid. 29. 19
Cvijić 2000a, 28.

107
 Fig. 2. Distribution of the cultural groups and tribes of the Central Balkan region

the eastern part of the Central Balkans connect- On the basis of the previous research by the
ed the Velika Morava River valley with the Timok leading archaeologists and classical historians
Basin, passing through the Stolice Saddle.20 We from the former Yugoslavia, such as A. Benac,
should also mention the route through the valley B. Čović, M. Garašanin, D. Srejović, R. Vasić, M.
of the Trgoviški Timok River to Nišava River that Parović-Pešikan, I. Mikulčić, F. Papazoglu, M.
connected Via Militaris with Lješ – Niš – Archar. Suić, S. Gabrovec and many others,21 we can pin-
The northern part of eastern Serbia did not show point the regional distribution of the Paleo-Bal-
potential of a communication hub, not at least kan tribes and their cultural groups during
until the construction of the road through the the period between the 7th and 5th century BC.
Djerdap Gorge during the 1st century AD. The In the broadest and simplified terms, the most
possibility of using river as a route of communi- commonly suggested distribution of the cultural
cation should not be excluded, but there are no groups and tribes of the Central Balkan region
clear data at this moment. can be seen on Figure 2 and will be discussed
further below.
*
21
See notes 2 and 3 as well as: Srejović 1960, 1973 and 1991;
Suić 1976; Gabrovec 1987. For complete older literature see
bibliography in Praistorija Jugoslavenskih zemalja V, ed. A.
20
Ibid. 60-61. Benac (Sarajevo 1987).

108
 The area of the present-day Srem, the Mačva on potters’ wheel appears in this phase, coming
region, southern Bačka and southwestern Banat from the southern regions. Influence of the Greek
was controlled by the so-called Bosut culture, as culture can be noticed at the strongholds Hisar,
defined by N. Tasić and P. Medović almost half a Cernica, and Belaćevac starting from the 6th cen-
century ago.22 This cultural phenomenon spread tury BC.30 In contrast with the previous phase, the
over the strategic point of the Sava and Danube territory previously occupied by the Belaćevac II
confluence, which was easily connected with the group seems to shrink, including only Kosovo
surrounding territories. The Velika Morava River without the Metohija region. This group spreads
valley, Eastern Serbia and Western Bulgaria, up eastward toward the Južna Morava River valley.
to the Isker River to the east and Nišava River to Its material culture was usually recognized as be-
the south was distinguished by the Zlot group, longing to the Paleo-Balkan Dardani tribe (Plin.
which have some similarity to the Ferigile group Nat. 3.29), which, in this case, controlled the two
from Oltenia in Romania, as well as the Late Bo- main Central Balkan routes through the Kosovo
sut culture and some Scythian elements. The Zlot and Metohija territories.
group originated from the Basarabi complex of During the period from the 7th to the 5th cen-
the Iron Age period.23 Geographically speak- tury BC, the extensive so-called Glasinac-Mati
ing, the Zlot group spread over parts of the four cultural complex extended from the Adriat-
big natural communication routes: through the ic Sea in the west to the Morava and Ibar Riv-
Danube Gorge, Velika and Južna Morava River er valleys to the east, from the Sava River in the
valleys, Nišava River valley, and Timok River north to the Mati River in the Northern Alba-
valley. Later historical sources from the Classi- nia in the south.31 It originated from the Bronze
cal and Hellenistic period define this territory as Age Glasinac culture of the Glasinac plateau in
belonging to the Triballi tribe. Hence, one can eastern Bosnia. Pottery from the region between
assume that this Paleo-Balkan tribe was the core Glasinac the plateau and Mati River valley shows
population of the Zlot group.24 Indeed, on the ba- exceptional level of similarity in the period from
sis of the written sources of ancient historians, the 7th to the 5th century BC.32 B. Čović has con-
such as Herodotus (Hdt. 4.49) and Thucydides sidered the Autariatae (Ps.-Scyl. 24) to be the
(Thuc. 2.96), it can be suggested that the Tribal- tribe linked with the archaeological material of
li occupied the territory enclosed by the Velika the Glasinac-Mati complex and has noticed that
Morava River in the west, the Danube River in this cultural material was used by several Illyri-
the north, the Isker River in the east, and proba- an tribes with a common origin and similar re-
bly the Nišava River in the south.25 ligious, cultural, and language patterns, such as
During Hallstatt C period, on the territories the Ardiaei (Strab. 7.5.), Docleatae (App. Ill. 47),
of Kosovo, Southern Serbia and Northern Mac- Illyrii proprie dicti (Plin. Nat. 3.144), Labeatae
edonia, stamped pottery decorated by using a (Liv. 44.23.3) and others.33
specific tool26 or a wheel appears,27 and is usually Based on the archaeological material from the
named Belaćevac I horizon.28 The development necropoleis and settlements in the lower Vardar
of this material group during the period from the / Axios River valley, R. Vasić defined Gevgelia
7th to the 5th century BC is similar to the horizon group extending from Demir-Kapija in Macedo-
of the stamped pottery from the previous phase, nia to Bohemitsa and Chausitsa in present day
and it is called Belaćevac II horizon, i.e. the Greece.34 Recently, D. Mitrevski suggested a dif-
younger horizon of this cultural manifestation.29 ferent name for this material culture, the Don-
In addition to indigenous pottery, pottery made jovardarsko-Peonian group.35 Chronologically,
this group can be anchored to the Hallstatt C1-
22
Brukner et al. 1974, 258-260; Medović 1978, 48-50.
23
Vasić 1973, 101-103; 1987b, 660-662; 1997, 92-94; Jevtić
1992; 2004, 159; Kapuran 2014, 85-87.
24
Vasić 1992, 395. 30
Bulatović 2007, 49.
25
Papazoglu 1969, 48-49; Filipović 2014, 47-52. 31
Čović 1987, 642-643.
26
Bulatović 2007, 48; Lazić 2009, 62. 32
Jevtić 1983, 39-41.
27
Vasić 1987c, 676; Garašanin 1988, 68. 33
Cf. Teržan 2015.
28
Tasić 1998, 170. 34
Vasić 1987e, 701-703.
29
Ibid. 1998. 35
Mitrevski 2008, 175-177.

109
D3 period (750–475 BC).36 The people connected rašanin have attributed it to the Dassaretae tribe
with this material culture controlled the Morava (Liv. 42.36.9),48 E. Petrova to the Paionean aristoc-
– Vardar route. Furthermore, the Gevgelia group racy,49 and I. Mikulčić to the Eneheleans (Apollod.
inhabited the crossroads of this communication 3.5.4; Hdt. 9.43; Paus. 9.5.3) and even just the for-
and the transversal road from the Vardar / Ax- eign aristocracy, which dominated the tribe.50
ios River valley towards Struma / Strymon Riv- The so-called Kuç and Zi cultural phenome-
er. Ethnos that could perhaps be connected with non connected with the tumulus necropoleis in
this group is the tribe of the Paiones (Hom. Il. the south of present day Albania, has been de-
848-850; Diod. Sic. 16.15, 2.6, 3.4, 4.2).37 fined by Zh. Andrea on the basis of the graves
The so-called Štip group was also defined by and burial customs. She, however, has identified
R. Vasić,38 but later he gave up on this term and this group as phase Barç IV,51 and connected the
defined the archaeological material as part of the graves to the Illyrians.52 M. Garašanin, on the
Early Iron Age culture of the Central and East- other hand, has underlined that during the ear-
ern Macedonia.39 Chronologically, this culture lier phase of the Iron Age in this part of Alba-
can be identified to Hallstatt B3-D3 (8th – second nia there are noticeable influences from the east,
half of the 5th century BC).40 This material cul- south, and also the north.53 The dispersion of the
ture spread through the Bregalnica River valley, Kuç and Zi cultural phenomenon can roughly be
Štip and Kočani regions in the present day Re- limited to the area between the Ohrid and Prespa
public of Northern Macedonia and the middle Lakes in proximity to the northern shores of the
Vardar River valley. One of the Paiones tribe was Ionian Sea and the southern coast of the Adri-
identified as ethnos connected with this material atic Sea, with the northern border somewhere
group.41 around the Shkumbin River valley. Even now,
Based on the extensive study on Pelagonia its southern border cannot be defined.54 This
by I. Mikulčić,42 R. Vasić defined the Pelagon cultural phenomenon encompassed a part of
group.43 Chronologically, this culture spans the Via Egnatia. In the later phase, the eastern bor-
8th to the second half of the 5th century BC, when der was moved further west, probably due to the
influences from the Late Archaic Greece were pressure from the Ohrid group. Perhaps the Kuç
noted.44 The Pelagones (Strab. 7.7.8, 7a.1.20, and Zi group can be connected with the Taulan-
9.5.11) could be identified as a tribe of this cul- tes and Bilion tribes (FGrH 1 F 99), but proving
tural group. They monitored Via Egnatia and this connection is quite an ungrateful task at this
were probably similar to the Paiones.45 moment.
The Ohrid group was identified by R. Vasić on
the basis of excavations of necropoleis around the **
Ohrid Lake that commenced in 1918.46 Chron- If we place certain types of weapons and defen-
ologically, this group spanned the beginning of sive equipment on our map of cultures and road
Hallstatt D1 up to D3 in its older phase (6th cen- networks, we can notice following patterns of
tury – second half of the 4th century BC).47 This distribution in the Central Balkan region. First
group also controlled Via Egnatia. Many tribes of all, in terms of a defensive equipment, the ap-
were suggested as the ethnic group that constitut- pearance of iron ribbed umbos on shields can be
ed the Ohrid material group; R. Vasić and M. Ga- traced to around the 7th century BC, all of which
were located in the interior of the Balkans.55 More
36
Vasić 1987e, 702. specifically, all shields were discovered in the ter-
37
Ibid. 710-711; Mitrevski 1997, 198-200. ritory or border area of the Glasinac-Mati com-
38
Vasić 1973, 108 ff.
39
Vasić 1987d, 690-692.
40
Ibid. 691-695. 48
Ibid. 731; Garašanin 1988, 71.
41
Ibid. 698-700. 49
Petrova 1996, 123 ff.
42
Mikulčić 1966. 50
Mitrevski 1997, 217.
43
Vasić 1973, 107; 1987f, 712-714. 51
Andrea 1985, 221-222.
44
Vasić 1987 f, 715. 52
Ibid. 222.
45
Vasić 1987e, 710-711; Mitrevski 1997, 198ff. 53
Garašanin 1988, 53-54.
46
Vasić 1987h, 724 ff. 54
Papadopoulos 2014.
47
Ibid. 725-728. 55
Filipović 2015a, 357-359.

110
plex. During Hallstatt D2/3, typical Greek shield, called sigynna type appeared for the first time in
aspis, has been found only in the far south at the the 7th century BC and continued to be used until
Trebenište cemetery.56 A similar pattern can be the 4th century BC.63 In fact, this type of a spear
observed in terms of the distribution of bronze resembles a Roman pilum, but chronologically
greaves. The earlier examples occurred in the belongs to the Early Iron Age of the Central Bal-
area of ​​northern Albania and the Glasinac pla- kan region. Examples here have been found in
teau and chronologically belong to period of the the Vardar and Drim River valleys. Further sim-
8th and beginning of the 7th century BC.57 These ilar examples have come from the Sanski Most
are bronze pieces with rings for attachment of and two pieces from the Grave 1 in Mound II
hide straps. The early pieces occurred only in the in Osovo. Additional piece have come from the
Glasinac-Mati complex. In this region, chron- warrior grave XI in Mound A at the Halos ne-
ologically later types of bronze greaves, which cropolis in Greek Macedonia.64 If we take a clos-
follow the anatomy of the leg, belong to the 5th er look at the swords, examples of curved single
century BC. They are considered as typical Greek blade iron swords occur in almost all areas of the
infantry equipment, along with the already men- Central Balkans.65 Glasinac type swords chrono-
tioned aspis shields, xiphoi swords, and bronze logically fit to the period of the first half of the 6th
helmets.58 Their distribution shows that have century BC, connected with the Glasinac – Mati
been used by many cultures in this territory. complex.66 Apart from Glasinac, Western Serbia,
If we consider only the bronze helmets of Northern and Southern Albania, only one han-
this period, the majority of the discovered piec- dle of Glasinac type swords has been found at
es are of the Illyrian type and only several are of Delphi.67 The Xiphoi swords, Greek two-edged
the Corinthian and Chalcidian types. Observed swords with cross-guards and flame-shaped low-
in a broader context, a higher number of the er part of the blades, chronologically belong to
Illyrian type helmets have been found on the the 6th century BC, and the majority of examples
Adriatic coast and its hinterland as well as in have been found in the border regions with the
the wider area of ​​the Thessaloniki bay.59 Chron- Greek world.68 Only few pieces have come from
ologically earlier variants have most often been the Drim River valley.69
found along the route of Via Egnatia between Furthermore, iron axes with parallel blades
Durres and Thessaloniki, while several pieces of belong to the Hallstatt D period, and most of
that type were found even on the Peloponnese them occur in the territory of the Glasinac-Mati
or Sicily.60 The highest number of all variants complex.70 The so-called Scythian arrows, made
comes from the territories of the Glasinac-Mati of bronze, belong to the period from the end of
complex and the Ohrid group, but there is also a the 7th to the 5th century BC.71 They appear in the
number of pieces from the Kuç and Zi and Pel- territories of the Zlotska and Bosut III groups as
agonska groups. Finally, the first find of bronze well as the Glasinac – Mati complex.72 It is in-
armour in the Central Balkan region should be teresting that all examples from the territory of
mentioned.61 The piece was excavated illegally in Glasinac – Mati come from graves. The contexts
the area around the confluence of the South and
Western Morava Rivers and as far as we can tell,
63
The term sigynna is taken from R. Vasić in press: Filipović
in press.
this piece represents the so-called bell cuirass of 64
Filipović 2015a, 365-372.
the middle phase, which can be dated to the 7th – 65
Parović-Pešikan 1982, 25-51.
first half of the 6th century BC.62 66
Дмитровић, К. / Васић, Р. 2012. Гвоздени мач гласинач-
In terms of weapons, there are a few notable ког типа из збирке Народног музеја у Чачку, Зборник
pieces of offensive weapons. Spears of the so- радова Народног музеја (Чачак) XLII, Чачак 2012, 13-20.
67
Kilian-Dirlmeier 1993, 129-130, Nr. 449, Taf. 58.
68
Numerous swords were found in the necropolises such
56
Filov 1927, 5-10. as Sindos (Despiné 2016) or Achontiko (Chrysostomou /
57
Kilian 1973, 528. Chrysostomou 2012) in Greece, and in Trebenishte (Filov
58
Snodgrass 1967. 1927) or Ohrid, Gorna Porta (Кузман 2013).
59
Blečić Kavur / Pravidur 2012, 35 ff. 69
Filipović 2015a, 372-378.
60
Filipović 2015a, 359-362. 70
Ibid. 388-390.
61
Filipović / Vasić 2017, 337-338, Fig. 1. 71
Melyukova 1964; Baitinger 2001, 28-30; Hellmuth 2006.
62
Snodgrass 1964, 71 ff, Fig. 30. 72
Filipović 2015b, 90-92.

111
 Fig. 3. Distribution of archaeological material of the 7/6th centuries BC mentioned in the text

in which the arrowheads were found are of par- tions in the Central Balkans during period from
ticular importance. In fact, two finds seem to 7th to the 5th century BC. Based on the distri-
have belonged to a warrior – one comes from an bution of weapons and defensive equipment, it
incinerated grave from Mound I in Pilatovići and seems that the main Central Balkan communi-
the second one is represented by a group find of cation routes, especially those leading from the
38 arrowheads from the site of Ostikovac. Ar- point where Velika Morava River flows into Dan-
rowheads have been excavated in other graves, ube and along the Morava – Vardar route, gradu-
too, but in insufficient numbers to be able to con- ally fade out. Yet, when compared with previous
firm that they belonged to an archer. Presence of periods, Via Egnatia and the lower part of the
these arrows in the Triballi territory could sug- Morava – Vardar axis shows much more intensi-
gest clashes between Autariatae and Triballi, as ty in terms of distribution of finds. The same can
known from the historical sources.73 be said of the secondary communication routes
on the territory of the Glasinac – Mati complex,
*** such as the Ibar River valley, which enters the
We can notice some stabilisation and flourishing old road from Pristina to Ljes by the Drim River
of trade relations between neighbouring popula- valley. It appears that the main transport route
traversed the territory of Western Serbia and
73
Papazoglu 1969, 69 ff. Eastern Bosnia. This route is indicated primarily

112
 Fig. 4. Distribution of archaeological material of the 6/5th centuries BC mentioned in the text

by the distribution of amber finds and defensive plateau via Southwestern Serbia, Northern Mon-
equipment, such as Glasinac-type swords and tenegro, and Metohija to the Mati River valley in
arrows of possible Scythian origins (Fig. 3). If the present-day Albania.74 He has also suggest-
we look at the Glasinac swords and greaves with ed that other Illyrian tribes could have had the
rings, we can notice that their usage is limited same origins and similar cultic, ethnographic
to the territories in the eastern part of the West and language characteristics as the cultural com-
Balkan and the western part of the Central Bal- plex. Pottery vessels from Southwestern Serbia
kan regions, roughly corresponding to the terri- and Metohija can confirm this, as they indicate
tory of the Glasinac – Mati complex. A similar strong cultural influence from the Glasinac pla-
distribution persists also in the late 6th and 5th teau.75 Furthermore, the astragal belt segments
century BC, at least in terms of the bronze hel- of the Glasinac type (previously known as the
mets, greaves, and xiphoi swords, which points Arareva gromila type) have a similar distribution
to southern influence (Fig. 4). It is clear that the during this period.76 Weapons and defensive mil-
population of the Glasinac – Mati complex be- itary equipment, however, are completely absent
came a dominant society in this territory during
the 7th and 6th centuries BC. B. Čović has pointed 74
Čović 1987, 642-643.
out the Autariatae were the tribe that used this 75
Jevtić 1983, 39, 44.
material culture, which spread from the Glasinac 76
Filipović / Mladenović 2017, 156-157.

113
in the area between the Velika Morava and Isker ne komunikacije, postojala je i mreža puteva manje
Rivers, equal to the territory of the Zlot cultur- važnosti, ali i nekoliko glavnih raskršća, poput oblasti
al group.77 As mentioned before, this is because današnjeg Niša, Soluna, Lipljana na Kosovu i Metohiji
Zlot cultural group was probably Triballi tribe, ili ušća Morave u Dunav.
Prikazana je i tradicionalna slika arheoloških kul-
which controlled less frequented parts of the
tura na ovim prostorima, kako bi se analiza distribucije
Morava and Timok River routes during 6th/5th oružja i opreme mogla, pored konunikacionih pravaca,
century BC. kombinovati i sa ovim parametrom, pa se na osnovu
Perhaps starting as early as the Neolithic, ove kompleksne slike čini da glavne balkanske komuni-
main Balkan communication routes comprised kacije, poglavito one koje vode iz oblasti ušća Morave u
the Morava – Vardar axis and Via Militaris. They Dunav i dalje ka jugu, u ovom periodu polako zamiru.
were often used during the following Late Bron- Isto tako, Via Egnatia i donji deo Moravsko-vardarskog
ze Age and the transitional Bronze to Early Iron puta pokazuju jači intenzitet zastupljenosti pomenu-
Age period, as can be concluded on the basis of tih tipova analiziranog materijala. To se može reći i za
the distribution of archaeological material of the sekundarne komunikacije na teritoriji tzv. kompleksa
Glasinac – Mati, kao što su doline Ibra i Drima, pa se
Aegean and Central European origins and of am-
čini da su tokom ovog perioda najintenzivnije korišće-
ber. On the other hand, during the period of the ne komunikacije u zapadnoj Srbiji i istočnoj Bosni, što
7th – 5th century BC, these routes gradually faded se može pretpostaviti na osnovu distribucije defanzivne
out, and the main north-south routes shifted to opreme, glasinačkog tipa mača, tzv. skitskih strela, ali i
the Drim, Ibar, Western Morava and Drina Ri- ćilibarskih nalaza. Sa druge strane, defanzivne opreme
vers valleys. i ćilibarskih nalaza nema na području između dolina
Morave, Nišave i Iskera.
Na engleski jezik preveli
Ognjen Mladenović i Vojislav Filipović

Bibliography
Rezime Andrea, Zh. 1985, Kultura ilire e tumave në pellgun e
Korçës, Tirane 1985.
Benac, A. 1987, Praistorija jugoslavenskih zemalja V,
Sarajevo 1987.
Neka zapažanja o komunikacijama Blečić Kavur, M. / Pravidur, A. 2012, Ilirske kacige s
i kontaktima na srednjem Balkanu područja BiH, Glasnik Zemaljskog muzeja BiH u
Sarajevu 53, Sarajevo 2012, 35-136.
i susednim oblastima na osnovu Булатовић, А. 2007, Врање, Београд – Врање 2007.
distribucije oružja tokom starijeg Bulatović, A. 2008, South Morava Basin in the Tran-
gvozdenog doba sitional Period from the Bronze to the Iron Age,
Starinar 57, Beograd 2008, 57-82.
U radu se govori o glavnim komunikacijama na cen- Цвијић, J. 2000a, Балканско полуострво, Сабрана
tralnom Balkanu, zajedno sa analizom distribucije дела, књ. 2, Београд 2000.
oružja i defanzivne ratničke opreme između VII i V Цвијић, J. 2000б, Говори и чланци. Сабрана дела,
veka pre n. e. Na osnovu analize prirodnih činilaca књ. 3, Београд 2000.
i starih komunikacija, koje je još pre jednog stoleća Човић, Б. 1976, Од Бутмира до Илира, Сарајево 1976.
uradio Jovan Cvijić, izdvojena su četiri glavna putna Čović, B. 1987, Glasinačka kultura, in: Benac, A. (ed.)
pravca na ovom prostoru: Moravsko-vardarska komu- Praistorija jugoslavenskih zemalja V, Sarajevo
nikacija koja je obuhvatala osu sever-jug, tzv. put Via 1987, 575-643.
Militaris (Morava – Nišava – Isker – Marica) koji je Filipović, V. 2014, Triballi as conservative Palaeobal-
spajao centralni i istočni Balkan, zatim transverzalna kan tribe in the 6th and 5th century BC, in: Guštin,
komunikacija od Jadrana do Dunava Lješ – Niš – Arc- M. / David, W. (eds.) The Clash of Cultures? The
har/Radujevac i komunikacija koja je sekla Balkan po Celts and the Macedonian World, Manching 2014,
osi zapad-istok, tzv. Via Egnatia. Pored ove četiri glav- 47-52.
Филиповић, В., Наоружање и ратничка опрема
у културама позног бронзаног и старијег гвоз-
77
Filipović 2014.

114
 деног доба на територији Србије, Македоније, Паровић-Пешикан, М. 1960, Грчки материјал на
Црне Горе и Албаније, Докторска дисертација, Гласинцу, Старинар 11, Београд 1960, 21-45.
Филозофски факултет Универзитета у Београду. Паровић-Пешикан, М. 1986, Неки нови аспекти
Filipović, V. in print, Iron Spears of the Balkan Sygin- ширења егејске и грчке културе на централни
nae Type from the Central Balkans (inspired by R. Балкан, Старинар 36, Београд 1986, 19-47.
Vasić), in: Filipović, V. / Bulatović, A. / Kapuran, Паровић-Пешикан, М. 1994, Скитски елементи у
A. (eds.) Papers in Honour of Rastko Vasić‘ 80th гвозденом добу Подунавља и централног Балка-
Birthday, Belgrade in print, 297-306. на, in: Тасић, Н. (ed.) Културе гвозденог доба Ју-
Filipović, V. / Vasić, R. 2017. Illicit Antiquities Plague гословенског Подунавља, Београд 1994, 101-110.
in Serbia, Glasnik SAD 33, Beograd 2017, 335-348. Петрова, E. 1996, Бригите на централниот Балкан
Filipović, V. / Mladenović, O. 2017. Prilog proučavanju во I и II миленијум пред н. е., Скопје 1996.
članaka astragalnih pojaseva sa teritorije centralne Петровић, П. В. 2007, Дарданија у римским
i jugoistočne Evrope / Contribution to the Study of итинерарима, Београд 2007.
Astragal Belt Segments from the Territory of Cen- Petrović, P. V. 2008, The Roman Road Naissus–Lissus:
tral and Southeastern Europe. Prilozi Instituta za The Shortest Connection between Rome and the
arheologiju u Zagrebu 34, Zagreb 2017, 143-183. Danubian Limes, Archaeologia Bulgarica 12/I, So-
Гарашанин, М. 1988, Настанак и порекло Илира, fia 2008, 31-40.
in: Гарашанин, М. (ed.) Илири и Албанци, Snodgrass, A. 1964, Early Greek Armour and Wea-
Београд 1988, 9-144. pons, Edinburgh 1964.
Jevtić, M. 1983, Keramika starijeg gvozdenog doba na Тасић, Н. 1998, Гвоздено доба, in: Тасић, Н. (ed.) Ар-
centralnobalkanskom području, Beograd 1983. хеолошко благо Косова и Метохије од неолита
Jevtić, M. 1992, Basarabi kultura na teritoriji Srbije, до раног средњег века, Београд 1998, 148-225.
doktorska teza, Filozofski fakultet, Univerzitet u Васић, Р. 1973, Културне групе старијег гвозденог
Beogradu, Beograd 1992. доба у Југославији, Београд 1973.
Јевтић, М. 2004, Гвоздено доба у околини Бора, in: Vasić, R. 1982, Prilog proučavanju grčkog oružja u Ju-
Лазић, М. (ed.) Бор и околина у праисторији, goslaviji, Godišnjak CBI 20, Sarajevo 1982, 5-24.
антици и средњем веку, Београд 2004, 127-163. Vasić, R. 1987a, Kneževski grobovi iz Novog Pazara
Јиречек, К. 1959 (1877), Војна цеста од Београда за i Atenice, in: A. Benac (ed.), Praistorija Jugosla-
Цариград и балкански кланци, in: Динић, М. venskih zemalja V, Sarajevo 1987, 644-650.
(ed.) Зборник Константина Јиречека, Посебна Vasić, R. 1987b, Moravsko-timočka oblast, in: A. Be-
издања 326, Одељење друштвених наука, нова nac (ed.), Praistorija Jugoslavenskih zemalja V, Sa-
серија, књ. 33, Београд 1959 (1877), 71-190. rajevo 1987, 651-672.
Kapuran, A. 2009, Praistorijski lokaliteti u severo- Vasić, R. 1987c, Oblast istočnog Kosova, južne Srbije i
istočnoj Srbiji, Beograd 2014. severne Makedonije, in: Benac, A. (ed.) Praistorija
Лазић, М. 2009, Ко су били Дарданци?, Архаика 2, jugoslavenskih zemalja V, Sarajevo 1987, 673-689.
Београд 2009, 53-75. Vasić, R. 1987d, Srednja i istočna Makedonija, in: Be-
Mikulčić, I. 1966, Pelagonija u svetlosti arheoloških nac, A. (ed.) Praistorija jugoslavenskih zemalja V,
nalaza, Skopje – Beograd 1966. Sarajevo 1987, 690-700.
Митревски, Д. 1997, Протоисториските заедници Vasić, R. 1987e, Đevđelijska grupa, in: Benac, A. (ed.)
во Македонија, Скопје 1997. Praistorija jugoslavenskih zemalja V, Sarajevo
Митревски, Д. 2008, Прилог кон вреднувањето 1987, 701-711.
на Долновардарската – Пајонска група на Vasić, R. 1987f, Pelagonija, in: Benac, A. (ed.) Prai-
железното време, in: Старделов, Г. / Битракова- storija jugoslavenskih zemalja V, Sarajevo 1987,
Грозданова, В. / Манева, Е. (eds.) Археолошките 712-723.
откритија на почвата на Македонија, Книга 17, Vasić, R. 1987g, Bosutska grupa, in: Benac, A. (ed.)
Скопје 2008, 175-191. Praistorija jugoslavenskih zemalja V, Sarajevo
Палавестра, А. 1989, Модели трговине и друштве- 1987, 536-554.
не структуре на централном Балкану гвозде- Vasić, R. 1987h, Ohridska oblast, in: Benac, A. (ed.)
ног доба, Balcanica 20, Београд 1989, 191-209. Praistorija jugoslavenskih zemalja V, Sarajevo
Palavestra, A. 1993, Praistorijski ćilibar na central- 1987, 724-733.
nom i zapadnom Balkanu, Beograd 1993. Vasić, R. 1992, Pages from the History of the Auta-
Papazoglu, F. 1969, Srednjobalkanska plemena u riatae and Triballoi, Balcanica 23, Beograd 1992,
predrimsko doba (Tribali, Autarijati, Dardanci, 393-399.
Skordisci i Mezi), Djela, knj. 30, knj. 1, Centar za Васић, Р. 1997, Старије гвоздено доба на подручју
balkanološka ispitivanja ANUBiH, Sarajevo 1969. источне Србије, in: Лазић, М. (ed.) Археологија
источне Србије, Београд 1997, 91-100.

115
 Godišnjak / Jahrbuch 2018, 47: 117–175
DOI: 10.5644/Godisnjak.CBI.ANUBiH-47.107

II
Članci / Aufsätze

Metalwork from Roman doors – examples in Bosnia and Herzegovina

Adnan Busuladžić
Sarajevo

Abstract: Almost every Roman site, particularly those where sizeable buildings have been found, also yield the
remains of security systems – pieces of locks, hinges, keys and so forth that served to lock and secure the buildings
as a whole or separate rooms, or chests and caskets. This is also true of sites in present-day Bosnia and Herzego-
vina, where such material has been found at various Roman archaeological sites. Most such objects are kept in
the National Museum of Bosnia and Herzegovina, but some important artefacts are also located in the Franciscan
Monastery in Visoko, the Museums in Doboj, Travnik, Tuzla, Zenica and Bijeljina, and other museum institutions
and collections.

Key words: Roman keys, ring keys, large keys, anthropomorphic keys, classic keys, Schiebschloss, lock systems,
latches, deadbolts, hinges, railings, Roman period, Bosnia and Herzegovina

Introduction cavations: bolts, latches, door-handles, hinges,

locks, keys and so forth. These enable us to re-
As early humans began to abandon natural shel- construct the probable uses of doors in Roman
ters, they started to construct simple shelters, times. Details associated with such finds are sup-
mainly as protection against the weather and plemented by comparison with more recent ex-
wild beasts. With the passage of time and the amples of almost identical function, manufacture
rise of civilizations, these shelters became more and materials as those from the Roman doors
sophisticated, especially with the rise of agri- their survival points to.1 As a result, in some in-
culture and a more settled lifestyle, when peo- stances, such as keys of atypical form (Plate 14),
ple began to build permanent shelters. Simple the only factor indicating that they date from the
drystone walls evolved into substantial masonry Roman period is that they were found at Roman
structures, turned with the addition of doors into sites. Some objects, such as latches (Plates 21 and
habitations. This was a significant lifestyle shift; 22), hinges (Plates 15, 16 and 17), along with
people were no longer merely taking shelter, they railings (Plate 25) and ring-shaped door-handles
were taking up residence. What we now call a (Plate 26), may have served a variety of purposes,
door or doorway became a fundamental archi- not necessarily as a door feature: they could be
tectural feature and symbol. used to join stone or wooden architectural com-
Since the great majority of doors were and are ponents of walls or roofs, one specimen could in
made of wood, few survive in their original form, fact be a horse bit, and others could have formed
especially from ancient times. Wood deteriorat- part of ox or horse harness. The most logical ex-
ed, or was destroyed by fire or rot, so that infor- planation is that objects of identical or very sim-
mation on wooden doors from the Roman peri- ilar outward appearance, size and construction
od is extremely sparse, consisting only of a few could have been used for different purposes. Sev-
images and a paucity of written sources. Their eral such objects dating from the Roman period
existence, however, is attested by the remains of
metal artefacts found during archaeological ex- 1
Pace 2014, 57.

117
have been found which have direct parallels in pled together – both nails and U-shaped staples
our time, when the same object can serve wholly had sharp pointed ends so they could be knocked
different purposes. into the wood, always with part of the head pro-
Another unresolved matter is that of dating truding, as they were usually longer than the
keys. Since they were in such widespread daily thickness of the board and the cross-beam that
use, their dating is extremely speculative. The held the boards together, so the head could be
same shapes of key, depending on context, are bent over to hold the boards firmly.
said to date from the late 1st,2 2nd and through to Since timber was readily available as a build-
the 4th century.3 Different key shapes were in use ing material, it was often used in Roman build-
at one and the same time throughout the Roman ings:9 as roof timbers, for outbuildings, as fences,
period. Some specimens are thus dated purely for furniture,10 and of course for doors. Where
as part of a larger site itself dated on the basis timber was scarce, many parts of a building,
of other types of archaeological material.4 Given and even furnishings, would be made of stone
the need to protect private and public property, or brick, but doors were always of wood. Where
Roman keys and locks were widely used, and there was a choice, oak was the timber of prefer-
have since often been found, at military, civilian, ence. The Romans drew on their own experience
private, public, religious, agricultural and other and that of other peoples with whom they came
Roman sites.5 into contact to perfect their techniques, having
Doors are a universal feature of buildings, in discovered that oak is resistant to mechanical
every civilization and every part of the world. damage and to insect and fungal attack. In ad-
The erection of walls necessarily entailed the in- dition to common oak,11 fir,12 beech,13 ash,14 Tur-
troduction of an opening, usually rectangular in key oak,15 walnut,16 pine17 and indeed any kind of
shape, which further required a means of closing timber that grew naturally in a given area could
off the opening when necessary, to protect the be used. It is likely that wealthier property own-
occupants from wild beasts, unknown or un- ers used a combination of different timbers for
wanted visitors, or robbery. The basic purpose aesthetic reasons. In that case the basic structure
of doors, from prehistory through antiquity6 and would be of one kind of timber, while the decora-
medieval times7 to this day, remains unchanged.8 tive elements would be of softer wood, more eas-
The only changes that have occurred are of an ily worked than oak, which is very hard. Roman
aesthetic nature, and in the type of materials and images survive which show elaborately decorat-
technology used in their construction. ed wooden doors.18 Wrought iron also began to
In Roman times, doors would be made of be used when making doors, to join the different
wood, though in some cases they could have components, to hang the door on the jambs, and
been made of metal or a combination of the two. in the manufacture of hinges, latches, locks and
They were rectangular, and most were opened keys. As the economy grew, and with it the need
and closed by moving them in an arc from the to protect buildings and their contents, metal
left or the right. They usually had a single pane, locks came into use.
but larger entrances, such as gateways, might
have double doors.
Most doors were probably made of rough-cut
timber, with boards ranging in thickness from 4
to about 10 cm. The earliest doors were probably
wholly made of timber, with metal components
introduced later. Boards would be nailed or sta-
9
Busuladžić 2014, 16.
10
Ulrich 2007.
11
Ballian / Memišević Hodžić 2016.
2
Koščević 2000, 36-37. 12
Ballian / Halilović 2016; Šilić 2005, 18.
3
Čargo 2002, 552. 13
Šilić 2005, 114.
4
Gregl 1989, 68-69. 14
Ibid. 420-424.
5
Pinterović 1978, T. LXVII, 2. 15
Ibid. 118.
6
Jacobi 1897, 464. 16
Ibid. 92.
7
Милошевић 1997; Trifunović 2015, 231. 17
Ibid. 26-42.
8
Jacobi 1897, 476-477. 18
Guhl / Koner 1994, 465.

118
The symbolism of keys beside the Pharaoh bestowed breath and life.32
The symbolism of the key also manifested itself
As well as their use in securing doors, keys had in religious processions, where the priests who
a certain symbolism. Their role was twofold – to possessed the keys to the temple carried a key as
open, and to close.19 A key could permit or re- a status symbol.33 Keys were an attribute of east-
fuse entry, and as such guarded the boundary ern deities. Opening and closing the gates to the
between two worlds, the outer and the inner, the next world34 was one of their essential functions,
known and the unknown, good and evil, life and for which reason doors are sometimes depicted
death... This is why a key often forms part of the on funerary stelae. Also in the religious context,
iconography of a deity, such as Hecate,20 goddess keys were sometimes buried with the deceased,
of the underworld, who holds in one hand the as grave goods,35 and scenes with doors, which
key to the nether regions and was responsible for would undoubtedly have had a lock and key, thus
admitting the souls of the dead. Other deities too also feature on some Greek and, later, Roman
feature a key as one of their attributes: among stelae.36
them Janus,21 Aphrodite,22 Cronos,23 Helios,24 The ritual context of the use of keys also re-
Cybele and Eros.25 Later, with the emergence of lates to the household hearth, while in funerary
Christianity, a key had a symbolic function in rites they also served as a talisman. One sug-
written sources.26 The keys to the Kingdom of gestion is that when preparing food for the de-
Heaven attributed to St. Peter were those that ceased, Romans would mark the hearth of their
had previously been emblems of Janus,27 the two- forebears with keys, both in the grave and on the
faced, the god of transitions, passages, gates and altar above it.37 Further support for this hypothe-
house doors,28 who held one key to secure the sis lies in the fact that keys are often found on or
door and another in his capacity as conductor of near the hearth.38 In Roman society, keys sym-
souls.29 As noted, among the ancient Greeks, the bolised strength and authority, a significance in
Titan Hecate held the keys to the gates of Hades, a direct correlation with their functions of locking
symbolism that the Etruscans also upheld. Vanth, and unlocking, and corresponding association
the Etruscan goddess of death, like the Erinyes with crime and the protection of valuable objects,
or Furies, was portrayed in funerary scenes as a the status of individuals whose status depended
winged being holding keys.30 Keys also had a spe- on freedom, and so forth.39 Surviving original
cific symbolism among the ancient Egyptians.31 material largely corroborates this.40 The symbol
Sources refer to the amulet known as the ankh, of the key as an object that was the “solution” to
known as the Egyptian cross but also as the key opening or closing41 was still present in late an-
of life and the key of the Nile. Keys were placed tiquity, and generally in the Christian tradition,42
in the hands of mummies to enable the deceased persisting into the Byzantine period.43 As already
to attain the mysteries of the afterlife. The key noted, this was true above all of St. Peter, who
held the keys to the gates of Heaven.44

19
Colin 2004, 217.
20
Srejović / Cermanović 2000, 449-450; Pace 2014, 39.
21
Ausführliches Lexikon der griechischen und römischen
Mythologie, II, Leipzig, 1890–1897, 15-54.
22
Paulys Wissowa 1894, 2729-2787; Busuladžić 2016, 142-143. 32
Garden / Olorenšo / Garden / Klajn 2011, 248.
23
Ausführliches Lexikon der griechischen und römischen 33
Ivčević 2014, 155.
Mythologie, II, Leipzig, 1890–1897, 1452-1572. 34
Garden / Olorenšo / Garden / Klajn 2011, 248-249.
24
Paulys Wissowa 1912, 58-92. 35
Ivčević 2003, 144.
25
LIMC/III; Ausführliches Lexikon der griechischen und 36
Ivčević 2014, 155.
römischen Mythologie, I, Leipzig, 1884–1886, 1340-1371; 37
Golubović 2008, 97-98.
Busuladžić 2017, 30-32. 38
Milovanović / Mrđić 2016, 245.
26
Čargo 2002, 551. 39
Pace 2014, 21-36.
27
Chevalier / Gheerbrant 1996, 564-565. 40
Ibid. 36-39.
28
Srejović / Cermanović 2000, 176-177. 41
Colin 2004, 217.
29
Garden / Olorenšo / Garden / Klajn 2011, 249. 42
Pace 2014, 22-23.
30
Milovanović / Mrđić 2016, 243. 43
Ibid. 24.
31
For types of keys among the Egyptians, see Jacobi 1897, 468. 44
Garden / Olorenšo / Garden / Klajn 2011, 248.

119
Material and manufacture massive entrance doors, where the lock would be
correspondingly large.
The keys and other metal components of doors In a few cases, two metals were used in combi-
in the museum collections covered in this paper nation,49 the grip and shank of iron and the bit of
were made almost exclusively of bronze or iron,45 bronze. Keys were made in specialist workshops.
with a few of precious metal. Most of the former A few instances of keys made of bone or ivory
were similar in their simple workmanship. It is have been found. A typical Roman key would be
clear at a glance that each component was pri- 6 to 8 cm long, though a few have been found
marily functional, not decorative, and that no up to 20 cm or so in length. A few extremely
great care was taken in their manufacture, at least small keys have also been found, their very size
in the majority of cases. Where greater care was suggesting that they belonged to a small box or
taken, it would be to ensure that the keys were lock.50 Variations in size can be observed in the
strong enough not to be damaged by cracking or keys presented in this paper.
breaking. Of two keys that stand out from this The metallurgical techniques used to make
general pattern, one was found at the site of the keys differed: bronze keys would normally be
Roman villa in Žabljak (Plate 6, fig. 10), and the cast, while iron keys were usually wrought.51
other, a large, damaged key, at Mogorjelo (Plate
13, fig. 11). The keys were decorated in niello, us-
ing inlaid silver wire,46 while the Mogorjelo key The concept and use of the key
was also gilded. This is a clear instance of care
taken over the manufacture of keys and other Keys and locks first appeared in the Orient,52
components only for chests, caskets and similar coming into widespread use in the last millenni-
valuable or prized objects. um BCE.53 In those days, keys were so large that
Along with the common finds of iron and they were often carried or worn on the shoul-
bronze keys, the Antiquities Collection of the der.54 The first certain forms of key date from
National Museum of Bosnia and Herzegovina ancient Egypt55 and Mesopotamia,56 followed by
has a number of objects consisting of lock parts, the Greeks, Etruscans57 and Romans.58 The Egyp-
lock escutcheons, hinges and door-handles. Two tians were the first to develop the cylinder lock
lock facings (Plate 20, figs 1, 4 and 5) were of sil- system, thereby largely perfecting the locking
ver, and were from a small chest. method.59 Images of keys on later Greek vases
Examination of the differences between keys and stone monuments also provide evidence of
found in Bosnia and Herzegovina, in the interior the use of keys.60
of what was the Roman province of Dalmatia, re- One of the most primitive methods of se-
veals that bronze keys were of finer quality than curing a door against unwanted intrusion was
those of iron.47 These small mainly bronze “clas- a wooden wedge on the inside. Another was to
sic” keys (Plate 1, fig. 12, Plate 2, fig. 1. 2. 4. 9. place a wooden bar horizontally across the door,
10, Plate 3, fig. 10. 11, Plate 4, fig. 6. 8. 9. 10. 11. making it impossible to open. This meant that
12, Plate 5, fig. 4. 5. 7. 8. 11, Plate 6, fig. 1. 2. 3. the door could be secured and opened only from
5. 6. 7. 8, Plate 7, fig. 5) or those in the shape of
a ring (Plate 11, fig. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 9. 10. 11. 12. 49
In our case, this is a specimen from Žabljak referred to
13. 14. 15) probably belonged to small chests in
above (Plate 6, fig. 10), in niello technique using iron inlaid
which various valuables were kept.48 The crud- with silver wire.
er iron keys would mostly have belonged to 50
Ivčević 2003, 144.
doors, mainly interior doors, while very large 51
Milovanović / Mrđić 2016, 256; Bogić 2017, 42.
keys would usually have belonged to gates and
52
Gaspar 1986, 40; Koch 2017, Taf. 10. 12.
53
Paulys Wissowa 1923, 557-563, 565-569.
54
Ciurletti 1996, 67.
55
Jacobi 1897, 468.
45
These are also the most common materials used to make 56
Pace 2014, 9-10.
keys. Ožanić / Radman-Livaja / Rendić-Miočević 2003, 33. 57
See Izzet 2011 on Etruscan material culture.
46
Čremošnik 1970, 106. 58
Milovanović / Mrđić 2016, 243.
47
Ivčević 2003, 144; Bogić 2017, 42. 59
Pace 2014, 18-21.
48
Čremošnik 1984, 44. 60
Čargo 2002, 551.

120
the inside. There is mention in Homer61 of the The rotary key mechanism
simplest wooden latches,62 which were closed
from the inside. The rotary mechanism involved a lock plate or
Two basic principles are found in Roman claustrum and a key or clavis. This system consists
locks.63 In the earlier system, when the key was of three groups, based on their distinct techni-
introduce into the lock it lifted the dead bolt, cal differences. The insertion of the key through
which was drawn by hand,64 freeing the lock, the lock plate acted directly on the deadbolt. The
while the later system had a rotary mechanism,65 key pressed against the deadbolt, and opened or
activated directly by the key. closed the door by drawing the deadbolt to the
side.71 Some authorities believe that this kind of
key was known as a temple key.72 It was the sim-
The slide key mechanism plest kind of key, being made of a metal bar that
was bent twice, usually at a right-angle.73
Sliding locks first appeared in the protohistori- The keys known as Laconian were similar to
cal period, and were improved over time, until these. They were also bent at a right-angle at the
by the Roman period they were the preferred base of the shank, and had two or three tines.74
type of lock. They were operated by inserting the Laconian keys remained in use over a long peri-
key into an L-shaped keyhole and then pushing od, including during Roman times.75
it upwards. The tines or teeth of the key passed The other later system, the basic principles
through an opening in the deadbolt, lifting the of which still apply to this day, involved a turn-
tumblers that held the deadbolt in place and were ing mechanism. Once the key was inserted into
held down by a spring above the tumblers. While the lock, its tines would lift the pins holding the
the key was engaged the deadbolt was freed and deadbolt in place. The deadbolt was locked when
could be slid left and right to lock or unlock it.66 the pins slotted into the corresponding holes in
When the key was inserted, the tines on the keys the deadbolt, and the lock could only be operat-
for this kind of lock67 lifted the small tumblers ed by a key with matching tines.76
(pessuli) that held the deadbolt in place. These The later system represented a technological
tumblers fitted into corresponding holes in the advance. In this case the lock was not opened
metal reinforcement on the deadbolt, and could by horizontal movement, but by turning the key
only be moved by a key that matched the tum- in the lock, thus moving the deadbolt to the left
blers. Once the deadbolt was clear of the tum- or right. This system is believed to have been a
blers, it would be moved in a straight line to Roman invention, and came into widespread use
free it from the closed groove into which it fit- in the 2nd century CE,77 though already known
ted when locked.68 This type of lock, the origin before that date. As a technological innovation,
of which was far back in prehistory,69 was most it has remained in use to this day.78 The keys for
commonly used in antiquity and throughout the such locks come in two kinds, with a solid or a
duration of the Roman Empire.70 cylindrical shaft, depending on the type of lock
they are designed to open.79 They were used in-
itially for chests and cosmetics caskets, but later
became widespread and, with only minor chang-
es, are still in use today.80

61
Pace 2014, 14-18; Čargo 2002, 551. 71
Ivčević 2003, 143.
62
Pace 2014, 43. 72
Gaspar 1986, 42.
63
Čargo 2002, 551. 73
Paulys Wissowa 1923, 557-558.
64
Ivčević 2003, 143. 74
Guaitoli 1996, 19.
65
Ožanić / Radman-Livaja / Rendić-Miočević 2003, 33. 75
Bassi 1996, 84.
66
Ivčević 2003, 144. 76
Ožanić / Radman-Livaja / Rendić-Miočević 2003, 33.
67
Marić Baković 2017, 76. 77
Ivčević 2003, 144.
68
Galliazo 1979, 150-151. 78
Koščević 2000, 36-37.
69
Čargo 2002, 551. 79
Čargo 2002, 551.
70
Marić Baković 2017, 76. 80
Ivčević 2003, 144.

121
Classification of keys escutcheons, intact or fragmentary (Plate 19 and
Plate 20).
Every key, regardless of the context in which it The slide-key lock, one of several known
was found, its date range, size,81 material and oth- types of Roman lock, first came into use in early
er factors, may be said to possess basic features Roman times and was later in widespread use,84
that allow it to be identified as a key. Every key particularly in High and Late Antiquity and even
has a handle with a grip and neck, and a shaft and into the early mediaeval period.85 Also known are
bit which correspond to the structure of the lock, wire locks, which first appeared in the 1st century
thus allowing for it to be locked and unlocked.82 and continued in use throughout the Roman pe-
The end of the handle would almost invariably riod86 and until mediaeval times,87 and are even
have some circular perforations, by which the key occurred in modern times.88
could be hung: given the importance of a key and The Antiquities Collection of the National
the possibility of losing it, owners would hang the Museum of Bosnia and Herzegovina has a sig-
key by these holes, directly or by threading a chain nificant number of simple keys for rotary locks,
through them. One such has been found in Bosnia which also came into use in the 1st century89 and
and Herzegovina, at the site of the great mining remained in use for centuries.90 The collections
settlement of Japra-Majdanište (Plate 6, fig. 8). of Roman keys in the National Museum of Bos-
Differences can be seen within the classifica- nia and Herzegovina and the Zenica Museum
tion of Roman keys, mainly relating to their size both include keys for slide-key locks.91 These
and shape. These were not an aesthetic issue, but came with a variety of mechanisms,92 and are
reflected the technical and structural differences represented in the collection the subject of this
in the lock mechanism, which was the principal paper by eight examples (Plate 23, fig. 1-8).
factor in the production of various types of keys. Along with these, the most numerous, a
The great majority of keys were not decorated. certain number were used with the simplest of
Since they were in constant use, and were purely wooden locks, the primitive Laconian key, which
functional in nature, there was no need for dec- also long remained in use (Plate 8, fig. 2, Plate 10,
oration. However, very rarely a bronze key could fig. 2. 5).93
have had some modest geometric decoration
of incised straight, diagonal or X-shaped lines
(Plate 2, fig. 1. 11, Plate 4, fig. 9. 12, Plate 5, fig. Typology of keys in museums in
8. 9. 10. 11, Plate 6, fig. 1. 2. 5. 6, Plate 8, fig. 5. 9,
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Plate 10, fig. 1. 4). This decoration would feature
on the neck of the key, the part between the grip The following typology is proposed for the ex-
and the shank, or even more rarely on the shank, amples presented, based on analysis of the types
in the form of a row of lines. of key in the Antiquities Department of the Na-
Ring keys are a somewhat different case, since tional Museum of Bosnia and Herzegovina and
some were items of jewellery with modest deco- in other museum collections and institutions
ration, but only as a function of their primary use covered by this analysis.
(Plate 11). In our case, the most highly decorated
example of a key is one with the figure of a hu-
man body on the ring (Plate 11, fig. 15). 84
Walke 1965, T. 123, 1-12.
Most Roman keys in the Antiquities Collec- 85
Radišić 2015, 292-293.
tion of the National Museum of Bosnia and Her- 86
Walke 1965, 59.
zegovina would have been used with metal locks 87
Štribar / Stare 1981, 29 and 51, fig. 32. Mediaeval locks,
of various types.83 Our museum collections have keys, latches and deadbolts have been recorded at several
sites. Trifunović 2015, 231; Radičević / Milivojević /
four different locks (Plate 18), together with lock Crnčević 2015, 243.
88
Jacobi 1897, 477.
81
Keys of different sizes have been found at numerous sites. 89
Ulbert 1959, 77.
Guhl / Koner 1994, 465. 90
Koščević 2000, 37.
82
Pace 2014, 47. 91
Walke 1965, T. 124, 7-10.
83
For types and variaties of keys and locks with reconstru- 92
Koščević 2000, 37.
ctions, see Gáspár 1986. 93
Ibid. 36.

122
Anthropomorphic keys, Stechschlüssel They were in widespread use,98 and most are of
(catalogue nos. 1-14, Plate 1) the usual, familiar shape and similar size.99 Such
keys were used to operate sliding bolts, and first
Keys in the stylised form of the human body con-
appeared in the early Roman period.100 This sys-
stitute one distinct type, within which there are
tem involved pressure from the key on a spring
certain differences. Some keys have a grip resem-
when it was inserted into the lock plate, the tines
bling legs, body, neck, head and arms (Plate 1, fig.
on bit of the key corresponding to the perfora-
6. 8. 9. 12. 13). The keys forming another group
tions of the deadbolt. Such locks are known as
have a grip resembling legs, body, neck and head
spring locks.101
without arms (Plate 1, fig. 1. 2. 3. 4. 10. 11. 14),
In most cases keys of this type have a handle
while a third is represented by a single example
set at a right-angle to the shaft, though in one
which appears to have only one arm (Plate 1, fig.
example it is set horizontally (Plate 3, fig. 10).
5). Another, also represented by a single exam-
There are differences in the shape of the bit, and
ple, appears to have arms, a neck, body and head,
in the number of tines, of which there may be
but only one leg (Plate 1, fig. 7). In each case, the
two (Plate 3, fig. 9. 11. 15, Plate 6, fig. 4. 8, Plate 8,
circular top part or handle of the key, suggesting
fig. 3. 5, Plate 9, fig. 6),102 three (Plate 2, fig. 1. 7.
a stylised head above the long neck, enabled the
9, Plate 3, fig. 1-4. 6-8, Plate 4, fig. 4. 9. 11, Plate
key to be hung. In every case but one, the head is
5, fig. 3. 8. 11, Plate 6, fig. 1. 5. 6. 9. 11, Plate 7, fig.
in the same plane as the rest of the key (Plate 1,
3. 7, Plate 8, fig. 1, Plate 9, fig. 9, Plate 10, fig. 2-5)
fig. 1. 2. 4-14), the exception being one in which
or four (Plate 2, fig. 10. 11, Plate 4, fig. 5. 10, Plate
the head is at a right-angle (Plate 1, fig. 3).
5, fig. 4-7, Plate 6, fig. 2. 3, Plate 7, fig. 5. 10, Plate
These keys are quite commonly found at an-
9, fig. 7. 8).103 One example had five tines (Plate
cient sites, particularly in Bosnia and Herzegovi-
10, fig. 1). There is usually a single row of tines,
na, where they have been recorded at Graci, Vo-
though two examples (Plate 3, fig. 12, Plate 4, fig.
jkovići, Dračevica, Panik and Gorica,94 and were
12) have two rows of tines.104
used to open the moving parts of a lock, usually
The handle and shank of the key also display
a padlock.95 Such keys were also used in other
differences. This part is flat, of varying thickness,
provinces.96
and always ends in a ring. The ring may be wide
Classic keys, Schiebschloss locks (Plate 2, fig. 1. 2. 5-10, Plate 3, fig. 2-15, Plate 4,
(catalogue nos. 15-117, Plate 2-10) fig. 1-7. 9, Plate 5, fig. 1-8. 11, Plate 6, fig. 2-4.
6-11, Plate 7, fig. 1. 3. 5. 9. 10, Plate 8, fig. 1. 2.
These, the most numerous keys found at archae- 5-8. 10, Plate 9, Plate 10, fig. 1-5. 7. 8. 12. 13).
ological sites, constitute another type of Roman There are also differences of detail in the treat-
key. They were made of bronze or iron, the latter ment of the ring. Most are circular, but a few are
the most common (Plate 2, fig. 3. 5-8. 11, Plate 3, octagonal in shape (Plate 2, fig. 3. 5. 6, Plate 3,
fig. 1-9. 12-15, Plate 4, fig. 1-5. 7, Plate 5, fig. 1-3. fig. 1, Plate 4, fig. 10. 11, Plate 6, fig. 5, Plate 7,
6. 9. 10, Plate 6, fig. 4. 9-11, Plate 7, fig. 1-4. 6-10, fig. 4. 7. 8, Plate 8, fig. 3. 9, Plate 10, fig. 6. 9), or
Plate 8, fig. 1-10, Plate 9, fig. 1-10, Plate 10, fig. of an inverted V-shape, like the roof of a house
2-13). Bronze keys (Plate 1, fig. 12, Plate 2, fig. 1. (Plate 4, fig. 8, Plate 5, fig. 9, Plate 6, fig. 1, Plate
2. 9. 10, Plate 3, fig. 10. 11, Plate 4, fig. 6. 8. 9. 10. 10, fig. 11).
11. 12, Plate 5, fig. 4. 5. 7. 8. 11, Plate 6, fig. 1. 2. 3. The shank of the classic Roman key also var-
5. 6. 7. 8, Plate 7, fig. 5, Plate 10, fig. 1) were prob- ies somewhat, particularly in shape. In some, it
ably for locks on chests, caskets or other valua-
ble objects. The main structural feature of these 98
Borzić et al. 2014, 204, fig. 33. 34; Bogić 2017, T. I, fig. 5.
keys is their L-shape. This type belongs to the 6, T. II, 7-14.
99
Čremošnik 1970, 106.
type known in scholarly works as Schiebschloss.97 100
Koščević 2000, 36.
101
Bogić 2017, 37.
102
The last example, though differing in the number of tines,
94
Čremošnik 1976, 126. is very similar to one discovered in Burnum. Borzić et al.
95
Bogić 2017, 35. 2014, 193, fig. 7.
96
Ibid. 41. 103
Jacobi 1897, 474.
97
Čremošnik 1958, 44-45. 104
Čremošnik 1976, 126.

123
consists of a simple elongated triangle, widening ic element. Most were of bronze, though some
from the bit to the handle (Plate 2, fig. 1. 3. 7. 8, have been found of iron or of silver. The many
Plate 3, fig. 5. 7-9. 11. 13, Plate 4, fig. 9. 11. 12, such keys found throughout the Roman Empire
Plate 5, fig. 1. 3-5. 6. 8. 10. 11, Plate 6, fig. 2. 6. 9. also include some made of two kinds of metal –
11, Plate 7, fig. 1. 4. 5. 7. 9. 10, Plate 8, fig. 1. 3. 4, bronze for the ring, and iron for the bit. Some
Plate 9, fig. 2. 5. 8. 9, Plate 10, fig. 1. 5. 6). Oth- ring keys have been found with seals applied to
ers are more decorative, with a narrow neck that the ring, highlighting their utilitarian purpose.108
widens abruptly (Plate 2, fig. 2. 4. 5. 10. 11, Plate Their very shape suggests a range of possibili-
3, fig. 1. 4. 10. 12. 14. 15, Plate 4, fig. 3. 4. 5. 7. 8. ties for the way they were worn. They could have
10, Plate 5, fig. 2. 7. 9, Plate 6, fig. 1. 3-5. 7. 8. 10, been hung as pendants from a belt or around
Plate 7, fig. 2. 3. 6. 8, Plate 8, fig. 2. 5-9, Plate 9, fig. the wrist or neck, attached to clothing, or worn
1. 3. 4. 7. 10, Plate 10, fig. 2-4. 7-12). In a few cas- on a finger like jewellery – this latter particular-
es the keys are decorated with transverse lines, ly in the case of silver ring keys.109 Also suitable
mouldings and X’s on the shank (Plate 2, fig. 1. to be worn on the finger were those with the bit
11, Plate 4, fig. 9. 12, Plate 5, fig. 4. 8. 9-11, Plate set next to the ring, so that they would appear to
6, fig. 1-3. 5. 6, Plate 8, fig. 5. 9, Plate 10, fig. 1). be a decorative ring. Ring keys with the bit at a
A general characteristic of keys of this type is right-angle to the ring were neither practical nor
that several determinant features may be found aesthetically suitable to be worn on a finger.
on the same key, making it impossible or very Their shape is an important factor in identi-
difficult to classify them into distinct variants. fication. Their small size suggests that they be-
Some keys of this type are known to have longed to the small locks of chests, caskets and
been found at sites and very close to buildings other such objects in which personal effects were
where a gateway or entrance to a building has kept.110 Ring keys were mainly used with slide-
been identified. Three keys of this among our ex- key and spring locks.111
amples were found respectively in a tower to the Various factors, depending on the archaeo-
west of a gateway, in the gateway of the west ram- logical context in which they were found, relate
part, and by a door by the ramparts at the site of to the social role of these objects. Ring keys have
Kastrum military camp near Doboj (Plate 2, fig. been found as grave goods,112 but also on private
7, Plate 3, fig. 2. 3). property or in public edifices.113 Analysis of the
Many examples of keys of this type have been examples found at Lauricum and Viminicium
found at Roman and Late Antiquity sites, evi- indicates that they were worn by women, men
dence that they were in widespread use through- and even children.114
out the Roman Empire.105 The collection forming the subject of analysis
in this paper has fifteen examples of this type.115
Ring keys Even a superficial analysis reveals certain differ-
(catalogue nos. 118-132, Plate 11) ences or variants, based on their technical differ-
Another distinct category of Roman keys con- ences, mainly as regards the bit.
sists of ring keys.106 These were a practical way Variant 1: In this variant (Plate 11, fig. 2-4)
of keeping keys, particularly important ones that the keys have a ring that may be circular or flat in
unlocked chests and caskets in which important section. The bit is set horizontally to the ring, and
items were kept.107 One of their principal fea- takes the form of a plate pierced to create vari-
tures is that they were not purely utilitarian, but ous geometric designs: the letter E,116 a rectangle,
also served as jewellery. Analysis of these rings 108
Milovanović / Mrđić 2016, 243-244.
reveals various designs for the bit, among them 109
Koščević 1991, 86-87.
a meander or Greek key motif, a heart, and a 110
Milovanović / Mrđić 2016, 244.
horseshoe, which may also have had a symbol- 111
Bogić 2017, 35.
112
Zotović / Jordović 1990, 31.
113
Milovanović / Mrđić 2016, 244.
105
Jacobi 1897, T. XXXXIV, fig. 7-14; Koščević 2000, 122- 114
Bogić 2017, 42.
124; Giunio 2016, 96; Bogić 2017, 38. 115
The gold ring resembling a ring key is shown by way of
106
Guhl / Koner 1994, 465. analogy only (Plate 11, fig. 1).
107
Ivčević 2014, 155. 116
Ivčević 2014, T. 8, fig. 80.

124
meander, swastika, heart, inverted letter U, bro- diminutive in size, the bit is identical in form to
ken circle and so forth. The bit is designed for the bit of larger keys.124
a slide-key lock. Their shape is mainly suitable They probably date from the 2nd to the 4th cen-
for wearing as a ring.117 The keys shown in this tury, particularly the late 2nd and first half of the
paper are of bronze, but despite this their prima- 3rd centuries, as in the case of variant 1.125
ry function was no doubt practical rather than Comparable examples have been found in the
decorative. provinces of Dalmatia,126 Pannonia,127 Germania,
Further indications that these shapes were also Moesia, Dacia, Macedonia and elsewhere in the
seen as items of jewellery or rings is that many keys Roman Empire.128
of this kind in silver and gold have been found, as Variant 3: Two examples belong to the third
well as rings of similar design but could not have variant (Plate 11, fig. 13. 14). The defining fea-
been used as keys, but rather bore images from tures of this group are the semi-circular section
mythology or religion. An illustrative example of of the ring and a horizontal, cylindrical or sol-
this kind was found at the large mining settlement id-cast bit in the shape of a spike. These keys
of Japra-Majdanište (Plate 11, fig. 1).118 operated rotary locks. As in other variants, this
Ring keys of this variant have been found in kind has been found in a wide range of contexts
various contexts at archaeological sites.119 Some from grave goods to finds within a residential
were found among grave goods in various types building. It ranges in date from the 2nd to the 3rd
of burial, at sacrificial areas, but also among century.129 The rotary lock was invented by the
everyday items in public edifices or private prop- Romans, and remains in use to this day.130
erty. They were quite popular, which explains Many comparable examples have been found
their long use from the 2nd to the 4th century, par- in Germania,131 Noricum, Pannonia, Moesia,
ticularly during the 3rd century.120 Macedonia and elsewhere in the Roman territo-
Their popularity is also indicated by the num- ries.132 An interesting, possibly analogous exam-
ber of finds at various sites in Germania,121 at ple, with the bit set horizontally and no fewer than
Burnum122 and in Noricum, Pannonia, Dalmatia, eight tines in two rows, was found at Burnum.133
Moesia and other provinces.123 Variant 4: One key, classified as belonging to
Variant 2: In this variant the ring is flat, round a distinct variant (Plate 11, fig. 15), has the bit set
or half-round in section (Plate 11, fig. 5-12). The at a right-angle, like those of variant 2, and could
feature that distinguishes them as forming a not for functional reasons have served as an item
separate group is that the bit is set vertically in of jewellery. The very interesting shape of the
relation to the ring. These ring keys were used ring is what sets it apart as a distinct variant. The
with spring locks. The position of the bit reveals ring in in the shape of an inverted human figure,
that they were above all keys, with no aesthetic with arms and legs extended to form a semicircle
aspirations to serve as jewellery. They were thus with the body. This ring key could not have been
classic keys but miniature in size. The bit set ver-
tically on the ring was shorter than in ordinary
keys, with a more or less elongated neck. Though 124
Milovanović / Mrđić 2016, 249.
125
Ibid. 251, 252-255.
126
Giunio 2016, 94.
127
Koščević 2000, 61.
128
Nikolić / Pop-Lazić 2005, 34-35; Petrović 1997, 124, cat.
117
Milovanović / Mrđić 2016, 247. 126-127; Koščević 1988, T. XXXV, 569. 599; Vágó / Bóna
118
Popović 1992, 14, type VI, 24, cat. no. 18; Henkel 1913, 1976, T. 15, 1041, 7, 1050, 5; Marcea / Gudea / Moţu 1993,
234, fig. 240. 107, Pl. XXVI, 6; Henkel 1913, 183. 248-249; Beckmann
119
Giunio 2016, 94. 1969, 40. 52; Milovanović / Mrđić 2016, 249-251 and many
120
Milovanović / Mrđić 2016, 247-248. others.
121
Jacobi 1897, T. XXXXIV, fig. 26. 129
Milovanović / Mrđić 2016, 255.
122
Borzić et al. 2014, 205, fig. 35. 36, 263, fig. 29. 130
Bogić 2017, 41.
123
Koščević 1988, T. XXXIV–XXXV, 565. 581. 583; Koščević 131
Jacobi 1897, T. XXXXIV, fig. 21-25. 27.
1995, Pl. 45-46. 472. 474-475; Dautova-Ruševljan 1995, 155, 132
Pop Lazić 2002, 69-70, fig. 22. 6; Koščević 1988, T. XXXV,
T. VI, 44; Brukner 1976, 40, T. XV, 7; Bojović 1981, 28, kat. 589-591; Petru 1972, 74, T. LVI, 12; Milovanović / Mrđić
77-79; Mihovilić 1979, 228, T. II, 20-23; Milovanović / Mr- 2016, 255 and many others.
đić 2016, 247-249 and many others. 133
Borzić et al. 2014, 274, fig. 40.

125
an item of jewellery, a finger-ring, but nonethe- as Vexirschlüssel, and operated the large locks of
less was of aesthetic value. massive doors or gates. The locks themselves are
The available literature reveals no comparable known as Drehschloss or Vorhängeschloss locks.142
examples, while the most nearly similar ring, on Variant 4: One example, of which the shank
which the figure of a standing orator is portrayed is circular in section and has an opening at the
and which dates from the 1st and 2nd centuries, is top so it can be hung, belongs to this variant. It
kept in the Metropolitan Museum.134 is of simple workmanship and operated a rotary
lock (Plate 13, fig. 5). It is probably of latish date,
Large keys given it structural features and the shape of the
(catalogue nos. 133-152, Plate 12. 13) bit and shank
Large keys have been found at numerous sites.135 Variant 5: Another distinct variant is repre-
Analysis of such examples reveals certain differ- sented by a number of examples with flat shanks
ences in the way they were used as well as struc- and a circular perforation at the end, so they
tural differences, of both the keys and the locks could be hung. The bit is fairly primitive, with
which they operated. Such keys were probably a bent tip which served to turn the mechanism,
latch lifters, designed to operate wooden latch- thus unlocking what were most likely wooden
es.136 Thus there were several variants which dif- locks (Plate 13, fig. 6. 7).
fered significantly one from another. Variant 6: This variant is represented by a sin-
Variant 1: The largest group consists of an- gle example which, though sharing certain fea-
chor-shaped keys (Plate 12, fig. 1-7. 9), with two tures with the larger group, has two curved tines
curved hooks, to left and right,137 a long, flat with which the lock was unlocked (Plate 13, fig.
shank, and with the top bent into a circle, prob- 8). Directly comparable examples have been
ably so they could be hung, as is the case with found at other Roman sites.143
other types of key. Their common feature is their Variant 7: Yet another key belongs to a variant
size, ranging from 10.06 to 19.05 cm. The popu- with the bit bent to one side, and with three tines
larity of this type is revealed by the fact that such that turned the lock system (Plate 13, fig. 9). This
keys have been found at various sites throughout too has analogies at known Roman sites, such as
the Empire.138 the Roman edifice in Saalburg.144
Variant 2: We have only one example of a large Variant 8: The structure of a large iron key
key with the bit on one side only, consisting of with a flat shank and flat bit bent to one side, a
two large tines (Plate 12, fig. 8). This type of key, narrow neck, and a wider upper shank (Plate 13,
which was operated by rotating to the right or fig. 10), also defines it as belonging to another
left, had from two to five tines. Analogies (Plate variant, though there are similarities between
12, fig. 8) have been found at Saalburg,139 Svrl- this and examples from variant 3 and 8.
jig,140 and Čečan, and date from Late Antiquity.141 Variant 9: Based on its principal feature, its
Variant 3: One of the many different groups size, this variant is represented by one example
consists of exceptionally large keys, ranging from (Plate 13, fig. 11). This key was gilded, and un-
21 to 24 cm (Plate 13, fig. 1-4). These are flat in doubtedly operated a luxury lock. Unfortunately
profile, with a thinner section on the lower part it is too badly damaged to allow for closer analysis.
of the shank. The bit is bent to one side at an It should be noted that large keys, especially
acute angle and ends in a circle or cylinder with those of variants 3, 4 and 5, were used only to
three tines (Plate 13, fig. 3), or none (Plate 12, fig. operate large locks on massive doors, such as the
1. 2. 4). These keys are known in scholarly works entrance gates to fortifications at Mogorjelo and
elsewhere.145
134
Pace 2014, 104.
135
Jacobi 1897, 469; Guhl / Koner 1994, 465.
136
Bogić 2017, 35.
137
Jacobi 1897, 469.
138
Ibid. 469, T. XXXXIV, fig. 1. 142
Čremošnik 1976, 126.
139
Ibid., T. XXXXIV, fig. 2. 143
Jacobi 1897, 469, fig. 17.
140
Bogić 2017, 36, fig. 4. 144
Ibid., T. XXXXIV, fig. 3-5.
141
Ivanišević / Špehar 2006, 148. 145
For Mogorjelo see Dyggve / Vetters 1966.

126
Atypical Roman keys find, no analogies to which have been found in
(catalogue nos. 153-159, Plate 14) Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Since locks and keys were so widely used, there Hinges
can be no doubt that they were manufactured in (catalogue nos. 160-189, Plate 15. 16. 17)
a variety of ways, reflecting basic, familiar techni-
cal principles. Interesting examples of keys have The Antiquities Collection of the National Muse-
thus been found at typical Roman sites. That keys um of Bosnia and Herzegovina has examples of
could be made from materials at hand, so as to various kinds of hinge. Hinges were an essential
secure portable and real property, is evidenced component of doors and locking systems. They
by examples from the preceding group, of which were the functional bearing component con-
some (Plate 14, fig. 2. 3), were probably made on necting the door and door frame, enabling the
site. door to be opened and closed as easily as possi-
This and similar examples were often in use ble. Hinges differ in design, as can be seen in the
later, in the mediaeval period, to secure large examples in our collection, which are of varying
doors or gates. shapes and manner of operation.
The continued use of keys that were very One method by which doors could be opened
similar to those of the Roman period, Late An- and close was known among the Etruscans, in
tiquity and the early mediaeval period, may be which the door pane fitted into a spike top and
observed at numerous sites, where determinant bottom, or in some cases extended into a pivot
archaeological material and keys formed part of at the top and bottom, forming the axis around
the finds.146 Analogues to some of our examples, which it could be turned. In such cases the
very similar in appearance, have been found at threshold serving as the base had to be provid-
the site of a burg at Wittelsbach.147 As well as ed with a groove along which the lower pivot
the sites at which they were found, very similar could move. This method was in widespread use
or identical examples have been found at Saal- in various areas, as confirmed by archaeological
burg,148 Sisak (Siscia) and Aquileia,149 supporting excavations.152 A new method of fitting doors was
the claim that our examples are indeed Roman, developed in the Roman period, using iron spike-
or date from Late Antiquity. shaped hinges. These were ideal for solid, heavy
In two instances our examples display almost doors, and were usually of wrought iron. This
identical features to those of classic keys (Plate system consisted of two identical spikes bent in
14, fig. 2. 3). the middle, when they fitted into each other; one
The other four examples (Plate 14, fig. 1. 4. 5. was attached to the door pane, the other to the
7) have a cylindrical shank with tines at the end, door frame. To ensure they remained securely at-
set at a right-angle to form the bit. As with other tached, they were very long, penetrating deep into
examples, the handle ends in a ring, enabling it the timber. If they protruded on the other side
to be hung. These keys were used to turn a lock of the door frame, the ends would be bent over.
plate, and were in use from the 1st century, re- Each door would have at least two such hinges,
maining in use for a long period.150 Direct analo- but depending on the weight and size of the door
gies to our examples have been found at Aquileia could have three or more. Examples of this de-
and Sisak.151 sign can be seen on eight of our hinges (Plate 15,
A very interesting key was found at Žabljak fig. 12-14, Plate 16, fig. 8-10, Plate 17, fig. 3. 5),
(Plate 14, fig. 6). According to the available liter- and another two examples (Plate 15, fig. 11, Plate
ature and other examples found, this is a unique 17, fig. 6) were probably of similar design.
Another variant consisted of a hinge with
both parts joined in the form of a closed or
curved ring, which meant that the door could
146
Radišić 2015, 292-293. not be removed from the door frame. The hinges
147
Koch 2017, Taf. 10.
148
Jacobi 1897, T. XXXXIV, fig. 16-18.
were fixed to the door frame and door by rivets
149
Koščević 2000, 125-126. or nails, and could be removed only by extract-
150
Ulbert 1959, 77.
151
Koščević 2000, 125. 152
Walton 1954, 43-46.

127
ing the rivets or nails (Plate 15, fig. 4-8, Plate 16, ed ends to enable them to be hammered into the
fig. 6. 7). wood (Plate 15, fig. 1. 2. 9. 10). This meant that
There was another, similar method of attach- the lower part was L-shaped. The longer arm
ing a door to the door frame. The ends of a hinge would be hammered into the door frame, leaving
curved into a narrow U- or O-shape, forming a the shorter arm exposed so that the upper part of
ring, were driven into the inner side of the door the hinge could be hung on it. These parts were
and set on a second, L-shaped part, the longer identical in shape to the spikes with bent head
arm of which was driven into the door frame. that were used to affix wall facings or other struc-
The iron part of the hinge that was set into the tural elements,157 so that they are identified at the
door was then fitted onto the shorter arm of the hypothetical level, in other words, their discov-
L. The L-shaped part was usually on the inside of ery at archaeological sites may be interpreted in
the door. This design enabled the door to be lift- two ways – they may be identified as hinges or as
ed off its hinges when it needed to be removed, bent plates used to affix structural elements. This
and most closely resembles the hinges used in hypothesis finds support in the fact that they
our time.153 Such hinges could also serve another may be found in large numbers, in which case it
purpose, that of consolidating architectural ele- is likely that they were used to attach wall facings
ments.154 in a given room or building, or in roof structures
In some cases, certain designs could be multi- and the like, whereas hinges would occur only in
purpose in nature. It is possible, based on obser- small numbers, reflecting the limited number of
vation of their structural features, that the sup- doors in a building.
ports for the insulating layer of a ceiling155 could Some of the hinges represented in this paper
also have been used as door hinges. These were lack one of the determinant features that would
T-shaped, and if the longer arm was hammered enable them to be identified with certainty (Plate
into the door one of the shorter arms could have 15, fig. 3, Plate 16, fig. 3. 4).
served as the upper part of the hinge that rested The technical solutions applied to hang doors
on the lower part of the hinge in the door frame onto door frames in the Roman period were very
(Plate 17, fig. 1. 2). Much the same is true of similar, and almost identical or similar examples
other examples of hinge that could equally have have been found at the known Roman site at
been part of the harness of draft animals.156 Saalburg.158
It may thus be concluded that the basic prin-
ciple on which a hinge operates remains un- Locks
changed, in various forms, to this day. The hol- (catalogue nos. 190-193, Plate 18)
low, ring-like or inverted cup-shaped lower part A door serving only the basic function of protec-
of the hinge fitted onto the upper spike, the latter tion from animals or the cold did not need to be
being fixed to the door and the lower part to the locked, but when people sought to protect their
wooden door frame. Both upper and lower parts property from others of malign intent, it became
could be fixed to the door frame and door in a necessary to develop various kinds of lock. These
variety of ways. A very striking example is that of locks, reflecting the experience of different peo-
a hinge found at Zecovi near Prijedor (Plate 17, ples and parts of the world, came in numerous
fig. 4). Hinges found at Lepenica (Plate 16, fig. forms and with different operating systems, as
2. 5) operated on a similar principle, except as evidenced at Roman archaeological sites.
regards the moving part fitted to the door frame, Roman locks can be roughly divided into two
where the lower spike fitted into the upper part basic groups, according to the method and pur-
of the hinge. pose of their use. The first consists of large locks
One method consisted of fitting both parts intended for the large doors of houses and public
of the hinge into the edge of the door frame and edifices, courtyard gates and the like. The other
door. In this case the hinges had to have point- consists of small locks intended for caskets, small
153
Матић 2007, 27-28.
154
Ivčević 2014, 183, no. 119. Basler 1977, T. I, 7. 8. 9.
157

155
Basler 1977, Plate IV, fig. 3. 5. Jacobi 1897, T. XXXXV, fig. 22-28. 30, T. XXXXVI, fig.
158

156
Šeper 1962, 335-428; Ratković 2008, 793-815. 13. 22.

128
doors, and other small articles, mainly caskets in and caskets, they could also be used for wallets,
which objects of value, jewellery, money, impor- bags and similar items.165
tant documents, cosmetics and medicines, etc., Analysis of keys also allows for the general
were kept. conclusion that rotary locks were used in Ro-
Both kinds of lock were in widespread use man times in Bosnia and Herzegovina, operated
throughout the Empire both geographically and by anthropomorphic keys (Plate 1), Schibschloss
chronologically, sites at which they have been locks operated by classic keys (Plate 2 – Plate 10),
found revealing that they were used from west- and Drehschloss and Verhängeschloss locks oper-
ern Europe159 to the central160 and eastern regions ated by large keys (Plate 13, fig. 1-4). The distri-
of the Empire.161 bution of locks is further revealed by keys that
Structurally, too, Roman locks consist of two provide evidence of simple wooden locks (Plate
basic parts, one being fixed, the other a movable 8, fig. 2, and Plate 10, fig. 2. 5).
element attached by a hinge to the fixed part.162 Locks of different types continued in use into
For the lock to function, the movable part was the late mediaeval period.166
lowered and inserted through the rectangular
lock plate, where a pin passed through it on the Lock escutcheons
inside. This part of the lock was visible, and was (catalogue nos. 194-208, Plate 19. 20)
treated with particular care, with the addition of Lock covers or escutcheons also display marked
various decorative features: straight or intersect- differences. Thus far the surviving examples
ing lines, scored triangles and the like. from Bosnia and Herzegovina reveal the pres-
The National Museum of Bosnia and Herze- ence of substantial locks for entrance doors or
govina has examples of locks from Stolac, Mog- gateways (Plate 19, fig. 1. 6). Direct analogies to
orjelo, Japra-Majdanište and Lisičići near Konjic our escutcheons (Plate 19, fig. 4. 5), have been
(Plate 18, fig. 1. 2. 3. 4). The first two locks were found at Magura, which are placed in the context
probably of the kind most commonly in use in of locks on cages and stakes.167 Another analogy
the interior of the Roman province of Dalmatia. was found at Tilurium.168 Escutcheons have also
A lock that has survived intact was operated by been found belonging to smaller locks, probably
inserting and turning a key. for wooden caskets, small door locks and the
The example from Japra-Majdanište (Plate 18, like. These last are represented in our collection
fig. 4) has a direct analogy found at Sisak.163 It by bronze169 and silver examples from Konjević
had a metal ward and was probably a padlock,164 Polje, Aquae S.... Panik and Mogorjelo (Plate
as suggested by its structure. This hypothesis is 19, fig. 2. 3, Plate 20, fig. 1. 4. 5). In a very few
further supported by the fact that the two sites cases, such as the luxury silver finds from Kon-
are quite close, and must have mutually influ- jević Polje near Srebrenica170 and from Panik
enced each other. The lock from Lisičići (Plate near Bileća, the escutcheon was of silver, which
18, fig. 5) is of almost identical structure, and is together with their small size indicates that they
also more likely to have been a padlock than a evidently belonged to a small lock on a casket or
classic lock. similar object, as does the discovery of the lam-
The evolution of different lock systems in the ina with which the casket was clad (Plate 20, fig.
Roman period is evidenced by finds at sever- 1).171 Both precious metal and luxury of design
al sites that could be defined as padlocks. They are to be seen in the decorated escutcheon from
worked in various ways, and though relatively Panik near Bileća (Plate 20, fig. 4. 5). Compara-
few in number, are represented throughout the tive examples reveal that this is not unusual. The
Roman Empire. As well as serving to lock lids presence of decorated locks and escutcheons of

159
Gáspár 1986, 123, cat. 265; Istenič 2000, T. 15. 23, gr. 75; 165
Koščević 1990, 25-28.
Plesničar-Gec 1972, T. CL, 20 gr. 653, T. CLX, 10 gr. 700. 166
Koch 2017, Taf. 12, fig. 13
160
Koščević 2000, 127. 167
Popović 2009, 318-319.
161
Ivčević 2003, 143. 168
Ivčević 2014, 177, no. 85.
162
Oltre la porta 1986, 97, fig. 33. 35. 169
Pace 2014, 41-42.
163
Koščević 2000, 127. 170
Bojanovski 2001, 179.
164
Ibid. 37. 171
Ibid. 186-197.

129
zoomorphic or anthropomorphic form has been latches were locked from the inside. Locks using
recorded at various archaeological sites.172 the latch principle were still in use later, in me-
Small keys, particularly ring keys of a size diaeval times – parts of latches similar to those
that indicates they belonged to small locks, are of the Roman period have been found, usually
also evidence of such small-sized locks on cas- the parts fixed to the door frame. Very similar
kets and chests of a personal nature.173 Lock es- examples have been found at the mediaeval site
cutcheons were designed to protect the lock and of Wittelsbach.178 Similar mechanisms were also
its surroundings from damage that might arise used in ancient times, as evidenced by examples
while operating the lock.174 These too could be of found. In some cases, depending on their size,
different materials, depending on the lock. In the these latches may have been used on very small
case of large door locks, which were in frequent locking systems.179 One interesting example
use, iron escutcheons were used of which exam- (Plate 22, fig. 16) consisted of an annular mov-
ples are found in the archaeological evidence able component attached to the door, of which
presented in this paper (Plate 19, fig. 1. 4-9). the free end was lowered onto or raised from
The lock escutcheons in the National Muse- the fixed component on the door frame. This is
um of Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Museum the simplest form of latch. In this case the fixed
in Doboj point to two basic shapes – circular component on the door frame must have had an
(Plate 19, fig. 1. 2. 3, Plate 20, fig. 1-5. 7) and rec- opening on the upper side to enable the moving
tangular (Plate 19, fig. 4. 5. 7. 8. 9, Plate 20, fig. part to be raised or lowered. In another variant,
6).175 In each case, they have a central L-shaped the moving metal part of the latch fitted horizon-
aperture to allow the key to be inserted into the tally from the side into the fixed component on
lock. The perforations at the corners of the rec- the door frame. Parts of latches found at Roman
tangular escutcheons allowed for the escutcheon sites in Bosnia and Herzegovina reveal that this
to be affixed to the wooden door, surrounding system is represented by quite a large number of
the lock. examples (Plate 21, fig. 1. 2. 4-9, Plate 22, fig. 1-3.
The popularity of such escutcheons is demon- 7-15). All this suggests that there were two differ-
strated by finds of rectangular176 and circu- ent latch systems, the horizontal and the vertical.
lar177examples throughout the Roman Empire. It may be assumed that wood was used to make
a significant number of latches identical to these
Latches systems, which, being of perishable material,
(catalogue nos. 209-237, Plate 21 and Plate 22) have not survived.
A latch may also be an integral part of a door Some parallels may be drawn with examples
and its locking system. The simplest method of from the 18th and 19th centuries, when the same
closing a door was with a latch. This consisted of principles applied to a new latch system which
two parts, one of which was attached to the door had a handle, a concealed mechanism, and a
frame. It is often difficult to distinguish this from concealed latch lifter.180
the double-ended cramps used to join two tim- In addition to the above methods, our exam-
ber or stone architectural elements. The second, ples also include some of which one component
moving component of a latch took the form of a was affixed by driving a nail through a perfora-
metal or wooden bar, usually flat, part of which tion. One end of the latch was bent, and served
was attached to the door while the other engaged as the holder, while the other end was lifted to
with the fixed part on the door frame. Doors with open and lowered to close the door from the in-
side (Plate 21, fig. 3. 12, Plate 22, fig. 4)
A significant proportion of surviving met-
172
Mellink 1989, 103-133.
173
See the section dealing with ring keys.
al latch components are almost identical to the
174
Pace 2014, 40-41. cramps used to join the various architectural
175
Some of the examples presented in this paper are too bad- components of a building (Plate 21, 1, 2, 5-8,
ly damaged for their shape to be identified (Plate 19, fig. 6,
Plate 20, 6).
176
Jacobi 1897, T. XXXXV, fig. 10. 11; Bernabò-Brea / Cava- 178
Koch 2017, Taf. 12, fig. 1-6.
lier 1965, T. CCXVIII, fig. 4. 17. 179
Ivčević 2014, 184, no. 128.
177
Bernabò-Brea / Cavalier 1965, T. CCXVIII, fig. 10. 180
Matić 2007, 49-50.

130
Plate 22, fig. 8-13). As a result, the parts of a latch are in the shape of human heads (Plate 24, fig.
that were attached to the door frame could have 1-3. 6), and lions’ heads (Plate 24, fig. 4. 5. 8).
served other purposes, making it impossible to The Franciscan Monastery in Visoko has one
identify them with certainty. example in the shape of a clothed girl (Plate 24,
fig. 7). Unfortunately, the site where it came from
Bolts and parts of Schiebschloss locks is unknown, but was probably local, though the
(catalogue nos. 238-245, Plate 23) handle itself was probably imported.
Bolts are another item used in locking systems. Similar door handles in the form of animal
Our specimens are of iron, rectangular in section heads – horse, lion, leopard, ram, bull – or of
and with a rectangular frame with openings181 or human hands, heads or entire figures, have been
indentations. Examples with no openings have recorded in many places.190
swastika-shaped indentations. The tines on the
Fragments of iron railings or gates
bit of the key engaged with these openings or in-
dentations. The indentations could also be trian-
(catalogue nos. 254-255, Plate 25)
gular,182 semi-circular, or rectangular.183 The same The Antiquities Collection of the National Mu-
principle applied to bolts of a different shape with seum of Bosnia and Herzegovina has some very
a number of holes forming a circle: here too the interesting and pieces from a decorative railing
tines of the bit engaged with the holes so the bolt or gate found in Morgorjelo. In the form of flo-
could be drawn.184 They were in very common ral tendrils, these have not previously been pub-
use, as reflected by finds of such bolts at numer- lished in scholarly works, and it appears from
ous sites. Several analogous specimens have been the available literature that no similar examples
found at Saalburg,185 Sisak and Aquileia,186 and have been recorded. Comparing with known ex-
the British Museum,187 the Museum of Croatian amples of wrought iron components of furniture
Archaeological Monuments in Split,188 and many – tables, chairs and the like191 – it may confident-
other institutions, possess a significant number. ly be assumed that these wrought iron objects
formed part of a railing or gate.
Door handles Further support for the hypothesis that these
(catalogue nos. 246-253, Plate 24) surviving fragments date from the Roman peri-
The National Museum of Bosnia and Herzegovi- od is provided by the large number of iron tools
na and the Franciscan Monastery in Visoko have and implements found at the same site. These
some quite fine examples of door handles. Made would have been used for a variety of agricul-
of bronze, these are in the shape of heads. They tural, animal farming and artisanal activities in
are of high-quality workmanship, and undoubt- the Roman period.192 Furthermore, the gateways
edly belonged to the substantial entrance doors identified at Mogorjelo, and the large number
to a building. Those presented in this paper are of edifices and other premises within the archi-
from known sites (Plate 24, fig. 1. 3. 4): the urban tectural complex, make it likely that there were
administrative centre and spa known as Aqua S.... iron railings or gates. Though this remains a hy-
in Ilidža near Sarajevo,189 and the important site pothesis, there is no reason not to attribute these
of Mogorjelo, already referred to several times in fragments to the same cultural and chronological
this paper. This too suggests that door handles of context. Their large size also suggests that they
this kind belonged to the (probably large) doors were from a gate or railing, rather than from
of handsome edifices. Some of our door handles items of furniture.
Based on broader comparisons, they could
181
Ivčević 2014, 177, fig. 84. have been from Roman chariots.193 In any event,
182
Busuladžić 2012, T. XVI. we remain open to alternative suggestions con-
183
Šeparović / Uroda 2009, 78. cerning the exact identification of these objects.
184
Križ / Stipančić / Škedelj Petrič 2009, 348, fig. 50a.
185
Jacobi 1897, 473 and T. XXXXV, fig. 1-5.
186
Koščević 2000, 126. 190
Pace 2014, 100-105.
187
Pace 2014, 54. 191
Guhl / Koner 1994, 446-447.
188
Šeparović / Uroda 2009, 78. 192
Busuladžić 2014.
189
Kellner 1895, 161-198. 193
Maise 2004, 9-12.

131
Ring door handles rajevo,212 Gradac near Neum,213 the early Chris-
(catalogue nos. 256-261, Plate 26) tian religious buildings in Mokro,214 Grude,215
and the wider region, where Roman remains of
These are another everyday object belonging to
similar use have been recorded, such as Livno,
doors, both large entrance doors and those with-
Tomislavgrad, Lepenica, Klobuk, Gradac, Mosko
in a building, and could also feature on smaller
kod Bileće, Mostar and elsewhere.
chests, caskets and the like, where they served
Analysis of these objects reveals that wherev-
the same purpose as door handles. On the other
er people lived and worked in the Roman period
hand, they could also have other purposes, serv-
in what is now Bosnia and Herzegovina, some
ing for example as parts of carts and the like.194
locking system or another was in use. Roman
keys, locks, bolts and other components of lock-
ing systems have been found not only at known
Conclusion Roman sites but also in places where no signifi-
Analysis of the many finds relating broadly to the cant Roman site has been recorded: among them
subject under discussion in ancient times sug- Vojkovići near Sarajevo, Velika Kladuša, Rakitno
gests a number of general conclusions. near Ljubuški, Amajlije near Bijeljina, Usora near
The interior of the Roman province of Dal- Tešanj, Šipovljani near Bosanski Petrovac, Drvar,
matia and the outer regions of the province of and Glogovac near Jajce.
Pannonia, to which the area of present-day Bos- The picture of locking systems and key forms
nia and Herzegovina belonged, was in no way is supplemented by a number of examples found
separate from general trends in the use of differ- at sites in Narona and Albania and kept in the
ent locking systems for buildings, gateways, en- National Museum of Bosnia and Herzegovina.
trance doors, casket and chests in which valuable These objects reveal that the population of
personal effects were kept. these parts in Roman times secured their prop-
These objects have been found at numer- erty in exactly the same way as people living in
ous sites known to date from Roman times, other provinces. They kept up with technical in-
such as the Roman villas195 in Višići,196 Pani- novations as every new patent reached the prov-
k,197 Lisičići,198 Mala Ruiška,199 Stolac,200 Stup,201 ince, albeit with a slight time lag.
Mušići,202 Proboj,203 Mogorjelo,204 Vitina205 and The archaeological material tells us that the
Tišina,206 military facilities such as Makljeno- owners and occupants of different buildings,
vac near Doboj,207 Gračina,208 urban settlements whether private or public, civilian, military or re-
such as Aqua S.... near Sarajevo209 and Japra-Ma- ligious, used locks and keys to secure their prop-
jdaništa,210 refugia, hill forts and forts such as erty, estates and personal affairs.
Zecovi near Prijedor211 and Debelo Brdo near Sa- Finds from local sites reveal that a variety
of different keys were in use: anthropomorphic
keys, ring keys, large keys and classic keys, along
194
Ratković 2008, 793-815. with latches, bolts, hinges, elaborate door han-
195
Busuladžić 2011, 98. dles, locks and lock escutcheons. This wide range
196
Ibid. 150-151. of objects used for or related to locking reveals
197
Čremošnik 1976, 41-164.
198
Busuladžić 2011, 157-158. further details. Most keys were used to lock typ-
199
Ibid. 165. ical entrance doors and represent the majority of
200
Ibid. 152-153. finds. In addition, given their greater size, a cer-
201
Ibid. 159. tain number of keys probably belonged to large
202
Ibid. 159-160.
203
Ibid. 151-152.
locks that could have been used only on gates
204
Ibid. 149. and big, heavy doors. At the other end of the
205
Ibid. 151. range are miniature keys that could have been
206
Busuladžić 2012, 211. used only to lock small objects such as caskets
207
Žigić 2017, 125-168.
208
Atanacković-Salčić 1978, 73-77. 212
Fiala 1894, 107-140; 1896, 97-107.
209
Pašalić 1959, 113-136. 213
For this site see Marijan 1989, 35-59.
210
Basler 1977, 121-216. 214
Sergejevski 1961, 211-228.
211
Čremošnik 1956, 136-146. 215
Arheološki leksikon Bosne i Hercegovine, vol. III, 1988, 324.

132
in which valuable personal effects, jewellery and katancima, baglamama, ogradama, halkama za vrata,
the like were kept. drškama vrata i oplatama od brava. Od samih poče-
The number of these finds reveals that it was taka čovjek je stvarajući prva organizirana staništa
common practice to use locks in Roman Bosnia pokušao napraviti i način zaštite. Ti oblici podrazum-
ijevali su i prve forme vrata, koja su se protokom vre-
and Herzegovina. Securing ones property, house,
mena razvijala. U rimsko doba vrata postaju univer-
household goods and furniture, livestock, valua- zalni i neizostavni element objekata. Ključevi dobijaju
bles in the home, military equipment and arms i simboličku ulogu. Oni postaju simbol graničara,
in military facilities, and early Christian religious jasne razlike između vanjskog i unutarnjeg, dobrog
buildings, was part of daily routine. Homes in i lošeg, poznatog i nepoznatog. Ključevi postaju dio
rural as well as urban areas were secured. ikonografije božice Hekate, Janusa, Afrodite, Krono-
This called for sets of locks and ancillary com- sa, Heliosa, Cibale i Erosa. Materijal od kojeg su u
ponents to be manufactured. It is difficult to im- rimsko doba metalni dijelovi vrata izrađeni najčešće
agine that a majority of locks would be imported je željezo, bronza, ali i srebro i pozlata. Ovi predmeti
from remote regions, and more likely that locks su primarno imali funkcionalnu, a tek sekundarno
dekorativnu namjenu. Prvi tipovi ključeva zabilježeni
were produced in major local centres by special-
su još kod starih Egipćana, stanovnika Mezopotam-
ist locksmiths, probably those who were also en-
ije, a potom Grka, Etruščana i Rimljana. Rimski sis-
gaged in metallurgy and metal-working. Analysis tem brava podrazumijevao je dva osnovna principa.
of the types of material reveals that most were Stariji sistem predstavljao je dvostruko guranje s bra-
made of iron, with a few of bronze, and two were vom koja je imala zasun na ručno potezanje, dok je
silver-plated. Iron locks were more robust and mlađi bio okretni sistem. Sistemom dvostrukog gu-
were suited to more substantial doors. The bronze ranja brava se otvarala na način da se zupcima koji
and two silver examples belonged to smaller, lux- su bili na bradi ključa, pošto se ključ uvuče u bravu,
ury items – boxes or caskets of some kind. podižu mali klinčići koji su fiksirali zasun. Ovaj tip
It is safe to assume that the small locks, es- se koristio u antici i tokom cijelog perioda Carstva.
cutcheons and ring keys used on small caskets, Okretni sistem je funkcionirao uz pomoć mehanizma
s ključaonicom – claustrum i uz pomoć ključa – clavis.
perhaps brought here from distant places and
Guranjem ključa zasun se direktno pomicao. Ovaj
large urban centres, were themselves import- je sistem predstavljao tehnički napredak i smatra se
ed. Examples that stand out are part of the sil- rimskim izumom. U masovniju upotrebu ulazi od II
ver escutcheon of the lock of a small box found stoljeća. Ključevi se u odnosu na materijal od kojeg
with other grave goods in Konjević Polje near su izrađeni, konstrukcijske razlike, različite oblike,
Srebrenica,216 and a decorated silver escutcheon dijele na više tipova. Tako su u ovom radu obrađeni
from Panik. primjerci više tipova. Na prvom mjestu to su antro-
pomorfni ključevi Stechschlüssel tip. Ovaj tip ključeva
Na engleski jezik prevela Saba Risaluddin nalikuje na ljudske figure (T. 1). Drugu veliku skupinu
predstavljaju klasični ključevi tzv. Schiebschloss tipa (T.
2-10). Ovi su ključevi služili za manipuliranje brava
sa zasunom na potezanje. Razlike među njima očitu-
ju se u broju zubaca na glavi ključa koji mogu biti u
jednom i u dva reda te ih može biti od dva do pet.
Sažetak Najveći broj ih je željeznih, dok ih je manji broj bio i
od bronze. Razlike su uočene i u odnosu na držač, koji
je gotovo po pravilu imao na vrhu prstenasti završetak
Metalni dijelovi rimskih vrata koji je mogao biti uokviren kružno ili u obliku slova
– primjeri iz Bosne i Hercegovine V ili oktogonalne forme. Ako su u pitanju ukrasni el-
ementi, onda su to kose, prave i poprečne linije. Treći
U Zemaljskom muzeju Bosne i Hercegovine, ali i tip odnosi se na prsten ključeve (T. 11), koji su mogli
drugim muzejskim ustanovama poput muzeja u Ze- imati željezne i bronzane primjerke, te glave koje su
nici, Doboju, Travniku, Tuzli, Franjevačkom samost- mogle biti četvrtaste, okrugle ili sa zupcima. Glave
anu u Visokom, pohranjeno je više predmeta koji se su mogle biti horizontalno postavljene i kod takvih
mogu determinirati kao metalni dijelovi rimskih vra- primjera predmeti su mogli služiti i kao prstenovi, te
ta. Riječ je o ključevima, rezama, zasunima, bravama, okomito – vertikalno postavljene glave koje su imale
isključivo funkciju ključa. Ovakva rješenja korište-
216
Bojanovski 2001, 207, fig. 3. na su i kod zlatnih prstenova koji su imali isključivo

133
dekorativnu ulogu (T. 11, sl. 1). Četvrti tip ključeva anizam imao dva osnovna dijela. Jedan je bio fiksiran i
odnosio se na velike primjerke (T. 12. 13) koji su služi- pričvršćen za štok (T. 21, sl. 1. 2. 3-9, T. 22, sl. 1. 8-15),
li za otvaranje velikih brava, na kapijskim i velikim dok je drugi dio bio fleksibilan i u formi prečke se uv-
ulaznim vratima. Ti ključevi su bili naglašeno većih lačio u fiksni dio, čime su se vrata zatvarala. Fleksibil-
dimenzija. Neki primjerci su imali oblik sidra (T. 12, ni dio mogao je biti stavljen sa strane ili je, ako je fik-
sl. 1-7. 9), dok su neki imali dva zupca sa strane (T. 12, sni dio bio otvoren u gornjem dijelu, postavljen odoz-
sl. 8). Četiri primjerka služila su za otvaranje velikih go prema dolje (T. 21, sl. 3, T. 22, sl. 4. 16). Prisustvo
brava Drehschloss ili Vorhängeschloss tipa. Ovi ključe- brave tipa Schiebschloss potvrđuju i nalazi zasuna – el-
vi (T. 13, sl. 1-4) poznati su u literaturi pod nazivom emenata koji su bili sastavni dio mehanizma ovog tipa
Vexirschlüssel. Zanimljive primjere predstavljaju i kl- brave (T. 23). Zupci glave ključa prihvatali su zasun
jučevi jednostavne izrade sa savijenom glavom (T. 13, prilikom otključavanja dodirujući udubljenja u obliku
sl. 6. 7), s dva (T. 13, sl. 8), ili tri zuba (T. 13, sl. 9), četvrtastih, srcolikih, trokutastih i okruglih profilaci-
te primjerak rađen u pozlati (T. 13, sl. 11). U man- ja ili ulegnuća u obliku svastike. Vrlo reprezentativne
ju skupinu mogu se uvrstiti atipični ključevi (T. 14). primjere drški s bogatijih ulaznih vrata oblika ljudskih
Ovi ključevi, iako oblika koji podsjeća na recentnije ili glava lavova (T. 24) te čitavih ženskih figura zabil-
primjerke, pripadaju rimskodobnim. Osnovni razlog ježeni su također u muzejskim institucijama u Bos-
ovakve determinacije je činjenica da su pronađeni ni i Hercegovini. Analogni primjeri diljem Rimskog
na lokalitetima potvrđene rimske provenijencije, Carstva potvrđuju hronološku determinaciju naših
kao i komparativni primjerci pronađeni također na predmeta. Dva do sada nepublicirana primjera žel-
rimskim lokalitetima. Posebna kategorija metalnih jezne ograde, vjerovatno od kapije s lokaliteta Mog-
dijelova vrata predstavljaju baglame (T. 15-17). Os- orjelo, također predstavljaju metalnu opremu (T. 25).
novna funkcija baglama jest da drže vrata i povezuju
Ovi fragmenti po svojim većim dimenzijama vjero-
štokove s vratima. Na ovaj način olakšavaju upotre-
vatno pripadaju dijelu ograde ili kapije, ali nije iskl-
bu vrata. U odnosu na konstrukcijske karakteristke
jučena ni mogućnost da je riječ o kovanim dijelovima
baglame mogu biti sastavljene iz dva odvojena dijela
namještaja ili dijelovima zaprežnih kola. U posljednju
od kojeg jedan dio ima trn, a drugi čašicu ili kružni
grupu metalnih dijelova vrata mogu se uvrstiti halke
otvor na koje je prvi dio stavljan (T. 15, sl. 1. 2. 9. 10.
od vrata koje su zabilježene u nekoliko slučajeva (T.
11, T. 16, sl. 2. 5, T. 17, sl. 1. 2. 6). Druga vrsta baglama
26). Ovi primjerci mogli su podjednako služiti kako
podrazumijeva primjerke koji su imali oba dijela pov-
za velika ulazna vrata i kapije, tako i u slučajevima ot-
ezana u formi zatvorenih halki, koje su se za štokove
i vrata povezivali nitnama i ekserima (T. 15, sl. 4. 5. 6. varanja škrinja, sanduka i dijelova namještaja.
7. 8, T. 16, sl. 6. 7). Treća skupina baglama predstav-
lja primjerke koji su podsjećali na oblik slova U ili O
te su oštrim špicastim krajevima bili pričvršćivani na
štokove i ivice vrata (T. 15, sl. 12. 13. 14, T. 16, sl. 8. 9.
10, T. 17, sl. 3. 5). Znatan broj primjeraka definiranih
Katalog
kao baglame mogao je imati i dvojaku namjenu. Osim
kao baglame, mogli su služiti i kao dio zaprežnih kola Antropomorfni ključevi
(T. 15, sl. 7. 8), konjske opreme (T. 16, sl. 1), nosača
arhitektonskih dijelova (T. 15, sl. 1. 2. 9. 10), nosača 1. Inv. br. 3134 (T. 1, sl. 1). Lokalitet: Mogorjelo,
izolacionih ploča (T. 17, sl. 1. 2) i slično. Na prostoru Čapljina. Opis: antropomorfni željezni ključ,
današnje Bosne i Hercegovine pronađeno je i neko- pločast. Dimenzije: visina 9 cm. Literatura: nepu-
liko ostataka rimskih brava i lokota (T. 18). Primjeri blicirano.
koji su imali limena pera za blokiranje su predstavljali 2. Inv. br. 483 (T. 1, sl. 2). Lokalitet: Mosko, Bileća.
katance (T. 18, sl. 4. 5). U kontekstu brava na pod- Opis: antropomorfni željezni ključ, pločast. Di-
ručju naše zemlje pronađeno je i više oplata od brava menzije: visina 6,2 cm. Literatura: nepublicirano.
(T. 19. 20), koji su se nalazili na vanjskoj strani brave 3. Inv. br. 761 (T. 1, sl. 3). Lokalitet: Šipovljani,
pričvršćeni na drvenu podlogu. Uloga oplate bila je Bosanski Petrovac. Opis: antropomorfni željezni
da zaštiti bravu prilikom svakodnevnog korištenja. ključ, pločast, drška postavljena okomito u odno-
U odnosu na oblik, materijal i dimenzije razlikujemo su na donji dio. Dimenzije: visina 6,5 cm. Litera-
željezne, bronzane i srebrene, okrugle, četvrtaste, ve- tura: nepublicirano.
like i male oplate. Srebreni primjerci manjih dimenzi- 4. Inv. br. 976 (T. 1, sl. 4). Lokalitet: Bosna i Herce-
ja (T. 20, sl. 1. 4. 5) korišteni su za male bravice škrinja govina. Opis: antropomorfni željezni ključ, pločast.
i malih kutija, dok su veće željezne oplate služile za Dimenzije: visina 4,6 cm. Literatura: nepublicirano.
velike brave ulaznih vrata. Sastavni dio vrata i sistema 5. Inv. br. 764 (T. 1, sl. 5). Lokalitet: Vojkovići, Sara-
zaključavanja bile su i reze (Tab. 21. 22). Ovaj je meh- jevo. Opis: antropomorfni željezni ključ, pločast.

134
 Dimenzije: visina 6,6 cm. Literatura: Fiala 1893, 19. Inv. br. 6339 (T. 2, sl. 5). Lokalitet: Japra-
327, sl. 22. Majdanište. Opis: željezni ključ, grublje izrade,
6. Inv. br. 808 (T. 1, sl. 6). Lokalitet: Gorica, Ljubuški. oštećene površine. Dimenzije: visina 10,6 cm. Li-
Opis: antropomorfni željezni ključ, pločast. Di- teratura: nepublicirano.
menzije: visina 7,4 cm. Literatura: Patsch 1902, 78, 20. Inv. br. 6354 (T. 2, sl. 6). Lokalitet: Japra-
sl. 10. Majdanište. Opis: željezni ključ, oštećen. Dimen-
7. Inv. br. 901 (T. 1, sl. 7). Lokalitet: Velika Kladuša. zije: visina 7,7 cm. Literatura: nepublicirano.
Opis: antropomorfni željezni ključ, pločast. Di- 21. Inv. br. 6730 (T. 2, sl. 7). Lokalitet: Kastrum, Do-
menzije: visina 7 cm. Literatura: nepublicirano. boj. Opis: željezni ključ, oštećen. Dimenzije: visina
8. Inv. br. 3487 (T. 1, sl. 8). Lokalitet: Mogorjelo, 6 cm. Literatura: nepublicirano.
Čapljina. Opis: antropomorfni željezni ključ, 22. Inv. br. 2871 (T. 2, sl. 8). Lokalitet: Višići, Čapljina.
pločast. Dimenzije: visina 9 cm. Literatura: nepu- Opis: željezni ključ s oštećenom kružnom perfo-
blicirano. racijom na kraju pločaste drške. Dimenzije: visina
9. Inv. br. nepoznato (T. 1, sl. 9). Lokalitet: Panik, 7,6 cm. Literatura: Čremošnik 1965, 198.
23. Inv. br. 195 (T. 2, sl. 9). Lokalitet: Stolac. Opis:
Bileća. Opis: željezni ključ antropomorfnog izgle-
bronzani ključ s kružnom perforacijom na kraju
da; vidljiva sva četiri ekstremiteta; na gornjem dije-
pločaste drške. Dimenzije: visina 3,7 cm. Literatu-
lu kružno-prstenasto rješenje. Dimenzije: visina 8,6
ra: Fiala / Patsch 1895, 278, sl. 99.
cm. Literatura: Čremošnik 1976, 126, T. XXV, 8.
24. Inv. br. 395 (T. 2, sl. 10). Lokalitet: Bosna i Herce-
10. Inv. br. 997 (T. 1, sl. 10). Lokalitet: Bosna i Her-
govina. Opis: bronzani ključ s kružnom perforaci-
cegovina. Opis: antropomorfni željezni ključ, jom na kraju pločaste drške. Dimenzije: visina 6,5
pločast. Dimenzije: visina 6,6 cm. Literatura: ne- cm. Literatura: nepublicirano.
publicirano. 25. Inv. br. 1021 (T. 2, sl. 11). Lokalitet: Glogovac, Ja-
11. Inv. br. 1032 (T. 1, sl. 11). Lokalitet: Livanjsko pol- jce. Opis: željezni ključ s kružnom perforacijom
je. Opis: antropomorfni željezni ključ, pločast. Di- na kraju pločaste drške; na ključu vidljivi ukrasni
menzije: visina 6,5 cm. Literatura: Mandić 1935, detalji u obliku poprečnih i kosih urezanih duplih
14, sl. 4. linija. Dimenzije: visina 10 cm. Literatura: nepu-
12. Inv. br. 1083 (T. 1, sl. 12). Lokalitet: Debelo brdo, blicirano.
Sarajevo. Opis: antropomorfni bronzani ključ, 26. Inv. br. 6725 (T. 3, sl. 1). Lokalitet: Kastrum, Do-
pločast. Dimenzije: visina 8,9 cm. Literatura: ne- boj. Opis: željezni ključ oštećene gornje kružne
publicirano. perforacije na drški. Dimenzije: visina 8 cm. Lite-
13. Inv. br. 217 (T. 1 sl. 13). Lokalitet: Gradac, Posušje. ratura: Čremošnik 1984, 46.
Opis: antropomorfni željezni ključ, pločast. Di- 27. Inv. br. 6733 (T. 3, sl. 2). Lokalitet: Kastrum, Do-
menzije: visina 8,6 cm. Literatura: Fiala / Patsch boj. Opis: željezni ključ s kružnom perforacijom
1895, 265, sl. 40. na kraju pločaste drške. Dimenzije: visina 7,2 cm.
14. Inv. br. 5676 (T. 1, sl. 14). Lokalitet: Mušići, Literatura: Čremošnik 1984, 46.
Višegrad. Opis: antropomorfni željezni ključ. Di- 28. Inv. br. 6735 (T. 3, sl. 3). Lokalitet: Kastrum, Do-
menzije: dužina 5,5 cm. Literatura: Čremošnik boj. Opis: željezni ključ s kružnom perforacijom
1970, T. IV, sl. 8. na kraju pločaste drške. Dimenzije: visina 7,6 cm.
Literatura: Čremošnik 1984, 46.
Klasični ključevi 29. Inv. br. 6735/a (T. 3, sl. 4). Lokalitet: Kastrum, Do-
boj. Opis: željezni ključ s kružnom perforacijom
15. Inv. br. 4686 (T. 2, sl. 1). Lokalitet: Kastrum, Do- na kraju pločaste drške. Dimenzije: visina 7 cm.
boj. Opis: bronzani ključ s vidljivim ukrasnim Literatura: Čremošnik 1984, 46.
znakom “X”. Dimenzije: visina 6,7 cm. Literatura: 30. Inv. br. 6735/b (T. 3, sl. 5). Lokalitet: Kastrum, Do-
Čremošnik 1984, 74, T. III, 2. boj. Opis: željezni ključ s kružnom perforacijom
16. Inv. br. 5747 (T. 2, sl. 2). Lokalitet: Japra-Majdanište. na kraju pločaste drške. Dimenzije: visina 6,9 cm.
Opis: bronzani ključ, oštećene površine. Dimenzi- Literatura: Čremošnik 1984, 46.
je: visina 5 cm. Literatura: Basler 1977, T. V, sl. 2. 31. Inv. br. 6709, pogrešan inventarni broj (T. 3, sl. 6).
17. Inv. br. 5772 (T. 2, sl. 3). Lokalitet: Japra- Lokalitet: Kastrum, Doboj. Opis: željezni ključ s
Majdanište. Opis: oštećeni željezni ključ. Dimen- kružnom perforacijom na kraju pločaste drške.
zije: visina 8,3 cm. Literatura: nepublicirano. Dimenzije: visina 6 cm. Literatura: nepublicirano.
18. Inv. br. 5746 (T. 2, sl. 4). Lokalitet: Japra- 32. Inv. br. 6709/a (T. 3, sl. 7). Lokalitet: Kastrum, Do-
Majdanište. Opis: bronzani ključ bez ukrasa. Di- boj. Opis: željezni ključ s kružnom perforacijom
menzije: visina 6,3 cm. Literatura: Basler 1977, T. na kraju pločaste drške. Dimenzije: visina 7 cm.
V, sl. 3. Literatura: nepublicirano.

135
33. Inv. br. 6709/b (T. 3, sl. 8). Lokalitet: Kastrum, 47. Inv. br. 3667 (T. 4, sl. 7). Lokalitet: Višići, Čapljina.
Doboj. Opis: željezni ključ s oštećenom kružnom Opis: željezni ključ s oštećenom kružnom perfo-
perforacijom na kraju pločaste drške. Dimenzije: racijom na kraju pločaste drške. Dimenzije: visina
visina 5 cm. Literatura: nepublicirano. 9,5 cm. Literatura: nepublicirano.
34. Inv. br. 1961 (T. 3, sl. 9). Lokalitet: Mogorjelo, 48. Inv. br. 4698 (T. 4, sl. 8. 8a). Lokalitet: Kastrum,
Čapljina. Opis: željezni ključ s kružnom perfora- Doboj. Opis: bronzani ključ s kružnom perfora-
cijom na kraju pločaste drške. Dimenzije: visina cijom na kraju pločaste drške; na vrhu završetak
4,6 cm. Literatura: nepublicirano. u obliku krova na dvije vode. Dimenzije: visina 6
35. Inv. br. 6743 (T. 3, sl. 10). Lokalitet: Kastrum, Do- cm. Literatura: Čremošnik 1984, 75, T. IV, 9.
boj. Opis: bronzani ključ s kružnom perforacijom 49. Inv. br. 1019 (T. 4, sl. 9). Lokalitet: Grkovci, Li-
na kraju pločaste drške. Dimenzije: visina 5,8 cm. vanjsko polje. Opis: bronzani ključ s kružnom per-
Literatura: Čremošnik 1984, 75, T. IV, 1. foracijom na kraju pločaste drške; na tijelu vidljivi
36. Inv. br. 753 (T. 3, sl. 11). Lokalitet: Narona, Vid. ukrasni detalji u obliku poprečnih kanelura. Di-
Opis: bronzani ključ s kružnom perforacijom na menzije: visina 4,2 cm. Literatura: nepublicirano.
kraju pločaste drške. Dimenzije: visina 4 cm. Lite- 50. Inv. br. 1038 (T. 4, sl. 10). Lokalitet: Amajlije, Bijel-
ratura: nepublicirano. jina. Opis: bronzani ključ s kružnom perforacijom
37. Inv. br. 697, pogrešan broj (T. 3, sl. 12). Lokalitet: na kraju pločaste drške. Dimenzije: visina 6 cm.
Proboj, Ljubuški. Opis: željezni ključ s kružnom Literatura: nepublicirano.
perforacijom na kraju pločaste drške. Dimenzije: 51. Inv. br. 396 (T. 4, sl. 11). Lokalitet: Bosna i Herce-
visina 8,2 cm. Literatura: Fiala 1897, 164. govina. Opis: bronzani ključ s kružnom perforaci-
38. Inv. br. 3670 (T. 3, sl. 13). Lokalitet: Višići, Čapljina. jom na kraju pločaste drške. Dimenzije: visina 3,6
Opis: željezni ključ s kružnom perforacijom na cm. Literatura: nepublicirano.
kraju pločaste drške. Dimenzije: visina 6,6 cm. Li- 52. Inv. br. 1690 (T. 4, sl. 12). Lokalitet: Mogorjelo,
teratura: Čremošnik 1965, 198. Čapljina. Opis: bronzani ključ s oštećenim gorn-
39. Inv. br. 3670/a (T. 3, sl. 14). Lokalitet: Višići, jim dijelom. Dimenzije: visina 7, 3 cm. Literatura:
Čapljina. Opis: željezni ključ s kružnom perfora- nepublicirano.
cijom na kraju pločaste drške. Dimenzije: visina 53. Inv. br. 4695 (T. 5, sl. 1). Lokalitet: Kastrum, Do-
8,6 cm. Literatura: Čremošnik 1965, 198. boj. Opis: željezni ključ s kružnom perforacijom
40. Inv. br. 4794 (T. 3, sl. 15). Lokalitet: Zecovi, Prije- na kraju pločaste drške. Dimenzije: visina 6,5 cm.
dor. Opis: željezni ključ s kružnom perforacijom Literatura: Čremošnik 1984, 46.
na kraju pločaste drške. Dimenzije: visina 10,7 cm. 54. Inv. br. 4674 (T. 5, sl. 2). Lokalitet: Kastrum, Do-
Literatura: nepublicirano. boj. Opis: željezni ključ s kružnom perforacijom
41. Inv. br. 4863 (T. 4, sl. 1). Lokalitet: Zecovi, Prije- na kraju pločaste drške. Dimenzije: visina 8 cm.
dor. Opis: željezni ključ s kružnom perforacijom Literatura: nepublicirano.
na kraju pločaste drške. Dimenzije: visina 10 cm. 55. Inv. br. 4675 (T. 5, sl. 3). Lokalitet: Kastrum, Do-
Literatura: nepublicirano. boj. Opis: željezni ključ s kružnom perforacijom
42. Inv. br. 4859 (T. 4, sl. 2). Lokalitet: Zecovi, Prije- na kraju pločaste drške. Dimenzije: visina 7,4 cm.
dor. Opis: željezni ključ s kružnom perforacijom Literatura: Čremošnik 1984, 46.
na kraju pločaste drške. Dimenzije: visina 8,1 cm. 56. Inv. br. 451 (T. 5, sl. 4). Lokalitet: Mostar. Opis:
Literatura: nepublicirano. bronzani ključ s kružnom perforacijom na kraju
43. Inv. br. 4860 (T. 4, sl. 3). Lokalitet: Zecovi, Pri- pločaste drške. Dimenzije: visina 5,3 cm. Literatu-
jedor. Opis: željezni ključ s oštećenom kružnom ra: nepublicirano.
perforacijom na kraju pločaste drške. Dimenzije: 57. Inv. br. 352 (T. 5, sl. 5). Lokalitet: Grude, Ljubuški.
visina 8,2 cm. Literatura: nepublicirano. Opis: bronzani ključ s gornjim dijelom koji nedo-
44. Inv. br. 4671 (T. 4, sl. 4). Lokalitet: Kastrum, Do- staje. Dimenzije: visina 3,7 cm. Literatura: nepu-
boj. Opis: željezni ključ s oštećenom kružnom blicirano.
perforacijom na kraju pločaste drške. Dimenzije: 58. Inv. br. 696 (T. 5, sl. 6). Lokalitet: Proboj, Ljubuški.
visina 7 cm. Literatura: Čremošnik 1984, 46. Opis: željezni ključ s kružnom perforacijom na
45. Inv. br. 4877 (T. 4, sl. 5). Lokalitet: Zecovi, Pri- kraju pločaste drške. Dimenzije: visina 7 cm. Lite-
jedor. Opis: željezni ključ s oštećenom kružnom ratura: Fiala 1897, 164.
perforacijom na kraju pločaste drške. Dimenzije: 59. Inv. br. 216 (T. 5, sl. 7). Lokalitet: Gradac, Posušje.
visina 8 cm. Literatura: nepublicirano. Opis: bronzani ključ s kružnom perforacijom na
46. Inv. br. 6710 (T. 4, sl. 6). Lokalitet: Kastrum, Do- kraju pločaste drške. Dimenzije: visina 6,6 cm. Li-
boj. Opis: bronzani ključ s kružnom perforacijom teratura: Fiala / Patsch 1895, 265, sl. 39.
na kraju pločaste drške. Dimenzije: visina 7 cm. 60. Inv. br. 700 (T. 5, sl. 8). Lokalitet: Proboj, Ljubuški.
Literatura: Čremošnik 1984, 46. Opis: bronzani ključ s kružnom perforacijom na

136
 kraju pločaste drške. Dimenzije: visina 4,6 cm. Li- 72. Inv. br. neinventarizirano (T. 6, sl. 9). Lokalitet:
teratura: Fiala 1897, 165. Žabljak, Višegrad. Opis: željezni ključ korodiran;
61. Inv. br. nepoznato (T. 5, sl. 9). Lokalitet: Tutnjevac, od glave prema gornjem dijelu se širi; na vrhu
Bijeljina. Opis: bronzani ključ sa šest poprečnih li- kružna perforacija. Dimenzije: nepoznato. Litera-
nija u tri para na tijelu; na vrhu ključa završetak u tura: Čremošnik 1970, 106, T. V, sl. 5.
formi krova na dvije vode; ispod se nalazi kružna 73. Inv. br. neinventarizirano (T. 6, sl. 10). Lokalitet:
perforacija. Dimenzije: dužina 9,3 cm. Literatura: Žabljak, Višegrad. Opis: željezni ključ korodiran;
Čremošnik 1958, 44. iznad glave vrat, nakon čega se tijelo naglo širi u
62. Inv. br. nepoznato (T. 5, sl. 10). Lokalitet: Tutnje- obliku pravougaonika; na vrhu kružna perforacija;
vac, Bijeljina. Opis: željezni ključ s teže vidljivim ključ ukrašen nielo tehnikom. Dimenzije: nepoz-
ukrasnim detaljima u dnu, oblika linije, slova Z nato. Literatura: Čremošnik 1970, 106, T. V, sl. 7.
i oznake X; ključ se prema vrhu postepeno širi; 74. Inv. br. neinventarizirano (T. 6, sl. 11). Lokalitet:
na samom vrhu kružna perforacija. Dimenzije: Žabljak, Višegrad. Opis: željezni ključ korodiran;
nepoznate. Literatura: Čremošnik 1958, T. V, sl. 5. od glave prema gornjem dijelu se širi; na vrhu
63. Inv. br. nepoznato (T. 5, sl. 11). Lokalitet: Maklje- kružna perforacija. Dimenzije: nepoznato. Litera-
novac, Kastrum, Doboj. Opis: bronzani ključ s na- tura: Čremošnik 1970, 106, T. V, sl. 6.
rebrenim stranama na kružnom otvoru; na vrhu 75. Inv. br. 1687 (T. 7, sl. 1). Lokalitet: Mogorjelo,
kružnog otvora stepeničasto ispupčenje; drška se Čapljina. Opis: željezni ključ s kružnom perfora-
postepeno sužava; na glavi četiri zupca; u donjem cijom na kraju pločaste drške. Dimenzije: visina
dijelu ključa ukrasni detalji u vidu poprečnih li- 7,3 cm. Literatura: nepublicirano.
nija. Dimenzije: visina 5,4 cm. Literatura: Žigić 76. Inv. br. 1533 (T. 7, sl. 2). Lokalitet: Mogorjelo,
2017, 135. Čapljina. Opis: željezni ključ s kružnom perfora-
64. Inv. br. 758 (T. 6, sl. 1). Lokalitet: Klobuk, Ljubuški. cijom na kraju pločaste drške; na vrhu drške tro-
Opis: bronzani ključ s kružnom perforacijom na kutast oblik. Dimenzije: visina 12 cm. Literatura:
kraju pločaste drške; na dršci vidljivi ukrasni de- nepublicirano.
talji u obliku urezanih znakova X. Dimenzije: visi- 77. Inv. br. 1526 (T. 7, sl. 3). Lokalitet: Mogorjelo,
na 9 cm. Literatura: nepublicirano. Čapljina. Opis: željezni ključ s kružnom perfora-
65. Inv. br. 196 (T. 6, sl. 2). Lokalitet: Stolac. Opis: cijom na kraju pločaste drške. Dimenzije: visina
bronzani ključ s kružnom perforacijom na kraju 9,9 cm. Literatura: nepublicirano.
pločaste drške. Dimenzije: visina 5,6 cm. Literatu- 78. Inv. br. 1525 (T. 7, sl. 4). Lokalitet: Mogorjelo,
ra: Fiala 1893, 516; Fiala / Patsch 1895, 278, sl. 100. Čapljina. Opis: željezni ključ s oštećenom kružnom
66. Inv. br. 718 (T. 6, sl. 3). Lokalitet: Usora, Tešanj. perforacijom na kraju pločaste drške. Dimenzije:
Opis: bronzani ključ s oštećenim gornjim dijelom. visina 7,5 cm. Literatura: nepublicirano.
Dimenzije: visina 3,7 cm. Literatura: nepublicirano. 79. Inv. br. 2113 (T. 7, sl. 5). Lokalitet: Čučkovića kula.
67. Inv. br. 712 (T. 6, sl. 4). Lokalitet: Usora, Tešanj. Opis: bronzani ključ s kružnom perforacijom na
Opis: željezni ključ s kružnom perforacijom na kraju pločaste drške. Dimenzije: visina 7,4 cm. Li-
kraju pločaste drške. Dimenzije: visina 9,6 cm. Li- teratura: nepublicirano.
teratura: Radimsky 1893, 268, sl. 16. 80. Inv. br. 3630 (T. 7, sl. 6). Lokalitet: Mogorjelo,
68. Inv. br. 812 (T. 6, sl. 5). Lokalitet: Gradac, Neum. Čapljina. Opis: željezni ključ s kružnom perfora-
Opis: bronzani ključ s kružnom perforacijom na cijom na kraju pločaste drške; na vrhu drške tro-
kraju pločaste drške; na vrhu trokutasti oblik. Di- kutast oblik. Dimenzije: visina 9,4 cm. Literatura:
menzije: visina 5,3 cm. Literatura: nepublicirano. nepublicirano.
69. Inv. br. 876 (T. 6, sl. 6). Lokalitet: Proboj, Ljubuški. 81. Inv. br. 2385 (T. 7, sl. 7). Lokalitet: Lisičići, Kon-
Opis: bronzani ključ s kružnom perforacijom na jic. Opis: željezni ključ s kružnom perforacijom na
kraju pločaste drške. Dimenzije: visina 6,5 cm. Li- kraju pločaste drške; na vrhu drške trokutast oblik.
teratura: Fiala 1897, 163. Dimenzije: visina 7,5 cm. Literatura: Čremošnik
70. Inv. br. 877 (T. 6, sl. 7). Lokalitet: Proboj, Ljubuški. 1957, 152.
Opis: bronzani ključ s kružnom perforacijom na 82. Inv. br. 2322 (T. 7, sl. 8). Lokalitet: Lisičići, Kon-
kraju pločaste drške. Dimenzije: visina 5,3 cm. Li- jic. Opis: željezni ključ s kružnom perforacijom na
teratura: Fiala 1897, 163. kraju pločaste drške; na vrhu drške trokutast oblik.
71. Inv. br. 5820 (T. 6, sl. 8). Lokalitet: Japra- Dimenzije: visina 13 cm. Literatura: Čremošnik
Majdanište. Opis: bronzani ključ s kružnom per- 1955, 115, sl. 7.
foracijom na kraju pločaste drške; na kružnom ot- 83. Inv. br. 2393 (T. 7, sl. 9). Lokalitet: Klobuk. Opis:
voru pričvršćen lanac. Dimenzije: visina ključa 4,7 željezni ključ s oštećenom kružnom perforacijom
cm, dužina lanca 11 cm. Literatura: Basler 1977, T. na kraju pločaste drške. Dimenzije: visina 7,2 cm.
V, sl. 1. Literatura: Sergejevski 1954, T. XIV.

137
84. Inv. br. 2487 (T. 7, sl. 10). Lokalitet: Mogorjelo, 97. Inv. br. 2035 (T. 9, sl. 3). Lokalitet: Mogorjelo,
Čapljina. Opis: željezni ključ s kružnom perfora- Čapljina. Opis: željezni ključ s kružnom perfora-
cijom na kraju pločaste drške. Dimenzije: visina cijom na kraju pločaste drške. Dimenzije: visina
7,6 cm. Literatura: nepublicirano. 8,9 cm. Literatura: nepublicirano.
85. Inv. br. 2488 (T. 8, sl. 1). Lokalitet: Mogorjelo, 98. Inv. br. 2015 (T. 9, sl. 4). Lokalitet: Mogorje-
Čapljina. Opis: željezni ključ s kružnom perfora- lo, Čapljina. Opis: željezni ključ s oštećenom
cijom na kraju pločaste drške. Dimenzije: visina kružnom perforacijom na kraju pločaste drške.
7,7 cm. Literatura: nepublicirano. Dimenzije: visina 9 cm. Literatura: nepublicirano.
86. Inv. br. 2490 (T. 8, sl. 2). Lokalitet: Mogorjelo, 99. Inv. br. 1529 (T. 9, sl. 5). Lokalitet: Mogorjelo,
Čapljina. Opis: željezni ključ s kružnom perfora- Čapljina. Opis: željezni ključ s kružnom perfora-
cijom na kraju pločaste drške. Dimenzije: visina cijom na kraju pločaste drške. Dimenzije: visina 6
10,6 cm. Literatura: nepublicirano. cm. Literatura: nepublicirano.
87. Inv. br. 2544 (T. 8, sl. 3). Lokalitet: Mala Ruiška. 100. Inv. br. neinventarizirano (T. 9, sl. 6). Lokali-
Opis: željezni ključ s kružnom perforacijom na tet: Zecovi, Prijedor. Opis: Veći željezni ključ s
kraju pločaste drške. Dimenzije: visina 8,3 cm. Li- pločastom drškom i kružnom perforacijom na
teratura: Skarić 1928, Taf. VIII, sl. 15. vrhu; na glavi dva zupca. Dimenzije: nepoznate.
88. Inv. br. 2765 (T. 8, sl. 4). Lokalitet: Mogorjelo, Literatura: Benac 1956, 149, sl. 11.
Čapljina. Opis: željezni ključ s kružnom perfora- 101. Inv. br. neinventarizirano (T. 9, sl. 7). Lokalitet:
cijom na kraju pločaste drške. Dimenzije: visina nepoznat. Opis: željezni klasični ključ s užim
9,3 cm. Literatura: nepublicirano. donjim dijelom i širim gornjim dijelom drške;
89. Inv. br. 2646 (T. 8, sl. 5). Lokalitet: Mogorjelo, na vrhu kružna perforacija; na glavi četiri zupca.
Čapljina. Opis: željezni ključ s kružnom perfora- Dimenzije: nepoznate. Literatura: nepublicirano.
cijom na kraju pločaste drške; u donjem širem di- 102. Inv. br. neinventarizirano (T. 9, sl. 8). Lokalitet:
jelu vidljivi ukrasni detalji u obliku poprečne dvije Putičevo, Travnik. Opis: željezni ključ jednosta-
urezane linije. Dimenzije: visina 12 cm. Literatura: van; na glavi četiri zupca. Dimenzije: nepoznate.
nepublicirano. Literatura: Truhelka 1893, 694, sl. 10.
90. Inv. br. 2160 (T. 8, sl. 6). Lokalitet: Lepenica, Kisel- 103. Inv. br. neinventarizirano (T. 9, sl. 9). Lokalitet:
jak. Opis: željezni ključ s kružnom perforacijom Putičevo, Travnik. Opis: željezni ključ jednosta-
na kraju pločaste drške. Dimenzije: visina 11,7 cm. van; na glavi tri zupca. Dimenzije: nepoznate.
Literatura: nepublicirano. Literatura: Truhelka 1893, 694, sl. 11.
91. Inv. br. 1531 (T. 8, sl. 7). Lokalitet: Mogorje- 104. Inv. br. neinventarizirano (T. 9, sl. 10). Lokalitet:
lo, Čapljina. Opis: željezni ključ s oštećenom Varošluk, Travnik. Opis: željezni ključ pločaste
kružnom perforacijom na kraju pločaste drške. drške s kružnim završetkom na vrhu; na dijelu
Dimenzije: visina 9 cm. Literatura: nepublicirano. koji ide prema glavi drška iz pločastog širokog
92. Inv. br. 1532 (T. 8, sl. 8). Lokalitet: Mogorje- oblika prelazi u uži dio. Dimenzije: nepoznate.
lo, Čapljina. Opis: željezni ključ s oštećenom Literatura: Truhelka 1893, 699.
kružnom perforacijom na kraju pločaste drške. 105. Inv. br. nepoznato (T. 10, sl. 1). Lokalitet: Panik,
Dimenzije: visina 6 cm. Literatura: nepublicirano. Bileća. Opis: bronzani ključ koji se od glave pre-
93. Inv. br. 1530 (T. 8, sl. 9). Lokalitet: Mogorjelo, ma vrhu širi; na vrhu prstenasti završetak; na ti-
Čapljina. Opis: željezni ključ s kružnom perfo- jelu ukrasni detalji u vidu poprečnih linija i zna-
racijom na kraju pločaste drške; na pločastom ka X; na glavi pet zubaca. Dimenzije: visina 5,3
središnjem dijelu ključa vidljivi tragovi poprečnih cm. Literatura: Čremošnik 1976, 96, T. XII, sl. 3.
linija. Dimenzije: visina 9,5 cm. Literatura: nepu- 106. Inv. br. nepoznato (T. 10, sl. 2). Lokalitet: Panik,
blicirano. Bileća. Opis: željezni ključ s glavom koja ima
94. Inv. br. 1528 (T. 8, sl. 10). Lokalitet: Mogorjelo, rješenje u formi savijenog vrha; na užem vratu
Čapljina. Opis: željezni ključ s oštećenom kružnom naglo se širi tijelo koje se opet postupno sužava
perforacijom na kraju pločaste drške. Dimenzije: prema prstenastom vrhu; na glavi postoje i dva
visina 5,2 cm. Literatura: nepublicirano. zupca. Dimenzije: visina 10,5 cm. Literatura:
95. Inv. br. 1689 (T. 9, sl. 1). Lokalitet: Zecovi, Prijedor. Čremošnik 1976, T. XXV, sl. 3.
Opis: Oštećeni željezni ključ, nedostaje gornji dio; 107. Inv. br. nepoznato (T. 10, sl. 3). Lokalitet: Panik,
korozija oštetila veći dio ključa. Dimenzije: dužina Bileća. Opis: željezni ključ s tri zupca; od glave se
6,5 cm. Literatura: Čremošnik 1956, 142-143. vrat naglo širi prema vrhu, da bi se opet postup-
96. Inv. br. 1534 (T. 9, sl. 2). Lokalitet: Mogorjelo, no sužavao; na vrhu prstenasto rješenje. Dimen-
Čapljina. Opis: željezni ključ bez gornjeg dijela. Di- zije: visina 7,5 cm. Literatura: Čremošnik 1976,
menzije: visina 4,2 cm. Literatura: nepublicirano. T. XXV, sl. 4.

138
108. Inv. br. nepoznato (T. 10, sl. 4). Lokalitet: Panik, 119. Inv. br. 876 (T. 11, sl. 2). Lokalitet: Beirut. Opis:
Bileća. Opis: željezni ključ s tri zupca; uski vrat bronzani prsten s pločastom četvrtastom gla-
naglo se širi prema vrhu koji ima kružnu formu; vom ključa, horizontalno postavljen. Dimenzije:
na tijelu vidljivi ukrasni detalji u obliku dva para prečnik 1,9 cm. Literatura: nepublicirano.
poprečnih linija. Dimenzije: visina 6,2 cm. Lite- 120. Inv. br. 877 (T. 11, sl. 3). Lokalitet: Beirut. Opis:
ratura: Čremošnik 1976, T. XXV, sl. 14. bronzani prsten s pločastom okruglom otvore-
109. Inv. br. nepoznato (T. 10, sl. 5). Lokalitet: Panik, nom glavom, horizontalno postavljenom. Dimen-
Bileća. Opis: željezni ključ s tri zupca i savijenim zije: prečnik 1,9 cm. Literatura: nepublicirano.
krakom; od glave prema vrhu ključ se postepeno 121. Inv. br. neinventarizirano (T. 11, sl. 4). Lokalitet:
širi; na vrhu prstenasto rješenje. Dimenzije: visina nepoznato. Opis: bronzani prsten s pločastom
7,5 cm. Literatura: Čremošnik 1976, T. XXV, sl. 16. četvrtastom glavom, horizontalno postavljenom.
110. Inv. br. nepoznato (T. 10, sl. 6). Lokalitet: Panik, Dimenzije: prečnik 2 cm. Literatura: nepublici-
Bileća. Opis: željezni ključ s četiri zupca; ključ rano.
se od glave prema vrhu postepeno širi; na glavi 122. Inv. br. 541 (T. 11, sl. 5). Lokalitet: Albanija. Opis:
prstenasto rješenje koje ima oktogonalni oblik. bronzani ključ oblika prstena, s tri zupca na gla-
Dimenzije: visina 7 cm. Literatura: Čremošnik vi; glava postavljena okomito u odnosu na obruč.
1976, T. XXV, sl. 11. Dimenzije: prečnik 2 cm, visina 3,2 cm. Literatu-
111. Inv. br. 4794 (T. 10, sl. 7). Lokalitet: Zecovi, Pri- ra: nepublicirano.
jedor. Opis: željezni ključ s tri zupca; na vrhu 123. Inv. br. 3695 (T. 11, sl. 6). Lokalitet: Višići,
prstenasto rješenje. Dimenzije: nepoznate. Lite- Čapljina. Opis: bronzani ključ oblika prstena;
ratura: nepublicirano. glava postavljena okomito u odnosu na obruč.
112. Inv. br. 6431 (T. 10, sl. 8). Lokalitet: Breza. Opis: Dimenzije: prečnik 1,9 cm, visina 3,2 cm. Litera-
željezni ključ koji se nakon vrata naglo širi; na tura: Čremošnik 1965, T. XI, sl. 14.
vrhu kružno prstenasto rješenje. Dimenzije: visi- 124. Inv. br. 2891, pogrešan broj (T. 11, sl. 7). Lo-
na 11,2 cm. Literatura: nepublicirano. kalitet: Višići, Čapljina. Opis: bronzani prsten
113. Inv. br. 7212 (T. 10, sl. 9). Lokalitet: Biograci. ključ s vertikalno postavljenom glavom; na gla-
Opis: željezni dosta korodirani ključ; nakon vra- vi tri zupca. Dimenzije: nepoznate. Literatura:
ta ključ se naglo širi; na vrhu prstenasto rješenje Čremošnik 1965, T. XI, sl. 13.
uokvireno u oktogonalni okvir. Dimenzije: visi- 125. Inv. br. 760 (T. 11, sl. 8). Lokalitet: Drvar. Opis:
na 8,5 cm. Literatura: nepublicirano. željezni ključ oblika prstena; glava postavljena
114. Inv. br. 2034 (T. 10, sl. 10). Lokalitet: Mogorje- okomito u odnosu na obruč. Dimenzije: visina 6
lo, Čapljina. Opis: željezni ključ jako korodiran; cm. Literatura: nepublicirano.
nedostaje gornji dio; nakon užeg vrata ključ se 126. Inv. br. 3891 (T. 11, sl. 9). Lokalitet: Višići,
naglo širi prema vrhu. Dimenzije: nepoznate. Li- Čapljina. Opis: mali bronzani ključ oblika prste-
teratura: nepublicirano. na, bez ukrasnih elemenata; na glavi tri zupca.
115. Inv. br. 2050 (T. 10, sl. 11). Lokalitet: Mogorjelo, Dimenzije: visina 2,9 cm. Literatura: nepublici-
rano.
Čapljina. Opis: željezni korodirani ključ; nakon
127. Inv. br. 4697 (T. 11, sl. 10). Lokalitet: Kastrum,
užeg kratkog vrata ključ se naglo širi; na vrhu
Doboj. Opis: bronzani ključ oblika prstena; glava
kružni otvor i rješenje na dvije vode. Dimenzije:
postavljena okomito u odnosu na obruč. Dimen-
dužina 8,7 cm. Literatura: nepublicirano.
zije: prečnik 1,9 cm, visina 2,7 cm. Literatura:
116. Inv. br. 3905 (T. 10, sl. 12). Lokalitet: Višići,
Čremošnik 1984, 73, T. II, 5.
Čapljina. Opis: željezni ključ vrlo korodiran; ne-
128. Inv. br. 3214 (T. 11, sl. 11). Lokalitet: Mogorje-
dostaje gornji dio. Dimenzije: visina 7 cm. Lite-
lo, Čapljina. Opis: bronzani ključ oblika prstena;
ratura: nepublicirano.
glava s tri zupca postavljena okomito u odnosu
117. Inv. br. 3667 (T. 10, sl. 13). Lokalitet: Višići,
na obruč. Dimenzije: prečnik 2,4 cm, visina 3,6
Čapljina. Opis: željezni loše očuvan ključ s
cm. Literatura: nepublicirano.
oštećenim vrhom. Dimenzije: visina 9,3 cm. Li-
129. Inv. br. 1320, pogrešan broj (T. 11, sl. 12). Lokali-
teratura: nepublicirano.
tet: nepoznat. Opis: bronzani ključ oblika prste-
na; glava s tri zupca postavljena okomito u od-
Prsten ključevi
nosu na obruč. Dimenzije: prečnik 1,3 cm, visina
118. Inv. br. 3790 (T. 11, sl. 1). Lokalitet: Japra, 3,8 cm. Literatura: nepublicirano.
Majdanište. Opis: zlatni prsten s pločicom na 130. Inv. br. 579 (T. 11, sl. 13). Lokalitet: Ljubuški. Opis:
kojoj je prikazan Jupiter Imperator i Viktorija. bronzani ključ oblika prstena, s cilindričnom
Dimenzije: prečnik 2,5 cm, težina 13,4 gr. Litera- glavom horizontalno postavljenom. Dimenzije:
tura: Basler 1977, T. XI, 1. prečnik 2,3 cm. Literatura: nepublicirano.

139
131. Inv. br. 1258 (T. 11, sl. 14). Lokalitet: Ilidža, Sa- 142. Inv. br. 1523 (T. 13, sl. 1). Lokalitet: Mogorje-
rajevo. Opis: bronzani prsten s ključem u obliku lo, Čapljina. Opis: veliki željezni pločasti ključ
trna horizontalno postavljen. Dimenzije: prečnik u obliku nedovršenog pravougaonika; na vrhu
2 cm. Literatura: nepublicirano. kružni završetak; poprečna greda u donjem di-
132. Inv. br. 2138 (T. 11, sl. 15). Lokalitet: Usora, jelu nešto uža; na samoj ivici donjeg dijela dva
Tešanj. Opis: bronzani ključ oblika prstena; hal- kružna otvora. Dimenzije: visina 24 cm. Litera-
ka prstena u obliku na leđima savijene ljudske tura: nepublicirano.
figure. Dimenzije: visina 5,3 cm. Literatura: ne- 143. Inv. br. 282 (T. 13, sl. 2). Lokalitet: Duvno.
publicirano. Opis: veliki željezni pločasti ključ u obliku
nedovršenog praovougaonika; na vrhu kružni
Veliki ključevi završetak; poprečna greda u središnjem dijelu
nešto uža. Dimenzije: visina 21 cm. Literatura:
133. Inv. br. 5677 (T. 12, sl. 1). Lokalitet: Mušići, Patsch 1904, 195, sl. 37.
Višegrad. Opis: veliki pločasti željezni ključ s dva 144. Inv. br. 770 (T. 13, sl. 3). Lokalitet: Podklečani,
savijena kraka i kružnim završetkom na vrhu. Rakitno, Ljubuški. Opis: veliki željezni pločasti
Dimenzije: dužina 17 cm. Literatura: nepublici- ključ; na vrhu kružni završetak; poprečna greda
rano. u donjem dijelu nešto sužena; na kraćem kraku
134. Inv. br. 6358 (T. 12, sl. 2). Lokalitet: Japra, kružni završetak s tri trna. Dimenzije: visina 23,5
Majdanište. Opis: veliki pločasti željezni ključ cm. Literatura: Patsch 1904, 214, sl. 77.
s dva savijena kraka, vrh oštećen. Dimenzije: 145. Inv. br. nepoznato (T. 13, sl. 4). Lokalitet: Panik,
dužina 13 cm. Literatura: Basler 1977, T. I, sl. 9. Bileća. Opis: željezni ključ velikih dimenzija od
135. Inv. br. 1524 (T. 12, sl. 3). Lokalitet: Mogorjelo, velike brave; na pločastom ključu glava savijena
Čapljina. Opis: veliki pločasti željezni ključ s dva u kružnu formu; na vratu postoji uži dio; na vrhu
savijena kraka i kružnim završetkom na vrhu. ključa kružno rješenje. Dimenzije: visina 18 cm.
Dimenzije: dužina 10,6 cm. Literatura: nepubli- Literatura: Čremošnik 1976, 128, T. XXV, sl. 10.
cirano. 146. Inv. br. 2159 (T. 13, sl. 5). Lokalitet: Lepenica,
136. Inv. br. neinventarizirano (T. 12, sl. 4). Lokalitet: Kiseljak. Opis: veliki željezni ključ s kružnim ot-
nepoznat. Opis: željezni ključ većih dimenzija, vorom na vrhu. Dimenzije: dužina 18,5 cm. Lite-
pločastog oblika s dva savijena kraka i kružnim ratura: nepublicirano.
završetkom na vrhu. Dimenzije: nepoznate. Lite- 147. Inv. br. 698 (T. 13, sl. 6). Lokalitet: Proboj,
ratura: nepublicirano. Ljubuški. Opis: željezni ključ s kružnom perfora-
137. Inv. br. 2157 (T. 12, sl. 5). Lokalitet: Lepenica, cijom na vrhu. Dimenzije: dužina 17,3 cm. Lite-
Kiseljak. Opis: veliki pločasti željezni ključ s dva ratura: Fiala 1897, 164.
savijena kraka i kružnim završetkom na vrhu. 148. Inv. br. 6342 (T. 13, sl. 7). Lokalitet: Japra-
Dimenzije: dužina 13,6 cm. Literatura: nepubli- Majdanište. Opis: željezni ključ oštećene
cirano. površine. Dimenzije: visina 10,5 cm. Literatura:
nepublicirano.
138. Inv. br. 2037 (T. 12, sl. 6). Lokalitet: Mogorjelo,
149. Inv. br. neinventarizirano (T. 13, sl. 8). Lokalitet:
Čapljina. Opis: veliki pločasti željezni ključ s dva
Lašva, Travnik. Opis: željezni ključ većih dimen-
savijena kraka i oštećenim kružnim završetkom
zija s debljom pločastom drškom i kružnom per-
na vrhu. Dimenzije: dužina 19,5 cm. Literatura:
foracijom na vrhu, koja je prekinuta; u donjem
nepublicirano.
dijelu drške neznatno proširena; na vrhu glave
139. Inv. br. neinventarizirano (T. 12, sl. 7). Lokali- dva zupca koja su savijena prema naprijed. Di-
tet: Zecovi, Prijedor. Opis: veliki željezni ključ menzije: nepoznate. Literatura: Truhelka 1893,
s drškom, oštećenog vrha; na glavi dva kriva 685-686.
kraka. Dimenzije: nepoznate. Literatura: Benac 150. Inv. br. neinventarizirano (T. 13, sl. 9). Lokalitet:
1956, 149, sl. 18. Debelo Brdo, Sarajevo. Opis: veliki željezni ključ
140. Inv. br. 3150 (T. 12, sl. 8). Lokalitet: Mokro. Opis: s drškom koja je u gornjem dijelu pločasta i na
veliki pločasti željezni ključ s dva savijena kraka vrhu u obliku kružne perforacije; u donjem di-
na jednoj strani; na vrhu kružni završetak. Di- jelu drška nepravilno okruglog presjeka; na glavi
menzije: dužina 13,5 cm. Literatura: nepublicira- tri zupca. Dimenzije: nepoznate. Literatura: Fiala
no. 1894, 121.
141. Inv. br. 3408 (T. 12, sl. 9). Lokalitet: Gradina Veli- 151. Inv. br. 2158 (T. 13, sl. 10). Lokalitet: Lepenica,
ki Badanj, Duvanjsko polje. Opis: željezni ključ s Kiseljak. Opis: željezni ključ s kružnom perfora-
dva kraka, dosta oštećen. Dimenzije: visina 18,6 cijom na kraju pločaste drške. Dimenzije: visina
cm. Literatura: nepublicirano. 16,5 cm. Literatura: nepublicirano.

140
152. Inv. br. 1688 (T. 13, sl. 11). Lokalitet: Mogorje- – gornjeg dijela baglame od vrata. Dimenzije:
lo, Čapljina. Opis: željezni ključ s oštećenom dužina 11,5 cm. Literatura: nepublicirano.
kružnom perforacijom na kraju pločaste drške; 161. Inv. br. 377/a (T. 15, sl. 2). Lokalitet: Lepeni-
na željeznoj površini vidljivi tragovi pozlate. Di- ca, Kiseljak. Opis: željezna baglama nepra-
menzije: visina 13,5 cm. Literatura: nepublicira- vilno četvrtastog presjeka; jedan kraj špicast,
no. predviđen za ukucavanje u štok; drugi kraj po-
Atipični rimski ključevi vijen prema gore, predviđen za stavljanje halke
153. Inv. br. 763 (T. 14, sl. 1). Lokalitet: Narona, Vid. – gornjeg dijela baglame od vrata. Dimenzije:
Opis: željezni ključ s kružnim završetkom u dužina 10 cm. Literatura: nepublicirano.
gornjem dijelu; na vrhu vidljivo zadebljanje; 162. Inv. br. 2861/b (T. 15, sl. 3). Lokalitet: Višići,
ključ cjevast; u donjem dijelu vidljivo oštećenje. Čapljina. Opis: željezni fragment pločastog dijela
Dimenzije: visina 10,5 cm. Literatura: nepublici- baglame s otvorom na jednom kraku. Dimenzije:
rano. visina 12,5 cm. Literatura: nepublicirano.
154. Inv. br. 5668 (T. 14. sl. 2). Lokalitet: Dabravina, 163. Inv. br. 369 a (T. 15, sl. 4). Lokalitet: Lepenica, Ki-
seljak. Opis: željezna baglama s dva pločasta kra-
Vareš. Opis: željezni ključ s velikim kružnim ot-
ka i po tri rupice, predviđene za pričvršćivanje
vorom na vrhu. Dimenzije: visina 5,8 cm. Litera-
na štok i vrata. Dimenzije: dužina 10,5 cm. Lite-
tura: Sergejevski 1956, 31.
ratura: nepublicirano.
155. Inv. br. 2156 (T. 14, sl. 3). Lokalitet: Lepenica,
164. Inv. br. 369 b (T. 15, sl. 5). Lokalitet: Lepenica, Ki-
Kiseljak. Opis: željezni ključ s velikim kružnim
seljak. Opis: željezna baglama s dva pločasta kra-
otvorom na vrhu. Dimenzije: visina 5,6 cm. Lite- ka i po tri rupice, predviđene za pričvršćivanje
ratura: nepublicirano. na štok i vrata. Dimenzije: dužina 11 cm. Litera-
156. Inv. br. 5731 (T. 14, sl. 4). Lokalitet: Japra, tura: nepublicirano.
Majdanište. Opis: bronzani ključ s kružnim ot- 165. Inv. br. 368 (T. 15, sl. 6). Lokalitet: Lepenica, Ki-
vorom u gornjem dijelu; na vrhu vidljiv trn. Di- seljak. Opis: željezna baglama s dva pločasta kra-
menzije: visina 8,6 cm. Literatura: Basler 1977, T. ka i po dvije rupice, predviđene za pričvršćivanje
V, sl. 5. na štok i vrata. Dimenzije: dužina 16,5 cm. Lite-
157. Inv. br. nepoznato (T. 14, sl. 5). Lokalitet: Ilidža, ratura: nepublicirano.
Sarajevo. Opis: željezni ključ s cilindričnim ot- 166. Inv. br. 241 (T. 15, sl. 7). Lokalitet: Gradac,
vorom na vrhu glave; na kraju ključa kružno Posušje. Opis: bronzana okrugla baglama sa
rješenje iznad kojeg je ukrasni element oblika sačuvanim fragmentom druge halke, koja se
broja 8. Dimenzije: visina 7 cm. Literatura: Kell- pričvršćavala na vrata. Dimenzije: prečnik 4 cm.
ner 1895, 175, sl. 23. Literatura: nepublicirano.
158. Inv. br. nepoznato (T. 14, sl. 6). Lokalitet: Žabljak, 167. Inv. br. 242 (T. 15, sl. 8). Lokalitet: Gradac,
Višegrad. Opis: željezni ključ korodiran, većih Posušje. Opis: bronzana okrugla baglama s dvije
dimenzija. Ključ neobičnog oblika s kružnom sačuvane halke za pričvršćavanje na vrata. Di-
perforacijom na vrhu, uskim tijelom oblika šipke menzije: prečnik 4 cm. Literatura: nepublicirano.
koji ima proširenje ispod gornje perforacije; gla- 168. Inv. br. neinventarizirano (T. 15, sl. 9). Lokalitet:
va u obliku okomito postavljene forme, odnosno Zecovi, Prijedor. Opis: željezna baglama oblika
dva kraka koja su savijena tvoreći krug. Dimen- klina, na kojoj je jedna strana u obliku špicastog
zije: nepoznate. Literatura: Čremošnik 1970, vrha za zakivanje u drveni štok, a druga u obli-
106, T. V, sl. 4. ku savijenog kraja, čineći slovo L; na drugi kraj
159. Inv. br. 2686 (T. 14, sl. 7). Lokalitet: Mogorjelo, se aplicirala baglama u obliku halke koja je bila
Čapljina. Opis: željezni ključ s cilindričnom gla- pričvršćena na vrata. Dimenzije: dužina 10,5 cm.
vom i jednim okomito postavljenim zubom; na Literatura: Benac, 1956, 149, sl. 3.
gornjem dijelu ukrasna profilacija; vrh izveden u 169. Inv. br. neinventarizirano (T. 15, sl. 10). Lokali-
obliku oble elipse. Dimenzije: visina 8,2 cm. Li- tet: Zecovi, Prijedor. Opis: željezna baglama na
kojoj je na jednoj strani špicasti dio za zakivanje
teratura: nepublicirano.
na drveni štok, a druga u obliku savijenog kraja
Baglame čini slovo L; na drugi kraj se aplicirala baglama u
obliku halke koja je bila pričvršćena na vrata. Di-
160. Inv. br. 377 (T. 15, sl. 1). Lokalitet: Lepeni- menzije: nepoznate. Literatura: Čremošnik 1956,
ca, Kiseljak. Opis: željezna baglama nepra- 142-143.
vilno četvrtastog presjeke; jedan kraj špicast, 170. Inv. br. neinventarizirano (T. 15, sl. 11). Lokalitet:
predviđen za ukucavanje u štok; drugi kraj po- Debelo brdo, Sarajevo. Opis: željezni predmet,
vijen prema gore, predviđen za stavljanje halke s jedne strane više špicast, s druge strane savi-

141
 jen u krug; prema konstrukciji najvjerovatnije 180. Inv. br. 367/a (T. 16, sl. 7). Lokalitet: Stolac. Opis:
dio baglame koji se učvršćivao na vrata i kroz željezna baglama s tri perforacije na pločastom
okrugli dio pričvršćivao na fiksni dio u štok vra- dijelu za pričvršćivanje na vrata i kružnom hal-
ta. Dimenzije: nepoznate. Literatura: Fiala 1894, kom za pričvršćivanje na fiksni dio. Dimenzije:
122. dužina 13 cm. Literatura: nepublicirano.
171. Inv. br. 5784 (T. 15, sl. 12). Lokalitet: Japra- 181. Inv. br. 6731 (T. 16, sl. 8). Lokalitet: Kastrum,
Majdanište. Opis: željezna jednostavna baglama Doboj. Opis: željezna jednostavna gruba bagla-
u obliku savijenog komada željezne deblje žipke ma, sastavljena iz dva kraka. Dimenzije: dužina
s dva oštra kraka koja su se aplicirala u štok vra- 15 cm. Literatura: Čremošnik 1984, 46.
ta. Dimenzije: nepoznate. Literatura: nepublici- 182. Inv. br. 6726/1 i 2 (T. 16, sl. 9). Lokalitet: Ka-
rano – slučajni nalaz. strum, Doboj. Opis: jednostavna željezna gruba
172. Inv. br. 5802 (T. 15, sl. 13). Lokalitet: Japra-
baglama, sastavljena iz dva kraka. Dimenzije:
Majdanište. Opis: željezna jednostavna baglama
dužina 12 cm jedne i 10 cm druge baglame. Lite-
u obliku savijenog komada željezne deblje šipke s
ratura: Čremošnik 1984, 46.
dva oštra kraka koja su se aplicirala u štok vrata.
183. Inv. br. nepoznato (T. 16, sl. 10). Lokalitet: Ka-
Dimenzije: dužina 11 cm. Literatura: nepublici-
strum, Makljenovac, Doboj. Opis: jednostavna
rano – slučajni nalaz.
173. Inv. br. nepoznato (T. 15, sl. 14). Lokalitet: Tut- željezna baglama, sastavljena iz dva dijela; u jed-
njevac, Bijeljina. Opis: željezna jednostavna nom dijelu koji je oštro savijen postoji kružna
baglama u obliku savijenog komada željezne de- perforacija na jednom kraku; na drugom kra-
blje šipke s dva oštra kraka koja su se aplicirala u ju kraka također kružna perforacija u koju se
štok vrata. Dimenzije: dužina 11 cm. Literatura: provlači drugi krak, koji je nastao savijanjem.
Čremošnik 1958, 43. Dimenzije: dužina 23 cm. Literatura: Žigić 2017,
174. Inv. br. 1679 (T. 16, sl. 1). Lokalitet: Mogorje- 136.
lo, Čapljina. Opis: željezna baglama s trnom za 184. Inv. br. 5792 (T. 17, sl. 1). Lokalitet: Japra
pričvršćavanje na štok vrata. Dimenzije: dužina Majdanište. Opis: željezna baglama s dva kraka
20 cm. Literatura: Busuladžić 2014, 319. na kojima je mogao stajati gornji ili donji dio
175. Inv. br. 371 (T. 16, sl. 2). Lokalitet: Lepenica, Ki- baglame; donji dio iskucan, predviđen za ekse-
seljak. Opis: željezna pločasta baglama od vrata, re. Dimenzije: dužina 17 cm. Literatura: Basler
ukrašena u obliku ljiljana; na sredini četvrtasti 1977, T. IV, sl. 3.
otvori za pričvršćivanje na vrata; na drugom kra- 185. Inv. br. 5800 (T. 17, sl. 2). Lokalitet: Japra
ju savijeni trn za nasađivanje vrata. Dimenzije: Majdanište. Opis: željezna baglama s dva kraka
dužina 13 cm. Literatura: nepublicirano. na kojima je mogao stajati gornji ili donji dio
176. Inv. br. 2375 (T. 16, sl. 3). Lokalitet: Lisičići, baglame; donji dio iskucan, predviđen za ekse-
Konjic. Opis: željezna baglama s trnom za re; vidljiva i četvrtasta perforacija. Dimenzije:
pričvršćavanje na vrata i kružnom halkom za dužina 16 cm. Literatura: Basler 1977, T. IV, sl. 5.
pričvršćavanje na fiksni dio baglame. Dimenzije: 186. Inv. br. 4869 (T. 17, sl. 3). Lokalitet: Zecovi, Pri-
dužina 9,5 cm. Literatura: nepublicirano. jedor. Opis: željezni element baglame, prstenasto
177. Inv. br. 2375/a (T. 16, sl. 4). Lokalitet: Lisičići,
savijena baglama s dva kraka. Dimenzije: nepoz-
Konjic. Opis: željezna baglama s trnom za
nato. Literatura: nepublicirano.
pričvršćivanje na vrata i kružnom halkom za
187. Inv. br. 4850 (T. 17, sl. 4). Lokalitet: Zecovi, Pri-
pričvršćavanje na fiksni dio baglame. Dimenzije:
jedor. Opis: željezna baglama s dva elementa, od
dužina 15,5 cm. Literatura: nepublicirano.
kojih je jedan ulazio u štok, a drugi u vrata. Di-
178. Inv. br. 2176 (T. 16, sl. 5). Lokalitet: Lepenica,
Kiseljak. Opis: željezna baglama iz jednog di- menzije: nepoznate. Literatura: nepublicirano.
jela, namijenjena za manji predmet; u jednom 188. Inv. br. 4122 (T. 17, sl. 5). Lokalitet: Grudine,
kraku pločasta, a u drugom u obliku trna za Bugojno. Opis: željezni dio baglame. Dimenzije:
pričvršćivanje na štok vrata. Dimenzije: dužina dužina 8,5 cm. Literatura: nepublicirano.
3,5 cm. Literatura: nepublicirano. 189. Inv. br. 3676 (T. 17, sl. 6). Lokalitet: Višići,
179. Inv. br. 367 (T. 16, sl. 6). Lokalitet: Stolac. Opis: Čapljina. Opis: željezni klinac koji ima u obliku
željezna baglama s tri perforacije na pločastom prstena savijenu jednu stranu; ovaj prstenasti
dijelu za pričvršćivanje na vrata i kružnom hal- krak mogao je služiti kao držač za postavljanje
kom za pričvršćavanje na fiksni dio; sačuvan i gornjeg dijela baglame – na to ukazuju dimen-
ekser za pričvršćivanje. Dimenzije: dužina 13 zije klina. Dimenzije: dužina 29 cm. Literatura:
cm. Literatura: nepublicirano. nepublicirano.

142
Brave 200. Inv. br. 1277 (T. 19, sl. 7). Lokalitet: Ilidža, Sa-
rajevo. Opis: četvrtasta željezna oplata od brave;
190. Inv. br. 895 (T. 18, sl. 1). Lokalitet: Stolac. Opis: vidljivi ostaci unutarnjeg mehanizma; ivice uz-
četvrtasti uzdužni dio željezne brave s dijelom dignute. Dimenzije: dužina 10,2 cm. Literatura:
predviđenim za mehanizam. Dimenzije: dužina Kellner 1895, 175 sl. 21.
7 cm. Literatura: nepublicirano. 201. Inv. br. 2154 (T. 19, sl. 8). Lokalitet: Lepenica,
191. Inv. br. 3478 (T. 18, sl. 2 i 3). Lokalitet: Mogorje- Kiseljak. Opis: željezna oplata od rimske brave,
lo, Čapljina. Opis: okrugla željezna brava s hal- četvrtastog oblika; vidljiva četiri kružna otvora
kom i djelomično sačuvanim mehanizmom za za pričvršćivanje na drvena vrata; u sredini vidl-
zaključavanje. Dimenzije: prečnik 4,8 cm. Lite- jiv otvor oblika slova L kroz koji je uvlačen ključ.
ratura: nepublicirano. Dimenzije: dužina 9 cm, širina 8 cm. Literatura:
192. Inv. br. 6352 (T. 18, sl. 4). Lokalitet: Japra, nepublicirano.
Majdanište. Opis: željezni lokot fragmentiran. 202. Inv. br. nepoznato (T. 19, sl. 9). Lokalitet: Ka-
Dimenzije: dužina 22 cm. Literatura: Basler strum, Makljenovac, Doboj. Opis: djelimično
1977, T. I, 11. očuvana željezna oplata od brave, na kojoj se vidi
193. Inv. br. 2290 (T. 18, sl. 5). Lokalitet: Lisičići, dio otvora u sredini i kružna perforacija kojom
Konjic. Opis: željezna reza koja se učvršćivala je učvršćivana za drvenu podlogu od vrata; riječ
na štok vrata; jedan krak špicast, a drugi krak s je o četvrtastoj oplati. Dimenzije: visina 8,2 cm.
okomitim vrhovima koji su služili da se spriječi Literatura: Žigić 2017, 136.
izvlačenje reze iz štoka. Dimenzije: visina 5,7 cm. 203. Inv. br. 7805 (T. 20, sl. 1). Lokalitet: Konjević
Literatura: Čremošnik 1955, 115. Polje, Srebrenica. Opis: okrugla dobro očuvana
manja oplata s vidljivim otvorima sa strane
Oplata od brave koji su služili za pričvršćivanje na podlogu te
194. Inv. br. 370 (T. 19, sl. 1). Lokalitet: Lepenica, Ki- koncentričnim krugovima; u sredini otvor ob-
seljak. Opis: okrugla željezna limena oplata od lika slova L u koji je uvlačen ključ. Dimenzije:
brave, dosta oštećena. Dimenzije: prečnik 15 cm. prečnik 6,01 cm. Literatura: Bojanovski 2001,
Literatura: nepublicirano. 179 i 207, sl. 3.
195. Inv. br. 1984 (T. 19, sl. 2). Lokalitet: Mogorjelo, 204. Inv. br. nepoznato (T. 20, sl. 2). Lokalitet: Panik,
Čapljina. Opis: okrugla bronzana limena oplata Bileća. Opis: bronzani kružni okov; na oplati
od bronze; u sredini vidljiv otvor namijenjen za koncentrični reljefno izvedeni krug; u sredini ot-
bravu; po ivicama maleni otvori za pričvršćivanje vor za ključ; s obzirom na dimenzije, oplata pri-
na drvenu podlogu vrata. Dimenzije: prečnik 8,3 pada bravi tipa Drehschloss. Dimenzije: prečnik
cm. Literatura: nepublicirano. 3 cm. Literatura: Čremošnik 1976, 124-125, T.
196. Inv. br. 1266 (T. 19, sl. 3). Lokalitet: Ilidža, Sa- XXII, 5.
rajevo. Opis: okrugla bronzana limena oplata 205. Inv. br. nepoznato (T. 20, sl. 3). Lokalitet: Pa-
od bronze; u sredini vidljiv otvor namijen- nik, Bileća. Opis: željezna oplata kružnog okova
jen za bravu; po rubovima otvori od eksera za manje brave; na oplati nema ukrasnih detalja;
pričvršćivanje na drvenu podlogu vrata. Dimen- u sredini otvor za ključ. Dimenzije: prečnik 3,9
zije: prečnik 7,6 cm. Literatura: nepublicirano. cm. Literatura: Čremošnik 1976, T. XXV, sl. 9.
197. Inv. br. 2030 (T. 19, sl. 4). Lokalitet: Mogorjelo, 206. Inv. br. nepoznato (T. 20, sl. 4. 5). Lokalitet: Pa-
Čapljina. Opis: četvrtasta željezna oplata od bra- nik, Bileća. Opis: srebreni okov brave kružnog
ve, sa slabo vidljivim otvorom u središnjem dije- oblika; na oplati vidljivi otvori za klince kojima
lu namijenjenom za bravu i otvorima na uglovi- je bila pričvršćena za podlogu; ukrašen tehni-
ma za pričvršćivanje; ivice savijene. Dimenzije: kom punciranja; vidljivi ukrasni detalji u formi
dužina i širina 8,5 cm. Literatura: nepublicirano. prstenastih koncentričnih polja s nizom tačkica;
198. Inv. br. 2386 (T. 19, sl. 5). Lokalitet: Lisičići, u unutrašnjem dijelu niz znakova oblika slova S;
Konjic. Opis: četvrtasta željezna oplata od bra- u drugom polju niz ornamenata oblika slova V;
ve, s vidljivim otvorom u središnjem dijelu na- okov je podijeljen u tri koncentrična prstenasta
mijenjenom za bravu i otvorima na uglovima za pojasa; treći pojas ima prikaz niza glava. Dimen-
pričvršćivanje; ivice savijene. Dimenzije: dužina zije: prečnik 8,8 cm. Literatura: Čremošnik 1976,
i širina 5,6 cm. Literatura: Čremošnik 1957, 152. 96-97, T. XII, sl. 1 i T. XVIII, sl. 5.
199. Inv. br. 2387 (T. 19, sl. 6). Lokalitet: Lisičići, 207. Inv. br. 2489 (T. 20, sl. 6). Lokalitet: Mogor-
Konjic. Opis: oštećena oplata od brave; nazire se jelo, Čapljina. Opis: željezna oplata od bra-
središnji četvrtasti otvor za bravu i kružni otvori ve vrlo oštećena s klincima uz pomoć kojih je
za pričvršćivanje. Dimenzije: dužina 12 cm. Lite- pričvršćivana za pozadinu. Dimenzije: dužina
ratura: Čremošnik 1957, 153, sl. 7/5. 6,3 cm. Literatura: nepublicirano.

143
208. Inv. br. 2118 (T. 20, sl. 7). Lokalitet: Čučkovića reza; na jednoj strani vidljiva kružna perforacija.
kula. Opis: bronzana oplata od brave, okruglog Dimenzije: dužina 16 cm. Literatura: nepublici-
oblika; dio odlomljen; na oplati ukrasni detalji rano.
u vidu kružnih koncentričnih krugova; vidljive 221. Inv. br. 2548 (T. 21, sl. 13). Lokalitet: Mala
dvije rupice za pričvršćivanje na podlogu i otvor Ruiška. Opis: željezna baglama, koja posjeduje
oblika slova L za ključ. Dimenzije: prečnik 8,7 kružnu perforaciju za fiksni dio baglame i trn za
cm. Literatura: nepublicirano. pričvršćivanje na vrata. Dimenzije: dužina 8 cm.
Literatura: nepublicirano.
Reze za brave 222. Inv. br. 1326 (T. 22, sl. 1). Lokalitet: Turbe, Trav-
nik. Opis: željezna reza s dva kružna otvora na
209. Inv. br. 373 (T. 21, sl. 1). Lokalitet: Lepenica, Ki-
pločastoj poprečnoj gredi. Dimenzije: dužina 9,3
seljak. Opis: željezna reza tordirane prečke. Di-
cm. Literatura: nepublicirano.
menzije: dužina 8,5 cm. Literatura: nepublicira-
223. Inv. br. 2447 (T. 22, sl. 2). Lokalitet: Stup, Sara-
no.
jevo. Opis: željezna reza oštećena. Dimenzije:
210. Inv. br. 373/a (T. 21, sl. 2). Lokalitet: Lepenica,
dužina 9,2 cm. Literatura: nepublicirano.
Kiseljak. Opis: željezna reza tordirane prečke.
224. Inv. br. 2449 (T. 22, sl. 3). Lokalitet: Stup, Saraje-
Dimenzije: dužina 8,1 cm. Literatura: nepublici-
vo. Opis: željezna reza s naglo savijenim dijelom
rano.
poprečne grede. Dimenzije: dužina 6 cm. Litera-
211. Inv. br. 2383 (T. 21, sl. 3). Lokalitet: Lisičići, Kon-
tura: nepublicirano.
jic. Opis: željezna reza sa sačuvanim jednim kra-
225. Inv. br. 6439 (T. 22, sl. 4). Lokalitet: Breza. Opis:
kom; na poprečnoj pločastoj gredi vidljiv otvor. željezna reza od vrata s lučno savijenom jednom
Dimenzije: dužina 14 cm. Literatura: Čremošnik stranom; na drugom kraku vidljiva oštećena
1957, 153, sl. 7/2. kružna perforacija koja je vjerovatno služila za
212. Inv. br. 372 (T. 21, sl. 4). Lokalitet: Lepeni- kačenje. Dimenzije: dužina 4,5 cm. Literatura:
ca, Kiseljak. Opis: željezna reza s pločastom nepublicirano.
poprečnom gredom. Dimenzije: dužina 19,5 cm. 226. Inv. br. 2448 (T. 22, sl. 5). Lokalitet: Stup, Sara-
Literatura: nepublicirano. jevo. Opis: željezna reza s oštećenim jednim
213. Inv. br. 375 (T. 21, sl. 5). Lokalitet: Lepenica, krakom; poprečna greda pločasta. Dimenzije:
Kiseljak. Opis: željezna reza okomito pločasto dužina 8 cm. Literatura: nepublicirano.
postavljena; krakovi oblo savijeni. Dimenzije: 227. Inv. br. 2450 (T. 22, sl. 6). Lokalitet: Stup, Sarajevo.
dužina 9 cm. Literatura: nepublicirano. Opis: željezna reza oblika slova L. Dimenzije: vi-
214. Inv. br. 374 (T. 21, sl. 6). Lokalitet: Lepenica, sina dužeg kraka 6 cm. Literatura: nepublicirano.
Kiseljak. Opis: željezna reza pločaste poprečne 228. Inv. br. 2382 (T. 22, sl. 7). Lokalitet: Lisičići,
grede. Dimenzije: dužina 9,3 cm. Literatura: ne- Konjic. Opis: željezna reza sa savijenim krako-
publicirano. vima i visoko savijenom poprečnom pločastom
215. Inv. br. 376 (T. 21, sl. 7). Lokalitet: Lepenica, Ki- gredom. Dimenzije: visina 8 cm. Literatura:
seljak. Opis: željezna reza sa sačuvanim krakovi- Čremošnik 1957, 152.
ma. Dimenzije: dužina 8,3 cm. Literatura: nepu- 229. Inv. br. nepoznato (T. 22, sl. 8). Lokalitet: Zeco-
blicirano. vi, Prijedor. Opis: željezna reza s presavijenim
216. Inv. br. 3483 (T. 21, sl. 8). Lokalitet: Mogorje- vrhovima; na sredini proširenje u vidu romba.
lo, Čapljina. Opis: željezna reza s pločastom Dimenzije: dužina 12 cm. Literatura: Čremošnik
poprečnom gredom. Dimenzije: dužina 9,5 cm. 1956, 142-143.
Literatura: nepublicirano. 230. Inv. br. 2441/a (T. 22, sl. 9). Lokalitet: Stup, Sa-
217. Inv. br. 2442 (T. 21, sl. 9). Lokalitet: Stup, Sara- rajevo. Opis: željezna reza pločastog presjeka.
jevo. Opis: željezna reza savijena. Dimenzije: Dimenzije: dužina 8,7 cm. Literatura: nepublici-
prečnik 5 cm. Literatura: Čremošnik 1930, T. XV. rano.
218. Inv. br. 2486 (T. 21, sl. 10). Lokalitet: Vitina, 231. Inv. br. 2441/b (T. 22, sl. 10). Lokalitet: Stup, Sa-
Ljubuški. Opis: željezna reza, pločastog presjeke; rajevo. Opis: željezna reza pločastog presjeka.
oštećeni krakovi. Dimenzije: dužina 9,6 cm. Lite- Dimenzije: dužina 6,3 cm. Literatura: nepublici-
ratura: nepublicirano. rano.
219. Inv. br. 2873 (T. 21, sl. 11). Lokalitet: Višići, 232. Inv. br. 2441/d (T. 22, sl. 11). Lokalitet: Stup, Sa-
Čapljina. Opis: velika željezna oštećena pločasta rajevo. Opis: željezna reza horizontalno postavl-
reza. Dimenzije: dužina 18 cm. Literatura: jene pločaste poprečne grede. Dimenzije: dužina
Čremošnik 1965, 198. 9,3 cm. Literatura: nepublicirano.
220. Inv. br. 2880 (T. 21, sl. 12). Lokalitet: Višići, 233. Inv. br. 2441/c (T. 22, sl. 12). Lokalitet: Stup, Sa-
Čapljina. Opis: velika željezna pločasta oštećena rajevo. Opis: željezna reza pločastog presjeka.

144
 Dimenzije: dužina 8,2 cm. Literatura: nepublici- foracije. Dimenzije: dužina 4,7 cm. Literatura:
rano. Busuladžić 2012, 211.
234. Inv. br. 2441/e (T. 22, sl. 13). Lokalitet: Stup, Sa- 244. Inv. br. 2025, Muzej Zenice (T. 23, sl. 7). Loka-
rajevo. Opis: željezna reza horizontalno postavl- litet: Tišina, Zenica. Opis: dio bronzane brave
jene pločaste poprečne grede. Dimenzije: dužina Schiebschloss sa sačuvanim dijelom na kome
8,3 cm. Literatura: nepublicirano. su vidljive četvrtaste, trokutaste i okrugle per-
235. Inv. br. neinventarizirano (T. 22, sl. 14). Loka- foracije. Dimenzije: dužina 4,2 cm. Literatura:
litet: Debelo Brdo, Sarajevo. Opis: željezna reza Busuladžić 2012, 211.
napravljena od savijenog komada metalne šipke 245. Inv. br. nepoznato (T. 23, sl. 8). Lokalitet: Panik,
četvrtastog presjeke; vrhovi oštri radi aplikacije Bileća. Opis: željezni zasun od brave tipa Schieb-
na drvenu osnovu. Dimenzije: nepoznate. Lite- schloss s vidljiva četiri četvrtasta otvora. Dimen-
ratura: Fiala 1894, 140, sl. 2. zije: dužina 6,5 cm. Literatura: Čremošnik 1976,
236. Inv. br. nepoznato (T. 22, sl. 15). Lokalitet: Tut- 128, T. XXVI, sl. 12.
njevac, Bijeljina. Opis: željezna reza napravljena
od savijenog komada metalne šipke; vrhovi oštri Drška vrata
radi aplikacije na drvenu osnovu. Dimenzije: 246. Inv. br. 1251 (T. 24, sl. 1). Lokalitet: Ilidža, Sa-
dužina 10 cm. Literatura: Čremošnik 1958, 43. rajevo. Opis: bronzana drška vrata s ljudskim
237. Inv. br. 2549 (T. 22, sl. 16). Lokalitet: Mala Ruiška. prikazom; na glavi je vidljiva kapa u obliku niza
Opis: željezna reza, koja ima halku, trn koji je kanelura. Dimenzije: visina 7,5 cm. Literatura:
služio kao drška te šiljati kraj koji se navlačio na Kellner 1895, 184, sl. 73.
drugi fiksirani dio na štoku. Dimenzije: dužina 247. Inv. br. 68, Franjevački samostan u Visokom (T.
14,5 cm. Literatura: nepublicirano. 24, sl. 2). Lokalitet: nepoznat. Opis: bronzana
drška vrata s ljudskim prikazom; na glavi je vidl-
Zasuni jiva kapa u obliku niza kanelura. Dimenzije: visi-
na 7 cm. Literatura: nepublicirano.
238. Inv. br. 6740 (T. 23, sl. 1). Lokalitet: Kastrum, Do-
248. Inv. br. 1866 (T. 24, sl. 3). Lokalitet: Mogorjelo,
boj. Opis: željezni dio zasuna brave tipa Schieb-
Čapljina. Opis: bronzana drška od vrata s ljuds-
schloss sa sačuvanim dijelom na kome su vidljive
kim prikazom, vjerovatno žene; glava s jasno
četvrtaste perforacije. Dimenzije: visina 5,5 cm.
izrađenom frizurom. Dimenzije: visina 6,7 cm.
Literatura: nepublicirano.
Literatura: nepublicirano.
239. Inv. br. 1278 (T. 23, sl. 2). Lokalitet: Ilidža, Sara-
249. Inv. br. 1250 (T. 24, sl. 4). Lokalitet: Ilidža, Sara-
jevo. Opis: željezni dio zasuna brave tipa Schieb-
jevo. Opis: bronzana drška od vrata s prikazom
schloss sa sačuvanim dijelom na kome su vidljive
lavlje glave. Dimenzije: visina 8,2 cm. Literatura:
četvrtaste perforacije. Dimenzije: visina 6,2 cm. Kellner 1895, 184, sl. 72.
Literatura: Kellner 1895, 175, sl. 24. 250. Inv. br. 1250/a (T. 24. sl. 5). Lokalitet: Ilidža, Sa-
240. Inv. br. 6724 (T. 23, sl. 3). Lokalitet: Kastrum, rajevo. Opis: bronzana drška od vrata s prikazom
Doboj. Opis: dio zasuna željezne brave Schieb- lavlje glave. Dimenzije: visina 8,4 cm. Literatura:
schloss sa sačuvanim dijelom na kome su vidljive Kellner 1895, 184.
četvrtaste perforacije. Dimenzije: nepoznate. Li- 251. Inv. br. 70, Franjevački samostan u Visokom (T.
teratura: Čremošnik 1984, 46. 24, sl. 6). Lokalitet: nepoznat. Opis: bronzana
241. Inv. br. neinventarizirano (T. 23, sl. 4). Lokalitet: drška vrata s ljudskim prikazom; na glavi je vid-
Kastrum, Doboj. Opis: dio zasuna željezne brave ljiva kapa u obliku niza kanelura; nedostaje kuka
Schiebschloss sa sačuvanim dijelom na kome su s leđne strane. Dimenzije: visina 7,2 cm. Litera-
vidljive četvrtaste perforacije. Dimenzije: nepoz- tura: nepublicirano.
nate. Literatura: Čremošnik 1984, 44. 252. Inv. br. neinventarizirano, Franjevački samostan
242. Inv. br. nepoznato (T. 23, sl. 5). Lokalitet: Ilidža, u Visokom (T. 24, sl. 7). Lokalitet: nepoznat. Opis:
Sarajevo. Opis: dio zasuna željezne brave Schieb- bronzana drška s prikazom djevojke s velom na
schloss sa sačuvanim dijelom na kome su vidljive glavi; s jedne strane kuka za pričvršćivanje na
četvrtaste perforacije, s vidljivim kosim linijama vrata. Dimenzije: visina 14 cm. Literatura: nepu-
na dvije perforacije. Dimenzije: dužina 7 cm. Li- blicirano.
teratura: Kellner 1895, 175, sl. 22. 253. Inv. br. neinventarizirano, Franjevački samostan
243. Inv. br. 1555, Muzej Zenice (T. 23, sl. 6). Loka- u Visokom (T. 24, sl. 8). Lokalitet: nepoznat.
litet: Tišina, Zenica. Opis: dio bronzane brave Opis: bronzana drška od vrata s prikazom lavlje
Schiebschloss sa sačuvanim dijelom na kome glave. Dimenzije: visina 8 cm. Literatura: nepu-
su vidljive četvrtaste, trokutaste i okrugle per- blicirano.

145
Ograda – kapija Arheološki leksikon Bosne i Hercegovine, I, II, III, Sa-
rajevo 1988.
254. Inv. br. 1182 (T. 25, sl. 1). Lokalitet: Mogorjelo, Ausführliches Lexikon der griechischen und römischen
Čapljina. Opis: fragmenti veće ograde ili kapije Mythologie, I, Leipzig 1884–1886.
od željeza, s floralnim i geometrijskim motivima; Ausführliches Lexikon der griechischen und römischen
vidljiva dva kraka, krug unutar kojeg se nalaze Mythologie, II, Leipzig 1890–1897.
ukrasni detalji u obliku spiralno završenih kra- Ballian, D. / Memišević Hodžić, M. 2016, Varijabilnost
kova i vitica. Dimenzije: dužina 56 cm. Literatu- hrasta lužnjaka (Quercus robour L.) u Bosni i Her-
ra: nepublicirano. cegovini, Sarajevo 2016.
255. Inv. br. 1183 (T. 25, sl. 2). Lokalitet: Mogorjelo, Ballian, D. / Halilović, V. 2016, Varijabilnost obične
Čapljina. Opis: fragmenti veće ograde ili kapije, jele (Abies alba Mll.) u Bosni i Hercegovini, Sara-
sastavljene u obliku floralnih ukrasa oblika viti- jevo 2016.
ca. Dimenzije: dužina 80 cm. Literatura: nepubli- Bassi, C. 1996, Catalogo e osservazioni di carattere
cirano. tipo cronologico, Oltre la porta. Serrature, chiavi e
forzieri dalla preistoria all' età moderne nelle Alpi
Halka od vrata orientali, a cura di Umberto Raffaelli, Trento 1996.
256. Inv. br. 2392 (T. 26, sl. 1). Lokalitet: Klobuk. Opis: Basler, Đ. 1977, Rimski metalurški pogon i naselje u
željezni pločasti okov od vrata, odnosno halka od dolini Japre, Glasnik Zemaljskog muzeja Bosne i
Hercegovine, n. s. A, XXX/XXXI, Sarajevo, 121-
vrata; sastoji se od oštećenog okruglog štita i tri
216.
karike. Dimenzije: prečnik 7,5 cm, dužina lanca
Beckmann, Ch. 1969, Metallfingerringe der römi-
14,5 cm. Literatura: Sergejevski 1954, T. XIV.
schen Kaiserzeit im freien Germanien, Saalburg
257. Inv. br. 5791 (T. 26, sl. 2). Lokalitet: Japra,
Jahrbuch, 26, Saalbur, 5-106.
Majdanište. Opis: željezna halka za vrata sa
Benac, A. 1956, Prethistorijska gradina Zecovi kod
sačuvanim trnom za pričvršćivanje na vrata. Di- Prijedora, Glasnik Zemaljskog muzeja Bosne i
menzije: prečnik 6 cm. Literatura: Basler 1977, T. Hercegovine, XI, Sarajevo, 147-166.
IV, 4. Bernabò-Brea, L. / Cavalier, M. 1965, Meligunìs –
258. Inv. br. 5817 (T. 26, sl. 3). Lokalitet: Japra, Lipàra. La necropoli greca e romana nella contra-
Majdanište. Opis: željezna halka za vrata sa da Diana, Palermo 1965.
sačuvanim trnom za pričvršćivanje na vrata. Di- Bojanovski, I. 2001, Rimski grobni nalaz iz Konjević
menzije: prečnik 8 cm. Literatura: Basler 1977, T. Polja u istočnoj Bosni, Glasnik Zemaljskog muze-
IV, 6. ja Bosne i Hercegovine, 48/49, Sarajevo, 164-212.
259. Inv. br. neinventarizirano (T. 26, sl. 4). Lokalitet: Bojović, D. 1981, Nakit iz zbirke Muzeja grada Beo-
Zecovi, Prijedor. Opis: željezna halka s oštećenim grada, Beograd, 1981.
privjeskom na kojem je halka visila. Dimenzije: Bogić, J. 2017, Antički ključevi sa teritorija Svrljiga,
prečnik 8 cm. Literatura: Čremošnik 1956, 142- Etno-kulturološki zbornik XXI, Svrljig, 31-45.
143. Borzić, I. / Cambi, N. / Glavičić, M. / Miletić, Ž. / Jadrić
260. Inv. br. nepoznato (T. 26, sl. 5). Lokalitet: Ka- Kučan, I. / Zaninović, J. 2014, Arheološka zbirka
strum, Makljenovac, Doboj. Opis: željezna hal- Burnum, Šibenik 2014.
ka s trnom za pričvršćivanje; na jednoj strani je Brukner, O. 1976, Vicus i villa rustica u pograničnoj
imala petlju kroz koju je provučena halka. Di- zoni panonskog limesa između Cusum-a i Bono-
menzije: prečnik 6,3 cm. Literatura: Žigić 2017, nia-e, Građa za proučavanje spomenika kulture
158, T. III, sl. 6. Vojvodine, VI–VII, Novi Sad, 19-43.
261. Inv. br. nepoznato. Lokalitet: Panik, Bileća. Opis: Busuladžić, A. 2011, Rimske vile u Bosni i Hercegovi-
bronzana halka bez ukrasa, namijenjena za veli- ni, Sarajevo 2011.
ka vrata. Dimenzije: dužina 7,2 cm. Literatura: Busuladžić, A. 2012, Rimska vila na lokalitetu Mlinčići
Čremošnik 1976, 124-125, T. XXII, sl. 7. – Podmočilo u selu Tišina kod Zenice, Glasnik
Zemaljskog muzeja Bosne i Hercegovine, br. 53,
Sarajevo, 137-245.
Busuladžić, A. 2014, Antički željezni alat i oprema sa
prostora Bosne i Hercegovine, Sarajevo 2014.
Bibliography Busuladžić, A. 2016, Predmeti i prikazi erotskog
sadržaja iz antičke zbirke Zemaljskog muze-
Atanacković-Salčić, A. 1978, Gračine, Humac, Ljubuš- ja Bosne i Hercegovine, Godišnjak Centra za
ki – antički vojni logor sa naseljem, Arheološki balkanološka ispitivanja, vol. 45, Sarajevo, 127-
pregled, 20, Beograd, 73-77. 205.

146
Busuladžić, A. 2017, Tragovi antičkog teatra, muzike, Instituts der Ungarischen Akademie der Wissen-
gladijatorskih brobi i takmičenja iz arheoloških schaften 15, Budapest 1986.
zbirki u Bosni i Hercegovini, Sarajevo 2017. Giunio, A. K. 2016, Medicamina faciei feminae. Odije-
Chevalier, J. / Gheerbrant, A. 1996, The Penguin Dic- vanje, frizure, kozmetika i mirisi starog Rima kroz
tionary of Symbols, 2nd ed. (trans. John Bucha- fundus Arheološkog muzeja Zadar, Zadar 2016.
nan-Brown), Penguin Books, 1996. Golubović, S. 2008, Grobovi u obliku bunara sa nekro-
Ciurletti, G. 1996, La chiave in età romana, Oltre la pola Viminacijuma, Beograd 2008.
porta. Serrature, chiavi e forzieri dalla preistoria Gregl, Z. 1989, Rimskodobna nekropola Velika Gorica
all' età moderna nelle Alpi orientali, a cura di Um- – Visoki Brijeg (istraživanja 1993), Opuscula Ar-
berto Rafaelli, Trento 1996. chaeologica, 14, Zagreb, 67-73.
Colin, D. 2004, Rječnik simbola, mitova i legendi, Guaitoli, M. T. 1996, Le più antiche chiavi fra docu-
Zagreb 2004. mentazione archaeologica e citazioni nelle fonti
Čargo, B. 2002, Ključevi i lokot, Longae Salonae, Split classiche. Oltre la porta. Serrature, chiavi e forzieri
2002. dalla preistoria all' età moderna nelle Alpi orienta-
Čremošnik, G. 1930, Nalazi iz rimskog doba na Stupu li, a cura di Umberto Rafaelli, Trento 1996.
kod Sarajeva, Glasnik Zemaljskog muzeja Bosne i Guhl, E. / Koner, W. 1994. The romans their Life and
Hercegovine, XLII, Sarajevo, 211-225. Customs, London 1994.
Čremošnik, I. 1955, Nova antička istraživanja kod Henkel, F. 1913, Die römisch Fingeringe der Rhein-
Konjica i Travnika, Glasnik Zemaljskog muzeja lande und der benachbarten Gebiete, Berlin 1913.
Bosne i Hercegovine, X, Sarajevo, 107-136. Fiala, F. 1893, Prilozi rimskoj arheologiji Hercegovi-
Čremošnik, I. 1956, Rimski ostaci na gradini Zecovi, ne, Glasnik Zemaljskog muzeja Bosne i Hercego-
Glasnik Zemaljskog muzeja Bosne i Hercegovine, vine, V, Sarajevo, 511-532.
XI, Sarajevo, 136-146. Fiala, F. 1893, Archäologische Beiträge, Wissenschaft-
Čremošnik, I. 1957, Dalja istraživanja na rimskom
liche Mittheilungen aus Bosnien und der Herze-
naselju u Lisičićima, Glasnik Zemaljskog muzeja
govina, I, Wien, 323-328.
Bosne i Hercegovine, XII, Sarajevo, 143-162.
Fiala, F. 1894, Jedna prehistorička naseobina na De-
Čremošnik, I. 1958, Rimska vila sa slavenskim nasel-
belom brdu kod Sarajeva, Glasnik Zemaljskog
jem u Tutnjevcu, Članci i građa za kulturnu istori-
muzeja Bosne i Hercegovine, VI, Sarajevo, 107-
ju istočne Bosne, II, Tuzla, 37-49.
140.
Čremošnik, I. 1965, Rimska vila u Višićima, Glasnik
Fiala, F. 1896, Izvještaj o prekopavanju na Debelom
Zemaljskog muzeja Bosne i Hercegovine, XX, Sa-
Brdu kod Sarajeva, Glasnik Zemaljskog muzeja
rajevo, 147-260.
Bosne i Hercegovine, VIII, Sarajevo, 97-107.
Čremošnik, I. 1970, Istraživanja u Mušićima i Žabljaku
i prvi nalazi najstarijih slavenskih naselja kod nas, Fiala, F. 1897, Beiträge zur römischen Archäologie
Glasnik Zemaljskog muzeja Bosne i Hercegovine, der Herzegovina, Wissenschaftliche Mittheilun-
XXV, Sarajevo, 45-117. gen aus Bosnien und der Herzegovina, V, Wien,
Čremošnik, I. 1976, Rimsko naselje na Paniku kod 163-173.
Bileća, Glasnik Zemaljskog muzeja Bosne i Herce- Fiala, F. / Patsch, C. 1895, Untersuchungen römisher
govine, n. s. A, XXIX, Sarajevo, 41-164. Fundorte in der Hercegovina, Wissenschaftliche
Čremošnik, I. 1984, Rimski castrum kod Doboja, Mittheilungen aus Bosnien und der Hercegovina,
Glasnik Zemaljskog muzeja Bosne i Hercegovine, III, Wien, 257-283.
n. s. A, 39, Sarajevo, 23-84. Istenič, J. 2000. Poetovio, zahodna grobišča II, Katalo-
Dautova-Ruševljan, V. 1995, Zanatski proizvodi i gi in monografije, 33, Ljubljana 2000.
numizmatički nalazi, Fruška Gora u antičko doba Ivanišević, V. / Špehar, P. 2006, Early Byzantine Finds
– prilozi za staru istoriju i arheologiju, Novi Sad from Čečen and Gornji Streoc (Kosovo), Starinar,
1995, 111-170. LV/2005, Beograd, 133-161.
Dyggve, E. / Vetters, H. 1966, Mogorjelo, Schriften Ivčević, S. 2003. Antički metalni predmeti iz Narone,
der Balkankommision Antiquarische Abteilung, Arheološka istraživanja u Naroni i dolini Neretve,
Band, XIII, Wien 1966. Izdanja Hrvatskog arheološkog društva, Vol. 22,
Galliazzo, V. 1979, Bronzi Romani del Museo Civico Zagreb – Metković – Split 2003, 129-169.
di Treviso, Collezioni dei Musei Archeologici del Ivčević, S. 2014, Metalni nalazi, Tilurium III,
Veneto, Roma 1979. Istraživanja 2002. – 2006., Zagreb, 147-225.
Garden, N. / Olorenšo, R. / Garden, Ž. / Klajn, O. 2011, Izzet, V. 2011, The Archaeology of Etruscan Society,
Larousse mali rečnik simbola, Beograd 2011. Cambridge 2011.
Gáspár, D. 1986, Römische Kästchen aus Panonien Jacobi, L. 1897, Das Römerkastell Saalburg, Homburg
I-II, Antaeus Mitteilungen des Archäologischen v. d. Höhe 1897.

147
Kellner, I. 1895, Rimski gragjevni ostanci u Ilidžama Mihovilić, K. 1979, Prstenje i naušnice rimskog doba
kod Sarajeva, Glasnik Zemaljskog muzeja Bosne i Slovenije, Arheološki Vestnik, XXX, Ljubljana,
Hercegovine, VII, Sarajevo, 161-198. 223-242.
Koch, R. 2017, Die Ausgrabungen in der Burg Wit- Milovanović, B. / Mrđić, N. 2016, Prsten-ključevi
telsbach 1978–1981, Bayerisches Landesamt für iz Viminacijuma, Glasnik Srpskog arheološkog
Denkmalpflege, Band 105, Kallmünz 2017. društva, 32, Beograd, 243-263.
Kohlert Németh, M. 1992, Römische Bronzen I – aus Nikolić, S. / Pop-Lazić, S. 2005, Ostaci antičke urbane
Nida-Heddernheim Götter und Dämonen, Kata- zone na dunavskoj padini, Singidunum 4, Beo-
log, Arshäologische Reihe, 14, Frankfurt am Mein grad, 7-44.
1992. Oltre la porta 1996, Oltre la porta, Serrature, chiavi e
Koščević, R. 1988, Antički brončani predmeti sa Ju- forzieri dalla preistoria all' età moderna nelle Alpi
goslovenskog dijela provincije Gornje Panonije, orientali, Trento 1996.
doktorska disertacija u rukopisu, Zagreb/Beograd Ožanić, I. / Radman-Livaja, I. / Rendić-Miočević, A.
1988. 2003, Na tragovima vremena, Iz arheološke zbirke
Koščević, R. 1990, Poklopac antičke brave iz Siska, Pri- Mateja Pavletića, Zagreb 2003.
lozi, 5/6, Institut za povijesne znanosti Sveučilišta Pace, T. D. 2014, A Typology of roman Locks and
u Zagrebu, Zagreb, 25-28. Keys, Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary
Koščević, R. 1991, Antička bronca iz Siska. Umjetničko- – rukopis, 2014.
obrtna metalna produkcija iz razdoblja rimskog Pašalić, E. 1959, Rimsko naselje u Ilidži kod Sarajeva,
carstva, Zagreb 1991. Glasnik Zemaljskog muzeja Bosne i Hercegovine,
Koščević, R. 1995, Siscia, Pannonia Superior – Finds sv. XIV, Sarajevo, 113-136.
and Metalwork Production, British Archaeolo- Patsch, C. 1902, Archäologische-epigraphische Unter-
gical Reports, International Series, 621, Oxford suchungen zur Geschichte der römischen Provinz
1995. Dalmatien, Wissenschaftliche Mittheilungen aus
Koščević, R. 2000, Arheološka zbirka Benko Horvat, Bosnien und der Herzegovina, VIII, Wien, 61-131.
Zagreb 2000. Patsch, C. 1904, Archäologisch-epigraphische Unter-
Križ, B. / Stipančić, P. / Škedelj Petrič, A. 2009, suchungen zur Geschichte der römischen Provinz
Arheološka podoba Dolenjske, Novo Mesto 2009. Dalmatien, Wissenschaftliche Mitteilngen aus
LIMC/III, 1986, Lexicon Iconographicum Mytholo- Bosnien und der Herzegovina, IX, Wien, 171-301.
giae Classicae, vol. III, Artemis – Winkler Verlag, Paulys Wissowa, G. 1894, Real-Encyclopädie der clas-
Zürich, München, Düsseldorf 1986. sischen Altertumswissenschaft, Stuttgart 1894.
Maise, C. 2004, Ein römisches rad bauen: Gewusst Paulys Wissowa, G. 1912, Real-Encyclopädie der clas-
wie, Augusta Raurica, 2004/1, 9-12. sischen Altertumswissenschaft, Stuttgart 1912.
Mandić, M. 1935, Gradine, gromile i druge starine u Paulys Wissowa, G. 1923, Real Encyclopädie der Clas-
okolici Livna, Glasnik Zemaljskog muzeja Bosne i sischen Altertumswissenschaft, Stuttgart 1923.
Hercegovine, XLVII, Sarajevo, 7-16. Petrović, B. 1997, Nakit, Antička bronza Singidunu-
Marić Baković, M. 2017, Rimski nadgrobni spome- ma, Beograd 1997, 85-160.
nici s Groblja sv. Ive u Livnu: prilog istraživanju Pinterović, D. 1978, Mursa i njeno područje u antičko
rimskih nekropola na Livanjskom polju, Glasnik doba, Centar za znanstveni rad JAZU, Osijek, Po-
Zemaljskog muzeja Bosne i Hercegovine, sv. 54, sebna izdanja I, Osijek 1978.
Sarajevo, 53-92. Plesničar-Gec, Lj. 1972, Severno emonsko grobišče,
Marijan, B. 1989, Grobni nalaz iz Graca kod Neuma, Katalogi in monografije 8, Ljubljana 1972.
Glasnik Zemaljskog muzeja Bosne i Hercegovine, Pop-Lazić, S. 2002, Nekropole rimskog Singidunuma,
42/43, Sarajevo, 35-59. Singidunum, 3, Beograd, 7-100.
Marcea, M. / Gudea, N. / Moţu şi, I. 1993, Praetori- Popović, I. 1992, Prstenje. Rimski nakit u Narodnom
um. Castrul şi aşezarea Romană de la Mehadia, muzeju u Beogradu, Beograd 1992.
Bucureşti 1993. Popović, I. 2009, Novi pogled na arheološke nalaze iz
Marijanski-Manojlović, M. 1987, Rimska nekropola konsekrativnog spomenika 1 na Maguri, Zbornik
kod Beške u Sremu, Novi Sad 1987. Narodnog muzeja, XIX-1, arheologija, Beograd,
Матић, M. 2007, Врата капиjа два света, Београд 315-342.
2007. Radičević, D. / Milivojević, V. / Crnčević, D. 2015,
Mellink, M. J. 1989, Archaeology in Anatolia, Ame- Đurine Ćelije na Rudniku: Preliminarni rezulta-
rican Journal of Archaeology, 93, no. 1, 103-133. ti arheoloških istraživanja u 2014. i 2015. godini,
Милошевић, Г. 1997, Становање у средњовековној Glasnik Srpskog arheološkog društva, 31, Beo-
Србиjи, Београд 1997. grad, 233-255.

148
Radimsky, W. 1893, Die römische Befestigung auf der Šilić, Č. 2005, Atlas dendroflore (drveće i grmlje) Bos-
Crkvenica und das Castrum bei Doboj, Wissen- ne i Hercegovine, Čitluk 2005.
schaftliche Mittheilungen aus der Bosnian und Štribar, V. / Stare, V. 1981, Srednjeveško naselje Otok
der Herzegovina, I, Wien, 262-273. pri Dobravi, Ljubljana 1981.
Radišić, M. 2015. Kasnoantički i ranovizantijski Trifunović, S. 2015, Poluzemunica predturskog doba iz
slučajni nalazi sa lokaliteta Gradac-Grbavče u Banatskog Karlovca, Glasnik Srpskog arheološkog
okolini Svrljiga, Glasnik Srpskog arheološkog društva, 31, Beograd, 221-231.
društva, 31, Beograd, 285-302. Truhelka, Ć. 1893, Iskopine u dolini Lašve, Glasnik
Ratković, D. 2008, Wagon and Harness Bronzes from Zemaljskog muzeja Bosne i Hercegovine, V, Sara-
the Roman Collection of the National Museum in jevo, 685-699.
Belgrade, Thiasos Festschrift für Erwin Pochmar- Ulbert, G. 1959, Die römische Donau – Kastelle
ski zum 65. Geburtstag, Wien 2008, 793-815. Aislingen und Burghöfe, Limesforschungen Rö-
Sergejevski, D. 1954. Staro-hrišćanska bazilika u Klo- misch-Germanische Kommission des Deutschen
buku, Glasnik Zemaljskog muzeja Bosne i Herce- Archäologischen Instituts, 1, Berlin 1965.
govine, IX, Sarajevo, 189-210. Ulrich, R. B. 2007, Roman Woodworking, New Haven
Sergejevski, D. 1956, Dabravina, Sarajevo 1956. – London 2007.
Sergejevski, D. 1961, Bazilika u Mokrom, Glasnik Ze- Vágó, E. B. / Bóna, I. 1976, Die Gräberfelder von Inter-
maljskog muzeja Bosne i Hercegovine, n. s. A, XV- cisa I. Budapest 1976.
XVI, Sarajevo 1960/61, 211-228. Walton, J. 1954, Carved Wooden Doors of the Baa-
Skarić, V. 1928. Römische Ansiedlung in Mala Ruiška, venda, Man, vol. 54, London, 43-46.
Glasnik Zemaljskog muzeja Bosne i Hercegovine, Walke, N. 1965, Das römische Donaukastell Straubing
XL, Sarajevo 1928, 99-107. – Sorviodurum, Limesforschungen Römisch-
Srejović, D. / Cermanović, A. 2000, Rečnik grčke i Germanische Kommission des Deutschen Ar-
rimske mitologije, Beograd 2000. chäologischen Instituts, 3, Berlin 1965.
Šeparović, T. / Uroda, N. 2009, Antička zbirka Muze- Zotović, Lj. / Jordović, Č. 1990, Viminacium 1 – Ne-
ja hrvatskih arheoloških spomenika (izbor), Split kropola Više grobalja, Beograd 1990.
2009. Žigić, V. 2017, Rezultati prvih arheoloških istraživanja
Šeper, M. 1962, Rimska kola iz Poljanca kod Ludberga, antičkog utvrđenja u Makljenovcu kod Doboja
Arheološki radovi i rasprave, II, Zagreb, 335-428. 1959. i 1960. godine, Godišnjak za balkanološka
ispitivanja, knj. 46, Sarajevo, 125-168.

149
 Tabla 1
ANTROPOMORFNI KLJUČEVI

4 (976)
1 (3134) 2 (483) 3 (761)

5 (764) 6 (808) 7 (901) 8 (3487) 9 (Prema I. Čremošnik, 1976.)

10 (997) 11 (1032) 12 (1083) 13 (217) 14 (5676)

Plate 1: Anthropomorphic keys / Tabla 1: Antropomorfni ključevi

150
Tabla 2
KLASIČNI KLJUČEVI

1 (4686) 2 (5747) 3 (5772) 4 (5746)

5 (6339) 6 (6354) 7 (6730) 8 (2871)

9 (195) 10 (395) 11 (1021)

Plate 2: Classic keys / Tabla 2: Klasični ključevi

151
 Tabla 3
KLASIČNI KLJUČEVI

1 (6725) 2 (6733) 3 (6735) 4 (6735a) 5 (6735b)

6 (6709) 7 (6709a) 8 (6709b) 9 (1961?) 10 (6743)

11 (753) 12 (697?) 13 (3670) 14 (3670a) 15 (4794)

Plate 3: Classic keys / Tabla 3: Klasični ključevi

152
Tabla 4
KLASIČNI KLJUČEVI

1 (4863) 2 (4859) 3 (4860) 4 (4671) 5 (4877)

6 (6710) 7 (3667) 8 (4698) 8a (4698)

9 (1019) 10 (1038) 11 (396) 12 (1690)

Plate 4: Classic keys / Tabla 4: Klasični ključevi

153
 Tabla 5
KLASIČNI KLJUČEVI

1 (4695) 2 (4674) 3 (4675) 4(451)

5 (352) 6 (696) 7 (216)

8 (700)

9 (bb) 10 (bb) 11 (bb)

Plate 5: Classic keys / Tabla 5: Klasični ključevi

154
Tabla 6
KLASIČNI KLJUČEVI

1 (758) 2 (196) 3 (718) 4 (712)

5 (812) 6 (876) 7 (877) 8 (5820)

9 (bb) 10 (bb) 11 (bb)

Plate 6: Classic keys / Tabla 6: Klasični ključevi

155
 Tabla 7
KLASIČNI KLJUČEVI

1 (1687) 2 (1533) 3 (1526) 4 (1525)

5 (2113) 6 (3630) 7 (2385) 8 (2322)

9 (2393) 10 (2487)

Plate 7: Classic keys / Tabla 7: Klasični ključevi

156
Tabla 8
KLASIČNI KLJUČEVI

1 (2488) 2 (2490) 3 (2544) 4 (2765)

5 (2646) 6 (2160) 7 (1531) 8 (1532)

9 (1530) 10 (1528)

Plate 8: Classic keys / Tabla 8: Klasični ključevi

157
 Tabla 9
KLASIČNI KLJUČEVI

1 (1689) 2 (1534) 3 (2035) 4 (2015)

6 (bb)
5 (1529) 7 (bb)

8 (bb) 9 (bb)
10 (bb)

Plate 9: Classic keys / Tabla 9: Klasični ključevi

158
Tabla 10
KLASIČNI KLJUČEVI

1. (Prema I. 2. (Prema I. 3. (Prema I. 4. (Prema I. 5. (Prema I.

Čremošnik, 1976.) Čremošnik, 1976.) Čremošnik, 1976.) Čremošnik, 1976.) Čremošnik, 1976.)

6. (Prema I.
Čremošnik, 1976.) 7. (4794) 8. (6431)
9. (7212)

10. (2034) 11. (2050) 12. (3905) 13. (3667)

Plate 10: Classic keys / Tabla 10: Klasični ključevi

159
 Tabla 11
PRSTEN KLJUČEVI

1 (3790) 2 (876) 3 (877) 4 (???)

5 (541) 6 (3695) 7 (2891) 8 (760)

9. (3891) 10. (4697) 11. (3214)

12. (1320)

14. (1258)
13. (579) 15. (2138)

Plate 11: Ring keys / Tabla 11: Prsten ključevi

160
Tabla 12
VELIKI KLJUČEVI

1 (5677) 2 (6358) 3 (1524) 4 (bb)

5 (2157) 6 (2037) 7 (bb) 8 (3150) 9. (3408)

Plate 12: Large keys / Tabla 12: Veliki ključevi

161
 Tabla 13
VELIKI KLJUČEVI

4 (Prema I. Čremošnik, 1976.)

1 (1523) 2 (282) 3 (770)

5 (2159) 7 (6342)
6 (698)

8 (bb) 9 (bb) 10 (2158) 11 (1688)

Plate 13: Large keys / Tabla 13: Veliki ključevi

162
Tabla 14
ATIPIČNI RIMSKI KLJUČEVI

2 (5668) 3 (2156)

1 (763)

4 (5731) 5 (bb)

6 (bb)

7. (2686)

Plate 14: Atipical Roman keys / Tabla 14: Atipični rimski ključevi

163
 Tabla 15
BAGLAME

1 (377) 2 (377a) 3 (2861b) 4 (369a) 5 (369b)

8 (242)
7 (241)
9 (bb)

6 (368)

12 (5784)
13 (5802) 14 (bb)
10 (bb)
11 (bb)

Plate 15: Hinges / Tabla 15: Baglame

164
Tabla 16
BAGLAME

1 (1679)

2 (371)

5 (2176)
3 (2375)

4 (2375a)

8 (6731)

6 (367)
7 (367a) 9 (6726)

10 (bb)

Plate 16: Hinges / Tabla 16: Baglame

165
 Tabla 17
BAGLAME

2 (5800) 3 (4869)
1 (5792)

4 (4850)

6 (3676)
5 (4122)

Plate 17: Hinges / Tabla 17: Baglame

166
Tabla 18
BRAVE

2 (3478)

1 (895)

3 (3478a)

4 (6352) 5 (2290)

Plate 18: Locks / Tabla 18: Brave

167
 Tabla 19
OPLATA OD BRAVE

1 (370) 2 (1984) 3 (1266)

5 (2386)
4 (2030) 6 (2387)

8 (2154) 9 (bb)
7 (1277)

Plate 19: Lock escutcheons / Tabla 19: Oplata od brave

168
Tabla 20
OPLATA OD BRAVE

1 (7805) 2. (Prema I. Čremošnik, 1976.) 3. (Prema I. Čremošnik, 1976.)

4. (Prema I. Čremošnik, 1976.) 5. (Prema I. Čremošnik, 1976.)

6. (2489) 7. (2118)

Plate 20: Lock escutcheons / Tabla 20: Oplata od brave

169
 Tabla 21
REZA

2 (373a)

1 (373) 3 (2383) 4 (372) 5 (375)

6 (374) 7 (376) 8 (3483) 9 (2442)

10 (2486) 11 (2873) 12 (2880) 13 (2548)

Plate 21: Latches / Tabla 21: Reza

170
Tabla 22
REZA

4 (6439)

1 (1326) 2 (2447) 3 (2449) 5 (2448)

8 (bb)

6 (2450) 7 (2382)

10 (2441b)
9 (2441a)

11 (2441d) 14 (bb) 15 (bb)

12 (2441c)

13 (2441e)
16 (2549)

Plate 22: Latches / Tabla 22: Reza

171
 Tabla 23
ZASUNI - DIO BRAVE TIPA SCHIEBSCHLOSS

2 (1278)

1 (6740)

4 (bb)

3 (6724) 5 (bb)

6 (1555)

8 (Prema I. Čremošnik, 1976.)

7 (2025)

Plate 23: Bolts and parts of Schiebschloss locks / Tabla 23: Zasuni – dio brave tipa Schiebschloss

172
Tabla 24
DRŠKA VRATA

1 (1251) 3 (1866)
2 (68)

4 (1250) 5 (1250a)

6 (70) 7 (bb) 8 (bb)

Plate 24: Door handles / Tabla 24: Drška vrata

173
 Tabla 25
OGRADA - KAPIJA

1 (1182)

2 (1183)

Plate 25: Fragments of iron railings or gates / Tabla 25: Ograda – kapija

174
Tabla 26
HALKA OD VRATA

1 (2392)

3 (5817)
2 (5791)

5 (bb)
4 (bb)

Plate 26: Ring door handles / Tabla 26: Halka od vrata

175
 Godišnjak / Jahrbuch 2018, 47: 177–191
DOI: 10.5644/Godisnjak.CBI.ANUBiH-47.108

Pismo natpisa stećaka

Lejla Nakaš
Sarajevo

Abstract: The form of Cyrillic used in stećak inscriptions belongs to the same tradition as the ustav or uncial script
used in the manuscripts, albeit somewhat altered by the influence of four-line (minuscule) diploma hand. Given
the letter forms’ dual origins, an attempt is presented in this paper at classifying some of the forms of transforma-
tion undergone by the uncial script used in stećak inscriptions.

Key words: Palaeography, Bosnian epigraphic Cyrillic, ustav or uncial book-hand, diplomatic minuscule

Naziv bosanska epigrafska ćirilica, koji je za ovu Raukarov pristup analizi uvažio je kao bitan
varijantu južnoslavenske ćirilice ponudio Beš- element prosudbe tezu da morfološke razlike ne
lagić,1 podrazumijeva postojanje elemenata za mogu biti jedini kriterij u određivanju pisma.
paleografsko izdvajanje pisma bosanskih i hum- Međutim, ako se ne polazi od čisto paleografskih
skih stećaka. Međutim, u vezi s isticanim paleo- kriterija, i ako posebnost slovne morfologije nije
grafskim obilježjima pisma natpisa postojale su osnova za identifikaciju jedne varijante pisma,
i još postoje mnoge historiografske kontroverze. tada uvođenje ortografskih kriterija za identifici-
Detaljan kritički pregled stavova koji se tiču de- ranje grafije izmiče paleografskom okviru defini-
finiranja bosanske ćirilice predstavio je T. Rau- ranja pismovnog sistema.
kar.2 Ustanovio je da se uglavnom razlikuju dva Kritika dosadašnjih paleografskih dometa u
mišljenja – prvo, koje bosansku ćirilicu izdvaja okviru istraživanja ćirilice na njenom zapadnom
iz cjelovitog razvitka južnoslavenske ćirilice te je graničnom području rasvijetlila je činjenicu da
posebnim pismom kojem ili daju ime bosanči- se, u nedostatku objektivnog metoda istraživanja
ca, ili ga poistovjećuje s pojmom zapadne ćiri- grafijskog sistema po sebi, slavenska paleografija
lice definirajući ga kao osamostaljenu varijantu fokusirala na ortografiju, uz sva ograničenja koja
zapadnog brzopisa; drugo, koje polazi od teze o su posljedica “etničkog” viđenja problema,4 iako
isključivom postojanju srpske ćirilice te zapadnoj s paleografskog aspekta ortografska rješenja ne
ćirilici i zapadnom brzopisu odriče posebnost.3 igraju distinktivnu ulogu u identifikaciji slovnog
sistema. Ističe se, osim toga, da je južnoslavenski
problem ćirilice često obojen predrasudama,5 jer
1
Bešlagić 2004, 143, također i u knjizi objavljenoj 2015, 27
za grafiju natpisa predlaže naziv bosanska epigrafska ćirilica 4
Lomagistro 2004, 131.
pozivajući se na terminologiju koju je predložio Raukar, koji 5
Sa stavom B. Lomagistro slaže se tri decenije ranije obli-
je istakao da je “za različite vrste ćirilskog pisma bolje upo- kovan stav T. Raukara o tome da historiografski rezultati u
trebljavati točne paleografijske oznake (na primjer: ustav proučavanju ćirilske pismenosti na zapadnom području po-
bosanskog tipa u rukopisima; diplomska minuskula; kance- kazuju osnovni nedostatak koji se sastoji “u tome što se tom
larijski ustav, za pismo isprava; bosanska lapidarna ćirilica, problemu nije pristupalo paleografijski, nego s unaprijed
za natpise na stećcima), dok se za zapadnoćirilski brzopis postavljenim tezama, u kojima su se suprotstavljala nastoja-
XVI-XVIII st. može upotrebljavati naziv bosančica, jer je on nja za određivanjem etničke podloge bosančice s konfesio-
u literaturi uobičajen u prvom redu za tu vrstu ćiriličnog nalnim kriterijem i čisto terminološkim pokušajima”; Rau-
pisma”; Raukar 1973, 137. kar 1973, 115. Argumenti zastupnika jednog i drugog stava
2
Pregled tih stavova u ćiriličnoj paleografiji predstavio je fokusirani su na pronalazak slova specifične morfologije
Raukar 1973, 103-144. zasvjedočenih na prostoru zapadnoga graničnog područja
3
Usp. rezime pregleda kod Raukara 1973, 116. ćirilice, s jedne strane, i izoliranje pojedinačnih primjera

177
se težište stavlja na traganje za matricom inovaci- za ćirilične staroslavenske spomenike iz Make-
ja i na dokazivanje prvenstva u upotrebi određe- donije. Naime, upotreba slovne kombinacije юѫ
nih slovnih varijanata. za -juju može se naći u 13. stoljeću u Manojlo-
Od vremena kada je Speranski opisao Manoj- vom evanđelju (Sl. 1.2) i Grigorovič-Giljferdin-
lovo evanđelje, uspostavljeni su kriteriji za pre- govom fragmentu evanđelistara (Sl. 1.1), ali i u
poznavanje bosanske škole, koji su zasnovani na prvoj četvrti 14. stoljeća u Divoševom evanđelju i
specifičnom setu ortografskih uzusa. Speransko- polovinom 14. stoljeća u Kopitarovom evanđelju,
ga u tome slijedi već Lavrov u svojoj paleografiji, zato pojava jusa u ranoj epigrafici (Sl. 2 i 3) ne
iako bi paleografski kriteriji trebali biti diferen- predstavlja iznenađenje.
ciraniji od filoloških. Kako se ortografska rješe-
nja u natpisima u potpunosti slažu s bosanskim
redakcijskim uzusima,6 način na koji se bilježe ja,
je; lj, nj; ć, đ postao je osnova i za klasificiranje
epigrafske ćirilice na širem zapadnojužnoslaven- 1 2
skom prostoru. Ipak, model deskripcije zasnovan
na tipologiji koja proizlazi iz ortografskih krite- Sl. 1. Upotreba slova jus ѫ u srednjovjekovnim
rija ne može objasniti grafijsku heterogenost, pa bosanskim rukopisima: 1. kontakt slova ю i ѫ u tekstu
su razne zasvjedočene morfologije razvrstane u азь полагаю ѫ о себѣ (Giljf.61 4a, r. 1);
preširokim definicijama koje se isuviše tiču pori- 2. kontakt slova ю i ѫ u tekstu о шѹюѫ его
(Manojlovo ev. 29b, r. 4)
jekla. Već u samom izboru ortografskih rješenja
karakterističnom za bosansku školu često je isti-
cana veza s najstarijom glagoljskom tradicijom,
Međutim, ova specifičnost ne predstavlja ni
pri čemu se u prvi plan postavljalo naglašavanje
preduvjet niti bilo kakvo obrazloženje za varija-
porijekla ćirilične pismenosti, naime njegova
cije koje su se tokom vremena ispoljile u grafiji
veza s makedonskom “jusovom” pismenošću.
natpisa. Okvir za identifikaciju slovnog sistema
Manir obilježavanja sekvence ju jusom ѫ ako
zasnovan na prepoznavanju određenog seta or-
tome ju prethodi ili slijedi još jedno ju, vezuje se
tografskih uzusa vodi ka tome da kao “jedini mo-
dalitet paleografske analize ostaje, neograničena
potvrda da se takva ista slova nalaze i izvan područja zapad-
ne ćirilice, s druge strane (usp. Raukar 1973, 114). i svrhovita samo sebi, deskripcija pojedinačnih
6
Kuna 2008, 285. Isti stav izražava i Raukar: “Kao što su be- znakova, koja pomaže jedino čitanju rukopisa,
zimeni pučki majstori klesali i urezivali svoje natpise čistim, ali ne i razumijevanju historijske, društvene i
jednostavnim narodnim jezikom, tako je i njihova grafija kulturne dinamike što u svakoj epohi nalazi svoj
bila jednostavna, sasvim u skladu s grafijom zapadne ćiri-
lice. Natpisi gotovo ne poznaju ligaturna slova ꙗ i ѥ, dok je
prirodni eho u grafijskoj evoluciji”.7 Deskripcija
ю nešto češće. Posve razumljivo, slovo ћ poznaju gotovo svi bezbrojnih varijanata koje se ispoljavaju u 15.
natpisi u mnogim varijantama. Slovo ѣ pretežno se upotre- stoljeću, epohi značajnih kulturnih, društve-
bljava umjesto ligature ꙗ, ali i za suglasnik j, te za označa- no-ekonomskih i političkih transformacija, uzi-
vanje glasa ě (jat). Objelodanjeni natpisi pokazuju da su se
ma kao polazište evolutivni model: jedno pismo
u XV i XVI st. na području srednjovjekovnog Huma i Her-
cegovine dodirivala područja ikavske i ijekavske štokavštine tipa ustava, ovlaš opisano kao svečano, preobra-
[...] Upravo ta izrazita ikavska jezična obilježja i jednostavna žava se – bez objašnjenja zašto i kako – u novi tip,
grafija povezuju dosad objelodanjene natpise iz srednjovje- poluustav krajem 14. stoljeća.
kovnog Huma sa suvremenim rukopisima i diplomatičkom Ovakvo stanje nastoji se prevladati uvođe-
građom u jedinstven pojam izvorne bosansko-humske ći-
rilske pismenosti”; Raukar 1973, 121-122. Nadalje, Raukar
njem funkcionalne kategorije knjiško / diplomat-
tvrdi: “Ovaj kratki pregled paleografijskih obilježja koja sa- sko pismo koja sistematizira pisanje prema nje-
drže bosanski rukopisi, lapidarni natpisi i bosanske ispra- govoj namjeni, što otvara prostor da se promjene
ve (do sredine XIV st.) pokazuje da se cjelokupna bosan- u sistemu pisanja tumače i istražuju u svjetlu
sko-humska ćirilska pismenost u kasnom srednjem vijeku
mijenjanja kulturnih i društvenih uvjeta. Iako i
odlikovala zajedničkim morfološkim, grafijskim i jezičnim
osobitostima, što je bio rezultat izvornosti u političkom i pri ovoj klasifikaciji na ustavno pismo knjiga i
kulturnom razvitku srednjovjekovne Bosne. To, dakako, minuskulno pismo dokumenata karakteristike
ne bismo smjeli objasniti bilo kakvom izoliranošću kulture nekih pisanih svjedočanstava (poluustav, ustav-
srednjovjekovne Bosne, nego u prvom redu izrazom njezine
snage”; Raukar 1973, 123. 7
Lomagistro 2008, 114.

178
 Sl. 2. Slovo ѫ na Humačkoj ploči Sl. 3. Slovo ѫ na Kulinovoj ploči

ni brzopis) izlaze iz okvira tradicionalne podjele, upotrijebljen, u izrazito hijerarhiziranom sred-

čini se da bi analiza grafije natpisa u svjetlu dvaju njovjekovnom društvu, ovisi radije o rangu oso-
modaliteta pisanja mogla ishoditi boljom siste- be kojoj se podiže stela nego o umijeću klesara.
matizacijom u deskripciji. U ovom se radu na- Natpis tepčije Batala (Sl. 4) karakterističan je
stoji uspostaviti upravo takav model opisa grafije predstavnik knjiškog tipa pisma. To pokazuju sva
natpisa stećaka, s ciljem provjere opravdanosti njegova slova i ukupni aspekt slovne koordinaci-
izdvajanja lapidarne (Raukar) ili epigrafske (Beš- je, a simbolični detalj koji otkriva duboku pove-
lagić) varijante ćirilice u poseban tip pisma. zanost sa sakralnim tipom pismenosti zapaža se
Već je ranije primijećeno da se mogu ustano- u načinu pisanja slova ѹ /u/ (Sl. 5.1).
viti dva ponešto različita tipa bosanske ćirilice To je horizontalna ligatura kao u Moskov-
kojom su pisani natpisi, ali da to ne pomaže u skom bifoliju (Sl. 5.3) i Pripkovićevom evanđelju
datiranju. Tip dvolinijskog pisma (ustav) defi- (Sl. 5.4), čiji je oblik drugog dijela slova, jednak
niran je kao svečani i sakralni, a četverolinijsko obliku u Petrogradskom evanđelju № 679 (Sl.
pismo (minuskula) kao poslovno i općenito brže 5.5), prisutan i u poluustavu dijaka Kupusca
pismo koje je sve više zastupljeno od sredine 14. 1331. godine (Sl. 5.2).
stoljeća, ali su oba tipa prisutna na natpisima sve Natpis Radovana Pribilovića iz 15. stoljeća
do kraja umjetnosti stećaka. Zapravo, u izboru (Sl. 6) reflektira tip pisma sakralnih rukopisa,
svečanog tipa pisma ne ogleda se njegovo hrono- osobito svojom formom inicijalnog slova.
loško prvenstvo, a koji će od dva tipa pisma biti

1 2 3 4 5
Sl. 5. Varijante slova ѹ: 1. u natpisu tepčije Batala; 2.
u povelji iz 1331. godine, koju piše dijak Kupusac; 3. u
Moskovskom bifoliju; 4. u Pripkovićevom evanđelju; 5.
u Petrogradskom evanđelju № 679

Sl. 6. Natpis Radovana Pribilovića iz Ričice

kod Kaknja, danas u samostanu Kraljeva Sutjeska
(Vego br. 242)

Još je Josip Hamm ukazivao na utjecaj glago-

ljice kao ranijeg pisma na ćirilicu u Bosni, sma-
Sl. 4. Natpis tepčije Batala, Turbe kod Travnika, trajući da je taj utjecaj očit u nepostojanju ligatu-
sada u Zemaljskom muzeju (Vego br. 257) ra ja ili je, u upotrebi glagoljičke numeracije ч =

179
 1 2 3 1
Sl. 7. Varijante slova д: 1. Milavići (Vego br. 93); 2.
Podgradinje (Vego br. 82); 3 Zografsko evanđelje,
glagoljsko slovo za /d/

1000.8 U Bosni i Humu ćirilička je ustavna grafija 2

u 13. st. potisnula raniju glagoljicu čiji su odjeci Sl. 8.1. Slova б, г, т, Jelaške (Vego br. 239);
– Grškovićev apostol (sredina 12. st. odlomak) i 2. Slova б, д, г, з, Blaževići kod Rogatice (poslije 1486)
Splitski misal (13. st. odlomak) – posljednji trag (Vego br. 211)
aktivnog života glagoljice u bosanskom srednjo-
vjekovlju.9 Obično se varijanta slova д /d/ s ukra-
snim trokutićima ili kružićima umjesto nožica
povezuje s glagoljskim slovom,10 ali je zanimljivo
da se ona u natpisima ne javlja prije druge polo-
vine 14. stoljeća. 1 2
Ovakav oblik slova д imaju natpisi iz Vla- Sl. 9. Slovo т: 1. Vranjevo Selo kod Neuma (poslije
đevine (Vego br. 222, 223), Blaževića (Vego br. 1363) (Vego br. 24);
211), Pojske, (Vego br. 253), Banovića (Vego br. 2. Gornja Kukavica kod Rogatice (Vego br. 210)
248), Starog Slanog (Vego br. 110, 111), ali i nat-
pis nepoznatog vojvode iz Rečana, datiran 23.
decembra 1370. (Tomović sl. 61). Ako posljednje
navedeno teritorijalno odstupanje nije dovoljan
poticaj da se razmisli o drukčijem tumačenju
pojave tog oblika slova, onda će njegovo razma-
tranje u sklopu većeg broja sličnih preobražaja Sl. 10. Slovo п: Veličani u Popovu polju (1377–1391)
drugih slova pomoći u rasvjetljenju slovne ino- (Vego br. 102); Biskup kod Konjica (1398)
vacije. Naime, zapažen je također uglati ukras (Vego br. 178)
slova г u natpisu Joakima Đuraša iz Crkve Sv.
Trojice (Prevlaka, Boka Kotorska) datiranom po- vodoravne linije slova postupkom sličnim kao
slije 1362. (Tomović sl. 57).11 Zasigurno je vrijed- u rukopisnim evanđeljima, koja imaju poseban
no pažnje to što se na natpisima stećaka ovakvo tip inicijala kojima je označena podjela teksta
slovo г pojavljuje u kombinaciji sa na isti način na Amonijeve glave, popraćena harmonijom
ukrašenim Б i т (sl. 8), ali i s najčešćim predstav- Evanđelja. Podjela teksta na Amonijeve glave
nikom grupe – д (Sl. 8.2). Riječ je o ukrašavanju prepoznatljivo je obilježje bosanske škole, čiji su
glavni spomenici tetraevanđelja, jer je u drugim
8
Hamm 1960, 50-53. redakcijama postepeno napuštena nakon što je u
9
Hercigonja 1982. 13. stoljeću stvorena nova, na savremene glave i
10
Bešlagić ovu varijantu slova д s dekorativnim trokutićima
i kružnicama umjesto nožica identificira u više primjeraka
stihove. Iako pojava ovih slova na natpisima nije
natpisa, ali ističe da je prisutna samo u epitafima iz druge rezervirana za inicijalnu poziciju teksta, ona je
polovine 14. i iz 15. stoljeća, u Podgradinju i Milavićima svakako odraz težnje pisanja svečanim tipom pi-
kod Stoca, Starom Selu kod Donjeg Vakufa, Zavajtu kod sma i ukrašavanja teksta. Tako naprimjer natpis
Foče, Vlađevini kod Rogatice i drugdje; Bešlagić 2015, 51.
Petka krstjanina u Šćepan Polju ima na isti na-
11
U slikovnim prilozima u knjizi G. Tomović, nalazi se i slo-
vo т ukrašeno trokutićima, u natpisu Vratka Čihorića, sl. 43, čin ukrašeno ѣ, г, Б i д, ukrašeno п (Sl. 10) imaju
datiranom 5. jula 1349. godine, u Crkvi sv. Nikole u Kur- natpisi Gojsave Sanković (Vego br. 178) i Radače
šumliji (sada u Niškom muzeju). U natpisu iz Veličana Pi- Čihorić (Vego br. 102), a dijak Radoje Milosalić
lihranija, gospođa Radača, predstavlja se kao kućnica Nenca
Čihorića, nevjesta župana Vratka.

180
ukrašava početna slova natpisa Ozrina Kopijevi-
ća (Vego br. 224).
Slova kojima se u tetraevanđeljima obilježa-
vaju počeci Amonijevih glava najčešće su ukra-
šena trouglastim završecima (Sl. 11), a slovo п
središnjim ukrasnim potezom na vodoravnoj
liniji (Sl. 12).
Sl. 15. Vrutočko evanđelje, inicijal В na početku
opširne glave 64 (Mt. 8:5) f. 53a i 178 (Mt. 18:1)
f. 101a

Sl. 11. Inicijali Amonijevih glava – slova г, д, т, ѣ, б

u Čajničkom, Pripkovićevom, Nikoljskom
i Vrutočkom evanđelju

Sl. 12. Inicijal п u Čajničkom, Nikoljskom,

Mletačkom i Vrutočkom evanđelju Sl. 16. Inicijal В u natpisu iz Ričice
(Vego br. 242)

Krug rukopisa s kojima je moguće usporediti

ovaj manir ukrašavanja inicijala vrlo je ograni- To je zapravo tip inicijala koji podrazumijeva
čen, jer je podjela na Amonijeve glave napuštena samo osnovno, minimalno ukrašavanje i samo
u 13. stoljeću posvuda osim u Bosni.12 Paralele iz jednu, crvenu boju. S druge strane, počeci opšir-
rukopisa 13. stoljeća kao što su Dobrejšovo (Sl. nih glava imaju bogatije ukrašene inicijale, koji
13), Baničko i Evanđelje W148 (Sl. 14), koji još su dvobojni, a i veći su, zauzimaju prostor visine
uvijek zadržavaju staru podjelu teksta, pokazuju četiriju linija, za razliku od skromnije veličine
da način izvedbe u njima ne podrazumijeva dvo- inicijala Amonijevih glava koji su visine triju li-
struku liniju i prazne prostore u vidu trokutića u nija. Ukrasne linije su im uvijene, a pojavljuju se
ukrasnim završecima slova. na takvim slovima i dodatne forme kao prstenovi
i vitice (Sl. 15). Na stećcima postoji samo jedan
primjer upotrebe ovog raskošnijeg tipa knjiškog
inicijala (Sl. 16) – početno slovo natpisa iz Ričice:
Iluminacijski motiv ruke koja blagosilja po-
Sl. 13. Dobrejšovo evanđelje, inicijali Amonijevih
znat u rukopisnim evanđeljima, kao u grčkom
glava п f.16v, г f.18, т f.46v, б f.46v, д f.55v rukopisu s početka 9. stoljeća (Sl. 17) jednako
kao u staroslavenskim kodeksima (Sl. 19), nalazi
se na natpisu Radivoja Ilića iz Rame (Sl. 18), što
također pokazuje vezu pisma natpisa s rukopi-
snim ustavom.
Nadredno slovo u rukopisnoj kratici реⷱ҇ (reče)
na ploči velikog sudije Gradiše (Sl. 20.1) na svoj
Sl. 14. Evanđelje W148, inicijali Amonijevih glava п način svjedoči o oponašanju grafijskog mani-
f.78v, г f.116v, т f.25v, б f.115, д f.166
ra koji je zastupljen u sakralnim tekstovima (Sl.
20.2), odatle on prelazi i u druge žanrove srednjo-
vjekovne pismenosti (Sl. 20.3,4) i ostaje u njima
12
Od 13. stoljeća stvorena je nova podjela na današnje glave prisutan sve do kraja srednjovjekovnog razdoblja.
i stihove; Grickat 1961–1962, 233.

181
 Sl. 19. Zografsko evanđelje, f. 264v

1 2 3 4
Sl. 17. Inicijal s rukom koja blagosilja u grčkom
rukopisu, poč. 9. st. (Sl. 1 u: Đorđić 1971, 233) Sl. 20. Skraćenica реⷱ҇ (reče): 1. na Natpisu velikog
sudije Gradiše, 12. st. (Vego br. 252); 2. u Vrutočkom
evanđelju, f.113a, kraj 14. st.; 3. u kancelariji kralja
Dabiše, 18. 2. 1393, r.5; 4. u kancelariji Sankovića,
1399, r.16

vremenskom rasponu (Sl. 21 i 23), radije govore

o maniru koji je razvila klesarska škola nego o
procesu razvitka same grafije. Možda je postupak
uvjetovan materijalom – pješčarom koji se osi-
pa, pa su tačke uboda trebale spriječiti krunjenje
glatke površine kamena pri urezivanju, ali to bi
isto tako mogao biti postupak koji ishodi odre-
Sl. 18. Ruka u položaju blagoslova na Natpisu
đenim estetskim efektom, kako se vidi u jednom
Radivoja Ilića iz Rame (Vego br. 260) grčkom natpisu na glatkom kamenu iz Arheološ-
kog muzeja u Istanbulu (Sl. 22).
Kako je već rečeno, tendencija pravilnog ure-
Tendenciju pisanja dvolinijskim tipom pisma
zivanja slova u okviru dvolinijskog sistema pisa-
jasno potvrđuje tehnika uboda krajnjih tačaka
nja odgovara ondašnjim stilskim mjerilima za
slova, koja datira još od natpisa Kulinovog veli-
najsvečaniji tip pisma, pa kod njenog ispoljava-
kog sudije. Gradišina ploča neosporno pokazuje
nja možemo računati s visokim rangom ili ugle-
da je riječ o vrlo staroj tehnici, tako da se ne može
dom osobe kojoj se kleše takav natpis.
prihvatiti Truhelkin stav kako se ovaj manir jav-
Bilo da je ovdje riječ o ravnanju redova ili o
lja u “potonje vrijeme” razvitka ćiriličnog pisma
razmjeru za raspon slova, ovakvi postupci spa-
u Bosni. U svakom slučaju, primjeri takvog kle-
daju u pravilo zanata. Snažan estetski dojam pro-
sanja slova, zabilježeni u središnjoj Bosni u širem
izvela je tehnika uboda trokutastim instrumen-

182
 Sl. 22. Arheološki muzej u Istanbulu, grčka stela

Sl. 21. Mihoio Grahovčić, kod Bile

tom, u natpisu stećka iz Paklarskog potoka kod

Travnika (Sl. 24), u kojem su mnogi istraživači
vidjeli utjecaj gotičkog pisma.13 Oblici slova ж 1 2
(usp. posljednje slovo na Truhelkinom izvatku Sl. 23. Tehnika urezivanja rubnih tačaka:
na slici ispod), κ (s usjekom iznad sredine slova), 1. na natpisu iz Tičića (Nakaš 2013); 2. na natpisu
ұ /č/ (s vodoravnom crticom preko sredine sta- iz Pojske (Vego br. 253)
bla) pokazuju da je to ustav iz 14. st.
Jedna od tehnika ravnanja redaka koja po- krstjanina iz Šćepan polja. Odličan crtež koji je
kazuje da klesar slijedi estetski zahtjev pisanja u objavila G. Tomović14 nije raščitan u potpunosti,
okviru dvolinijskog sistema kao u knjiškom pi- odnosno kraj natpisa izdijeljen je u transkripciji
smu – povlačenje linija cijelom dužinom teksta tako da daje nesmislene nizove slova, uglavnom
– ispoljila se već u natpisu sudije Gradiše, ali je zato što nije prepoznat pisarski uzus za ispisiva-
potvrđena i u kasnijem razdoblju, na natpisu iz nje imena grada Jerusalima pa tako ni simbolični
Dištice (Sl. 25), na području Jelaška. kontekst koji upućuje na poruku iz Otkrovenja:
Savršeni primjer uspjelog postupka u klesanju
ustavne ćirilice može se, za usporedbu, pogledati поставихь: бѣлигь: за живота · а чекахь: смрьти ·
ꙋ соколꙋ · а ꙋ милога · га̅ воеводе стѣпана кои ме
u Natpisu fra Vite, graditelja manastira Dečani,
почтено: хранаше: а бг̅ь неговꙋ дш̅ꙋ сьхни ꙋ вшемь
iz 1335. godine (Sl. 26). ерс̅ми · ѣ петко крьстиѣнинь ·
Konačno, o dubokoj povezanosti umjetnosti
natpisa i knjiške pismenosti govori, možda najrje- Postavih bjelig za života, a čekah smrti u Sokolu,
a u miloga gospodina vojevode Stjepana koji me
čitije, činjenica da je bez poznavanja srednjovje-
pošteno hranjaše (=čuvaše). A Bog neka njegovu
kovnih sakralnih tekstova ponekad nemoguće
dušu shrani (=sačuva) u Višnjem Jerusalimu. Ja
razumjeti sadržaj natpisa. Kao primjer takvog Petko krstijanin.
jednog izazova za čitanje navodim natpis Petka
13
Truhelka 1894, 780; Bešlagić 2004, 63. 14
Tomović 2010, 101-122; Komar 2014, 29-30.

183
 Sl. 24. 1. Natpis iz Paklarskog potoka kod Travnika (Vego br. 255);
2. Izolirana slova Natpisa iz Paklarskog potoka, Truhelkin crtež (GZM, 1894)

Skraćenice iz sakralnih tekstova u ovom nat-

pisu: дш̅ꙋ (dušu), га̅ (gospodina), бг̅ь (Bog), ерс̅ми
(Jerusalim) izvedene su u istome maniru kao u
knjiškom žanru.16 Iako ovakve grafetičke podu-
darnosti mogu izgledati kao običan detalj, one
traže da poklonimo više povjerenja činjenici da
su tvorci epigrafskog teksta uronjeni u srednjo-
vjekovnu duhovnost. Zapravo, ispitivanje sakral-
nog konteksta vodilo bi potpunijem tumačenju
oštećenih tekstova natpisa. Izraz Višnji Jerusalim
Sl. 25. Urezivanje linijske sheme na natpisu iz Dištice nalazi se u naslovu 65. poglavlja Apokalipse (u
(Vego br. 239) modernoj podjeli teksta odgovara početku 21.
poglavlja) i u Hvalovom rukopisu izgleda ovako:
·ξ̅е̅· о новьᵻ̈ нбс̅ьᵻ и земльᵻ̈ и о вишнемь ермⷭ҇ьᵻ
Gramatički oblici starocrkvenoslavenske pro-
venijencije najčešći su uzrok krive ili nesmislene Hval krstjanin, Blagovêštenьe eže ot Iovana [21:2-4]
interpretacije teksta. A jedan od većih problema 16
Ako se uzme u obzir da kratice “u doslovnom čitanju
za one čitače koji ne poznaju utjecaj starocrkve- podrazumijevaju gotovo potpun nesklad s govorenim jezi-
noslavenske jezičke strukture na ukupnu pisanu kom” (Žagar 2007, 430), razumljivo je zašto jedna od rjeđe
tradiciju srednjovjekovnog razdoblja jeste stari korištenih nije korektno pročitana u radovima istraživača.
Ćirilična kratica za Jerusalim ерс̅лмь, imala je suviše raznih
nastavak lokativa -ѣ (> -и /-i/), baš kao i u slučaju
formi i pisari su bili nedosljedni u pogledu njenog unificira-
ovog natpisa – ерс̅ми. Zbog toga je, u Bešlagiće- nja. Žagar smatra da je raznolikosti ove kratice doprinijela
vom15 pokušaju, kraj ovog natpisa također krivo “dužina riječi te strah od preklapanja kratkih inačica s dru-
pročitan kao Jeremija Petko krstijanin. gim slavenskim riječima (npr. sa zamjeničkim imь), odno-
sno od nepreciznosti. Učestalost, naime, te riječi nije bila ta-
15
Bešlagić 1975, 102; 2004, 126. kva da bi se posve lako mogla prepoznati”; Žagar 2007, 455.

184
 Sl. 26: 1. Dečani, crkva Svetog Spasa, južni portal priprate s natpisom fra Vite i godinama zidanja crkve od 1327.
do 1335. godine – fotografija; 2. Dečani, crkva Svetog Spasa, južni portal priprate s natpisom fra Vite crtež iz knjige
V. Đurića i G. Babić-Đorđević

O novê nebesi i zemli i o višьnemь Erusolimê: žavanje pisma moglo bi dati nove i korisne uvi-
2
I gradь svęti Erusolimь vidêhь nizьhodęštь sь de, a jedan od tih je da sloboda u pismu podsti-
nebese ot Boga prigotovanь [...] 3I slišahь glasь sь če individualnost registra – slobodu u jezičkom
nebese glagoluštь: Se i skiniê Božiê sь človêki i ve- izrazu – što se u slučaju natpisa očituje u slobodi
seli sę sь nimi i ti ludie ego budutь i samь Bogь sь
bilježenja govornih, ijekavskih oblika. Pravilnost
nimi budetь Bogь ihь. 4Otimetь vsaku slьzu ot oči-
ju ihь i smrьti ne budetь kь tomu ni plača ni vьpla
je nešto poremećena; neka slova se protežu izvan
ni bolêzni ne budetь kь tomu i prьvaê mimoidutь17
dvolinijskog sistema prema dolje ili prema gore,
slova su općenito slobodnije izvedena, a nisu ni
Pošto je u literaturi već istaknuto kako Apo- jednako široka, niti jednako razmaknuta. Javlja
kalipsa “dugo nije pripadala liturgijskome ko- se i po nekoliko varijanti jednog te istog slova u
deksu Istočne crkve pa su malobrojni njeni srp- kojima se pokazuje utjecaj poslovnog, četveroli-
ski, makedonski i bugarski prepisi”,18 čini mi se nijskog pisma.
da bi spominjanje nebeskoga Jerusalima u ovom Prva izmjena je izduženje i vertikalizacija sta-
natpisu moglo biti izuzetno značajno pri odgo- bla slova а. Za ovom mutacijom slijedi i izmjena
varanju na sve zahtjevnije pitanje o konfesiji vla- в /v/ u pravcu kvadratnog oblika, zatim dezarti-
snika natpisa. kulacija slova к, koje se svodi na dvije paralelne
U paleografiji još ne postoji konkretan odgo- linije, više-manje zakrivljene, zatim produženje
vor na pitanje koji su pokretači grafijske transfor- bočnih stranica т do dna linije ᲅ, a oblik slova ч
macije, ili oni koji izazivaju prijelaz iz dvolinij- /č/ se pojednostavljuje pa se ono piše bez stubića.
skog u četverolinijski sistem. Jasno je, pak, da na Nekoliko decenija kasnije д i з jače zalaze u če-
povećanje broja primjeraka natpisa u 15. stoljeću tverolinijski sistem, a zatim i г, i potom и /i/. B.
utječe promjena u društvu: natpisi pripadnika Lomagistro19 iznosi zanimljiv stav da prvi stadij
građanske klase u usponu nose znatniji udio u evolucije svakog pisma počiva na glosama, gra-
tom broju, a pismo kojim su oni pisani, kao i nji- fitima, ekstremno fragmentarnim dokumentima,
hov jezički izraz, postaju sve prostiji. Uvažavanje što daje povoda da se razmisli o tome da li su neke
historijskih i kulturoloških činilaca za preobra- od promjena koje su se očitovale u poslovnom
pismu mogle biti izazvane pojavom slovnih vari-
17
Hamm 1960, 98.
18
Kappel 2012, 89. 19
Lomagistro 2008, 127.

185
jacija proisteklih iz pisanja u drugom, zahtjevni-
jem materijalu – kamenu. Poticaj za preobražaj
slovnog sistema mogao bi dolaziti od promjene
podloge za pisanje, pa i samih instrumenata za 1 2
pisanje, što bi uz osnovni motiv – ubrzavanje Sl. 28: 1. Tipično slovo ж u natpisima;
procesa pisanja – dovelo do pojave paralelnog 2. Specifični oblik slova ж
slovnog sistema s posebnom namjenom.
Slovo ж /ž/ u dezartikuliranoj formi pozna- Dezartikulacija slova к također ima rane po-
to je od 14. st. u Natpisu iz Prečana, na Treska- tvrde u natpisima, a najranije na Kulinovoj ploči
vici (Sl. 27.1); na kraju 14. i na početku 15. st. (Sl. 29).
nalazimo ga u natpisu Grubače, supruge vojvo-
de Miotoša, na Miotoševom stećku, a na stećku
Radovana Pribilovića sredinom 15. st. u Ričici
kod Kaknja. Na osnovu forme ustavnog slova ж
(Sl. 27.2) nastali su već u 14. stoljeću pojedno-
stavljeni oblici sa smanjenim ili potpuno ravnim
gornjim dijelom slovne figure,20 koji se nalaze u
rukopisima (Sl. 27.5), poveljama (Sl. 27.3,4) i na
stećcima (Sl. 27.6,7).

Sl. 29. Varijante slova к: 1. ustavno slovo к (Giljf.61);

2. dezartikulirano к u Petrogradskom evanđelju;
3. tipični izgled slova к u natpisima; 4. dezartikulirani
oblik slova к u Kulinovom imenu
1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Sl. 27. Varijante slova ж: 1. dezartikulirano slovo Sredinom 15. stoljeća pojavljuju se natpisi na-
ж (Vego br. 205); 2. ustavno slovo ж u Čajničkom pisani slovnim oblicima potpuno preuzetim iz
evanđelju; 3. ж iz banske kancelarije; 4. ж iz povelja brzopisa (Sl. 30). Može se reći da je ova pojava
kralja Ostoje; 5. ustavno ж iz Hvalovog, Mletačkog posebno vezana za natpise koji u to vrijeme cvje-
i Radosavljevog zbornika; 6, 7. starije, ustavno slovo taju na širem području Hercegovine – naročito u
ж na stećcima (Vego br. 178 i 102)
okolini Ljubinja i Stoca.

Slovo ж u obliku zvjezdice, dakle u formi ti-

pičnoj za natpise stećaka (Sl. 28.1), poznato je
već u 13. st. iz kancelarije dubrovačkog notara
Paskala, ali je u kamenu ono zabilježeno još rani-
Sl. 30. Slova iz brzopisa u kamenu /a/ /v/ /k/ /n/ /t/ /č/
je, na Humačkoj ploči. S druge strane, specifični
/ž/ /b/ (Vego br. 88, 89, 60, 79, 74, 80, 75, 45)
brzopisni oblik slova ж koji liči na dva spojena
slova є od kojih je drugo okrenuto kao u ogleda-
lu (Sl. 28.2), prisutan je na stećcima neočekivano Da pri izboru ovog pisma nije bila presudna
rano – već u natpisu banovog netjaka Vladislava jednostavnost, može se razumjeti iz prisustva
u Vranjevu Selu, tako da bi pretpostavke o gla- brzopisne forme slova д, (Sl. 31) koja je zapravo
goljskom porijeklu takve njegove forme s hrono- nepogodna za uklesavanje.
loškog aspekta mogle biti sasvim prihvatljive.21

20
Bešlagić također zapaža da se ovaj oblik slova javlja u
natpisima iz 14. stoljeća, npr. na Natpisu vojvode Masna u 1 2
Drežnici 1355–1357. godine, ali ističe da se takvo slovo na-
lazi već na Natpisu Marije Divice iz 1231. godine; Bešlagić Sl. 31. 1. Brzopisno д u 15. st. na kamenu (Vego
2015, 53. br. 88, 91, 96, 150); 2. Brzopisno д u kancelarijama
21
Đorđić 1971, 153. Tvrtka II 1420. i Stjepana Tomaša 1446.

186
 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Sl. 32. Varijante slova ч: 1. Moskovki bifolij; 2. Petrogradsko evanđelje; 3. Kupusac, dijak bana Stjepana 1331.
godine; 4. Dušan, logofet Tvrtka II 1420; 5. Milivoj, dijak velikog vojvode Hrvoja 1404; 6. Natpis iz Toplice u župi
Lepenici kod Zabrđa 1420; 7. Natpis pod Kočerinom; 8. Natpis iz Paklarskog potoka

I na kraju ovih općih razmatranja o slovnim razvoja pisma išao od ustava najstarijih spome-
specifičnostima u natpisima stećaka ukazat ću nika iz 12. i 13. stoljeća, preko poluustava, koji se
na zastupljenost specifičnog slova ұ /č/ u svim javlja u 13. stoljeću, do brzopisa koji se oblikuje u
tipovima ćiriličnoga pisma koji su u upotrebi u 14. stoljeću. Međutim, ono je u suprotnosti s či-
srednjovjekovnoj Bosni. Primjer iskrsavanja tog njenicom da su sva tri tipa grafije naporedo pri-
slova važan je pokazatelj koji nam govori da su sutna i nakon 14. stoljeća sve do kraja umjetnosti
se svi žanrovi pismenosti doticali i prožimali i da stećaka. Autori koji zastupaju ovaj model prikaza
nijedna verzija pisma nije imala neovisan razvoj. grafije natpisa u tome vide odraz manjeg ili većeg
U Petrogradskom, Moskovskom i Batalo- kašnjenja u razvoju pisma.23
vom evanđelju specifično slovo za /č/ izgleda kao Evolutivni model koji su zastupali istraživa-
za 180 stepeni okrenuta forma slova za /ć/ (Sl. či natpisa bio je i osnovni kriterij za periodiza-
32.1,2), što je pojava koja ostavlja dojam estetske ciju grafije natpisa. Upravo prema tom polazištu
simetrije u grafijskom sistemu. Isto slovo ima i Bešlagić ocjenjuje da razdoblje cvjetanja ćiriličke
Kupusac (Sl. 32.3), dijak bana Stjepana Kotroma- epigrafike u Bosni i Hercegovini počinje u drugoj
nića, u svome poluustavu, a zatim u 15. stoljeću polovini 14. stoljeća i traje do propasti kraljev-
to slovo u minuskulnoj formi piše Milivoj u kan- stva. Eksplicitno je pak da na brojnost primjera-
celariji velikog vojvode Hrvoja (Sl. 32.5) i logotet ka utječe promjena u društvu: natpisi pripadni-
Dušan (Sl. 32.4) u kancelariji Tvrtka II. Slovo ұ ka građanske klase u usponu nose znatniji udio
zabilježeno je i na stećcima, imaju ga Kotorac kod u tom broju, a pismo kojim su oni pisani, kao i
Ilidže (Vego br. 207), Paklarski potok kod Travni- njihov jezički izraz, postaju sve prostiji. Iz tog
ka (Sl. 32.8, Vego br. 255), Vlađevina kod Roga- aspekta cvjetanje je izjednačeno s kategorijom
tice (Vego br. 223), Toplica u župi Lepenici (Sl. kvantiteta, ali sami tekstovi i način pisanja ispo-
32.6, Vego br. 251), Kočerin kod Lištice (Sl. 32.7, ljavaju se zapravo sve više kao opadanje. Oslanja-
Vego br. 1), Gradac kod Konjica (Vego br. 16). jući se na drugačija mjerila, uvažavajući umijeće
U zaključku se može samo potvrditi kako se izvedbe (vještinu), Tomović cvjetajuće razdoblje
razaznaju dva paleografski ponešto različita tipa natpisa ograničava na vrijeme do sredine 14.
ćirilice kojom su pisani natpisi stećaka, ali da to stoljeća. Uzima li se, dakle, u obzir kvantitet ili
ne pomaže u datiranju,22 jer se na dvolinijski tip kvalitet, rezultati periodizacije pokazuju se kao
natpisa nailazi za sve vrijeme prisutnosti ove um- dijametralno suprotni.
jetnosti. Zbog toga bi se radije moglo reći da se Evolutivni model u paleografiji više nije odr-
ovdje radi (1) o svečanom tipu pisma – ustavnom živ, jer je uspostavljena funkcionalna kategorija
i (2) o tipu koji upliće elemente minuskule, tač- kojom se nastoji sistematizirati pisanje prema
nije brzopisne slovne forme, ali ne četverolinijski njegovoj namjeni, pa se tip dvolinijskog pisma
aspekt. Koji od dva tipa će biti upotrijebljen za- (ustav) definira kao svečani i sakralni, a četvero-
visilo je više od ranga osobe kojoj se podiže stela linijsko pismo (minuskula) kao poslovno i opće-
nego od umijeća klesara. nito brže pismo. Pri tom se samo po sebi razumi-
Nastojanje da se pismo natpisa definira u je da dijalektički poticaj za razvoj minuskule, pa
evolucijskom smislu uvažava tezu da je proces ni poluustava, nije mogao proisteći iz pisma tipa
22
Kuna 2008, 284. 23
Usp. npr. Bešlagić 2015, 28.

187
ustava. Ostaje ipak otvoreno pitanje šta je pokre- Batalovo evanđelje Evanđelje tepčije Batala, fragment
nulo grafijsku transformaciju pisma natpisa iz tetraevanđelja s kolofonom, crkvenoslavenski bo-
dvolinijskog prema četverolinijskom sistemu. sanskog porijekla, iz 1393. godine. Ruska nacional-
na biblioteka u Sankt Peterburgu, sign. Q.п.I.62.
Digitalne fotografije dostupne na: http://nlr.ru/
manuscripts/fondy/elektronnyj-katalog#169?a-
b=73B6AFE6-A5CA-4F89-A6F7-58A64F-
CBBD02
Summary Čajničko evanđelje, tetraevanđelje, crkvenoslavenski
bosanskog porijekla, 14–15. stoljeće, Muzej Crkve
Uspenja Bogorodice i Crkve Vaznesenja Hristo-
The Script of Stećak Inscriptions vog, Čajniče. Izd.: Ramić-Kunić, E. 2017, Čajničko
četveroevanđelje: bosanski rukopis s početka 15.
An attempt is made in this paper to shed some light stoljeća, Institut za jezik, Posebna izdanja, knjiga
on the characteristics of the script used on stećci, tak- 26, Sarajevo 2017.
ing as the starting point current views on epigraphic Dobrejšovo evanđelje, tetraevanđelje, bugarski crk-
Cyrillic in the Southern Slavic area. The term Bosnian venoslavenski, prva polovina 13. stoljeća, Nacio-
epigraphic Cyrillic, suggested by Bešlagić for this form nalna biblioteka Sv. Kiril i Metodij, Sofija, sign.
of Southern Slavic Cyrillic, assumes the existence of НБКМ 17, dio čuvan u Beogradskој narodnoj
features that allow the script used on Bosnian and biblioteci (br. 214) uništen je 1941. Izd.: Цонев,
Humian stećci to be isolated paleographically. While Б. 1906, Добрѣйшово четвероевангеле:
most such inscriptions use the letter form known as Срѣднобългарски паметникъ отъ XIII вѣкъ,
ustav (uncial) without ascenders or descenders, links Български старини, кн. I, София 1906. Digitalne
have been posited between this version of “two-line” fotografije dostupne na stranici http://europeana.
script and “four-line” diploma hand (viz., the square eu [Добрейшово евангелие) | поп Добрейшо]
letter for [v] and the letter form for [č] ), as have Giljf.61 Grigorovič-Giljferdingovi fragmenti evan-
traces of Glagolitic influence ( < [ž]). These fac- đelja, šest listova u Ruskoj nacionalnoj biblio-
tors suggest a timeframe for formation of the script teci u Sankt Peterburgu, sign. Giljf. 61, digital-
that rules out an evolutionary relationship of priority ne fotografije dostupne na: http://www.nlr.ru/
to miniscule, such as is usually assumed in palaeogra- manuscripts/fondy/elektronnyj-katalog#192?a-
phy. The script of the inscriptions thus forms part of b = FA 6 8 A 4 E 7 - 5 E 4 8 - 4 7 E 6 - 9 D 8 A- C D 5 5 D -
the same tradition as the uncial of the manuscripts, 3B2A79B
but has undergone a certain degree of transformation Hvalov zbornik, crkvenoslavenski bosanskog pori-
under the influence of four-line diploma hand. Given jekla, 1404. godine, Biblioteca dell’Universita,
this dualism, a proposal is put forward in the paper Bologna, Cod. 3575b. Izd.: Kuna, H. / Gošić, N. /
for classifying certain types of transformation affect- Grabar, B. / Jerković, V. / Nazor, A. 1986, Hvalov
ing the uncial script used on the Stećci. zbornik (faksimil, transkript i komentar), Svjetlost
– Akademija nauka i umjetnosti Bosne i Hercego-
vine, Sarajevo 1986.
Manojlovo evanđelje, crkvenoslavenski bosanskog
porijekla, početak. 14. stoljeća, Arhiv Srpske aka-
demije nauka i umjetnosti, Stara zbirka, sign. 343,
Izvori primjera i ilustracija Beograd. Varijante prema izdanju Speranskog
(1906).
Mletački zbornik, crkvenoslavenski bosanskog pori-
Rukopisi jekla, 14. stoljeće, Biblioteca nazionale Marciana,
Venezia. Faksimilno izd.: Pelusi, S. 1991, Novum
Baničko evanđelje, tetraevanđelje, bugarski crkve- Testamentum Bosniacum Marcianum, Centro
noslavenski, kraj 13. stoljeća, Nacionalna biblio- Veneto Studi e Ricerche sulle Civiltà Classiche e
teka Sv. Kiril i Metodij, Sofija, sign. НБКМ 847. Orientali Giunta Regionale del Veneto, Studio
Izd.: Дограмаджиева, Е. / Райков, Б. (подг.) Editoriale Programma, Padova 1991.
1981, Банишко евангелие: Среднобългарски Moskovski bifolij, druga polovina 14. stoljeća, Ruska
паметник от XIII век, БАН, София 1981. Digi- državna biblioteke, sign. br. 291, arhiv arhiepisko-
talne fotografije dostupne na stranici http://euro- pa Nikona (Roždastvenskogo), kart. 14, ed. hr. 17,
peana.eu [Банишко евангелие] digitalne fotografije kupljene od vlasnika, opis u:
Svodny katalog SRK 2002, str. 433.

188
Nikoljsko evanđelje, tetraevanđelje, crkvenoslavenski Tomović br. 61 Natpis nepoznatog vojvode iz Rečana,
bosanskog porijekla, 14–15. stoljeće, Biblioteka datiran 23. decembra 1370.
Sir Chester Beatty, Dublin, W147. Izd.: Даничић, Vego br. 1 Natpis Vignja Miloševića iz Kočerina kod
Ђ. 1864, Никољско јеванђеље, Државна Lištice, 1410–1411.
штампарија, Београд 1864. Vego br. 14 Humačka ploča, Humac kod Ljubuškog.
Petrogradsko evanđelje № 679, četveroevanđelje, crk- Vego br. 15 Natpis vojvode Masna (Mastan) iz
venoslavenski bosanskog porijekla, Arhiv Filija- Drežnice, 1355–1357. godine.
le Instituta za historiju Ruske akademije nauka, Vego br. 16 Natpis Stojsava Miloševića, početak 15.
Sankt Peterburg, digitalne fotografije stoljeća, Gradac kod Konjica.
Pripkovićevo evanđelje, tetraevanđelje, crkvenos- Vego br. 53 Natpis rabe Božije Marije Divice iz 1231.
lavenski bosanskog porijekla, 14–15. stoljeće. godine, Vidoštak kod Stoca.
Ruska nacionalna biblioteka u Sankt Peter- Vego br. 60 Natpis Đurena Pekšića, Udora kod Stoca,
burgu, sign. Giljf. 6. Dostupno na: http:// 16. st.
www.nlr.ru/manuscripts/fondy/elektronnyj- Vego br. 45 Natpis Radoja, Radimlja kod Stoca, oko
katalog#160?ab=77478FC9-0DD7-4F5A-BAA4- 1477.
57A5331CE2A8 Vego br. 74 Natpis Petra Vukčića, Boljuni kod Stoca,
Radosavljev zbornik, Apostolska biblioteka Vatikan, 15/16. st.
Cod. illir.12, digitalne fotografje rukopisa dostup- Vego br. 75 Natpis Radiča Vladisalića, Boljuni kod
ne na: https://digi.vatlib.it/view/MSS_Borg.ill.12 Stoca, 15/16. st.
Splitski odlomak glagoljskog misala, Bosna, 13. Vego br. 79 Natpis Stane Đurenovice, Boljuni kod Sto-
stoljeće. Izd. Štefanić 1957. ca, 15. st.
Vrutočko evanđelje, tetraevanđelje, crkvenoslaven- Vego br. 80 Natpis Ninoja Ljupovčića i sina mu Crje-
ski bosanskog porijekla, kraj 14. stoljeća, Uni- pa, Podgradinje u Gornjem Hrasnu, 15. st.
verzitetska biblioteka Sv. Kliment Ohridski, Sko- Vego br. 82 Natpis Radivoja Draščića, 14/15. stoljeće,
plje. Izd.: Nakaš, L. 2015, Vrutočko bosansko Gornje Hrasno, Podgradinje kod Trebinja.
četveroevanđelje, Forum Bosnae, Sarajevo 2015. Vego br. 88 Natpis Pavla Radovića, Premilovo polje,
W148 Srpsko tetraevanđelje iz 13. stoljeća, iz kolek- 15. stoljeće.
cije Chester Beatty, Dublin. Digitalne kopije s Vego br. 89 Natpis Stipka Radosalića, Premilovo Polje
internetskih stranica Narodne biblioteke Srbije, kod Ljubinja, 14/15. stoljeće.
Beograd. Vego br. 91 Natpis Radosava Vukčića, sina Vukca
Zografsko evanđelje Codex Zographensis, tetrae- Pićevića, 15. stoljeće, Ljuti do u Dabru polju.
vanđelje, staroslavenski, 11. stoljeće, Ruska na- Vego br. 93 Natpis Bogdana Hateljevića, Milavići u
cionalna biblioteka, sign. Глаг. 1. Izd.: Jagić, V. Dabru polju, 1391–1404. god.
1879, Quattuor evangeliorum codex glagoliticus Vego br. 96 Natpis Vukosava, Vlahovići kod Ljubinja,
olim Zographensis nunc Petropolitanus; chara- 15. st.
cteribus cyrillicis transcriptum, notis criticis pro- Vego br. 102 Natpis gospođe Radače, rabe Božije Po-
legomenis appendicibus auctum, Berolini 1879. lihranije, kćeri župana Miltjena Draživojevića,
Digitalne fotografije dostupne na http://nlr.ru/ kazanca Sanka sestre, kućnice župana Nenca
manuscripts/fondy/elektronnyj-katalog#1?ab=D- Čihorića, Veličani, Popovo polje, 1377–1391. god.
2D92E28-51F6-4085-B3D7-B2AAB8DA9BDD Vego br. 110 Natpis Dobrila Pribilovića, Staro Slano,
14/15. st.
Vego br. 111 Natpis Dobrila Božićkovića, Staro Slano,
Natpisi prva pol. 15. st.
Vego br. 150 Natpis Ivana Mrčića, Fatnica kod Bileće,
Bešlagić sl. 21 Natpis Mihoila Grahovčića, iz 15. st.
Brajkovića kod Bile, Leksikon stećaka 2004, 210. Vego br. 178 gospođa Gojsava, kći Jurja Balšića,
Tomović br. 33 Natpis fra Vite, graditelja manastira kućnica vojvode Radiča, prista u kući kaznaca
Dečani, iz 1335. godine, crtež; Dečani, natpis fra Sanka i župana Bilijaka, Biskup kod Konjica, 1398.
Vite na južnom portalu crkve Svetog Spasa, dati- A se leži gospoja Gojsava.
ran godinama zidanja crkve (1327–1335); Đurić / Vego br. 205 Natpis Ivana iz Prečana, Prečko polje,
Babić-Đorđević 1997, crtež, str. 49; fotografija u Treskavica, 14/15. st.
Đorđić, Istorija ćirilice, sl. 87. Vego br. 207 Natpis Bogčina, sina kneza Stipka
Tomović br. 43 Natpis Vratka Čihorića, datiran 5. jula Ugarčića, Kotorac kod Ilidže, 15. st.
1349. godine, iz Crkve sv. Nikole u Kuršumliji, Vego br. 211 Natpis Bogdana Ozrjenovića iz Blaževića,
prenesen u Niški muzej. uzidan u vanjski zid pravoslavne crkve u Rogatici,
poslije 1486. god.

189
Vego br. 218 Natpis Grubače, supruge vojvode tár Országos Levéltár, digitalna fotografija do-
Miotoša, Seljani kod Rogatice, 15. st. stupna na https://archives.hungaricana.hu/en/
Vego br. 222 Natpis vojevode Miotoša, iz Vlađevine charters/view/155122/?pg=7&bbox=103%2C-
kod Rogatice prenesen u vrt Zemaljskog muzeja, 2201%2C3358%2C-352.
GZM 1889, knj. I, str. 751. 1446. Stjepan Tomaš, 22. august, pisar Tvrtko
Vego br. 223 Natpis Vlatka Vlađevića, iz Vlađevine Sekulović u Vranduku, Arhiv HAZU Zagreb, Ćir.
kod Rogatice prenesen u vrt Zemaljskog muzeja, I, 4.; sl. Turbić-Hadžagić 2010, 185.
1399–1415. god.
Vego br. 242 Natpis Radovana Pribilovića iz Ričice
kod Kraljeve Sutjeske prenesen u samostan, 15. st.
Vego br. 248 Natpis Božićka Banovića, Banovići, 14.
st.
Vego br. 251 Natpis velikoga kneza bosanskoga Ra- Literatura
doja iz Toplice u župi Lepenici kod Zabrđa 1420. Bešlagić, Š. 1975, Stećci u Pivi, Starine Crne Gore V,
god. Cetinje 1975, 81-119.
Vego br. 252 Natpis velikog sudije Gradiše, iz Bešlagić, Š. 2004, Leksikon stećaka, Svjetlost, Sarajevo
Podbrežja kod Zenice, poslije 1193. god., sada u 2004.
Muzeju u Zenici. Bešlagić, Š. 2015, Ćirilički epigrafski spomenici sredn-
Vego br. 253 Natpis Dragaja, iz Pojske kod Zenice pre- jovjekovne Bosne i Hercegovine, Stanak, Sarajevo
nesen u Zavičajni muzej u Travniku, 15. st. 2015.
Vego 254 Kulinova ploča, Biskupići–Muhašinovići Đorđić, P. 1971, Istorija srpske ćirilice – paleografsko-
kod Visokog, 1193. filološki prilozi, Zavod za izdavanje udžbenika SR
Vego br. 255 Natpis iz Paklarskog potoka kod Gorn- Srbije, Beograd 1971.
jeg Turbeta blizu Travnika prenesen u Zavičajni Đurić, V. / Babić-Đorđević, G. 1997, Srpska umetnost
muzej u Travniku, 1451. god.; slova kao gotička, u srednjem veku, knj. II, Srpska književna zadru-
Bešlagić sl. 68. ga, Beograd 1997.
Vego br. 257 Natpis tepčije Batala, Gornje Turbe kod Grickat, I. 1961–1962, Divoševo jevanđelje: Filološka
Travnika, poslije 1400. god. analiza, Južnoslovenski filolog, XXV, 227-291.
Vego br. 260 Natpis Radivoja Ilića, Lipa kod Livna, 15. Hercigonja, E. 1982, Bosančica, Enciklopedija Jugos-
st.; također slika u Bešlagić, Leksikon, sl. 179. lavije, 2, Bje-Crn, JLZ, Zagreb 1982.
Hamm, J. 1960, Apokalipsa bosanskih krstjana, Slovo
9–10, 43-104.
Povelje Jurić-Kappel, J. 2012, Sistem žanrova u srednjovje-
kovnoj vjerskoj književnosti: nekoliko načelnih
1331. dijak Kupusac; povelja bana Stjepana II zapažanja, Bosanskohercegovački slavistički
Kotromanića knezu Vuku i Pavlu Vukoslaviću, kongres, Zbornik radova, knjiga 1, Lingvistika,
Magуar Országos Levéltár, Budimpešta; fotografija Slavistički komitet, Sarajevo 2012, 87-98.
dostupna na https://archives.hungaricana.hu/en/ Komar, G. 2014, Stari ćirilični natpisi istočne Herce-
charters/view/311113/?pg=0&bbox=-1620%2C- govine, Društvo za arhive i povjesnicu hercegnov-
3877%2C6123%2C131. sku, Herceg Novi 2014.
1353. Prozračac, Tvrtko I Vlatku Vukoslaviću daje Ključ Kuna, H. 2008, Srednjovjekovna bosanska književnost,
sa selima, Vrbanja, Zemunik Magуar Országos Forum Bosnae, Sarajevo.
Levéltár, Budapest https://archives.hungarica- Kuna, H. / Gošić, N. / Grabar, B. / Jerković, V. / Nazor,
na.hu/en/charters/view/86165/?pg=0&bbox=- A. 1986, Codex christiani nomine Hval; Zbornik
247%2C-4849%2C6422%2C-1061. Hvala krstjanina: Potpuno faksimilirano izdanje
1393. Dabiša, 18. februar u Sutisci, Hrvatski državni originala iz Univerzitetske biblioteke u Bolonji,
arhiv u Dubrovniku, sign. 1393_IVa 25, pisar Sarajevo 2014.
Tomaš Lužac. Lomagistro, B. 2004, Paleografia e ideologia, Studii
1420. Tvrtko II 16. august, Pod Visokim, Čremošnik Slavistici, Rivista dell' Asociazione Italiana Slavisti
br. 50 (pismo: polukurzivna minuskula); HR – 2004/1, 127-137.
Hrvatski državni arhiv u Dubrovniku, sign. 7. 3. Lomagistro, B. 2008, La scrittura cirillica minuscola:
(Diplomata et acta) 15. st. br 227; sl. Đorđić 1971: genesi ed evoluzione, Contributi italiani al XIV
402; sl. Turbić-Hadžagić 2010, 126. Congresso Internazionale degli Slavisti, Ohrid,
1446. Tomaš Doroteji Blagajskoj, 25. maj, pisar 10-16 settembre 2008, Firenze 2008, 111-148.
Tvrtko Sekulović u Sutjesci, Mađarski državni
arhiv, Budimpešta, Magуar Nemzeti Levél-

190
Nakaš, L. 2013, Natpisi na stećcima iz Tičića, Naše Tomović, G. 2010, Nadgrobni natpis Petka krstjanina,
starine: godišnjak Zavoda za zaštitu kulturno-isto- Zbornik radova sa naučnog skupa “Šćepan Polje i
rijskog i prirodnog nasljeđa Bosne i Hercegovine, njegove svetinje kroz vjekove”, Plužine, 24-25. sep-
Zavod za zaštitu kulturno-istorijskog i prirodnog tembar 2006, Sveviđe, Berane 2010, 101-122.
nasljeđa Bosne i Hercegovine, Sarajevo 2013, 45- Tomović, G. 1974, Morfologija ćiriličkih natpisa na
48. Balkanu, Prosveta, Beograd 1974.
Nakaš, L. 2015, Vrutočko bosansko četveroevanđelje, Truhelka, Ć. 1894, Starobosanski pismeni spomenici,
Forum Bosnae, Sarajevo 2015. Glasnik Zemaljskog muzeja VI, 771-782.
Raukar, T. 1973, O problemu bosančice u našoj histo- Turbić-Hadžagić, A. 2010, Srednjovjekovni bosanični
riografiji, Radovi sa simpozijuma “Srednjovjekov- pravni tekstovi, Gradačac 2010.
na Bosna i evropska kultura”, Muzej grada Zenice, Vego, M. 1962–1970, Zbornik srednjovjekovnih nat-
1973, 103-144. pisa Bosne i Hercegovine I–IV, Izdanje Zemaljs-
Speranski, M. N. 1906, Mostarskoje (Manojlovo) kog muzeja, Sarajevo 1962–1970.
bosnijskoje evangelije, Tipografija Varšavskago Žagar, M. 2007, Grafolingvistika srednjovjekovnih
Učevnago Okruga, Varšava 1906. tekstova, Matica hrvatska, Zagreb 2007.

191
 Godišnjak/Jahrbuch 2018,47:193-197
DOI: 10.5644/Godisnjak.CBI.ANUBiH-47.109

Novi listovi Vrutočkog bosanskog četveroevanđelja

Mehmed Kardaš
Sarajevo

Abstract: The paper discusses new sheets of the Bosnian Gospels, stored in the Serbian Patriarchate Library in
Belgrade under the signatures no. 313. A preserved fragment of the Gospel text consists of six parchments, which
contents are parts of The Gospels of Matthew and Mark. Through an analysis, the sheets were identified as a part of
the Vrutok Gospel, a Medieval Bosnian manuscript dating from the end of the 14th century, and on this occasion
the most important palaeographic and linguistic features of the passages are presented.

Key words: Vrutok Gospels, new pages, Library of Serbian Patriarchate in Belgrade, language, handwriting

Godine 2016. u Beogradu je, povodom održa- važnosti bilo pitanje da li ovaj dio evanđeoskog
vanja 23. međunarodnog kongresa vizantijskih teksta nedostaje Vrutočkom rukopisu.2
studija, u organizaciji Srpske akademija nauka Prema opisu koji prati faksimil, čiji je autor
i umetnosti postavljena izložba “Svet srpske ru- M. Ubiparip,3 a na osnovu Inventara rukopisa
kopisne knjige (XII–XVII vek)”. Izložbu je pratio Biblioteke Srpske patrijaršije4 koji su sačinili Z.
katalog u kojem su objavljeni faksimili izloženih Ranković, V. Vukašinović i R. Stanković, saznaje
eksponata, dok su u popratnim tekstovima done- se da su listovi pisani na pergamentu, dimenzije
seni najvažniji kodikološki podaci o prezentira- su 178 x 117 mm. Za četveroevanđelje se tvrdi
nim rukopisima te kratak opis kojem je dodana da je pisano u 13. stoljeću te da pripada “zapad-
najrelevantnija literatura o svakom od njih. Preli- noj skupini crkvenoslavenskih rukopisa”, čiji su
stavajući katalog, posebnu pažnju privukla mi je tekstovi prepoznatljivi po tome što u njima nema
stranica četveroevanđelja koja čini dio fragmenta znakova interpunkcije, čak ni tačke, a od nadred-
od šest listova pohranjenih u Biblioteci Srpske pa- nih znakova pojavljuje se samo titla.5 Ubiparip
trijaršije pod signaturnom oznakom br. 313. Upe- navodi i ove podatke o pismu i jeziku fragme-
čatljiva sličnost objavljene stranice sa rukopisom nata: slovo đerv, koje je dugo ostalo sačuvano u
Vrutočkog bosanskog evanđelja1 bila je očigled- knjigama iz bosanskih krajeva, zatim primjeri
na, ali je pripadnost fragmenta ovom rukopisu zamjene suglasnika ф sa п, čak i njihovo miješa-
trebalo dodatno ispitati, pri čemu je od presudne nje; u fragmentu se javljaju primjeri vokalizacije
poluglasa u jakoj poziciji, dok fonetska osobina
2
L. Nakaš nedavno je ustanovila da su Belićevi listići dio
Vrutočkog rukopisa. Pored sličnosti slova koju je uočio još
1
Vrutočko bosansko četveroevanđelje pripada porodici Po- Grujić (1937: 267), najuvjerljiviji argument je kontinuitet
pović iz sela Vrutok kod Gostivara. Na osnovu bilješki koje teksta jer se na posljednje redove Mostarskog bifolija (1b)
su na marginama upisali raniji vlasnici, vjerovatno se ruko- nadovezuju početni redovi Vrutočkog rukopisa (1a) (Nakaš
pis nalazio u Vrutoku već prije 1865. godine (Nakaš 2015, 2013: 9).
639). O tome kako je ovaj srednjovjekovni bosanski kodeks 3
Ubiparip 2016, 257-259.
došao u posjed porodice Popović, nema sigurnih podataka. 4
Ranković et al. 2012, 300.
Osim toga, u rukopisu nije sačuvan kolofon, tako da ne- 5
M. Ubiparip na osnovu ovih odlika utvrđuje njihovu
mamo podatke o prvobitnom vlasniku, mjestu i vremenu “припадност групи српских јеванђеља са западног
pisanja kodeksa. терена” (2016: 257).

193
koja ovaj odlomak naročito približava knjigama Listovi Beogradske patrijaršije sadrže nekoli-
pisanim u skriptorijima jugoistočnih bosanskih ko iluminacija, a najzanimljiviji je inicijal п, izve-
prostora (kao što je Čajničko evanđelje) jesu ri- den na sličan način kako su izvedeni i inicijali н
jetki ikavski refleksi jata (tilesi, na kolinu).6 u Vrutočkom rukopisu:
Sadržaj stranice objavljene u spomenutom
katalogu čini kraj Matejeva evanđelja i početak П Н
popisa glava Evanđelja po Marku (Mt. 28:14 –
Mk. 0:8). Provjerom sadržaja teksta Vrutočkog
četveroevanđelja, koje je nedavno izdao Među-
narodni forum Bosna (ur. L. Nakaš 2015), po-
kazalo se da upravo ovaj dio danas nedostaje
Vrutočkom evanđelju.7 Time je postalo jasno da
fragment pripada ovom kodeksu, što je uspored- 2a (br. 303) 76a 66b
bom rukopisā pokazala i paleografska analiza.
Iako kvadratični tip poluustava kojim su pisani Na osnovu prepisanih prvih redova evanđeo-
fragmenti već na osnovu vizuelnog utiska govori skog teksta sada se može precizno utvrditi kom-
da je autor odlomka pisar Vrutočkog evanđelja, pletan sadržaj ovih listova:
detaljnija paleografska analiza samo je dodatno 1. list: (a) Mt. 27:28–39; (b) Mt. 27:40–49
potvrdila takvu pretpostavku. Od posebnih slov- 2. list: (a) Mt. 27:50–60; (b) Mt. 27:61–28:3
nih formi izdvaja se karakteristično pisanje slova 3 list: (a) Mt. 28:4–14; (b) Mt. 28:15–Mk. 0:8
uk , sa vodoravnom crticom na spoju jakog i 4. list: (a) Mk. 1:14–24; (b) Mk. 1:25–35
slabog dijela slova, zatim slova č u morfološ- 5. list: (a) Mk. 1:36–2:1; (b) Mk. 2:2–11
koj varijanti tipičnoj upravo za pisara Vrutočkog 6. list: (a) Mk. 2:12–19; (b) Mk. 2:20–26
rukopisa. I jezičke osobine odlomaka podudara- Međutim, ni sadržaj ovog fragmenta ne ide u
ju se s onima koje su u posljednjem istraživanju kontinuitetu. Stranica 3b završava 8. glavom (ʜ о
izolirane kao najvažnije odlike Vrutočkog evan- ʜʒɑБρɑɴʜ ɑпс̅то ̅ ʌь), a nakon nje nedostaje list koji
đelja: fragment sadrži primjere ikavizma, baš kao sadrži ostatak popisa glava te tekst početka Mar-
što i Vrutočko evanđelje pripada skupini najjače kova evanđelja (1:1–14). S obzirom na to da ne-
ikaviziranih,8 zatim se bilježe primjeri vokaliza- dostaje upravo ovaj list, to upućuje na mogućnost
cije poluglasa u jakom položaju, prelaska вь > u da je on nekada ranije izdvojen iz kodeksa, mož-
itd. da baš zbog iluminacije koja dolazi prije teksta.
Ljubazni uposlenici Biblioteke Srpske patri- Inače, listovi koji su danas pohranjeni u Bi-
jaršije dozvolili su mi uvid u sačuvane listove, a blioteci Srpske patrijaršije u Beogradu bili su
na osnovu pregleda stranicā može se reći da je sastavnim dijelom Vrutočkog četveroevanđelja
kompletan fragment u odličnom stanju, bez bilo u vrijeme kada su prvi istraživači ovoga rukopi-
kakvih oštećenja. Na horizontalnim marginama sa pisali svoje prikaze. To saznajemo na osnovu
očuvani su Euzebijevi kanoni, kao što su uosta- primjera koje izdvaja M. Grujić u radu o Vrutoč-
lom očuvani u kompletnom kodeksu. Nažalost, kom kodeksu.10 Naime, Grujić navodi primjere s
ovi fragmenti ne sadrže glose, čijim je otkriva- kraja Matejeva i početka Markova evanđelja, da-
njem Vrutočki rukopis već postao čuven. Naime, kle upravo one koji pripadaju beogradskim listo-
L. Nakaš nedavno je otkrila dvadeset novih glosa vima. Na osnovu toga je L. Nakaš pretpostavila
u ovom evanđelju, od kojih se čak devet tekstu- da dva ili tri bifolija možda još uvijek postoje, “s
alno podudara sa glosama izgubljenog Srećkovi- obzirom na to da je vrijednost ovih listova sadaš-
ćevog evanđelja.9 njem vlasniku poznata, jer su prije nestanka bili
predmet filološke analize”.11 Moguće je da je Gru-
6
Ubiparip 2016, 259. jić izdvojio ove fragmente u vrijeme kada je pisao
7
U izdanju Vrutočkog evanđelja (2015) posljednja stranica prikaz, ali oni očito kasnije nisu pridruženi ko-
Matejeva evanđelja završava stihom 27:7 Svêtь že stvoriše, deksu, nego su nepoznatim putem došli u Bibli-
kupiše imь selo skudilьni(...), a sačuvani dio Markova evan-
đelja počinje od 2:27 (...) S(y)nь Čl(o)v(ê)č(ь)sky suboti...
8
Nakaš 2015, 674. 10
Grujić 1937.
9
Usp. Nakaš 2012; 2015, 665-673. 11
Nakaš 2015, 644.

194
oteku Srpske patrijaršije u Beogradu. Zanimlji- similarity of the published sheet with the handwriting
vo je da su se u Grujićevom prikazu našli neki of The Bosnian Vrutok Gospels was obvious, and its
primjeri iz rukopisa, poput гρєБѣ u Mt. 27:60,12 content makes the end of Matthew’s Gospel and the
koji upućuje na zapadnoštokavsko područje, što beginning of a list of the chapters of The Gospel Ac-
cording to Mark. By checking the content of the text
naročito naglašava H. Kuna.13 Lik гρєБѣ poseb-
of the Vrutok Gospels, which was recently published
no je interesantan s obzirom na to da su primjeri by the International Forum Bosnia (2015), it turned
pojave re < ro u bosanskim evanđeljima iznimno out that precisely this part today is missing. This made
rijetka pojava. it clear that the fragment belongs to this codex, which
Leksičke varijante iz ovih fragmenata navodi was also demonstrated by the comparison of hand-
i I. Grickat u studiji o Divoševom evanđelju,14 ali writings using paleographic analysis. The sheets that
se čini da je gotovo kompletan spisak primjera are stored today at the Serbian Patriarchate Library in
preuzet iz Grujićevog rada. Kao ni Grujić, ni Belgrade were an integral part of the Vrutok Gospels
Grickat ne navodi primjere sa stranice koja sa- at the time when the first researchers of this manu-
drži sami početak Markova evanđelja (1:1–14). script15 wrote their impressions, but later, for un-
known reasons, they were separated from the codex.
U svakom slučaju, otkrivanje ovih listova i
njihovo identificiranje vrijedno je zbog toga što
se njima upotpunjuje još jedan bosanski rukopis
– u ovom slučaju Vrutočko četveroevanđelje. To
je posebno značajno kada se ima u vidu činjenica
da je većina bosanskih srednjovjekovnih knjiga Literatura
do naših dana preživjela u nepotpunom obliku, Grickat, I. 1961–1962, Divoševo jevanđelje: filološka
pa je upotpunjavanje svake od njih izuzetno vri- analiza, Južnoslovenski filolog, XXV, Beograd
jedno istraživačima. Nadamo se da će Beograd- 1961–1962.
ska patrijaršija u skorijoj budućnosti dozvoliti Grujić, R. M. 1937, Jedno evanđelje bosanskog tipa
digitaliziranje ovih listova kako bi se oni što prije XIV–XV veka u južnoj Srbiji, Zbornik lingvističkih
podvrgnuli detaljnijoj filološkoj analizi. i filoloških rasprava u čast A. Beliću, Beograd,
263–277.
Koch, C. 2012, Bilješke o glosama bosanskog
četveroevanđelja iz Srećkovićeve zbirke, Forum
Bosnae, br. 57, Sarajevo, 100–152.
Kuna, H. 2008, Bosanska srednjovjekovna književnost,
Summary Forum Bosnae, br. 45, Sarajevo 2008.
Nakaš, L. 2012, Dvadeset glosa bosanskog Vrutočkog
evanđelja, Forum Bosnae, br. 57, Sarajevo, 153–
New sheets from the Bosnian Vrutok 187.
Nakaš, L. 2013, Nova saznanja o Vrutočkom evanđelju,
Gospels Ricerche slavistiche, 11 (57), 5–20.
Nakaš, L. 2015, Vrutočko bosansko četveroevanđelje,
In Belgrade, in 2016, an exhibition “The World of
Forum Bosnae, br. 67–68, Sarajevo 2015.
Serbian Manuscripts (12th–17th centuries)” organized
Pavlović, M. 1921, Belićevi odlomci bosanskog
by the Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts, was set
jevanđelja, Zbornik filoloških i lingvističkih studi-
up. The exhibition was followed by an exhibition cata-
ja u čast A. Beliću, Beograd, 239–248.
logue in which the facsimiles were published. Brows-
Rakić, Z. et al. 2016, Svet srpske rukopisne knjige
ing the Catalogue, my attention has been drawn to a
(XII–XVII vek), SANU, Beograd 2016.
page of the Gospels which forms a part of the frag-
Ranković, Z. et al. 2012, Inventar rukopisa Biblioteke
ment of six sheets stored in the Library of the Serbian
Patriarchate under the signature no. 313. Significant Srpske patrijaršije, Beograd 2012.

12
Grujić 1937, 257.
13
Kuna 2008, 110.
14
Grickat 1961–1962, 272. 15
Grujić 1937; Grickat 1961.

195
 Slika 1. Vrutočko četveroevanđelje, odlomak br. 313, str. 2a
(Katalog “Inventar rukopisa Biblioteke Srpske patrijaršije”, str. 74)

196
 Slika 2. Vrutočko četveroevanđelje, odlomak br. 313, str. 3b
(Katalog “Svet srpske rukopisne knjige (XII–XVII vek)”, str. 258)

197
 Godišnjak/Jahrbuch 2018,47:199-213
DOI: 10.5644/Godisnjak.CBI.ANUBiH-47.110

O organizaciji i načinu funkcioniranja sudske vlasti u kadiluku Tešanj

u drugoj polovini 18. stoljeća

Aladin Husić
Sarajevo

Abstract: Rad predstavlja historijsku rekonstrukciju organizacije i načina funkcioniranja sudske vlasti u među-
prostoru Tešnja, Maglaja i Žepča. Pitanje se promatra u povijesnoj vertikali od ulaska tog kraja pod osmansku
vlast, osnivanja zasebne sudske jedinice za to područje, njegovog pozicioniranja u sistemu organizacije sudske
vlasti u Bosni, do samog ustroja i organizacije službi u navedenom kadiluku, među kojima su: kadija, naib, katib,
muhziri, pomoćne službe i “svjedoci čina”. Na primjeru tog kadiluka istovremeno se ukazuje na način organ-
izacije i funkcioniranja nekih sudskih okruga kod nas. Na temelju izvora donosi se lista nosilaca pojedinih službi
pri ovom sudu, ukazuje na specifičnosti koje se uočavaju u hronološkom redoslijedu obavljanja funkcije kadije
ili neke druge službe te donose primjeri njihove prakse kako su je dokumentirali izvori. Razmatraju se i neka
pitanjima devijantnih pojava koje su pratile rad sudskih institucija ili nosilaca pojedinih funkcija u pravosudnim
ustanovama kadiluka Tešanj.

Key words: qazā of Tešanj, qādī, naib, katib, muhzir, assisting services, judiciary jury (şühûdü’l-hâl)

Nastanak kadiluka Tešanj no do potpune stabilizacije uprave i afirmacije

otvorenog dijela grada, odnosno civilnog naselja.
Područje Tešnja pod osmansku vlast došlo je po- Za kratko vrijeme sistem uprave u potpunosti je
četkom 16. stoljeća, najvjerovatnije između 1512. stabiliziran i organiziran tako da je nahija Tešanj
i 1520. godine.1 Prema nekim istraživanjima, sve formirana i teritorijalno zaokružena do 1550.
su prilike da se to dogodilo oktobra 1512. godi- godine, kada se prema dostupnim izvorima spo-
ne.2 Proces uspostave vlasti, adaptacije prostora u minje prvi put.4 Toj nahiji prvobitno su pripadali
osmanski administrativni i društveno-ekonom- gradovi Tešanj i Doboj s još 45 naseljenih mjesta,
ski sistem potrajao je deceniju-dvije, jer je nave- bilo da je riječ o samostalnim selima ili njihovim
deni kraj dugo bio pograničje, što je ostavilo ne pridruženim naseljima, dakle zaseocima. U sud-
samo ekonomske nego i demografske posljedice skom smislu, do formiranja zasebnog kadiluka,
na sam Tešanj i njegovo okruženje. Rezultati tog Tešanj i njegova okolina pripadali su kadiluku
oporavka vidljivi su već do 1530. godine, kada Brod,5 a potom, kada su se stekli uvjeti za izvje-
izvori govore da je Tešanj mjesto s 36 domaćin- snu reorganizaciju sudske podjele, osnovan je
stava, a samo deceniju kasnije nalazimo znatno zaseban kadiluk sa sjedištem u Tešnju, što je lo-
više domova (65), što je višestruk pozitivan trend gičan slijed u procesu uspostave i zaokruživanja
za sam grad, ali i cjelokupno područje.3 Tvrđava sistema vlasti i uprave u jednom području koje
u Tešnju bila je u svojoj osnovnoj namjenskoj voj- je ulazilo u sastav Osmanskog Carstva. Nemamo
noj funkciji i služila je za smještaj vojne posade, izričitu potvrdu, ali se pretpostavlja da je kadi-
a vjerovatno i za dio organa civilne vlasti neop- luk Tešanj osnovan između 1566. i 1584. godine.
hodne za funkcioniranje administracije, poseb-
1
Handžić 1974, 161-162. 4
Tahrir Defteri, No. 432, 499-500.
2
Mrgić 2008, 158. 5
Kadiluk Brod obuhvatao je nahije: Bobovac, Brod i Lašvu,
3
Husić 2012, 301-318. dakle, područje Kaknja, Zenice i Travnika.

199
Najkraće, obuhvatao je međuprostor Tešnja, Do- muslimana u njima nije bio dostigao ni 15%, jer
boja, Maglaja i Žepča.6 Jedan od kriterija koji je su te tri nahije, podložne izrazitijim migracionim
nametao potrebu formiranja kadiluka u nekom procesima i naseljavanju Vlaha, pokazale veću
području bio je broj stanovnika, posebno broj zatvorenost spram utjecaja islamske duhovnosti.8
muslimana, kojem je u tom slučaju neophodan S druge strane, dvije temeljne nahije Tešanj i Ma-
kadija. Kako je to bilo u neposrednoj vezi s na- glaj imale su dokumentirana 2.722 domaćinstva.
stankom i formiranjem kadiluka, ovdje ćemo se Takvo je stanje bilo na području u vrijeme for-
ukratko osvrnuti i na to pitanje. miranja kadiluka Tešanj. Kao područje s više
U vrijeme formiranja kadiluka i na širem te- gradskih naselja, pa i zavidnim brojem stanov-
šanjskom području bilo je organizirano pet na- ništva i disperzijom naseljenih mjesta, očito da
hija: Usora, Ozren, Maglaj, Trebetin i Tešanj. Na jedan kadija nije mogao podmirivati i stizati sve
prostoru tih pet nahija dokumentirana su 3.394 poslove na jednom tako širokom prostoru. Stoga
domaćinstva. Odmah pada u oči velika razli- je bilo neophodno u sudski sistem tog područja
ka među nahijama, pri čemu se Tešanj i Maglaj uvesti i pomoćnike, odnosno zamjenike (naibe)
svojom brojnošću domaćinstava izdvajaju u od- ili zastupnike kadije u nekim od tih mjesta. Tu je
nosu na ostale nahije. Ako se posmatra distri- tvrdnju još davno istakao Hazim Šabanović9 te je
bucija stanovništva, uočljivo je da je samo u te uočio da su tešanjske kadije svoje naibe imale u
dvije nahije živjelo 80% žiteljstva kadiluka, dok Žepču i Maglaju. Opravdanost takve teze potvr-
je u tri male “patuljaste” nahije (Usora, Ozren i đuju i izvori iz kasnijeg perioda, posebno ovi iz
Trebetin) živjelo svega 20% stanovništva terito- druge polovine 18. stoljeća. Međutim, na osno-
rija koji je zahvatao kadiluk Tešanj. U području vu jednog izvora H. Šabanović je iznio konsta-
koje je pripadalo kadiluku do početka 17. stolje- taciju da je krajem 18. stoljeća Tešanj pripadao
ća evidentirano je 150 seoskih naselja, s mnogo- Maglajskom kadiluku.10 Osim što se to ne može
brojnim selištima, čiflucima koji su postepeno potvrditi niti jednim izvorom iz 18, ne može ni
naseljavani i prerastali u manja ili veća naselje- izvorima iz 19. stoljeća.11
na mjesta u kasnijim razdobljima. Želimo istaći
da su također već formirana i razvijala se četi-
ri gradska naselja, i to: Tešanj, Doboj, Maglaj i Kadiluk Tešanj u rangiranju kadiluka
Žepče. Osim Žepča, sva tri ostala imala su vojne
posade i predstavljala su i vojne centre. Za razli- Evlija Čelebija nije prošao kroz Tešanj niti u nje-
ku od nahija Tešanj i Maglaj, gdje se duh islama govoj blizini te ga prema tome i ne spominje.
osjećao snažnije i gdje su muslimani veoma rano Bilo bi vrlo dragocjeno njegovo zapažanje o Teš-
činili većinu stanovništva (56,5%), nemuslimani nju, kojega smo nažalost uskraćeni. No, negdje
su bili u nešto manjem broju (43,5%), bez obzira približno u isto vrijeme sačuvani su neki drugi
na to što je to područje kojim su prolazile vlaške izvori koji nam daju mogućnosti pozicioniranja
mase u svom kretanju ka zapadu ili sjeverozapa- kadiluka Tešanj, kako u užem tako i u širem te-
du, dio kojih se zaustavio upravo oko Maglaja i ritorijalnom okviru. Vojni sudija rumelijskog
Tešnja.7 To je bilo znatno vidljivije i uočljivije na dijela Osmanskog Carstva sačinio je (1667/68)
teritoriju malih nahija Ozren, Usora i Trebetin, popis 361 kadiluka u evropskom dijelu carstva,
koje su zajedno brojale svega 27 naselja s 8 seli- podijeljenih u 12 kategorija. Prema toj klasifika-
šta (mezri). Svaka od ove tri nahije imala je do- ciji kadiluk Tešanj nalazio se u tzv. “salise” kate-
maćinstava kao neka manja ili osrednja gradska goriji, što bi u pojednostavljenoj varijanti u redo-
naselja u to vrijeme u Bosni, dok su sve tri zajed- slijedu hijerarhijski bio šesti “razred” od ukupno
no imale domaćinstava kao razvijenije gradsko dvanaest razreda u rangiranju kadiluka. On se
naselje, približno koliko sam Travnik u to doba dakle nalazio u samoj sredini, gdje se prema na-
(693). Sve tri malene nahije imale su ukupno 672 vedenoj kategorizaciji nalazilo ukupno 36 kadi-
dokumentirana domaćinstva, dakle i manje od
Travnika. U vrijeme formiranja kadiluka, broj
8
Nametak 2000, 455-475; 2000a, 291-385; Handžić 1984,
129-146; 1994, 235-248.
9
Šabanović 1982, 150, 184.
6
Šabanović 1982, 150, 184. 10
Šabanović 1942, 343.
7
Handžić 1990, 57-66; 1994, 19-31. 11
Bojanić-Lukač / Katić 2005.

200
luka. Na prostoru Bosanskog ejaleta u tu grupu mjenjivao šerijatsko pravo.17 U ekonomskoj sfe-
spadali su još kadiluci: Akhisar (Prusac), Pljevlja ri, imao je ulogu nadzornog organa kontrole
(Tašluca), Tuzla (Memlehatejn), Osijek, Valpovo, tržišta, obavezu kontrole cijena prehrambenih
Bosna-Brod (Travnik-Zenica), Mostar, Požega artikala na tržištu, a posebno u sferi zakonitog
i Mitrovica.12 Prema tom izvoru kadiluk se de- razreza pojedinih poreza nadgledanje njihovog
finira na sljedeći način: “Tešanj, u Bosanskom ubiranja te nadzora i praćenja blagovremenog i
sandžaku. (Nalazi se) dvadeset sedam konaka.13 besprijekornog izvršavanja naredbi viših instan-
Okružuju ga kadiluci Jajce, Bijeljina i Derventa.” ci.18 S obzirom na širinu prostora, broj stanovniš-
Iz jednog kasnijeg izvora, pozicija kadiluka tva, brojnost predmeta, obaveza i poslova koje je
definirana je na sljedeći način: “Kadiluk Tešanj je trebalo izvršavati, kadija nije mogao sam raditi
u Bosanskom sandžaku; dvadeset i sedam kona- i nadzirati sve što je bilo u njegovoj nadležnosti
ka. Unaokolo su kadiluci Derventa i Jajce.”14 Nije i obavezi. On je imao pomoćnike koji su činili
poznato iz kojeg vremena tačno potječe izvor, ali dio kadijinog ureda i bili mu podređeni. To su
se zna da je njegov prijepis nastao sredinom 18. najčešće bili: zamjenik (naib), ostavinski djeli-
stoljeća (1745).15 U Bosanskom sandžaku bilo je telj (kassam), tržišni inspektor (muhtesib), pisar
formirano 15 kadiluka, među kojima i Tešanj. (katib), građevinski inspektor (mimar), sudski
U to vrijeme on je predstavljao jedan od 48 ka- policajac (muhzir) i “svjedoci čina” (şühûdü’l-
diluka koliko je Bosanski ejalet imao na svome hâl) kao poseban, iako vanjski, gotovo redovan
prostoru. U takvoj sudskoj podjeli i organizaciji segment rada pravosudnih institucija.19 Izvan sa-
kadiluk Tešanj se nalazio tokom 18. stoljeća. mog sudskog sistema i kadijinog ureda postojale
su i neke druge “vanjske pomoćne službe” koje su
bile obavezne sarađivati i pomagati kadiji u vrše-
O organizaciji sudske vlasti nju njegove funkcije. To su bili: upravitelji vakufa
(mutevelije), ćehaje esnafa, subaša, spahija, zatim
U sistemu osmanske vlasti, administracije i upra- predstavnici pojedinih društvenih grupa ili nase-
ve kadija je imao vrlo značajnu ulogu i posebno ljenih mjesta.20
mjesto. Stoga su ga imenovali organi centralne, a Ovdje trebamo spomenuti još jednu institu-
ne pokrajinske vlasti, od kojih je u tom smislu bio ciju koja nije izravno bila dio pravosuđa, ali su
potpuno nezavisan. Njihov osnovni zadatak bio itekako bili međusobno povezani u praksi. To je
je kontrola provedbe zakona i nadležnih akata u institucija muftije, koji je predstavljao najvažnije
djelokrugu njihove nadležnosti, bez obzira na to konsultativno i savjetodavno tijelo kadije u ne-
odakle dolazili, iz pokrajinskih ili centralnih ni- kim pravnim pitanjima.21 Odluka kadije umno-
voa vlasti. Stoga svi akti i jesu dolazili najprije na- gome je zavisila od fetve, koju muftija o nekim
mjesniku, a on ih je obavezno prosljeđivao kadi- pitanjima izdaje i na zahtjev kadije te po potrebi
ji.16 Osim toga, i ono što se tiče nižih nivoa vlasti dostavlja sudu. Kadija se morao ravnati s odred-
i uprave ili pojedinačni akti išli su preko kadije. bama fetvi, što u jednom izvoru imamo izrav-
U svome radu kadija se oslanjao na šerijatsko no zasvjedočeno. Naime, u jednom zemljišnom
pravo. Shodno tome, imao je potpunu nadlež- sporu, koji je trebao riješiti tešanjski kadija Omer
nost nad muslimanima, a nad nemuslimanima (1757), njemu se nalaže da treba “stvar ispitati i
tek djelimično, i to u krivičnim pitanjima. U uzeti uvida u odredbe fetve”.22 U pitanjima za koje
običajnim, nasljednim i sl. pitanjima nemusli- ni sam kadija nije imao jasnu pravnu osnovu, on
mani su imali potpunu autonomiju. Na zahtjev se obraćao muftiji kao konsultativnoj instanci i
stranke kadija je imao obavezu voditi postupak
i za nemuslimane, s tim da je u tom slučaju pri- 17
Sućeska 1965, 48.
18
Šabanović 1973, 19-20; Sućeska 1965, 49-51; Aličić 1983,
47-54.
12
Istanbul, Belediye Kitabliği, No. K13, 28-43; Özergin 1988, 19
Ipširli 2004, 322-323; Aydin 2004, 543-546.
253, 261. 20
Ipširli 2004, 323; Aydin 2003, 341-344; 2004, 543-546; Ali-
13
Ovdje se podrazumijeva 27 konaka udaljenosti od čić 1983, 47-54.
Istanbula. 21
Aydın 2003, 341-344; 2004, 543-546; Jennings 1978, 134-
14
Šabanović 1942, 308, 314, 343; Bašagić 1930, 177-179. 135.
15
Šabanović 1942, 308, 314. 22
NUBBiH Rs. 832, fo. 57. (prijevod: Abdulah Polimac, Sa-
16
Akdağ 1971, 75-81. lih Trako i Lamija Hadžiosmanović)

201
od njega tražio fetvu o nekom pitanju, na temelju kadije. Tek kod nekih, po nadimcima Travniki,
čega je kasnije donosio sudsku odluku. Saraji i sl., moguće je vidjeti mjesto porijekla. Za
Svoje svakodnevne poslove kadija je obavljao Muharemiju kadiju 1752. godine zna se da je iz
u namjenskim prostorijama – sudnici (mehke- Sarajeva. Ali očito je bilo pokušaja da se poneka
ma) ili pak namjenskom objektu. U razvijeni- od lokalnih osoba domogne barem pomoćničke
jim mjestima sjedište kadije obično se nalazilo službe naiba u kadiluku. Stanovnici su bili izričito
u centru grada uz neki reprezentativan objekat, protiv toga i uvijek su reagovali podnošenjem pe-
ili pak u blizini glavne džamije.23 U sva tri mje- ticija nadležnim instancama za njihovu smjenu.
sta Tešanjskog kadiluka gdje se sudilo postojale
su zgrade ili odaje suda (mehkeme). To se vidi i
iz podneska stanovništa koje se žali da su kadije O nosiocima sudske vlasti na
oduvijek sjedile u sudskim prostorijama (mehke- području kadiluka
mama), a da se u praksu uvode neke stvari koje
ne priliče sudskom kodeksu, to jest pretvaranje I pored obilja dokumenata iz dugog vremenskog
prakse suđenja u “mobilno suđenje”. Dakle, ka- perioda izvori ne pružaju previše prostora za
dije ili naibi povremeno su “išli na teren” izvan praćenje imena na pozicijama kadija u Tešnju,
službenih prostorija. No, žalba ne sadrži samo taj tako da ih je dokumentiran relativno mali broj
vid kršenja kodeksa i pravne prakse. Uz to su ka- u odnosu na vremenski okvir koji obuhvataju
dije nepravedno sudile i izlasci su im koristili više dokumenti iz druge polovine 18. stoljeća. Prema
kao pokriće za druge stvari, kao što su besplatna onome što nalazimo u sidžilu iz druge polovine
ishrana i besplatno konačenje. Taj dodatni teret 18. stoljeća,26 na položaju kadija u Tešnju koji
stanovništvo je teško podnosilo i zato se žalilo.24 su rješavali neka od naprijed istaknutih pitanja
Broj sudskog personala nije bio strogo propi- te unosili dokumente u sidžil bili su: Husein ef.
san i varirao je u odnosu na mnogobrojne fak- (1752–1753),27 Mustafa ef. (1753–1754),28 po-
tore, prvenstveno rang kadiluka te druge prilike novo Mustafa (1755–1756),29 Omer ef. (1757),
lokalnog karaktera, veličinu teritorija, gustinu hadži Alija (1757), Hasan ef. (1758), Mehmed
naseljenosti, broj stanovništva i naravno obim Čurčić (1788),30 Hasan ef. (1781), Hulusi ef.
poslova koji su dolazili kadiji na dnevni red. (1789). Iz navedenog se također vidi da je prvom
Ipak postojao je jedan minimum za funkcioni- spomenutom 1752. godine na položaju kadije u
ranje suda, a to su, osim kadije, pisar (katib) i Tešnju prethodio Muharemi efendija smijenjen
sudski izvršitelj (muhzir), što je bilo neophodno početkom augusta 1752.31 Zapostavivši neke
za normalno funkcioniranje.25 Ostalo je zavisilo druge okolnosti i bez temeljite analize za hadži
od naprijed istaknutih okolnosti, kao što je broj
službi pri sudu i broj ljudi u pojedinim služba- 26
NUBBiH, Rs 832.
ma. Sasvim sigurno službe pri sudu, kao i broj
27
Prema dokumentiranom, kao kadija se posljednji puta
javlja 28. X 1753. Rs. 832, fo. 33.
izvršilaca, bili su različiti i u tom pogledu praksa 28
Prvi put se javlja 22. XI 1753, što znači da se smjena dogo-
i stanje bili su drugačiji od suda do suda. Kada je dila negdje u posljednjem kvartalu 1753. i da je on izravno
u pitanju sjedište kadiluka u Tešnju, u pravnom naslijedio Huseina ef. na položaju kadije u Tešnju.
segmentu sud su zajednički opsluživali kadija i
29
Vjerovatno je između ove dvije godine neko drugi obav-
ljao službu kadije jer se teško jedno lice moglo zadržati to-
njegov naib, dok su u ispostavama Maglaj i Žepče
liko dugo. Kadije su imenovane najviše na period do dvije
to radili samo naibi. godine (Rs. 832, fo. 106). Ovdje je moguće i da su to dvije
U principu, jedno od pravila u pravosudnom različite ličnosti s istim imenom.
sistemu bilo je da mještanin ne može obavljati 30
Vjerovatno je riječ o Mehmedu ef. Čurčiću iz sarajevske
službu kadije ili naiba. Otuda su, dakle, kadije i loze Čurčića koji se titulira kao efendija 1781, a kasnije i kao
kadija u Tešnju. Vjerovatno iz iste loze potječe i kadija Rad-
naibi i u kadiluku Tešanj morali potjecati izvan gib efendija Čurčić; Tanović 2016, 77.
prostora kadiluka. I pored toga, malo je podata- 31
U vremenu koje je prethodilo službovanju Muharemije,
ka iz kojih se može doznati odakle su pojedine zbog kontinuiteta službe, ali i svojevrsne povezanosti dva
sidžila, navest ćemo i kadije koje su na tom položaju pret-
hodile navedenim licima. To su: Jusuf (1741), Derviš Ebu
23
Akdağ 1971, 76. Bekir (1741), Ajni ef. (prije 1745), Arslan sin Mustafe, s.
24
AD, 757, II, 144-146. Mehmeda (1745), Mustafa (1746); Čar-Drnda 2005, 93, 97,
25
İnalcık 1991, 4. 129, 113.

202
Aliju se ponekad navodi da je: “Na dužnost te- stafa ef. (1782),46 kadija Osman ef. (1782),47 kadi-
šanjskog kadije postavljen 1171/1757. godine. ja Salih Ahmed Bosnevi Travniki (1784),48 naib
Dakle, smijenio je Huseina kadiju.”32 Zanema- Mustafa (1785),49 kadija hadži Mehmed Rušdi
rimo li čak i navedenu hronologiju i rotacije (1787),50 kadija Musić Nedžib, kadija Sulejman
1752–1758, nije moguće da jedna osoba ostane (1792),51 kadija Ali Hulusi (1791),52 naib Meh-
tako dugo na položaju kadije. U suštini, kako je med Seid (1792).53
vrijeme odmicalo, tako se smanjivao rok na koji
su kadije mogle biti imenovane, tako da je u 18.
stoljeću rok kadijske službe trajao godinu.33 Iz Devijacije u sudskom sistemu
tog su razloga česte smjene u navedenim sluča-
jevima. Među tešanjske kadije neopravdano je Bez obzira na to što su po prirodi svoje funkcije
svrstan i Isa Arif, kadija Dervente 1789. godine, kadije čuvari poretka, sistema, u funkciji zašti-
jer su to dva različita kadiluka.34 Derventa u sud- te prava i dijeljenja pravde, kadije ne odgovore
skom smislu nije bila vezana za Tešanj, kao što su uvijek toj svojoj ulozi. Ranije smo spomenuli pri-
to Žepče ili Maglaj. mjer Muharemije i pobune na čijem je čelu bio.
Osim navedenih, u različitim kontekstima Ima indicija da je i neki od kadija u Tešnju, čije
izravno spomenutih kadija ili naiba, želimo nave- ime nije navedeno, ali je službovao prije Ome-
sti i nekoliko osoba koje se ne spominju u sidži- ra ef. (1757), bio sklon koruptivnim radnjama
lu, ali se spominju u drugim izvorima u vremen- i primanju mita. Takvu pritužbu višoj instanci
skom okviru koji obuhvata sidžil (1752–1790), u Travniku uputio je izvjesni Alija optužujući
a obavljali su neku od sudskih službi u Tešnju. “tešanjskog kadiju za protuzakonitu odluku”, za
To su sljedeće kadije: Hafizade Mustafa, koji se koju je kao nedozvoljeni dar primio “dvadeset
kao kadija spominje 1754. godine,35 zatim naib dukata” pri presudi u zemljišnom sporu u selu
Mustafa 1760.36 te naib hadži Sulejman 1764.37 Netače, danas zaseoku Omanjske kod Tešnja.
Šest godina kasnije (1766) na službi se spomi- Taj spor trebao je sredinom 1757. godine riješiti
nje naib Mustafa.38 Kako mandat naiba nije bio aktuelni kadija Omer efendija.54 Da su kadije tih
strogo ograničen kao kadije, moguće je da je on godina bile sklone određenim nezakonitostima i
sve vrijeme obavljao funkciju naiba u kontinui- da stanovništvo nije bilo zadovoljno vidi se i iz
tetu. Nakon ovoga, gotovo deceniju nemamo ne- sadržaja fermana upućenog 1758. (3. II).55 Koliko
kih vijesti o kadijama ovog kadiluka. Tek 1775. god ovaj ferman imao općenit karakter, iz njega
godine spominje se ime kadije hadži Sulejmana vidimo da je i sudski sistem bio poprilično osla-
ef.,39 a potom iste godine kadije Mehmeda40 i bio i da je bilo ne samo opravdanog nego i vrlo
nešto kasnije kadije Osmana Abdusamedovića ozbiljnog razloga za intervenciju Centra. Osim
(1777).41 Iza toga vrlo brzo slijedi službovanje mnogobrojnih sudskih taksi, koje su se umno-
Omera ef. (Rifdi Saraji) (1778),42 potom se jav- žavale i služile kao sredstvo za uzimanje novca,
ljaju imena naib Ibrahim (1779),43 kadija Hasan kadije su očito pronalazile i drugi način dolaska
ef. (1780)44 i naib Ibrahim (1780),45 kadija Mu- do “dodatnih izvora prihoda” uzimajući poklone
i sudeći ne po pravu i pravdi nego prema drugim
kriterijima. Nije to bila nepoznanica ni central-
noj vlasti i očito da su pritužbe s terena alarmi-
32
Fatić 2005, 66. rale da im se uputi upozorenje, zbog čega se u
33
Aydin 2004, 536.
fermanu kadijama posvećuje posebna pažnja i
34
Fatić 2005, 68.
35
OIS ANUBiH, Ahkam defteri, 85, I-II, 213.
36
AD. 85 I-II, 348. 46
AD 85, V, 21.
37
Isto 553. 47
Isto 59.
38
Isto III, 58. 48
Fatić 2005, 67.
39
Isto 195. 49
AD 85, VI, 12.
40
Isto 244. 50
Isto 144-146.
41
Isto 397. 51
Isto 212.
42
Isto 494; Fatić 2005, 66. 52
AD 75, II, 201.
43
AD 85, IV-V, 125. 53
AD 85, VI, 237.
44
AD 85, IV, 230. 54
Rs. 832, fo. 57.
45
AD 85, IV-V, 276. 55
Isto fo. 82-82.

203
taksativno nabrajaju uočene nepravilnosti: fa- vjerovatno sudskih policajaca, kojima je također
voriziranje neke od strana u postupku, povišene trebalo osigurati istu logistiku.58 Da su kadije bile
naplate za izdavanje hudžeta, povećani iznosi za potkupljive vidi se i iz zemljišnog spora koji je
hardži kitabet i za upis u sidžile i svakako najdra- 1779. preuzeo kadija Travnika Feraizi Alija, jer
stičniji prekršaj – primanje mita.56 U istom fer- su tamošnje sudije bile pristrasne i u tom pred-
manu to se na još jednom mjestu izričito zabra- metu. Pošto je slučaj bio došao i do šejhul-islama,
njuje: “Službenici suda ne smiju uzimati mito.” on je ovaj predmet delegirao travničkom kadiji
Sve to očito znači da je ta praksa bila uzela šireg kako bi se izbjegla pristrasnost i osigurao najpra-
maha i da je centralna vlast o svemu bila dobro vedniji ishod. Kadija Omer (Rifdi Saraji) i naib
informisana. Ibrahim izdali su hudžet 1191, za šta nisu imali
Sankcija predviđena za nosioce sudskih funk- pravnog osnova, tako da su na nelegalan način u
cija u ovom slučaju bila je “brisanje sa spiska posjed zemljišta Mustafe i Mehmeda Agića bili
kadija”, što je značilo automatski i kraj njihove došli braća Mustafa i Husejn Pobrić.59
kadijske karijere. A za jednog službenika suda Nije poznato kako su pojedinci uspijevali da
nema veće kazne nego doživotna diskvalifikacija uđu u sudski sistem protivno općem pravilu koje
iz službe i nemogućnost povratka. Činjenica da je važilo da lokalno stanovništvo ne može vršiti
je jedna optužba evidentirana i u Tešnju govori sudsku vlast upravo iz predostrožnosti od korup-
da ni tešanjske kadije nisu bile izuzetak od općeg cije, zbog osiguravanja nepristrasnosti i spreča-
stanja koje je zavladalo u pravosudnom sistemu vanja moguće podmitljivosti. No, kako se uveli-
Osmanskoga Carstva. ko, između ostalog uz pomoć “trgovine položa-
Sve ovo govori samo o tim pojavama u Bosni. jima”, dolazilo i do kadijskih funkcija, nije čudo
Ali iz dokumenata kasnijih godina, pred sami da se te pojave susreću i u Tešnju.60 Već 1766.
kraj 18. stoljeća (1789), vidimo da su slična upo- stanovništvo Tešnja je protestovalo protiv naiba
zorenja bila upućena svim mulama, kadijama i Mustafe jer je bio mještanin i još uz to sklon uzi-
naibima u “srednjem krilu Rumelije” i da su bile manju povišenih taksi, mimo propisanih tarifa.61
evidentne razne zloupotrebe ljudi iz sudskog si- I stanovništvo Žepča iz istih razloga 1785. godi-
stema. A kako je to funkcioniralo, vidi se iz slje- ne tražilo je smjenu naiba Saliha jer je mješta-
dećeg: “Nakon što se uzme u zakup po već odre- nin, a osim toga “naplaćuje veće takse”. Kao što
đenoj cijeni, oni tu cijenu podvostruče, pa silom se vidi, obrazac optužbi u više je slučajeva isto-
uzimaju od sirotinje. Taj dodatak na propisanu vjetan.62 Na nesavjestan rad i kršenje sudijskog
cijenu kadije dijele među se, kao i gradske ćehaje kodeksa žalilo se stanovništvo Maglaja i Žepča
i mubašir. Na ovaj način se upropaštava imovina 1787. godine. Njihovu žalbu višim instancama
sirotinje.”57 Sudeći prema onome što je sačuva- uputio je tešanjski kadija Mehmed Rušdi.63 Bar
no, problem u sudstvu naročito je bio izražen u prema optužbi, osim što su mimo propisa hoda-
posljednjim decenijama 18. stoljeća. Sve su češće li po selima i živjeli na račun seljaštva, svoje su
bile pritužbe na nosioce sudske vlasti. U nekoli- zadatke povjeravali drugim licima, izricali kazne
ko godina više puta susrećemo predmete koji na i bez suđenja, dakle po slobodnom nahođenju.64
to ukazuju. Najprije nalazimo pritužbe stanov- Očigledno ih i stanovnišvo, revoltirano ponaša-
ništva na kadiju i naiba u Tešnju 1778. godine. njem pojedinih kadija ili naiba, nije štedilo, tako
Osim što su mimo uobičajene prakse napuštali da su neke kadije bile na meti te su ih pojedinci
svoja službena mjesta (mehkeme), zloupotreblja- izlagali neprijatnostima. Kadija Ali Hulusi efen-
vali su položaj na takav način da su bez zahtjeva dija u Žepču bio je žrtva Omer-baše i društva
stranaka tražili ostavinske diobe, pri čemu su za koji su mu otuđili 1.950 groša.65 Sve u svemu, od-
to naplaćivali i veće takse od propisanih. Njihov
“terenski rad” podrazumijevao je niz drugih oba- 58
AD, 85, III, 429, 433.
veza za stanovništvo koje su oni sami nametali IV-V, 62-63.
59Isto,

– konačenje, ishrana i sl. Problem je bio tim veći 60

Aličić 1984, 168-176.
što oni nisu išli sami, nego u pratnji konjanika,
61
AD, III, 58.
62
AD, 75 II, 51.
63
Isto 144-146.
56
Rs. fo. 83-82. 64
Isto.
57
Rs. fo. 73. 65
Isto 201.

204
nosi između nosilaca sudske vlasti i stanovništva i kao pisar suda (1756), što bi moglo upućivati
nisu bili besprijekorni. Razlozi su ponekad bili na to da je s položaja pisara bio unaprijeđen u
opravdani i razumljivi, a ponekad vrlo neočeki- naiba, dok su neki drugi iz statusa naiba bili una-
vani. Stanovništvo je itekako moglo utjecati na prijeđeni u status kadije. Isto tako, evidentno je
smjenu, ali i dati doprinos u imenovanju poje- da se pojedine osobe nakon kadijskog mandata
dinih lica na položaje u sudskim uredima. Radili pojavljuju i kao naibi. Valija Mehmed-paša 1758.
su to putem predstavki, žalbi, pritužbi na kadije. (21. III) dao je odobrenje da hadži Alija, teme-
Ako bi se one pokazale opravdanim, kadija ili ljem kadijske murasele, može vršiti funkciju nai-
neki drugi službenik se smjenjivao, izuzev ako ba. Njegovo postavljenje tražilo je stanovništvo, a
nije uživao neku posebnu zaštitu koju je zadobio Hasan efendija, aktuelni kadija, uputio je molbu
uz korupciju ili na neki drugi način. valiji. I ovdje se susrećemo s vrlo neobičnom i za-
nimljivom situacijom. Nakon što je Hasan efen-
dija imenovao hadži Aliju svojim zamjenikom
Naibi – naibom, ovaj je istu dužnost prenio na Omera
efendiju već od 1. redžepa 1171. (11. III 1758),
Obim posla nije dopuštao da kadija može sve dakle od svog imenovanja.67
obavljati sam, posebno ako je bila riječ o širem Možda se ovdje radi o nekoj vrsti rotacije, jer
prostoru koji on treba pokrivati, ili o većim mje- su kadije, zavisno od okolnosti, mogle na toj po-
stima gdje mu je bilo sjedište, brojnijim seoskim ziciji ostati 16, a najviše do 24 mjeseca u 17, a u
naseljima i stanovništvu. Ponekad nije uspijevao 18. stoljeću samo godinu dana. To je zanimljivije
pokrivati sve obaveze ni samom u sjedištu ka- tim prije što u sidžilu na dva mjesta nalazimo pe-
diluka ili je naprosto bivao spriječen obavljati čat kadije h. Alije. Pravo na posjedovanje i izradu
pojedine obaveze, zbog čega bi za takve situacije pečata on je bio stekao 1160. (1747/48) godine,
imenovao svoga zamjenika i u sjedištu kadiluka. što znači da je najkasnije još od toga vremena
Stoga su kadije, posebno u udaljenijim mjestima bio u sudskoj službi. Na još dva mjesta nalaze se
gradskoga tipa, u području kadiluka morale ima- drugi nečitki pečati.68 Hadži Alija se tako u ra-
ti svoje pomoćnike (naibe), koji su ih mijenjali zličitim kontekstima titulirao kao naib 1756. (11.
u njihovim poslovima i obavezama. Naibi su bili VII), 1757. (21. X) i 1758. (11. III), a kao kadija
prvi i najvažniji saradnici kadije u sudskim pita- 1756. (15. IV) i 1757. (25. IX).69 I iz ovoga se na-
njima i on ih je imenovao na određeno vrijeme zire svojevrsna relativnost tituliranja, kao i neke
ili na konkretan posao. Naibi nisu bili ograničeni hronološke i nelogičnosti, jer se u manje od dva
kratkotrajnošću roka službe kao kadije. Ipak, iz mjeseca vrlo jasno i bez dvojbe ista osoba titulira
prakse ovoga suda ne bi se moglo reći da su naibi kao kadija 25. septembra 1757, a 21. oktobra iste
tako dugo ostajali na tim pozicijama. Sve ukazu- godine, dakle ni mjesec dana kasnije, kao naib.
je na to da su se mijenjali često kao i kadije, bez Očekuje se da se ta hijerarhija kreće od naiba ka
obzira na to što se u literaturi navodi da su mogli kadiji, a ne obrnuto kao što se iz ove hronologi-
ostati i dvije do tri decenije.66 Služba naiba finan- je nazire, prvo kadija pa onda naib. Očigledno je
sirala se iz raznolikih taksi koje je sud naplaćivao da su u tim rotacijama neki s viših dobijali i niže
za svoje pravne usluge. Kadija je naibu uglavnom rangirane službe, što je opet bilo povoljnije u od-
delegirao poslove koji nisu bili procesnog nego nosu na “čekanje”.
inspekcijsko-istražnog karaktera, kao što su: U nadležnosti tešanjskog kadije bile su i sud-
istrage, inspekcije, verifikacije, osim ako odre- ske ispostave nahija Žepče i Maglaj, što znači da
đene okolnosti nisu nalagale i nešto drugačije. je kadija imao svoje opunomoćene zastupnike u
Uprkos dugom razdoblju, u velikom broju pred- Žepču i Maglaju, preko kojih je obavljao određe-
meta opet susrećemo relativno mali broj imena u ne poslove, odnosno dio svojih ovlasti prenosio
ulozi naiba. Od prvih pomoćnika kadije nakon je na svoje zamjenike (naibe). Njih su imenovale
1752. spominju se: naib Alija (1756, 1757, 1758),
Musa, naib kadije, (1757) i naib Fojničanin Ga- 67
Rs. fo. 60.
ribi-efendija (1757). Izvjesni Musa spominjao se 68
Rs. 832, fo. 84 i fo. 90. Nečitak pečat postoji i na fo. 34. i
110. Oblici pečata su različiti. Pečat hadži Alije je pravouga-
onog, dok je drugi pečat okruglog oblika.
66
Ipširli 2006, 312-313. 69
Rs. fo. 60, fo. 104, fo. 84, fo. 98.

205
kadije, vjerovatno uz saglasnost Bosanskog diva- su službe trajale duže od kadijske, no i pored toga
na i samog valije. U mnogim dokumentima to iznenađuje mali broj mjesta ili dokumenata u
se izričito i ističe, jer su upućeni između ostalog kojima se pisari spominju u bilo kom kontekstu.
i tamošnjim kadijinim naibima, ali se oni uvijek Katibi su dobijali berat o postavljenju s definisa-
oslovljavaju “naibu nahije Žepče” ili “naibu nahi- nim pravilima načina vršenja službe.
je Maglaj”, ili nekom sličnom sintagmom, samo, Tek od početka 1756. imamo izvjesnije vijesti
“naibu Žepča” ili “naibu Maglaja”. Iako se vrlo ri- o katibima, i to da je pisar Mehmed umro, a “uče-
jetko spominju imenom, povremeno nailazimo ni Musa-halifa sin Ahmedov je najdostojniji toga
na imena pojedinih “naiba”. Međutim, samo je položaja”. Iz ovoga se nazire da je on u suštini već
jednom naib Žepča potpisan imenom – Omer, bio na pripravničkoj službi kod svoga prethodnika
sredinom 1756. godine. Nekoliko godina kasnije i možemo reći “pretpostavljenog” Mehmeda, od
(1760) znamo da je u Žepču kao naib službovao kojega je učio sudski “pisarski” zanat. Iz atributa
Mustafa.70 Manja grupa ljudi pokušala ga je dis- “učeni” jasno se daje do znanja da je on iskusan u
kreditovati, ali su u njegovu odbranu stali prvaci “pisarskom zanatu”. Zahtjev za njegovo postavlje-
“svi učeni ljudi, age, kapetan”, kao i većina sta- nje tražio je kadija Mustafa, a potvrda imenovanja
novništva. Njegovi simpatizeri su ga okvalifiko- stigla je sredinom februara 1756.75 Do kraja 1756.
vali i “kao učena i prijatna”, što, eto, nekima ipak (26. XII) on se spominje kao pisar (katib). To daje
nije bilo dovoljno te su tražili njegovu smjenu. dovoljno argumenata da bi on mogao biti unapri-
I kasniji podaci su samo fragmentarni i vrlo jeđen u “naiba” jer se već od sljedeće 1757. godine
rijetki. Sljedeće saznanje o naibu imamo iz 1781. (22. III) spominje “Musa, naib kadije”.76 U raznim
godine, iz čega vidimo da je naib “Osman ef.” već slučajevima za usluge suda, sastavljanje deftera ili
“bivši naib”,71 a nedugo potom (1785) iz drugih nekog drugog akta, posebno kod razreza poreza,
izvora kao naib u Žepču spominje se Salih ef.72 sud je za uslugu i troškove te vrste naplaćivao tzv.
Tri godine kasnije doznajemo da je naib u Žepču “katibiju”, dakle troškove popisa ili troškove sa-
bio i izvjesni Mustafa efendija, kojega je mura- stavljanja “deftera”, iz čega se između ostalog fi-
selom od 2. IX 1788. imenovao tešanjski kadija nansirala i ova služba. Iz fermana se vidi da se u
Mehmed Čurčić.73 tome pretjerivalo i da to nije imalo osnova, iako
je itekako prisutno u mnogim razrezima. Prema
onome kako se susreću u praksi suda u Tešnju, ti
Katibi troškovi su iznosili 10%.
Obavezan sastavni dio jedne sudske institucije
bili su pisari (katibi) kroz čije su ruke prolazili Muhziri
svi ulazni i izlazni akti. Oni su bili ti koji su pratili
kadiju u poslovima, pratili procese koje su kadi- Ovo je bila posebna služba pri sudu koju najčešće
je vodile ili neke druge sudske postupke, vodili nije mogla obavljati jedna osoba nego više njih.
službene zabilješke, upisivali kadijine odluke ili To je zavisilo od veličine kadiluka i same organi-
predmete. Često je broj pisara (katiba) bio više zacije suda shodno lokalnim potrebama. Sud je
od jednog. To je zavisilo od veličine cjelokupnog u izvanrednim okolnostima, posebno u manjim
aparata, veličine kadiluka i frekvencije predmeta kadilucima i manjim sudovima, mogao funkci-
koji su dolazili na sud. I na čelu te službe nalazio onirati bez nekih službi, u nužnim okolnostima
se “glavni pisar” ili “generalni sekretar” (başkati- bez pisara (katiba) jer je to mogao raditi sam
b),74 posebno ako se radilo o većim kadilucima i kadija, ali nije mogao funkcionirati bez sudske
većim sudovima s brojnijim personalom. Naža- policije (muhzira), koju nije mogla nadomjestiti
lost, nemamo puno informacija o tome koje su niti jedna druga služba pri sudu.77 Iz izvora vi-
sve osobe obavljale pisarske poslove u Tešnju. Te dimo da je pri sudu u Tešnju postojao “ured za
privođenje na sud” ili, kako se vrlo često koristi,
70
AD, 85, I-II, 348. “sudski pozivar”. No nije to bio samo obični “do-
71
Rs. fo. 116.
72
AD, 75, II, 51. 75
Rs. fo. 105.
73
Rs. fo. 64. 76
Rs. fo. 51. Moguća je i podudarnost imena.
74
İnalcık 1991, 4. 77
Ahiskali 2006, 85-86.

206
stavljač poziva” ili pojednostavljeno kurir, kako šće se javlja izvjesni Hasan (1756–1758) i vrlo je
sugerira sam naziv, nego služba sa znatno značaj- često različito etiketiran od strane pisara: “aga u
nijom ulogom i većim ovlastima, čija je zadaća uredu za privođenje”, “čauš”. Bez obzira na razli-
bila osigurati prisustvo strana u postupku.78 Za čita tituliranja, vjerovatno je riječ o istoj osobi, jer
te svoje poslove od kadije, ili zavisno od sudske se uglavnom radi o relativno kratkom vremen-
instance koja je tražila privođenje, dobijali su skom okviru, ili pak njegovom statusnom na-
službeni nalog za privođenje (muraselu) kojom predovanju. U jednom nedatiranom dokumentu
je osiguravan legalitet privođenja. U slučaju po- (1757) kao muhziri se spominju i Mehmed80 te
trebe, “sudski izvršitelj” mogao je dobiti i po- Šaban ćehaja (1757).81 Iz kasnijih godina susreće
moć nekog iz reda lokalnih vojnih struktura. O se samo još jedno ime – Halil (1781).82 Iz ovoga
tome je odlučivao sam kadija i on je bio taj koji bi se dalo razumjeti da su i sudski policajci bili
je tražio dodatnu intervenciju. Na prijedlog ili na rangirani, bez obzira na to što ih izvor ne spomi-
“molbu” kadije koju je on dostavljao centralnim nje uvijek dosljedno prema njihovim činovima
vlastima, muhziri su birani iz reda lokalnog sta- ili statusima u redu sudske policije. No, ako je bio
novništa, najčešće iz vojničkih slojeva društva, o aga ili čauš, to znači da je i u toj službi, čak i na
čemu je odabrani kandidat dobijao berat kao i svi nižim nivoima, osim muhzirbaše, bila evidentna
drugi službenici u funkciji sistema. Na službi je hijerarhija i da je pri sudu u Tešnju bilo više sud-
ostajao sve dok ju je obavljao besprijekorno i dok skih policajaca. Za ove usluge sud je naplaćivao
je ne bi bio lišen zbog nesavjesnog obavljanja, posebne takse (ihzariya) koje je sud određivao i
pritužbi ili ličnih razloga. naplaćivao od stranaka za koje su oni morali biti
Na čelu sudske policije u jednom sudskom angažirani.
okrugu stajao je obično muhzirbaša pod izrav-
nom “komandom” suda, odnosno kadije kao
najodgovornijeg lica jednog sudskog okruga.79 Pomoćne službe u sudu
Ne znamo niti je moguće ustanoviti tačan broj
sudskih policajaca (izvršitelja) koji su bili anga- Postojale su i pomoćne službe i pomoćni službe-
žirani, posebno s obzirom na prirodu posla, kao nici pri uredu kadije, koje se javljaju više puta. Te
i činjenicu da su trebali često ići na teren, kako su službe obavljali: Alija (1756), Ali-baša (1756),
bi dostavljali sudske pozive, privodili stranke Mustafa (1756), softa Mehmed (2. VIII 1757),
sudu, dostavljali sudske odluke i presude. Uvi- Uzeir softa (10. X 1757), softa Osman (18. XII
jek ih je moralo biti više i morali su imati ko- 1757), Mehmed (1757–1758), Osman (18. XII
nja kao osnovno transportno sredstvo. To je bio 1757), Mehmed-baša (8. I 1758) i mula Mehmed
uvjet da bi se neko uopće mogao kandidirati za (17. II 1758).83 Zanimljivo je da se u pomoćnim
tu službu. Broj ovih službenika opet je zavisio od službama javljaju i dva mlada službenika, softe –
faktora koje smo navodili za druge službe. To je učenici, novi svršenici neke od obrazovnih usta-
bilo posebno važno za ovu službu s obzirom na nova. Bez obzira na sve druge moguće opcije,
fizičku složenost posla. Za razliku od većine dru- ovdje se kao osnovna nameće da je najvjerovat-
gih sudskih službi, koje su svoje poslove najčešće nije riječ o svršenicima Ferhad-begove medrese
obavljale u prostorijama suda, ova služba imala u Tešnju. To znači da su softe Mehmed, Uzeir i
je dominantno terenski karakter. Stoga se u fizič- Osman kao mladi došli da odrade početni staž
kom smislu može smatrati najzahtjevnijom služ- kod kadije Tešnja i da su se već tu pripremali za
bom, jer je podrazumijevala stalni terenski rad, neku od državnih službi, da li pri sudu ili nekoj
obilazak mjesta u kojima su stranke u postupku drugoj ustanovi obrazovnog karaktera, shodno
ili protiv kojih se vodi postupak. stepenu obrazovanja i rangu škole koju su za-
Sudski policajci bili su posebno značajan fak- vršili. Ne potcjenjujući osnovno značenje riječi
tor kada su u pitanju bili teži prekršaji ili krivična “softa”, ovdje nam se ova riječ nameće prvenstve-
djela, naročito ona teža. U sudu u Tešnju najče-
80
Rs. fo. 81.
81
Rs. fo. 92.
78
Jennings ga naziva “ad hoc commite of ‘Muslims’…” 82
Rs. fo. 101.
Jennings 1978, 150-153. 83
Rs. fo. 80, fo. 81, fo. 85, fo. 92, fo. 93, fo. 95, fo. 96, fo. 97,
79
İnalcık 1991, 4; Akdağ 1971, 79. fo. 115.

207
no u značenju osobe koja stažira ili je na nekom otuda i proizilaze razlike u definicijama suštine
pripravničkom mandatu. Nažalost, kasnije ih uloge ovoga tijela pri sudu. Logično je očekivati
ne nalazimo ni u kakvoj funkciji ili im taj atri- da različiti izvori daju i različite pretpostavke za
but nije dodavan uz ime. Vidimo također da se interpretaciju. Ako tome dodamo još i vremen-
među pomoćnim službenicima nalaze i “vetera- sku i teritorijalnu razliku te tradiciju, onda su
ni” jer kako drugačije tumačiti titulu mule među stavovi još udaljeniji. Kako god, mora se imati na
pomoćnim službenicima, kao i titulu “baše”. Vje- umu činjenica da će svaki izvor ponuditi nešto
rovatno ove titule odražavaju svojevrsnu hijerar- drugačije pretpostavke i da dosta toga zavisi od
hiju unutar odjela pomoćnih službi kadije, što bi izvora i brojnih drugih okolnosti – vremenskih,
značilo da je hijerarhijski to išlo sljedećim redo- geografskih, društvenih i sl. Stoga se čini nepo-
slijedom: baša Mehmed, mula Mehmed i softe trebnim ograničavati se na uže faktore i na njima
Mehmed, Uzeir i Osman kao početnici i priprav- praviti generalizacije. Generalni zaključci se sa-
nici u sudu. svim sigurno ne mogu donositi na temelju užeg
izvornog korpusa, užeg vremenskog ili geograf-
skog pravnog iskustva. Sužavanje u bilo kom od
Svjedoci čina (şühûdü’l-hâl) tih segmenata znači sužavanje suštine institucije
şühûdü’l-hâl pri sudu. U instituciji şühûdü’l-hâl
Sudski postupci bili su otvorenog tipa i imali su neki autori vide tri osnovne funkcije kroz koje se
javni karakter tako da im se moglo prisustvo- osigurava: 1. javnost postupka, 2. izvor potrebnih
vati službeno i neslužbeno. Kako bi se osigurao saznanja i 3. izvor ili garant za dosljednu primje-
karakter javnosti postupka, pri sudu je ustanov- nu običajnog prava.87
ljena posebna institucija porote – şühûdü’l-hâl, Institucija svjedoka (şühûdü’l-hâl) bila je
čiji broj nije bio strogo propisan niti je službeno vrlo važan sastavni element pravosudnog siste-
ograničavan. To je nešto što je prisutno i u dru- ma u Osmanskom Carstvu. Međutim, njihova
gim pravnim sistemima, na isti ili sličan način.84 I uloga nije bila uloga svjedoka “očevidaca”, u ne-
u evropskoj pravnoj praksi postoji “stalno vijeće” koj krivičnoj radnji ili nekim drugim pravnim
i “povremeno vijeće” iz reda građana, što odgo- sporovima, kako to sam naziv na prvi pogled
vara instituciji şühûdü’l-hâl u osmanskom siste- sugerira, bez obzira na to što se pojavljuju i u
mu.85 To je bilo “ad hoc” tijelo koje se formiralo tim slučajevima. U sporovima privatno-pravne
od slučaja do slučaja, ali ne znači da se pojedinci prirode sudija je pozivao svjedoke da potvrde ili
nisu mogli pojavljivati više puta kao članovi tog demantuju “navod” ili argument stranke. Insti-
tijela. Svjedoci (şühûdü’l-hâl) su prisustvova- tucija svjedoka (şühûdü’l-hâl) u ovom kontekstu
li pravnom postupku radi ispravnosti procesa, ima šire značenje, ona daje legalitet i legitimitet
a ne u svojstvu svjedoka stranaka u postupku. ispravnosti pravnog postupka. Važnija je tim pri-
Birani su iz reda istaknutijih poznavalaca prav- je što su je činila ugledna lica lokalne zajednice,
nih propisa ako je riječ o naibima ili istaknutih odnosno prostora kadiluka, naravno, opet zavi-
lica lokalne zajednice ako je riječ o svjedocima sno od predmeta o kojem je sud vodio postupak
(şühûdü’l-hâl). i trebao dati svoju riječ. Ti su se porotnici bira-
Ovo tijelo nije bilo stalno ni nužno obavezu- li iz reda poznavalaca običajnog prava i običaja
juće u svim predmetima, što je poznato86 i što se jednog kraja.88 Još jedan vrlo važan momenat
naravno potvrđuje i u sudskoj praksi u Tešnju u ističe se u ovakvim slučajevima. Obično se među
kojem imamo mnogo predmeta zavedenih bez ovim “svjedocima čina” nalazila neka iz katego-
upisanih porotnika. Na ulogu svjedoka şühûdü’l- rije osoba jedne od strana u postupku, bilo da je
hâl u literaturi se gleda i tumači na različite na- riječ o poslovnim osobama (zanatlije, trgovci),
čine. U interpretacijama se uglavnom promatra ulemi, stanovnicima pojedinih naselja-mahala,
iz perspektive korištenog izvornog korpusa te ili pak pripadnicima vojničkih redova.89 Oni su
kadiji pomagali da ne donese presudu koja bi
84
Natuknica: porota, Hrvatska enciklopedija (http://www.
enciklopedija.hr/natuknica.aspx?id=49554, pristupljeno 19.
9. 2018). 87
Taş 2008, 38.
85
Aydın 2003, 341-344; Jennings 1978, 146. 88
Akdağ 1971, 81; Jennings 1978, 142-146.
86
İnalcık 1991, 4. 89
Jennings 1978, 144; Taş 2008, 25-44.

208
mogla biti u suprotnosti s običajima i praksom. kod većine (78) vjenčanja korištena i dokumen-
Ako je predmet imao širi značaj i po svojoj sušti- tirana institucija şühûdü’l-hâl, dok u 43 slučaja
ni, pravnoj težini i pravnom djelovanju nadilazio nije korištena ili nije dokumentirana. Od toga ko
teritorijalni okvir kadiluka, onda su se u svojstvu se vjenčava, odnosno iz kojeg su kraja ugovorne
“svjedoka” (şühûdü’l-hâl) pozivale osobe koje su strane, zavisio je i sastav svjedoka. Premda nije
pripadale tom društvenom rangu. U vrijeme na- postojao neki poseban kriterij odabira niti uvjet
stanka i u predmetima koji su sadržani u ovom koji bi neko trebao ispuniti da bi mogao biti po-
sidžilu, ta se institucija javljala u sljedećoj vrsti čašćen takvom ulogom, primjetno je da se kao
predmeta: vjenčanjima, tužbama, legalizacijama svjedoci rijetko pojavljuju lica koja nemaju neko
vakufa, poklonima, punomoći, zavjetima, opo- društveno ili profesionalno obilježje. Vjerovatno
rukama, jamstvima, procesima i vakufnamama. je to zavisilo i od samih stranaka pri vjenčanju
Analiza pokazuje da je ova institucija dokumen- koje su utjecale na sastav şühûdü’l-hâl. Osim oso-
tirana u ukupno 95 slučajeva sadržanih u izvoru ba iz samoga Tešnja i njegove uže ili dalje oko-
iz druge polovine 18. stoljeća. line, koliko se iz dokumentiranog može vidjeti,
Najviši i najznačajniji sudski postupak “sud- u pojedinim predmetima participirala su i lica
ska porota – vijeće” održan je u tvrđavi u Teš- iz udaljenijih mjesta i krajeva: Zenice (Broda),
nju (25. X) 1753. pred valijom Mehmed-pašom Žepča, Doboja, Maglaja, jer je jedan od bračnih
Kukavicom, koji je tim povodom ciljano došao drugova bio s tih područja. Vidimo da su se i
u Tešanj.90 Pravnu formu tog akta sročio je bo- pojedini službenici suda vrlo često nalazili u toj
sanski vojni sudija Mehmed Gulšeni. To je u ulozi. To najvjerovatnije znači da je sud delegirao
suštini bio svojevrstan zavjet o očuvanju mira u pojedine osobe u sastav tima svjedoka.94 Ostaje
tešanjskom kraju, u povodu pojave pobunjenika, dilema da li su tu bili po službenoj dužnosti ili
sljedbenika Muharemije. Ovdje je mnogo važnije je u nedostatku drugih osoba radi potpunosti
ko se pojavljuje u ulozi svjedoka (şühûdü’l-hâl): porote i cjelokupnog pravnog postupka kadija
Hasan – kapetan tvrđave Kamengrada, hadži delegirao ljude iz pravosuđa da nadomjeste od-
Šaban – kapetan Prijedora, Ibšir-beg – kapetan sustvo trećih osoba. U analizi dokumentiranih
tvrđave Bihać, Mustafa-aga – emin čauša, Abdu- slučajeva sudski izvršioci su ponajčešće od svih
llah-aga – ćehaja čauša, Ibrahim efendija – timar drugih participirali u aktivnostima suda u insti-
tezkeredžija, Mustafa efendija – timar defterdar, tuciji şühûdü’l-hâl. Njihovo učešće doseže 22%
Mehmed-beg – ćehaja bosanske defterhane, Mu- prisustva u vjenčanjima. Moguće je da je to ima-
stafa efendija – defterdar bosanske blagajne, vi- lo i svoju pragmatičnu dimenziju jer su bili uvi-
sost Bektaš-paša – mutesarrif Klisa i drugi.91 Kao jek “prisutni” na sudu u odnosu na osobe koje
što se vidi, u ovom slučaju to je bila kombinacija je trebalo okupljati ne samo izvan suda u gradu
3 bosanska kapetana, 6 ljudi pokrajinske admi- nego i iz daljih mjesta. Treba svakako računati
nistracije (Bosanskog divana) i sandžakbeg Kli- i na svakodnevne životne, poslovne ili profesio-
sa.92 Istim povodom valija Mehmed-paša bio je i nalne obaveze potencijalnih članova tog “vijeća”,
u Žepču, no nemamo ovako decidirane podatke a izvan su suda. U jednom od vjenčanja u toj ulo-
o svemu onome što se tamo događalo u tom smi- zi u Tešnju našao se i silah-aga bosanskog valije.95
slu. Sve što je iz jedne murasele vidljivo jeste da Uz njega svakako treba izdvojiti nekoliko lica
su valijine destinacije istim povodom bile Tešanj koja su sasvim sigurno imala viši stepen autori-
i Žepče.93 teta prirodom svoga položaja u društvu: ugledni
Budući da su bračni ugovori najbrojniji do- kadija, hafiz efendija, muderis, kapetan, ugledni
kumenti sadržani u korištenom izvoru, prirodno imam iz Tešnja. Što se tiče ostalih, ovdje ćemo
je očekivati da se ova institucija najčešće javlja istaći da su to bili: age, alemdari, aščije, baša iz
upravo u tim predmetima. Nažalost, i u ovom kasabe Zenica,96 baše, bašeskije, berberi, buljku-
slučaju nedostaje konzistentnosti, pri čemu je baše, čauši, ćehaje, dizdar-age, efendije, handžije,
hodže, imami, kalfe, katibi, mjesni imami, muha-
90
Rs. fo. 27.
91
O organizaciji Bosanskog divana i navedenim pozicijama
više u: Šabanović 1973, 19-45; Aličić 1983, 38-42. 94
Rs. fo. 20. sudski službenik Husein.
92
Rs. fo. 27. 95
Mladenci iz Žepča i Ozimica. Rs. fo. 35.
93
Rs. fo. 102. 96
Rs. fo. 79.

209
fizi tvrđave, muhziri, munle, odabaše ekmekčija, instanca, sama pokrajinska vlast personificira-
odabaše, pekari, pomoćni službenici, softe, služ- na u Bosanskom divanu. Garancije za politič-
benici suda, spahije, sudski pisari, tabaci i terzije. ke zatvorenike iz Sarajeva koji su učestvovali u
Kada sumiramo sve navedeno, vidimo da su to, jednoj pobuni krajem 1789. godine, koje su dali
dakle, bili pripadnici vojničkog, ulemanskog ili četvorica uglednih Sarajlija, porotnički je trebala
zanatskog sloja ili drugi ugledniji članovi zajed- propratiti grupa od šest članova vijeća.99
nice i društva. Da je jamstvo imalo težinu i zahtijevalo vrlo
Od vrste, značaja i težine sudskog postupka ozbiljan pravni tretman potvrđuje i činjenica da
zavisio je i broj članova ovoga tijela. Vidjeli smo je za čin jamstva jedne osobe za na prvi pogled
naprijed da je u poroti održanoj u Tešnju uz pri- bizaran problem međuljudskih odnosa bila ne-
sustvo valije u tom svojstvu bilo 11 visokopozici- ophodna porota od četiri člana. Ismail-baša je
oniranih lica što pokrajinske administracije što jamčio za bračni par Hasana i Umihanu iz Karši-
predstavnika pojedinih kapetanija. Ovdje ćemo jake “da će se dobro slagati sa svojim susjedima,
ipak kao polazište uzeti najfrekventnije predme- da ih neće psovati i krasti”.100 Dakle, gotovo be-
te, a to su vjenčanja, koja su najbrojniji akti op- značajan problem, u kojem je trebalo sudjelovati
ćenito, pa prema tome i po instituciji “svjedoka”. četveročlano porotno vijeće.
Broj prisutnih “porotnika” varirao je između dva Minimalno četveročlano porotno vijeće su-
i pet. Jedan je izuzetak od tog pravila u kojem srećemo i kod darivanja, iako u tom slučaju i nije
je samo jedno lice u svojstvu svjedoka. Šta je sve do kraja jasno da li samo četveročlano ili ih je
utjecalo na broj porotnika teško je sa sigurnošću bilo i više, jer se navodi i “ostali”. Očito da je ono
tvrditi. No, ono što se može pouzdano ustvrditi bilo sastavljeno od više porotnika, čija imena u
jeste da taj broj nije bio u izravnoj vezi s visinom ovom slučaju nisu unesena u ovaj spis, što ne zna-
bračnog ugovora, odnosno mehra. Kriterij je teš- či da u nekom drugom nisu bila sadržana. Kada
ko dokučiti iz dokumentiranih slučajeva, ali bi to se pogleda sadržaj poklona, onda na neki način
mogao biti socijalni i društveni status porodice postaje jasnije zašto je naizgled beznačajan akt
“mladoženje”. trebao tako brojnu porotu. Riječ je o nekretnini,
Kod tužbi je stvar nešto drugačija i tu je, čini mulkovnom posjedu, koji su činili “kuhinja po-
se, presuđivala težina slučaja. U tužbama se nji- krivena šindrom, soba, avlija i samanluk”. Dvije
hov broj kretao od dva do pet u jednostavnijim su vrlo važne činjenice u ovom slučaju: taj je po-
tužbenim zahtjevima, dok su složenije tužbe klon bio kompenzacija za uslugu očito duže skrbi
imale i veći broj porotnika, sedam, pa i devet. Za o darovatelju(ici), a spomenuti se mulk nalazio
teško krivično djelo razbojništva i krađe u kući u samom središtu grada “čaršijskom džematu is-
hadži Husejna porotu je činilo devet osoba. Za pod tvrđave”. Na širi sastav porote vjerovatno je
drugo razbojništvo (otmica i krađa) koje se, isti- utjecalo i to što je posjed sa sve četiri strane bio
na kasnije, dogodilo u Viništu kod Zavidovića omeđen također mulkovnim posjedima te je tre-
1781. godine, u sastavu porote nalazilo se sedam balo pravno “ojačati” i “potvrditi” čin dara, radi
osoba.97 U tužbenom zahtjevu Fatime iz Karšija- eventualnih sporova tokom postupka ili kasnije,
ke 1778. godine za privođenje jemca Fazlije Isla- kako nasljednika tako i susjeda koji su imanjem
ma iz Zenice, porotu je činilo pet osoba, i to tri okruživali spomenuto privatno vlasništvo.
“mule” i dva “bega”, dakle, s društvenog i socijal- Punomoć za prodaju nekretnine 1780. ubra-
nog stanovišta vrlo respektabilna porota.98 jala se u one radnje kojima je prisustvovao broj-
Jamstvo je očito također zahtijevalo širu po- niji porotnički tim. Ovaj je slučaj zanimljivi
rotu. Sve su prilike da je i tu težina samoga čina prije svega po tome što su u njemu učestvovali
zavisila od povoda i težine “počinjenog djela”. sudionici iz Žepča i Travnika. Kako god, porotu
Krivična djela, posebno ona koja su nastala po je činilo šest osoba: dva imama, dvojica mula i
osnovu političke odgovornosti i okvalificirana dvojica aga.101
kao djela protiv države, smatrala su se težim kri-
vičnim djelima za koje je nadležnost imala viša
99
Isto.
97
Rs. fo. 111. 100
Rs. fo. 74.
98
Rs. fo. 77. 101
Rs. fo. 113.

210
 Neočekivano brojna porota od jedanaest Summary
porotnika javlja se u “zavjetnom činu” Adžema
Ibrahima odricanja od “svakog opojnog pića”
(1757) uz obećanje spremnosti na batinanje “na On the Organization and the
javnom trgu”. Ako je broj porotnika od jedanaest Functioning of Judiciary Authority
osoba neko iznenađenje, onda sasvim sigurno
to nije sastav porote, u kojoj nalazimo pet oso- in the Qadha of Tesanj in the Second
ba s titulom “efendija”, što znači članovi iz reda Half of the 18th Century
“uleme”, i to jedan profesor (muderris) i četvorica
imama, tri učene osobe (mula) kapetan, dvojica Separate qazā of Tešanj was formed in second half of
16th century after complete stabilization of govern-
aga. Riječ je, dakle, o formiranju najprimjereni-
ment which followed the conquest that happened,
jeg porotnog vijeća, koje po pravnoj prirodi pita- most probably, in October 1512. The qazā consisted of
nja pripada upravo porotnicima iz sfere islamske 4 nahiya districts: Tešanj, Maglaj, Usora, Ozren, and
vjerske naobrazbe i sigurno boljim poznavaoci- Trebetin. In the area belonging to the qazā 4 urban
ma šerijatsko-pravnih propisa.102 Za svaki slu- settlements had developed, while there existed 150
čaj tu su i predstavnici iz reda vojničkog stale- rural settlements in the qazā. In 17th century, together
ža, kapetan, age i jedan predstavnik zanatskog with other 36 qazās, Tešanj was ranked at the degree
esnafa.103 U sudskoj realizaciji oporuke (vasijet) of “salise“, keeping this rank in 18th century as well.
i pravnoj legalizaciji njenog izvršenja (1781), Due to the vast areas qazā of Tešanj covered the
u svojstvu porotnika sudjelovalo je pet osoba, structure was organized in manner that in centre
there was residing judge / qādī with all complemen-
među kojima j predstavnik vojničkog reda (aga),
tary services, while in nahiya districts of Žepče and
trojica učenih (mula) i sudski policajac (muhzir) Maglaj there were branch offices. This organizational
kao predstavnik suda.104 Nakon svih navedenih structure remained until the end of 18th century, while
slučajeva, ispod svih očekivanja je da se u do- Maglaj was organized as a separate judiciary region
kumentiranju i obnovljenoj legalizaciji vakufa during 19th century.
i vakufske imovine na području kadiluka nađu Qādī in the qazā’s centre in Tešanj had own as-
svega po dva porotnika. To je čudnije tim prije sistant (nāib). In this paper there is an overview of
što je riječ o ponovnom zavođenju vakufske imo- documented names for judges who performed duty
vine čije su vakufname stradale u agresiji Eugena of qādī or naib be it in the centre of qazā or in branch
Savojskog na Tešanj. Doduše, u tom su procesu offices in Maglaj and Žepče.
It is observable that in the second half of 18th
učestvovali i svi službenici vakufa i za tu prili-
century the qādīs did not perform their duty cons-
ku delegirani mubašir Ahmed-aga, ali u svojstvu cientiously and in accordance to the judiciary codex
porotnika. Osim što se spominje mali broj osoba, which used to be broken in many ways. In a couple of
oni se spominju u dokumentiranju samo nekih complains and even in the fermān that was issued and
vakufa, ne svih.105 delivered to Bosnia deviating discrepancy methods of
Iz izloženog se može vidjeti kako je u praksi qādīs from rules of judiciary service are observable.
funkcionirao jedan sudski okrug srednjeg ranga Firstly, into ranks of qādī assistants started to creep
u drugoj polovini 18. stoljeća, koje je sve službe in persons who according to the existing rules were
imao u svome sastavu. Osim toga, ukazano je i not deserving this post. Therefore, in the second half
na probleme koji su se javljali u okviru sudskog of 18th many complains appear requesting change of
naibs due to the fact that they were locals. This situati-
sistema na relaciji kadije ili naibi u odnosu na
on could open way to a possible unconscientious work
stanovništvo. U mjeri u kojoj su izvori dopuštali and abuse of the position. However, qādīs also used to
detektirani su nosioci pravosudnih funkcija, ili commit acts that were out of judiciary manner, those
nekih drugih službi koje su djelovale pri sudu u include taking bribe what consequently led to unfair
navedenom kadiluku. verdict. Due to the quoted circumstances some cases
were addressed to the qādī in Travnik. This started to
take ground especially after some officials of judiciary
government started to perform in practice “mobile
102
Rs. fo. 117. judging” where they seemingly would do judging or
103
Isto. do other activities. For them this was way to reach ad-
104
Isto.
105
Rs. fo. 84-85.

211
ditional funds in easy and uncomplicated way which Fatić, A. 2005, Tešanjska oaza islamske duhovnosti,
was against the law. Pregled islamske duhovnosti tešanjskog kraja,
Based on available sources it has been establis- Planjax, Tešanj 2005.
hed that in Tešanj existed following posts: qādī ser- Handžić, A. 1974, Gazi Husrev-begovi vakufi u
vice, naib service, katib (secretary), muhzir, assisting Tešanjskoj nahiji u XVI stoljeću, Anali Gazi Hus-
services, and sometimes institution of judiciary jury. rev-begove biblioteke, II-III, Sarajevo 1974, 161-
This paper based on available and documented sour- 162.
ces presents activities of each single judiciary post Handžić, A. 1984, O društvenoj strukturi stanovništva
that was counted above. u Bosni početkom XVII stoljeća, Prilozi za orijen-
talnu filologiju, XXXII-XXXIII, 1982–83, Saraje-
vo, 129-146.
Handžić, A. 1990, O kretanju stanovništva u regionu
srednjeg toka Bosne (Međuprostor Maglaj – Do-
boj – Tešanj) od druge polovine XV do kraja XVI
Izvori i literatura stoljeća, u: Šehić, N. (ur.), Migracije i Bosna i Her-
Istanbul Başbakanlık Osmanlı Arşivi, Tapu Defteri, cegovina, Institut za istoriju, Sarajevo 1990, 57-66.
432. Handžić, A. 1994, O društvenoj strukturi stanovništva
Istanbul, Belediye Kitabligi, No. K13. u Bosni početkom XVII stoljeća, u: Studije o Bos-
Nacionalna i Univerzitetska biblioteka Bosne i Herce- ni, historijski prilozi iz osmansko-turskog perio-
govine, Rs. 832. (prijevod: Abdulah Polimac, Salih da, Research Centre for Islamic History, Art and
Trako i Lamija Hadžiosmanović) Culture, Istanbul 1994, 235-248.
Orijentalni institut, Zbirka ANUBiH, Ahkam Defteri Husić, A. 2012, Tešanj u 16. stoljeću (od puste varoši
75, II; 85, I-VI (regesta: Abdullah Polimac). do značajne kasabe), Prilozi za orijentalnu filolo-
giju, 61/2011, Sarajevo 2012, 301-318.
Ahiskali, R. 2006, Muhzir, Türkiye Diyanet Vakfı, İnalcık,  H. 1991, Maḥkama,  Encyclopaedia of Is-
İslâm Ansiklopedisi (TDV, IA); Cilt 31, İslam lam,  Volume VI, New Edition, Leiden and Brill,
Araştırmaları Merkezi, Istanbul 2006, 85-86. 3-5.
Akdağ, M. 1971, Türkiye'nin İktisadi ve İçtimai Tarihi, Ipširli, M. 2004, Osmansko državno uređenje, u:
Cilt II 1453–1559, Türk Tarih Kurumu Basımevı, Ihsanoğlu, E. (prir.), Historija Osmanske države i
Dil ve Tarih-Coğrafya Fakültesi – Ankara Üniver- civilizacije, Orijentalni institut – IRCICA, Saraje-
sitesi Yayinlari, No. 131, Ankara 1971. vo 2004, 161-507.
Aličić, A. S. 1983, Uređenje bosanskog ejaleta od 1789. Ipširli, M. 2006, Naib, Türkiye Diyanet Vakfı, İslâm An-
do 1878. godine, Orijentalni institut, Sarajevo siklopedisi (TDV, IA), Cilt 32, İslam Araştırmaları
1983. Merkezi, Istanbul 2006, 312-313.
Aličić, A. S. 1984, Manuskript Ahvali Bosna od Muha- Jennings, R. C. 1978, Kadi, Court, and Legal Proce-
meda Emina Isevića (poč. XIX v.), Prilozi za ori- dure in 17th C. Ottoman Kayseri: The Kadi and
jentalnu filologiju, 32–33/1982–83, Sarajevo 1984, the Legal System, Studia Islamica, No. 48 (1978),
163-198. 132-172.
Aydin, M. A. 2003, Mahkeme, Türkiye Diyanet Vakfı, Leksikografski zavod Miroslav Krleža, Hrvatska enci-
İslâm Ansiklopedisi (TDV, IA), Cilt 27, Istanbul klopedija, natuknica: porota. Dostupno na: http://
2003, 341-344. www.enciklopedija.hr/natuknica.aspx?id=49554,
Aydin, M. A. 2004, Pravo kod Osmanlija, u: Ihsanoğlu, pristupljeno 19. 9. 2018.
E. (prir.), Historija Osmanske države i civilizacije, Mrgić, J. 2008, Severna Bosna 13–16. vek, Istorijski
Orijentalni institut – IRCICA, Sarajevo 2004, 515- institut SANU, Beograd 2008.
585. Nametak, F. (ur.) 2000, Opširni popis Bosanskog
Bašagić, S. 1930, Kako se za turske uprave Jugoslavi- sandžaka iz 1604., Sv. I/2, obradio: Adem Handžić,
ja dijelila na kadiluke (Neposredno pred ,,Bečki Bošnjački institut Zurich, Odjel Sarajevo i Orijen-
rat“), Novi Behar, God. IV, Br. 12, Sarajevo, 177- talni institut u Sarajevu, Tomus septimus, Serija II,
179. Defteri, Knjiga 4, sv. I/2, Sarajevo 2000.
Bojanić-Lukač, D. / Katić, T. (prev. i prir.) 2005, Nametak, F. (ur.) 2000a, Opširni popis Bosans-
Maglajski sidžili 1816-1840, Bošnjački institut, kog sandžaka iz 1604., Sv. III, obradila Amina
Fondacija Adila Zulfikarpašića, Sarajevo 2005. Kupusović, Bošnjački institut Zurich, Odjel Sara-
Čar-Drnda, H. (prijevod i obrada) 2005, Sidžil jevo i Orijentalni institut u Sarajevu, Tomus deci-
Tešanjskog kadiluka 1740–1752., Orijentalni in- mus, Serija II, Defteri, Knjiga 4, sv. III, Sarajevo
stitut, Sarajevo 2005. 2000.

212
Özergin, M. K. 1988, Rumeli Kadılıklarında 1078 Dü- Šabanović, H. 1973, Bosanaki divan, Organizacija i
zenlemesi, Ismail Hakkı Uzunşarşılıya Armağan, uređenje centralne zemaljske uprave u Bosni pod
Turk Tarih Kurumu, Ankara 1988, 251-309. turskom vlašću do kraja XVII stoljeća, Prilozi za
Sućeska, A. 1965, Ajani (Prilog izučavanju lokalne vla- orijentalnu filologiju, 18–19, Orijentalni institut,
sti u našim zemljama za vrijeme Turaka), Naučno Sarajevo 1973, 9-45.
društvo SR Bosne i Hercegovine, Djela, Knjiga Šabanović, H. 1982, Bosanski pašaluk, postanak i
XXII, Odjeljenje istorijsko-filoloških nauka, Knji- upravna podjela, Svjetlost, Sarajevo 1982.
ga 14, Sarajevo 1965. Tanović B. 2016, Čurčića vakuf, Dobra knjiga, Saraje-
Šabanović, H. 1942, Popis kadiluka u Europskoj Tur- vo 2016.
skoj od Mostarca Abdullaha Huremovića, Glas- Taş, H. 2008, Osmanlı Kadı Mahkemesindeki
nik Hrvatskog zemaljskog muzeja, Sarajevo 1942, “Şühûdü'l-Hâl” Nasıl Değerlendirilebilir?, Bilig/
307-356. Türk Dünyası Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 44 (2008),
Ankara, 25-44.

213
 Godišnjak/Jahrbuch 2018,47:215-224
DOI: 1 10.5644/Godisnjak.CBI.ANUBiH-47.111

Novinske osmrtnice i transnacionalna praksa u Bosni i Hercegovini

Aiša Softić
Sarajevo

Abstract: The recent war in Bosnia and Herzegovina has caused probably the greatest wave of migration of the
Bosnian population into other countries, which also influenced traditional customs, including those relating to
death rituals. When it comes to death, migration into other countries opens many questions, including those re-
lated to the decisions about the place of burial. Thus, for example, migrants chose to be buried either in their home
or adopted countries. Also, there is a question related to the decisions about death announcements. In adopted
countries, death is often announced through the existing webs of communication inside migrant communities,
while in home countries death is announced through the media, especially through newspaper obituaries, which
is specific to larger urban areas. This paper addresses the phenomenon of newspaper obituaries as a possible win-
dow into the way that Bosnian migrants elsewhere deal with the question of burial and death rituals. In addition to
newspaper obituaries, this paper relies on ethnographic material that includes a number of informant interviews.
The analysis demonstrated that such death obituaries could be observed as a form of transnational practice that
includes the maintenance of relationships and communication of Bosnian immigrants with their home country.  

Key words: migrants, obituaries, transnationalism, Bosnia and Herzegovina

Uvod migrant”, uključujući poimanja identiteta, zna-

čenje i doživljaj života u različitim migrantskim
Migracije i pojave vezane uz problematiku mi- sredinama, kao i transnacionalne veze sa zemlja-
gracija predmet su istraživanja mnogih discipli- ma porijekla, rodna iskustva migracija i promje-
na, uključujući sociologiju, ekonomiju, geogra- nu uspostavljenih i usvajanje novostečenih kul-
fiju i antropologiju. Antropološki interes za mi- turnih i drugih vrijednosti.3 Drugim riječima,
gracije posebno se intenzivira tokom šezdesetih antropologija migracija uveliko se bavi procesi-
godina 20. stoljeća, da bi osamdesetih i devede- ma prilagođavanja i kulturnim promjenama u
setih godina istog stoljeća postale centralna tema okviru migrantskih zajednica.4
antropoloških istraživanja.1 S porastom zanima- Od početka devedesetih godina 20. stoljeća
nja za kompleksan problem migracija javljaju se transnacionalizam predstavlja jedan od osnov-
nastojanja koja idu u pravcu formuliranja teorij- nih teorijskih okvira kroz koji antropolozi pro-
skih postavki čiji je cilj da migracije protumače matraju migracije i migracijske procese.5 Pod
iz različitih aspekata.2 Zbog slojevitosti i široke transnacionalizmom se podrazumijevaju trajne
vizure koju zahvata, upravo antropološko pro- veze koje migranti održavaju između zemalja
matranje migracija naročito može biti zanimljivo porijekla i zemalja prijema. Ove veze uključuju
i značajno, posebno s obzirom na činjenicu da ne samo “zajednice, nego sve druge vrste soci-
se antropološki pristup fokusira na pitanja “ko, jalnih formacija, kao što su transnacionalno ak-
kako i zašto” u kontekstu migracija. Također, an- tivne mreže komunikacije, grupe i organizacije”.6
tropologija kroz tzv. etnografiju iskustva nastoji
razotkriti značenje vezano za pitanje kako je “biti 3
Isto 22.
4
Brettell 2000, 98.
1
Antonijević 2013, 13-14, 22. 5
Vertovec 2007, 963.
2
Isto 13. 6
Faist 2010, 9.

215
U odnosu na transnacionalizam, pojedini autori riječ o savremenim migracijama, onim koje su se
preferiraju termin međudržavna translokalnost, zbivale naročito intenzivno od šezdesetih pa do
u kojem je naglasak upravo na “pojmu lokaliteta kasnih osamdesetih godina 20. stoljeća, Bosna
kao ključnom u prekograničnim aktivnostima” i Hercegovina se uklapala u bivši jugoslavenski
umjesto dvoznačnog termina transnacionali- okvir. Naime, sredinom 20. stoljeća iz Bosne i
zam.7 Obavještenja o smrti u zemljama porije- Hercegovine je mahom ruralno stanovništvo
kla vezana za migrante preminule u zemljama odlazilo na tzv. “privremeni rad” u inostranstvo,
prijema u tom se smislu mogu promatrati kao odnosno zemlje Zapadne Evrope. Najbrojniju
transnacionalna praksa održavanja veza i mreža skupinu ovih migranata činili su gastarbajteri
komunikacija i kroz bitan momenat smrti. (njem. gost-radnik), čiji su se odlasci podvodili
Pitanje migracija i smrti već je fokus pojedinih pod radne migracije.15 Ove radne migracije ipak
studija u antropologiji, geografiji i sličnim disci- nisu bile novina jer je radnih migracija s balkan-
plinama, mada predstavlja relativno novu temu u skih prostora bilo i u prethodnom, 19. stoljeću.16
evropskom istraživanju migracija i etničkih ma- U slučaju migracija koje su započele u šezdesetim
njina.8 Međutim, posmatrano u globalnom kon- godinama 20. stoljeća poseban naglasak je bio na
tekstu, takva je literatura u porastu. Neki praksu njihovoj privremenosti, mada se ona u stvarnosti
vezanu za posmrtne običaje u zemljama prijema vrlo često pretvarala u trajnost.
i porijekla nazivaju “posthumnim transnacio- Upravo po broju radnih migranata BiH je
nalizmom”.9 Naprimjer, govoreći o posmrtnim spadala u zemlje s izrazitom stopom migracija
običajima među afričkim migrantima u Južnoj (u prvom migracionom valu iz ranih šezdesetih
Africi, Nunez i Wheeler tvrde da se slučajevi godina prošlog stoljeća BiH je u jugoslavenskom
smrti u zemlji prijema posmatraju kao smrt “na okviru bila na četvrtom mjestu17). Međutim, tako
nemjestu” (out of place).10 U Južnoj Africi čak očigledna migraciona kretanja iz BiH sredinom
postoje organizacije koje se bave uslugama “od- 20. stoljeća nisu našla odgovarajuće mjesto u on-
govarajućeg” ukopa, uključujući povratak tijela dašnjim etnološkim radovima – migracije kao
u zemlju porijekla preminulog.11 Kada su u pita- savremena pojava nisu se uklapale u višedece-
nje meksički migranti u Sjedinjenim Američkim nijsko poimanje etnologije na bivšim jugosla-
Državama, ovaj je proces institucionaliziran na venskim prostorima kao nauke o seoskoj kulturi,
državnom nivou.12 S druge strane, veliki broj mi- pa su na taj način etnolozi propustili priliku da
granata ukopava se u zemljama prijema. S tim u istraže kompleksniju sliku tradicionalne kulture,
vezi, Balkan tvrdi da sprovođenje posmrtnih obi- što bi višestruko koristilo i etnolozima i etnolo-
čaja u zemlji prijema predstavlja bitan vid utvrđi- giji kao znanosti.18
vanja pripadanja u migrantskim zajednicama te Rat u BiH 1992–1995. godine prouzročio je
da su odluke vezane za pripadanje mrtvog tijela ogromna migraciona kretanja koja su u isto vri-
vezane za uspostavljanje socijalnih i komunalnih jeme po svom karakteru bila različita. Bile su to
granica.13 Isto tako, Hunter tvrdi da je izbor mje- i unutrašnje i vanjske migracije, i prinudne i do-
sta ukopa u kontekstu migracija usko skopčan s brovoljne, i legalne i ilegalne, i privremene i traj-
vezom između mjesta i identiteta.14 ne. Migracioni val nastavio se i nakon okončanja
rata. Uzroci su različiti, među kojima svakako
dominira ekonomska i socijalna nestabilnost u
Migracije i Bosna i Hercegovina BiH i skoro četvrt stoljeća nakon okončanja rata.
Kontekst nastanka migracija devedesetih godina
Bosna i Hercegovina se općenito označava kao prošlog stoljeća primarno je uslovio da su mi-
zemlja s dugom iseljeničkom tradicijom. Kada je granti i migrantske teme vezane za prostor Bosne
7
Čapo Žmegač 2003, 119.
i Hercegovine našle mjesto u obimnoj i značajnoj
8
Jonker 1996; Reimers 1999; Gardner 2002.
9
Félix, 2011.
10
Nunez / Wheeler 2012, 215. 15
O jugoslavenskim gastarbajterima v. Mihajlović 1987; Da-
11
V. isto Lee 2011. niel 2007.
12
Félix 2011. 16
Krstić 2011, 296.
13
Balkan 2015, 120. 17
Isto 310.
14
Hunter 2016, 179. 18
Čapo Žmegač 2010, 110.

216
literaturi o migracijama u evropskim i svjetskim jer su i opcija “ovdje” i opcija “tamo” skopčane s
razmjerama.19 nizom vrlo osjetljivih pitanja koja se protežu u
I dok se u početku spomenutih migracionih rasponu od pitanja pripadanja, odnosno identi-
kretanja iz sredine 20. stoljeća prepoznavao sko- teta, pa do troškova koji nastaju pri ukopu “ov-
ro ustaljeni obrazac u kojem su centralno mjesto dje” i onih povezanih s transportom tijela umrle
zauzimali mladi, radno sposobni muškarci, koji- osobe u matičnu zemlju radi ukopa.22
ma su se ne uvijek i ne nužno tek kasnije pridru- Kad je riječ o posmrtnoj običajnoj praksi,
živale i supruge, a djeca često bivala ostavljena u koja je također snažan indikator identiteta, otva-
matičnoj zemlji i povjerena na čuvanje najbližim ra se niz dilema, pogotovo za najbliže srodnike
srodnicima,20 u ratnim i poratnim migracijama preminule osobe. Dio odgovora na pitanje kako
izrazita je i uobičajena grupnost. Naime, uočljivo riješiti neka od pitanja koja pokreće smrt mi-
je da su se na odlazak iz matične zemlje odluči- granta u zemlji prijema mogu ponuditi i novin-
vale odmah cijele porodice, i to ne samo nuklear- ske osmrtnice koje, kako je to još krajem sedam-
ne već i proširene. U nekim slučajevima ove su se desetih godina 20. stoljeća u svom radu pokazala
migracije protezale i na širu zajednicu, ne nužno Dunja Rihtman-Auguštin,23 mogu biti izvanre-
i srodničku, što se uklapa u pojam lančanih mi- dan etnološki (i antropološki) materijal, “teren
gracija.21 bez terena”, odnosno “teren kod kuće”. Upravo iz
Ove posljednje migracije daleko se više do- novinskih osmrtnica iščitavaju se brojne i važne
življavaju i kao trajne, za razliku od stvarne ili činjenice kako o pokojniku i smrti, tako i o živim
podrazumijevane, i obično početne, privreme- srodnicima i životu, shvaćenom u širokom smi-
nosti onih iz sredine 20. stoljeća. Bitna se razlika slu riječi, životu u kojem se grade mnogostruke i
ogleda i u činjenici da su ratne i poratne migra- po svom karakteru različite socijalne mreže. Po-
cije iz Bosne i Hercegovine geografski znatno sebno, i što je za temu ovog rada naročito važno,
šire i obuhvataju ne samo cio prostor Evrope već upravo osmrtnice “progovaraju” o odnosu pre-
i daleke prekookeanske zemlje. Migracije iz sre- ma tradicionalnim obrascima u koje se smješta
dine 20. stoljeća primarno su bile vezane za rad smrt, ali i o osavremenjavanju običajne prakse,
i skrbništvo za porodicu u matičnoj zemlji, dok ili pak o njenom napuštanju.
su one koje su se dogodile u ratnom kontekstu Novinske osmrtnice i ranije su privlačile pa-
često vezane za nemogućnost nastavka života u žnju etnologa na južnoslavenskim prostorima,24
originalnim zajednicama, što je presudno uticalo pri čemu je težište bilo na novinskim osmrtni-
na karakter i trajnost ovakvih migracija. cama kao pojavi savremene kulture,25 pokazujući
da takvi sadržaji itekako mogu biti etnološki za-
nimljivi i poticajni.
Novinske osmrtnice kao odraz Ovaj se rad isključivo fokusira na novinske
savremenih migrantskih praksi osmrtnice koje se tiču smrti u zemlji prijema, a
kao izvor su korištene osmrtnice koje su objav-
Smrt, kao jedan od najvažnijih i najdramatičnijih ljene u Oslobođenju, najstarijim bosanskoherce-
obreda prelaza, posebno se doima značajnim u govačkim novinama, te u Avazu, koji se smatra
kontekstu migracija, otvarajući brojna pitanja i najtiražnijom dnevnom novinom na istom pro-
stvarnog i simboličnog značenja. Gdje se ukopa- storu. Smrtovnice u Avazu praćene su u njego-
ti, kako se ukopati, kako konačno i zauvijek pre- vom digitalnom izdanju, dok u Oslobođenju to
mostiti jaz između “ovdje” i “tamo”, šta implicira nije bio slučaj, već je kao izvor korištena njihova
priklanjanje “ovdje”, odnosno povratak “tamo” – raspoloživa arhiva. Međutim, i u jednom i u dru-
neke su od dilema s kojima se migranti suočavaju gom slučaju posmatrani period je bio nasumice
u kontekstu govora o smrti. Kad je u pitanju briga odabran i vremenski ograničen – od 1. marta
o tome gdje ukopati tijelo nakon smrti, moguć- 2015. do 1. marta 2016. godine. U Oslobođenju
nost rješenja samo se prividno čini jednostavnim su u navedenom periodu objavljena 194 obavje-
19
O migracijama i migrantima u vezi s BiH v. Black 2001; 22
Felix 2011; Hunter 2016.
Colic-Peisker 2002; Kelly 2003; Halilovich 2005; Franz 2005. 23
Rihtman-Auguštin 1978.
20
Kovačević / Krstić 2011, 970. 24
Rihtman-Auguštin 1978; Čolović 1984.
21
Halilović 2013, 63. 25
Rihtman-Auguštin 1978, 117.

217
štenja koja se po raznim osnovama odnose na se reći da se tiču primarno pokojnika i sredine (s
smrt izvan matične zemlje, dok je u istom peri- naglaskom na lokalnosti) kojoj je po rođenju pri-
odu u digitalnom izdanju Avaza objavljeno 46 padao. Spomenuta obavještenja o smrti upućuju
takvih osmrtnica. Raspoloživa građa iz spome- na činjenicu da se sa smrću izvan matične zemlje
nutih dnevnih novina pokazala je da ove osmrt- poseban značaj pridaje upravo lokalnom u od-
nice objavljuju pripadnici svih konfesionalnih nosu na sve druge identitete. S druge pak stra-
skupina u BiH. Stoga se može reći da analizirane ne, upravo kroz obavještenja u matičnoj zemlji
osmrtnice odslikavaju posthumnu transnacio- o smrti izvan zemlje porijekla i umrli i oni koji
nalnu praksu bosanskohercegovačkih migranata daju takva obavještenja “objavljuju svoju vernost
u cjelini. kulturi koju dele (ili su dijelili, op. A. S.) sa osta-
Jasna distinkcija između nekadašnjih gastar- lim članovima grupe”,26 a kojoj su pripadali po
bajtera – radnika na privremenom radu u ino- različitim osnovama (u geografskom, konfesio-
stranstvu – i ratnih, odnosno poratnih migranata nalnom, etničkom ili nekom drugom pogledu).
na osnovu podataka koje nude novinske osmrt- Kao supstitucija običajnog odlaska “na žalost”,
nice nije mogla biti uočena, pa tako ni precizno što podrazumijeva iskazivanje sućuti najbližim
povučena. Međutim, u nekim slučajevima, na srodnicima preminule osobe, mogu se označiti
osnovu podataka dobijenih iz nestrukturiranih posljednji pozdravi, druga velika grupa novinskih
intervjua koji su vođeni sa srodnicima umrlih osmrtnica. Među njima se također može izdife-
osoba, bilo je jasno da je riječ o ljudima koji su rencirati nekoliko podgrupa. Tako se prema lo-
prije više od četiri decenije otišli u zemlje Zapad- kaciji pošiljaoca izdvajaju:
ne Evrope. U nekim slučajevima potvrđivalo se 1. posljednji pozdravi koji su upućeni iz matične
pravilo o naknadnom priključivanju ostalih čla- zemlje27 i
nova porodice (supruge i djece) muškom članu 2. posljednji pozdravi koji se šalju iz zemlje pri-
koji je već ranije bio napustio matičnu zemlju. jema.28
Stoga se u radu obje navedene kategorije proma- Zanimljivo je da se posljednji pozdravi iz ze-
traju kao cjelina, odnosno kao migranti. mlje prijema upućuju preko ovdašnjih novina
Osmrtnice koje su, na osnovu navedenog kri- bez obzira na to što je umrli, jednako kao i poši-
terija, bile predmet analize mogu se podijeliti u ljaoci, pripadao migrantskoj populaciji. Na ovaj
nekoliko skupina. Tako bi prvu činila isključivo način, preko printanih medija društva porijekla,
obavještenja o smrti izvan matične zemlje. Njih posljednji pozdravi upućuju se i u slučajevima
daju: kada se ukop pokojnika također obavio u zemlji
1. članovi najuže porodice (supružnik i/ili djeca) prijema.
iz zemlje prijema, čemu naruku svakako idu Ako se kao kriterij promatra veza pošiljalaca
savremene tehnologije koje pružaju takve mo- posljednjih pozdrava s pokojnikom, onda se uo-
gućnosti; čava da pozdrave šalju:
2. bliski srodnici pokojnika u matičnoj zemlji; 1. najbliži srodnici (članovi nuklearne porodice),
3. prijatelji pokojnika kako u zemlji porijekla 2. rodbina, i to obostrano, i iz matične zemlje i iz
tako i u zemlji prijema. zemlje prijema, kao što je to slučaj i s
Ova su obavještenja skoro isključivo jedno-
obrazna i tipska i obično ne nude mnogo eleme- 26
Bart 1997, 222.
nata za širu analizu. Stoga se ona u biti uklapaju 27
Jedan takav primjer je i sljedeći (Oslobođenje, 1. mart
u ukupan korpus novinskih osmrtnica čija sušti- 2015), a odnosi se na osobu koja je umrla i sahranjena u
na jeste sama obavijest o smrti. Sjedinjenim Američkim Državama:
U nekim slučajevima obavještenja o smrti Posljednji pozdrav
Našoj dragoj prijateljici
izvan zemlje porijekla daju se naknadno, odno- D. S.
sno kad je već obavljena sahrana i ukop pokojni- Naše duboko saučešće izražavamo porodici.
ka. Takva su obavještenja zaista samo i isključivo L. i S. K.
obavještenja, iz kojih se ne iščitava skoro nikakva
28
Tako su 6. novembra 2015. godine u Oslobođenju “po-
sljednji pozdravi” upućeni preminuloj S. M. od “raje iz Či-
želja njihovih davalaca za bilo kakvim oblikom
kaga”, gdje je i sama pokojnica kao migrant živjela. A 13. no-
participacije zajednice zemlje porijekla u po- vembra iste godine objavljen je “In respect to the memory of
smrtnom ritualu. Za ovakva obavještenja može F. H.” od “friends from Canada”.

218
3. prijateljima i u matičnoj zemlji i u zemlji Kada su u pitanju osmrtnice koje se odnose
prijema. na migrante, posebno su s antropološkog aspekta
Nameće se zaključak da se smrt, bez obzira zanimljivi podaci koji se tiču mjesta ukopa.
na to što se dogodila daleko od matične zemlje, U promatranom periodu (1. mart 2015. – 1.
mnogo više tiče društva porijekla nego društva mart 2016. godine), u obje spomenute dnev-
prijema. Iščitava se to već iz činjenice da se oba- ne novine, u Oslobođenju i Avazu, ukupno je
vještenja o smrti migranta daju u matičnoj zemlji objavljena 131 osmrtnica u kojoj su sadržani ja-
čak i onda kada se cio posmrtni ritual obavlja u sni podaci o vremenu i mjestu smrti te podaci o
zemlji prijema. Bez obzira na to što smrt potvr- mjestu ukopa. Od tog broja, u 51 slučaju ukop
đuje da migranti podjednako pripadaju i “ovdje” se obavljao u zemlji prijema, što u ovom slučaju
i “tamo”, ili ni “ovdje” ni “tamo”, 29 čini se da je znači izvan Bosne i Hercegovine. Preostalih 80
jedini stalni, nepromjenljivi identitet, koji se sa smrtovnica, ili nešto malo više od 60%, odnosi se
smrću naročito potvrđuje, upravo lokalni. Na na smrt u zemlji prijema, ali se ukop umrle osobe
takvom je tragu i sljedeća rečenica izrečena u obavio u zemlji porijekla.
jednom obavještenju o smrti u kojoj se ističe da Skoro opće mjesto u oba tipa navedenih
je umrli “svoje umorno tijelo ostavio u dalekoj osmrtnica, tj. u slučaju ukopa i izvan matične
Australiji, a srce i dušu u svom rodnom Saraje- zemlje i u matičnoj zemlji, može se označiti pre-
vu”.30 Ukop u zemlji porijekla stoga upućuje na cizno navođenje tri bitna lokaliteta koja, svaki
posebno značenje koje mjesto (topos) ima u ži- na svoj način, određuju čovjeka: mjesto rođenja,
votu, odnosno u smrti migranta. mjesto smrti (koje u pravilu koincidira s mjestom
Kad su u pitanju sjećanja, koja su također svoj u kojem je pokojnik živio) i mjesto ukopa.
izričaj našla u novinskim osmrtnicama, njihov se Iako je podatak o mjestu rođenja bitan eleme-
kalendar u potpunosti poklapa s onim tradicij- nat identifikacije pokojnika, on ipak nije presu-
skim, pa se ona i za migrante u matičnoj zemlji dan u smislu odabira mjesta ukopa. To znači da
daju sedam, četrdeset i godinu dana nakon smrti, su neki drugi elementi u tom pogledu značajni,
a u nekim slučajevima i kasnije, što je u direktnoj pri čemu važnu ulogu ima mjesto prebivanja ži-
vezi s karakterom smrti (nesretnim slučajem, ili vih srodnika kao nosilaca sjećanja, ali i mjesto
ako je riječ o smrti vrlo mlade osobe).31 ukopa predaka koje se ne mora poklapati ni s
Upravo činjenica smrti u zemlji prijema, ali mjestom rođenja migranta ni s mjestom predmi-
još više činjenica da najbliži srodnici umrle oso- grantskog prebivanja.
be također pripadaju populaciji migranata, uzro-
kovala je pojavu još jedne, u odnosu na druge
vidove novinskih osmrtnica znatno malobrojnije Okvir za sahranu u zemlji porijekla
grupe. To su novinska saučešća. Ona su svojevr-
sna supstitucija za neposredno izražavanje sau- Pored etnografskog rada “kod kuće” – praćenja
češća ožalošćenim srodnicima pokojnika.32 novinskih osmrtnica, u radu su u nešto manjem
obimu korištene i druge metode, prvenstveno
29
Aluzija na naslov knjige Dragane Antonijević Stranac
nestrukturirani intervjui s osobama čiji su srod-
ovde, stranac tamo. nici, prijatelji, poznanici kao migranti živjeli i
30
Na istom je tragu i obavještenje objavljeno nešto ranije u umrli izvan granica BiH, ali je ukop obavljen u
Oslobođenju (februar 2015) o smrti V. V., koji je živio, pre- matičnoj zemlji. U nekoliko navrata objavljene
minuo i sahranjen u Londonu, “a srcem uvijek bio u BiH, i
su osmrtnice i bile poticaj da se pokuša doći do
uz nas – i kad je radost i kad je tuga”.
31
Npr. sjećanje u povodu četvrte godišnjice smrti tridese-
tjednogodišnjaka, koji je preminuo u SAD, objavljeno je Umrla osoba, kao i najbliži članovi njene porodice, živjela je
krajem septembra 2015. godine u Oslobođenju. i sahranjena u Kanadi.
32
U Oslobođenju od 29. decembra/prosinca 2015. godine Sa znatno više emocionalnog naboja je npr. saučešće objav-
objavljeno je sljedeće novinsko saučešće: ljeno u istom listu 7. 11. 2015. godine:
Duboko ožalošćeni da je iznenada umrla naša draga D. K.
M. P. Dragi S. i D., dijelimo bol sa Vama za dobrom i plemenitom
Izražavamo najdublje saučešće Tvojim kćerkama E. i A. i D.
njihovim porodicama Naviru sjećanja na dane kada smo bili nerazdvojni i kada
Neka ti dragi Allah dželešanuhu podari lijepi Dženet. nam je bilo najteže.
Š., N., A. i V. K. Vaši D. i M. B.

219
informatora, odnosno kazivača koji bi, eventual- najvećem broju prakticiraju onda kada se sahra-
no, mogli upotpuniti sliku koju nude novinske na pokojnika obavlja u matičnoj zemlji. Pored
osmrtnice. Upravo zabilježena kazivanja upuću- toga, registrira se da se običajna praksa provo-
ju na neke od razloga koji su uticali na odluku di i u zemlji prijema pri ukopu također u zem-
o ukopu u matičnoj zemlji. U dva slučaja niko lji prijema.34 U prvom slučaju može se govoriti
od najuže porodice ne živi više u BiH, odnosno o favoriziranju pripadanja matičnoj zemlji, dok
u Sarajevu, ali je ukop pokojnika ipak obavljen se u drugom prihvata pripadanje zemlji prijema.
u Sarajevu jer je i u jednom i u drugom slučaju Drugim riječima, prostoru kojem je pripadao
to bila izričita želja pokojnika. U prvom slučaju, migrant za života pripada i njegovo mrtvo tijelo.
pokojnik je više puta još za života isticao da po Daleko veća zastupljenost provođenja običaj-
smrti želi da bude sahranjen u Sarajevu, gradu u nih radnji pri ukopu u zemlji porijekla direktno
kojem je nekada živio. proističe iz činjenice da su takvi običaji svojstveni
U drugom slučaju umrla je ostavila izričitu određenoj zajednici i određenom prostoru. Ta-
usmenu oporuku bratu: “Ako ja umrem u Nje- kvu običajnu praksu ne poznaje zemlja prijema,
mačkoj, nemoj da ja ostanem tamo, u tuđoj zem- što nikako ne znači da se ona ne može provesti
lji” (istakla A. S.), već da se ukop i dženaza obave u zemlji prihvata. Jedan od razloga za odsustvo
u Sarajevu, a samo polaganje u mezar “na tabu- posmrtne običajne prakse ponesene iz matične
tu, nikako u sanduku” (kazivala H. V., Sarajevo) zemlje leži najvjerovatnije u činjenici da je iz
čime se, između ostalog, prema shvatanju kazi- različitih razloga učešće zajednice u posmrtnim
vača, iskazuje i konfesionalna pripadnost umrle običajima u zemlji prijema najčešće vrlo reduci-
osobe. rano (nepoznavanje takve prakse, slabo razvijena
Odluka o mjestu ukopa u navedenim primje- mreža kontakata s domintnom domicilnom gru-
rima proistekla je iz usmene oporuke pokojnika. pom, malobrojnost migranata s kojima se dijeli
Ali iz nestrukturiranih intervjua koji su vođeni zemlja porijekla ili također slabo razvijene unu-
s kazivačima proističe da odluku o mjestu uko- tarmigrantske mreže).
pa mogu donijeti i najbliži srodnici pokojnika, a Pored navedenih primjera, u kojima se rješe-
da na takvu odluku ni na koji način nije uticao nja koja se odnose na običajnu praksu nameću
pokojnik za života. Zaključuje se da je u takvim kao logična za srodnike pokojnika (ukop u ma-
slučajevima često druga generacija migranata tičnoj zemlji i običajne radnje također u matičnoj
prepoznavala značaj matične zemlje svojih rodi- zemlji, odnosno, ukop u zemlji prijema i shodno
telja kao važan faktor identiteta. Ukop u nekim tome i običajne radnje u zemlji prijema), registri-
slučajevima u rodovska groblja, ili u drugima uz raju se i primjeri ukopa u zemlji prijema, dok se
bliske pokojnike (a ta se bliskost ne mora odno- običajne radnje provode u zemlji porijekla.35
siti samo na krvno srodstvo), pokazuje da se i za-
jednica mrtvih shvata kao elemenat identiteta.33
34
U Oslobođenju je 27. 11. 2015. godine objavljena osmrtni-
ca u kojoj se navodi da je osoba umrla u Kaliforniji, gdje će
Višedecenijsko vezivanje za određene grobne se obaviti i ukop i tevhid, u džamiji “na adresi 7561 Central
cjeline utiče ne samo na odabir mjesta ukopa već Ave. 33, Huntington Beach”, dok se u Avazu 15. 1. 2016. go-
i na buduće prekogranične veze potomaka mi- dine obavještava da će se u povodu godišnjice smrti “tevhid
granata. proučiti u džamiji u Geteborgu iza podne namaza”. Samo
nekoliko dana kasnije, također u povodu godišnjice smrti,
Kad je riječ o običajnim radnjama koje prate
porodica obavještava da će posjetiti grob G. G. “u Briselu –
smrt, novinske osmrtnice pokazuju da se one u Belgija i položiti cvijeće” (Avaz, 1. 2. 2016).
35
U Oslobođenju je 20. 1. 2016. godine objavljena sljedeća
33
U Novom Sadu je 12. septembra 2015. preminuo D. Z. osmrtnica koja pokazuje primjer sahrane u zemlji prijema,
Sahrana će biti obavljena 17. septembra u pravoslavnom a običajne prakse u matičnoj zemlji:
groblju u Čapljini, navodi se u osmrtnici objavljenoj u Oslo- 17. januara 2016. godine blago u Gospodinu preminula je
bođenju (16. 9. 2015). Kazivač iz okoline Čapljine, V. J., koji naša voljena K. S.
se u rodno mjesto vratio 1999. godine, ističe da je sahrana Sprovod drage nam pokojnice obavit će se 28. januara 2016.
pokojnika koji su preminuli izvan matične zemlje vrlo česta godine u Oslu.
praksa u ovom kraju BiH. Pored spomenutog, navodi još Sveta misa zadušnica obavit će se 28. januara 2016. godine u
niz takvih primjera, ističući da su ključni elementi koji utiču 18 sati u crkvi sv. Josipa. (u Sarajevu, prim. A. S.)
na takvu praksu postojanje porodičnih grobnica te želja da Isti slučaj je i s R. L., koja je umrla i sahranjena u San Fran-
budu uz svoje bliske pokojnike (djed, otac, majka), kako bi cisku, ali je misa zadušnica održana u kapeli Franjevačke
“bili zajedno i na onom svijetu”. teologije u Sarajevu.

220
 Posebno zanimljivi su, s aspekta pripadanja posredno govori i o građenju identiteta u okviru
pokojnika, ali i njegovih najbližih srodnika, pri- tog društva.
mjeri prakticiranja posmrtne običajne prakse i u U periodu nakon rata 1992–1995. godine,
matičnoj zemlji i u zemlji prijema.36 To jasno po- odnosno disolucijom SFRJ, i države nastale na-
kazuje osjećaj istovremenog pripadanja i “ovdje” kon raspada bivše Jugoslavije shvataju se kao
i “tamo” koji migranti na različite načine razvija- “inostranstvo”, pa se u nizu slučajeva bilježe pri-
ju, potvrđujući da oni mogu razvijati identitete mjeri smrti u susjednim zemljama, dok se ukop
“unutar društvenih mreža koje (ih) istodobno pokojnika obavlja u BiH, čime se također poka-
povezuju sa dva društva”.37 zuje značaj mjesta u životu migranta, a naročito
U slučajevima ukopa u matičnoj zemlji, obi- u slučaju smrti izvan matične zemlje.41
čajne radnje u sklopu posmrtnog rituala obično Smrt u zemlji prijema, ali ukop u matičnoj
su one koje spadaju u skupinu tradicionalnih. zemlji, ustvari je povratak primarnom, rođe-
Intervjui provedeni u sklopu rada na ovoj temi njem definiranom identitetu. To ukazuje da se,
pokazuju da u daljnjem komemoriranju pokoj- bez obzira na to što je dom stvoren izvan matič-
nika u običajnoj praksi u pojedinim slučajevima ne zemlje, makar nakon smrti ipak nastoji trajno
ne učestvuje niko od druge generacije migrana- vratiti u svoj prapočetak. Time se, na simboličan
ta – najbližih srodnika preminule osobe. Lično način, krug zatvorio – čovjek se sa smrću konač-
prisustvo, odnosno participacija živih srodnika, no i zauvijek vratio u tačku odakle je rođenjem i
u običajnoj se praksi kompenzira novcem koji pošao. Čak i u slučajevima kada se ukop pokojni-
se šalje kako bi se obavile običajne radnje, što se ka obavlja u zemlji prijema, ali se obavještenja o
može promatrati u kontekstu transformacija obi- smrti daju u matičnoj zemlji, potvrđuje se trajna
čajne prakse. Na preoblikovanje običaja u velikoj povezanost migranata sa zemljom porijekla.42
mjeri utiču i razlozi objektivne prirode (prostor- Upravo novinske osmrtnice ilustriraju koli-
na udaljenost, nemogućnost odsustvovanja s ko su migracije složen i višeznačan proces. One
radnog mjesta i sl.). Ali, bez obzira na to, možda pokazuju da povezanost sa zemljom porijekla ne
se ipak donekle može govoriti i o “protjerivanju” posjeduje samo određena starosna grupa migra-
ili ignoriranju smrti, što je jedna od odlika za- nata (što bi se možda moglo očekivati) već da se
padne kulture.38 to odnosi na sve generacije jer se bilježe sahrane
Prakticiranje običaja vezanih za smrt u zem- u zemlji porijekla i u slučaju smrti vrlo mladih
lji porijekla može također ukazivati na to da se osoba, odnosno druge generacije migranata.43
migranti nisu u potpunosti uklopili u društvo ze- Ukopati se u matičnoj zemlji za pokojnika
mlje prijema koje, između ostalog, ima i drugači- znači konačno i zauvijek vratiti se kući. Za po-
ju posmrtnu praksu. Ukop (sahrana) u matičnoj tomke migranata to je još jedna, možda najjača
zemlji pokazuje također trajne veze migranata s spona sa zemljom porijekla, koja se ostvaruje
društvom porijekla koje nisu, kako bi se očeki- upravo preko mrtvih. Jer i onda kad u matič-
valo, s protokom vremena slabile, već su čak i za noj zemlji nemaju više nikoga od živih najbližih
potomke migranata one postale bitne u stvaranju srodnika, oni imaju “svoje mrtve” kojima se vra-
vlastitog identiteta.39
Međutim, kad je riječ o običajnim radnjama pokazuje prihvatanje posmrtne prakse zemlje prijema:
“Funerall Services will begin at 10 AM et The DeJohn –
koje prate ukop pokojnika u zemlji prijema, tu
Flynn – Mylott Funeral Home in Willoughby Hills, Ohio,
je situacija nešto drugačija. Pored onih ponese- followed by a gathering at All Souls Cemetery in Chardon,
nih iz matične zemlje, uočava se i prihvatanje Ohio, USA. Poslije ukopa zajednički obiteljski ručak i evo-
posmrtne prakse društva zemlje prijema,40 što ciranje uspomena na našu dragu N.”
41
U Zagrebu je 20. oktobra preminula B. K. Polaganje urne
36
Tako se u Oslobođenju od 5. 11. 2015. godine navodi da će će se obaviti na gradskom groblju Bare u Sarajevu, stoji u
se komemoracija S. F. obaviti u Torontu, gdje je umrla, dok osmrtnici koja je objavljena u Oslobođenju od 1. 12. 2015.
će datum komemoracije u Sarajevu biti naknadno objavljen. godine.
37
Čapo Žmegač 2013, 125. 42
U Avazu je početkom decembra 2015. objavljeno obavje-
38
Toma 1989, 9. štenje o tragičnoj smrti devetnaestogodišnjaka u St. Louisu,
39
Čapo Žmegač 2003, 118. gdje je obavljen i ukop pokojnika.
40
U povodu smrti J. D. “Memorial service u Vancouveru 43
Tako se u osmrtnici objavljenoj sredinom juna 2015. u
biće u srijedu, 24. februara 2016.” (Oslobođenje, februar Oslobođenju obavještava da je Š. J. umrla u 18. godini u
2016). 2. marta 2015. objavljeno je slično obavještenje koje Švajcarskoj, a da će se ukop obaviti u Bratuncu.

221
ćaju, koje “obilaze”. Upravo su oni u nizu sluča- smrtnih ostataka migranata radi ukopa u matič-
jeva isključivi razlog njihovih posjeta matičnoj noj zemlji. Kao dopuna analizi novinskih osmrt-
zemlji. Sve to govori o još uvijek vrlo prisutnom nica, kad je to bilo moguće, korištena je i metoda
kultu mrtvih na našim prostorima te o čvrstoj nestrukturiranih intervjua kako bi se kroz etno-
sponi živih i mrtvih koju čak ni ogromna pro- grafiju iskustva odgonetnulo ko, kada i zašto od-
storna, ali ni vremenska udaljenost ne narušava. lučuje o mjestu i načinu ukopa, kao i ukupnom
Recentna, i ograničena, etnografska istraživa- posthumnom ceremonijalu, uključujući posebno
nja vezana za temu smrti u zemlji prijema, a uko- običajnu praksu. Upravo spomenuta etnografija
pu u matičnoj zemlji upućuju na zaključak da su upućuje na zaključak da je odluka o sahrani u
odluku o mjestu ukopa donijeli ili pokojnici za matičnoj zemlji često potpuno lična odluka pre-
života, ili pak njihovi živi srodnici. Je li to konač- minulog migranta, čime on u konačnici preuzi-
no ostvarenje sna o povratku, jedina mogućnost ma i aktivnu ulogu u upravljanju samom smrću.
da se iluzija o povratku, koju brojni migranti Iz novinskih osmrtnica iščitava se ne samo
godinama i decenijama gaje, pretvori u stvarni težnja migranta k ukopu u zemlji porijekla, što
i trajni povratak? Ili je to povratak među “svoje se može promatrati kao potvrda njegove uklo-
mrtve”, u rodovska groblja u koja su sahranjivane pljenosti ili, s druge strane, kao potvrda njegove
generacije predaka pokojnika koja se prepoznaju neuklopljenosti i neprihvatanja u zemlji prijema,
kao jedina moguća mjesta ukopa? već u nizu slučajeva i težnja da se društvo porije-
Primjeri smrti u zemlji prijema, a ukopa u kla samo i isključivo obavijesti o smrti daleko od
matičnoj zemlji koje nude analizirane osmrtnice matične zemlje. Takvi primjeri pokazuju specifi-
mogu se promatrati u različitim kontekstima i u čan vid transnacionalne prakse koja se ostvaruje
vrlo širokom rasponu – od tradicionalnog vjero- posredno i ima posebno značenje za migrantsku
vanja da se pokojnik, u pogledu mjesta ukopa, zajednicu jer se ni o jednom drugom obredu
vraća tamo odakle je i uzeta zemlja za njegovo prelaza ne obavještava društvo zemlje porijekla
stvaranje, preko običaja ukopa na svojoj zem- osim u slučaju smrti
lji, koji je u direktnoj vezi s tzv. patronatskim Novinske osmrtnice također su pokazale da
pravom koje se razvilo u srednjem vijeku,44 do je lokalni identitet jedan od najvažnijih kad je
transnacionalnog pristupa migracijama, koji riječ o smrti izvan matične zemlje, a sahrani u
posebnu pažnju posvećuje upravo odnosu mi- matičnoj zemlji te da transnacionalnu praksu ne
granta i društva porijekla. Kad je riječ o novin- predstavlja samo posljednje putovanje posmrt-
skim osmrtnicama, taj se odnos može podjed- nih ostataka već i docnija posmrtna običajna
nako primijeniti i na umrle osobe i na njihove praksa. Ukop u zemlji porijekla, kao i provođe-
žive srodnike, prijatelje, poznanike, također mi- nje običajne prakse, zatim obavještenja o smrti ili
grante. Promatranje osmrtnica u sklopu proble- kasnije komemoriranje pokojnika kroz novinske
matike migracija na svojevrstan način pokazuje osmrtnice u matičnoj zemlji može biti dugoro-
svu složenost odnosa migranta prema matičnoj čan poticaj za transnacionalne aktivnosti nared-
zemlji, što posebno dolazi do izražaja u slučaju ne generacije migranata koji se upravo preko mr-
smrti. Upravo novinske osmrtnice, u kontekstu tvih vezuju za zemlju svojih predaka.
na kojem se temelji ovaj prilog – smrti u zemlji
prijema, a ukopa u zemlji porijekla, jedan su od
pokazatelja “paralelnih životnih iskustava ‘tamo’
i ‘ovdje’”.45

Zaključak
U ovom radu promatrane su novinske osmrtnice
na osnovu kojih se može, između ostalog, steći
uvid i u transnacionalnu praksu povratka po-
44
Lovrenović 2010, 300.
45
Čapo Žmegač 2010, 22.

222
 Summary Bart, F. 1997, Etničke grupe i njihove granice, u: Pu-
tinja, F. / Stref-Fenar, Ž. (ur.) Teorije o etnicitetu,
Biblioteka XX vek, Beograd 1997.
Newspaper Obituaries and Black, R. 2001, Return and reconstruction in Bosnia
Herzegovina: missing Link, or Mistaken Priority?,
Transnational Practice in Bosnia and SAIS Review, Vol. 21, No. 2, Summer Fall 2001,
Herzegovina the Johns Hopkins University Press.
Brettell, C. B. / Hollifield, J. F. 2014, Migration Theory:
Focusing on newspaper obituaries, this paper ad- Talking Across Disciplines, Routledge, New York
dressed the transnational practice of return of de- and London 2014.
ceased’s body into their home country. In addition Colic-Peisker, V. 2002, The process of comunity and
to the analysis of newspaper obituaries, empirical identity building among recently arrived Bosnian
evidence was also gathered from unstructured inter- Muslim refugees in Western Australia, Mots Plu-
views to examine the “who, when, and why” of the riels, No. 21, May 2002.
decision-making related to the place and manner of Čapo Žmegač, J. 2003, Dva lokaliteta, dvije države,
burial and posthumous ritual. Presented ethnograph- dva doma: Transmigracija hrvatskih ekonomskih
ic evidence suggests that the decision about burial in migranata u Munchenu, Narodna umjetnost. Hr-
one’s home country is most often a personal decision vatski časopis za etnologiju i folkloristiku, Vol. 40,
made by the deceased migrant, through which he No. 2, 117-131.
plays an active role in his own death. Newspaper obit- Čapo Žmegač, J. 2010, Različiti pristupi povratnim
uaries do not solely demonstrate the migrant’s wish to migracijama, Studia ethnologica Croatica, Vol. 22,
be buried in their home country – which can be read 11-38.
as either a proof of their assimilation or the lack of Čolović, I. 1984, Značenje novinskih tužbalica,
it – but also the wish for an announcement of death Etnološke sveske, V, 49-56.
that happened far from a home country. Such exam- Daniel, O. 2007, Gastarbajteri. Rethinking Yugos-
ples show a specific kind of transnational practice that lav Economic Migrations towards the European
is very important for migrant communities, especially Nort-West through Transnationalism and Popular
because no other transitional event is announced in Culture, in: Ellis, S. G. / Klusáková, L. (eds.) Ima-
their home country. gining Frontiers, Contesting Identities, Edizioni
Newspaper obituaries also show that local identity Plus, Pisa, 277-302.
is most important when it comes to migrants’ death Faist, Th. 2010, Diaspora and Transnationalism: What
in an adopted country, and their burial in their home Kind of Dance Partners?, in: Bauböck, R. (ed.)
country. Moreover, the abovementioned transnati- Diaspora and Transnationalism: Concepts, Theo-
onal practice is demonstrated not only through the ries and Methods, Amsterdam Unuversity Press,
transportation of deceased’s body, but also through Amsterdam, 9-34.
posthumous death rituals. Burial in a home country, Felix, A. 2011, Posthumous Transnationalism: Post-
along with the performance of death rituals, newspa- mortem Repatriation from the United States to
per obituaries, and memorialization of the deceased Mexico, Latin American Research Review, Vol. 46,
through newspaper obituaries in the home country, No. 3, 157-179.
can be a longterm incentive for transnational and Franz, B. 2005, Uprooted and Unwanted: Bosnian re-
transgenerational activities of migrants who maintain fugess in Austria and United States, College Stati-
their relationships with their home country through on Texas A&M University Press, 2005.
their dead. Gardner, K. 2002, Age, narrative and migration: the
life course and life histories of Bengali elders in
London, Berg, Oxford 2002.
Halilovich, H. 2005. ‘A Uniguen Identity’, Refugee
Transitions, No. 16, winter 2005.
Halilović, H. 2006, Bosanskohercegovačka dijaspora
Literatura u vrtlogu globalnih migracija: izazovi i šanse za
Bosnu i Hercegovinu, Pregled, 193-218.
Antonijević, D. 2013, Stranac ovde, stranac tamo.
Halilović, H. 2013, (Re)konstrukcija zavičajnih iden-
Antropološko istraživanje kulturnog identiteta
titeta u bh. dijaspori: translokalne zajednice u
gastarbajtera, Srpski genealoški centar, Beograd
Australiji i Sjedinjenim Američkim Državama, u:
2013.
Emirhafizović, M. et al. (ur.) Migracije u Bosni i
Balkan, O. 2015, Burial and Belonging, Studies in Eth-
Hercegovini, Fakultet političkih nauka Univerzi-
nicity and Nationalism, Vol. 15, No. 1, 120-134.

223
 teta u Sarajevu i Ministarstvo za ljudska prava i nalni kapital, u: Majnhof, U. H. / Triandafilidu, A.
izbjeglice BiH, Sarajevo 2013. (prir.) Transkulturna Evropa, Clio, Beograd 2008.
Hunter, A. 2016, Staking a Claim to Land, Faith and Marković, P. 2009, Izgubljeni u transmisiji? Srpski
Family: Burial Location Preferences of Middle Ea- gastarbajteri između svetova, Hereticus, 4, 7-24.
stern Christian Migrants, Journal of Intercultural Mihajlovic, S. 1987, The Yugoslav Gastarbeiter: The
Studies, Vol. 37, No. 2, 179-194. Guest Who Stayed for Dinner, Northwestern Jour-
Jonker, G. 1996, The knife’s edge: Muslim burial in the nal of International Law & Business, Vol. 8, No. 1,
diaspora, Mortality, Vol. 1, No. 1, 27-43. Spring 1987, 181-196.
Kelly, I. 2003, Bosnian refugees in Britain, Questio- Nunez, L. / Wheeler, B. 2012, Chronicles of Death Out
ning Community, Sociology, Vol. 37, No. 1, BSA of Place: Management of Migrant Death in Johan-
Publication Ltd. nesburg, African Studies, Vol. 71, No. 2, 212-233.
Kovačević, I. / Krstić, M. 2011, Između istorije i Povrzanović Frykman, M. 2001, Povezati mjesta,
savremenosti: antropološko proučavanje gastar- izdržati udaljenosti: iskustva i implikacije trans-
bajtera u 21. veku, Etnoantropološki problemi, n. migrantskih putovanja, Narodna umjetnost, 38/2,
s., God. 6, Sv. 4, 969-982. 11-31.
Krstić, M. 2011, Dijaspora i radnici na privreme- Reimers, E. 1999, Death and identity: graves and fu-
nom radu u inostranstvu: osnovni pojmovi, nerals as cultural communication, Mortality, Vol.
Etnoantropološki problemi, n. s., God. 6, Sv. 2, 4, No. 2, 147-166.
295-318. Rihtman-Auguštin, D. 1978, Novinske osmrtnice,
Lee, R. 2011, Dead “On the Move”: Funerals, Entre- Narodna umjetnost, 15, 117-173.
preneurs and the Rural-Urban Nexus in South Af- Toma, L.-V. 1989, Smrt danas, Biblioteka XX vek,
rica, Africa, Vol. 81, No. 2, 226-247. Beograd 1989.
Lovrenović, D. 2010, Stećci: Bosansko i humsko mra- Vertovec, S. 2007, Introduction: New directions in the
morje srednjeg vijeka, Rabic, Sarajevo 2010. anthropology of migration and multiculturalism,
Majnhof, U. H. / Triandafilidu, A. 2008, Šire od di- Ethnic and Racial Studies, Vol. 30, No. 6, 961-978.
jaspore: transnacionalne prakse kao transnacio-

224
 Godišnjak/Jahrbuch 2018,47:225-226
DOI: 10.5644/Godisnjak.CBI.ANUBiH-47.112

III

Kritike i prikazi / Besprechungen

Adnan Busuladžić, Tragovi antičkog teatra, muzike, gladijatorskih borbi i takmičenja iz

arheoloških zbirki u Bosni i Hercegovini = Evidence of the theatre, music, gladiator combats and
games from ancient Greece and Rome in archaeology collections in Bosnia and Herzegovina,
Zemaljski muzej Bosne i Hercegovine, 2017, 314 str.

Monografija Tragovi antičkog teatra, muzike, gladijatorskih borbi i takmičenja iz arheoloških zbirki u Bosni i Her-
cegovini je nastala kao rezultat plodnog naučnog rada Adnana Busuladžića na polju klasične arheologije i nje-
govog djelovanja u pravcu modernizacije bosanskohercegovačkog arheološkog diskursa. U tom smislu je sama
monografija podijeljena u dva dijela, od kojih je u prvom dijelu autor predstavio različite teoretske rasprave na
tematiku teatra, muzike, gladijatorskih igara i atletizma u grčko-rimskom svijetu, dok je u drugom dijelu mono-
grafije predstavljen katalog sa arheološkim materijalom antičke provenijencije obrađenim u monografiji, a koji
su dio različitih muzejskih zbirki sa područja Bosne i Hercegovine. Polazeći od navedene općeprisutne premise
o teoretskom razumijevanju značaja i utjecaja navedenih kulturoloških fenomena unutar grčko-rimskog svijeta,
a težeći što kvalitetnijem dostizanju spoznaje istih, autor monografije u svakom od poglavlja i potpoglavlja prvo
pristupa predstavljanju korijena određene pojave u teatru, muzici, gladijatorskim borbama i takmičenjima u kon-
tekstu klasične Grčke i Rima, a zatim se, postižući pretpostavljeni i očekivani nivo razumijevanja istih, referira na
konkretne primjere sa područja Bosne i Hercegovine minuciozno ukazujući na činjenicu da je prostor današnje
Bosne i Hercegovine u vremenima klasičnih civilizacija poput Grčke i Rima reprezentirao jedan segment veće
cjeline nekadašnje historijske pozornice.
U prvome poglavlju pod nazivom Uvod Adnan Busuladžić započinje djelo sa razmatranjima o počecima
antičkog teatra u antičkoj Grčkoj, dosljedno slijedeći ideju da je potpuno percipiranje uloge pozornice kulturnog,
duhovnog i imaginarnog života u antičkom svijetu moguće isključivo kroz spoznaju razloga i načina nastanka
ovih oblika zabave i izgradnje kulturnog identiteta antičkog čovjeka. U tom smislu Busuladžić svoju, moglo bi
se reći predstavu o predstavi, započinje u periodu mitova i drevnih grčkih kultova polazeći od Dioniza, tačnije
Dioniza Eleuterija i kolijevke grčke tragedije, teatra smještenog na mjestu gdje su obavljane kultne ceremonije.
Nalazeći se u centru misli i ideje starih Grka, u podnožju Akropolja, na ovom mjestu je nastao najstariji poznati
teatar još u dalekom VI stoljeću stare ere i upravo polazeći od ove tačke se autor Busuladžić osvrnuo na brojne
kultove i mitološke pozadine božanstava poput Sabazija, Libera, Erosa-Amora, kao i Satira-Silena, na području
Rimskoga carstva, kao i teritorija koji danas pripadaju Bosni i Hercegovini. Analizirajući ove kultove i božanstva
Adnan Busuladžić ih uspješno povezuje sa teatarskim izvedbama i materijalnim ostacima u kojima su prepoznat-
ljivi tragovi materijalnog fiksiranja duhovnosti i kulturnog života antičkog čovjeka i njegovog okruženja.
U idućem, drugom poglavlju se vrši analiza uloga tragedije, komedije, pantomime i mime u razvoju an-
tičke teatarske umjetnosti. U tom smislu je na ovom mjestu prezentiran historijski razvoj različitih teatarskih
žanrova koji se javljaju u antičkom periodu, polazeći od Eshila i Sofokla, nastanka tragedije i njene socijalno-po-
litičke dimenzije pa sve do razvoja istih žanrova u okvirima rimskog svijeta. Prateći postupni razvoj cjelokupnog
kulturološkog fenomena „predstave“ Busuladžić u više navrata zapaža činjenicu da su „mnogobrojne religijske
svečanosti bile nezamislive bez igara“ te se kroz prizmu ovoga zapaža nezamjenjiva uloga teatarske pozornice u
životu, kao i smrti, antičkog čovjeka. Sam nastavak djela autora Busuladžića dodatno ukazuje na ovu činjenicu
kroz detaljnu analizu pojave i razvoja teatra, amfiteatra i hipodroma kao namjenskih objekata, a na kraju i kroz
analizu pokretnih materijalnih ostataka kao simbola teatra, posebice teatarskih maski. Govoreći upravo o pojavi
teatarskih maski autor pravi, u odnosu na klasični bosanskohercegovački arheološki diskurs, značajnu digresiju
ka modernim promatranjima uloge i značaja materijaliziranih elemenata žive kulture te upravo na ovom mjestu
vodi čitaoca u neke segmente, poput religioznosti, uloge maske kao predmeta koji nije skrivao lice već naprotiv

225
pred gledateljima otkrivao nova lica, lica božanstava, lica različitih emocija i slično. Pored ovoga se u ovom dijelu
navode brojni podaci o prikazu odjeće i obuće glumaca, kao i prikazu itifaličkih muškarca na arheološkim ostaci-
ma koji se čuvaju u zbirci Zemaljskog muzeja u Sarajevu. Na kraju, ovo poglavlje autor završava raspravom o ulozi
glumaca i ulozi publike u teatarskim izvođenjima, jasno ukazujući na činjenicu da je auditorij predstavljao i živog
participanta predstave a ne promatrača kao što je to slučaj u vremenima modernog doba.
Slijedeća dva poglavlja, treće i četvrto, predstavljaju detaljne podatke o muzici i gladijatorskim borbama
kao načinu epikurejskih zadovoljenja aponie i ataraxie, kao načinu života antičkog vremena. U tom smislu treće
poglavlje donosi značajne podatke o muzici kroz razvoj muzičkih instrumenata u antičkoj Grčkoj i Rimu, pa sve
do pojave kršćanstva kao dominantne religije. U nastavku autor prezentira podatke o prikazima predstava svirača,
plesačica i plesača kao motiva koji se javljaju na obrađenim predmetima. Dakako da su, te su u tom kontekstu
i navedene, različite mitološke figure utjecale na razvoj muzike bilo kao izumitelji koji su kreirali pojedinačne
instrumente bilo kao neki od najvećih muzičara koje po tradiciji poznaje čovječanstvo. Uzimajući u obzir njihove
prikaze na ostacima materijalne kulture prezentiranim kroz arheološke nalaze autor Busuladžić se osvrće direk-
tno na mitološke figure ovih ličnosti te tako detaljno prikazuje Orfeja čija lira je stavljena u sazviježđa, Kaliope,
Hermesa – Merkura, Apolona, Atene i Silvana, kao i stranih kultova poput božanstva Izide sa kojom je povezana
upotreba sistruma. Prateći dva prožeta svijeta u kojim je antički čovjek pronalazio svoju razonodu i zadovoljstvo,
od kulturološke uzvišenosti muzike do surove okrutnosti autor opravdano naglašava značaj gladijatorskih borbi
tog vremena te se osvrće na njihovo porijeklo još od Samnita i Etruraca odakle su iste stigle i u rimske živote.
Na svojstven način, teatarska bina kao i ona iz pisane predstave, sa nerijetko tragičnim završetkom koji su akteri
na pozornici mogli odigrati samo jednom, gladijatorska borba je posjedovala svoj kult, svoja božanstva najčešće
zaštitnike gladijatora. Tu se posebice izdvajaju Dijana, Silvan, Mars i Nemeza kao takvi dok su Dioskuri štitili atle-
tičare i sportiste a Heraklo sportiste, gladijatore, atletičare dok je i sam bio tema teatarskih komada. Ovo poglavlje
se u cilju potpune spoznaje gladijatorskih borbi i sporta završava opisom upotrebe strigila, bronzanih aribalosa i
prezentacijom primjeraka koji su evidentirani u različitim zbirkama sa područja Bosne i Hercegovine.
U posljednjem tekstualnom poglavlju, Tragovi antičkog teatra i amfiteatra na tlu Bosne i Hercegovine, autor
donosi zaključna razmatranja o ovoj problematici, te na kraju samog poglavlja taksativno navodi sve predmete
koji se mogu, bilo preko likovnih prikaza ili kao utilitarni predmet, povezati sa pojavama glume, muzike, gladija-
torskih igara i atletizma, a nalaze se u arheološkim zbirkama muzeja sa područja Bosne i Hercegovine.
Nakon ovoga slijedi katalog predmeta koji su obrađeni u monografiji, u kome se za svaki predmet navodi
mjesto čuvanja, lokalitet na kojem je pronađen, navodi kratki opis i dimenzije predmeta, te se prezentira literatura
u kojoj je predmet obrađen, ukoliko je predmet publiciran. Također u katalogu su prvo opisani predmeti prona-
đeni izvan Bosne i Hercegovine, a nalaze se u zbirkama bosansko-hercegovačkih muzeja, dok su u drugom dijelu
kataloga navedeni predmeti koji su pronađeni na tlu današnje Bosne i Hercegovine, te se nalaze u prethodno
navedenim zbirkama.
Nakon predstavljene teme i kataloga, slijedi popis literature korištene tokom izrade monografije, prema
kojem se na četrnaest stranica može uočiti široka upotreba djela štampanih u susjednim zemljama, ali i Njemač-
koj, Italiji, Velikoj Britaniji, Francuskoj, SAD-u, Mađarskoj i drugim, što umnogo povećava naučnu vrijednost
monografije.
U posljednjem dijelu monografije, autor u pedeset i osam tabela predstavlja 144 fotografije i ilustracije ar-
heološkog materijala iz različitih zbirki bosansko-hercegovačkih muzeja, a koji je prethodno opisan u monografiji
u katalogu predmeta.
Na kraju, nužno je naglasiti da se autor ovom monografijom otisnuo izvan poznatih okvira na prostoru
Bosne i Hercegovine te se dotakao teme o području za koje u Bosni i Hercegovini do sada nije postojalo dje-
lo u kojem bi se na sistematičan način i na jednom mjestu izvršila prezentacija ove problematike. Monografija
daje kompletnu sliku razvoja teatra, muzike, gladijatorskih borbi i takmičenja u antičkoj Grčkoj i Rimu, te je
u sklopu iste autor Busuladžić izvršio povezivanje ovih pojava sa arheološkim materijalom iz zbirki različitih
bosansko-hercegovačkih muzeja, a koji je na kraju i prezentiran putem brojnih ilustracija i fotografija. Uz ovo
je neophodno napomenuti da je ova monografija pisana dvojezično, tačnije bosanskim i engleskim jezikom, što
umnogome uvećava potencijal njene diseminacije u svjetskim naučnim krugovima. U cjelini, ovdje je riječ o
savremenoj monografiji koja prelazi granice tradicionalne bosansko-hercegovačke deskriptivne arheologije otva-
rajući pitanje moderne spoznaje teatarskog komada u kojem se na historijskoj pozornici odvijao život običnog
antičkog čovjeka. Napuštajući pitanje političke interpretacije, historijskih ličnosti i pojedinačnih događaja od izu-
zetnog značaja te predstavljajući radosti i zadovoljstva običnog čovjeka ova monografija postaje novo polazište za
buduće istraživače koji se u Bosni i Hercegovini, a i šire, budu bavili problematikom teatra, muzike, gladijatorskih
borbi i takmičenja.
Adnan Kaljanac

226
 Godišnjak/Jahrbuch 2018,47:227-228
DOI: 10.5644/Godisnjak.CBI.ANUBiH-47.113

Hronika / Chronik

Izvještaj o radu Centra za balkanološka ispitivanja ANUBiH u 2018. godini

Aktivnosti Centra za balkanološka ispitivanja ANUBiH tokom 2018. godine uglavnom su bile
usmje­rene na izdavačku djelatnost. U okviru raspoloživih mogućnosti radilo se i na obradi arheološkog
materijala, kao i na završnoj pripremi digitalne prezentacije kartoteka iz okvira balkanologije koje su u
prethodnom periodu oformljene u okviru naše institucije. Prvu polovinu godine obilježilo je štampa-
nje i distribucija Godišnjaka/Jahrbucha br. 46 za 2017. godinu, a u drugom polugodištu su prikupljeni
i obrađeni radovi za Godišnjak/Jahrbuch br. 47 za 2018. godinu. Uz redovne rubrike, ovaj broj sadrži
i priloge koji su prezentirani na prvoj PeBA-konferenciji (Perspectives of Balkan Archaeology – The
Early Iron Age: Methods and Approaches) koja je održana u Zemaljskom muzeju Bosne i Hercegovine
u Sarajevu 8–9. aprila 2016. godine. Pripremu i štampanje časopisa je i ovoga puta podržalo Evroazij­
sko odjeljenje Njemačkog arheološkog instituta. Značajnu fininsijsku pomoć pružili su Fondacija za
izdavaštvo Sarajevo, Federalno ministarstvo obrazovanja i nauke, kao i Zentrum für Antike Welten iz
München-a.
Tokom 2018. godine nastavljeno je s radom na štampanju istorijskih izvora za srednjovjekovnu Bo-
snu, autora prof. dr. Esada Kurtovića. Riječ je o drugom tomu knjige ”Izvori za historiju srednjovjekov-
ne Bosne (Ispisi iz knjiga kancelarije Državnog arhiva u Dubrovniku 1341–1526)” koji sadrže arhivsku
građu iz serije Debita notariae (Knjige zaduženja). U ovoj fazi pripreme publikacije za štampanje najviše
se radilo na pronalaženju finansijskih sredstava. S obzirom da Akademija nema mogućnosti samostal-
no finansirati ovo izdanje, prihvaćena je ponuda Historijskog arhiva u Sarajevu i Instituta za historiju
u Sarajevu za zajednički rad na štampanju ove vrijedne publikacije. U tom smislu su obavljeni i prvi
razgovori, te se nadamo da će štampanje drugog toma “Izvora” u dogledno vrijeme biti privedeno kraju.
Također, radilo se na pripremi drugog toma izdanja “Lične zabilješke generala Oskara Potioreka o
unutrašnjopolitičkoj situaciji u Bosni i Hercegovini (period od jula do početka I. svjetskog rata 1914.
godine)” koji pripremaju akademik Dževad Juzbašić i prof. dr. Zijad Šehić. U toku ove godine pri­
kupljen je najveći dio Potiorekovih rukopisa u Bečkim arhivima, a prikupljanje i obrada ovog materijala
biće završeni u sljedećoj godini.
U saradnji s Arheološkim institutom Filozofskog fakulteta Univerziteta u Sarajevu u ovoj godini se
pristupilo sistematizaciji arheološke građe koje je sakupljena tokom istraživanja našeg Centra na Gla-
sinačkom području u vremenu od 1975. do 1990. godine. Uglavnom se radi o materijalu iz gradinskih
naselja koji je tokom ratnih godina nekoliko puta premještan, te je došlo do djelimičnog gubitka po-
pratne dokumentacije. Na osnovu inventarskih knjiga i dnevnika iskopavanja uspješno su identificirani
i razvrstani nalazi iz Gradine Ilijak, a u narednoj godini će se raditi na sistematskom pregledu i razvrsta-
vanju nalaza iz naselja Kadića brdo na kome su obavljena sistematska istraživanja šireg obima, kao i na
nalazima iz drugih glasinačkih naselja. Ovaj posao su uz konsultaciju s prof. dr. Balgojem Govedaricom
u ovoj godini obavile saradnica Centra, Sabina Vejzagić i studentice s Arheologije s Filozofskog fakul-
teta u Sarajevu, Maida Turkmanović i Dženefa Merdanić.
Veoma značajan segmenat ovogodišnje aktivnosti odnosi se na finalnu pripremu web prezentacije
dva korpusa kulturno-istorijske građe na kojima su angažovani saradnici našeg Centra. Radi se o kar-
toteci “Grobovi prastanovnika sjevero-zapadnog Balkana” koju je svojevremeno inicirao dr. Zdravko

227
Marić u saradnji s Blagojem Govedaricom i Seadom Čerkezom. Materijal je već odavno sakupljen i sis-
tematizovan. Međutim, rad na elektronskoj finalizaciji tih podataka odvija se s dosta poteškoća, uglav-
nom zbog nedostatka finansijskih sredstava.
Novi član našeg Centra, prof. dr. Lejla Nakaš također se uključila u rad na elektronskoj prezentaciji
kulturno-istorijske građe s našeg prostora, projektom digitalizacije crkveno-slavenskog rječnika. Građu
za ovaj rječnik najvećim dijelom je sakupila prof. dr. Herta Kuna u periodu do 1990. godine. Elek-
tronska građa je već kompletirana i sada je potrebno napraviti web stranicu za pretraživanje različitih
varijanti glagoljičkih i ćiriličkih tekstova. Oba projekta digitalizacije na kojima se radi u našem Centru
biće prezentirana na novoj web stranici Akademije nauka i umjetnosti BiH, čime će se u znatnoj mjeri
olakšati pretraživanje podataka i šire istraživanje bitnih elemenata duhovne kulture, kako iz perioda
srednjeg vijeka, tako i iz dalje prošlosti našeg prostora.

Sabina Vejzagić

228
 Godišnjak/Jahrbuch 2018,47:229
DOI: 10.5644/Godisnjak.CBI.ANUBiH-47.114

In memoriam

Orhan Jamaković
(1946–2018)

Boreći se sa teškom bolešću, dana 15. augusta 2018. zauvijek nas je napustio
saradnik našeg Godišnjaka/Jahrbuch-a, arheolog Orhan Jamaković. Kolega
Jamaković rođen je u Senti (FNR Jugoslavija, NR Srbija) 28. 2. 1946. godine,
a najveći dio života proveo je u Banja Luci i u Adelaidi, u Australiji. Arheo-
logiju je studirao na Univerzitetu u Beogradu u vremenu od 1968. do 1973.
godine, nakon čega se zaposlio kao kustos u Muzeju Bosanske Krajine u Banja
Luci. Bavio se muzeološkim radom i istraživanjem praistorijskog perioda na
području sjeverozapadne Bosne. Osim muzeoloških aktivnosti obavio je niz
arheoloških iskopavanja, između ostalog na eneolitskom naselju u Kastelu Ba-
nja Luka, na praistorijskom naselju Brdašce u Laktašima (zajedno sa Z. Žera-
vicom), na neolitskom naselju Kovačica kod Kotor Varoši, i na nizu bronzanodopskih i željeznodopskih
gradinskih naselja u srednjem toku Vrbasa (područje Banja Luke). O tim istraživanjima objavio je više
naučnih radova.
Tokom rata u Bosni i Hercegovini Orhan Jamaković je, kao i mnogi ovdašnji arheolozi i drugi
mladi ljudi, bio primoran da napusti zemlju i zasnuje novi život u inostranstvu. On se preselio u Adelai-
du u Australiji, i mada u novoj sredini nije mogao obezbijediti zaposlenje u struci, on je našao vremena i
snage da nastavi s naučnom obradom svojih starih iskopavanja. Na osnovu kopija dijela dokumentacije
koje je ponio iz Banja Luke, on je strpljivo rekonstruisao svoja prethodna istraživanja, a rezultate tog
svog rada objavio je u Glasniku Zemaljskog Muzeja, kao i u našem Godišnjaku/Jahrbuch-u. Zahvaljuju-
ći tome, naučnoj javnosti su mogli biti prezentirani autentični izvještaji “iz prve ruke”, odnosno iz pera
autora iskopavanja.
Pored svoje primarne muzeološke i arheološke djelatnosti Orhan Jamaković je bio i svestrano
socijalno angažovan u svojoj sredini. U Banja Luci ga pamte ne samo kao neumornog istraživača, već i
kao vrsnog sportistu. Odlaskom Orhana Jamakovića izgubili smo dobrog kolegu, velikog arheološkog
entuzijastu i plemenitog čovjeka.

Redakcija Godišnjaka/Jahrbuch-a

229
 Adrese autora / Autorenadressen

Prof. dr. Adnan Busuladžić Dr. sci. Aladin Husić

Filozofski fakultet u Sarajevu Orijentalni institut
Katedra za arheologiju Zmaja od Bosne 8b
Franje Račkog 1 BA – 71 000 Sarajevo
BA – 71 000 Sarajevo [email protected]
[email protected]
Aleksandar Jašarević, MA
Dr. sci. Milijan Dimitrijević Muzej u Doboju
University of Sydney Vidovdanska 4
Department of Classics and Ancient History BA–74 000 Doboj
Camperdown NSW 2006 [email protected]
Australia
[email protected] Dr. Aleksandar Kapuran
Institut za arheologiju Beograd
Dr. Vojislav Filipović Kneza Mihaila 35/IV
Arheološki institut Beograd RS – 11 000 Beograd
Kneza Mihailova 35/IV [email protected]
RS – 11 000 Beograd
[email protected] Dr. sc. Mehmed Kardaš
Filozofski fakultet u Sarajevu
Prof. dr. Mario Gavranović Odsjek za bosanski, srpski i hrvatski jezik
OREA Abteilung Europa Institut für Orientalische Franje Račkog 1
und Europäische Archäologie Österreichische BA – 71 000 Sarajevo
Akademie der Wissenschaften [email protected]
Fleischmarkt 20
A – 1897 Wien Prof. dr. Carola Metzner-Nebelsick
[email protected] Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
Geschwister-Scholl-Platz 1
Mr. sci. Melisa Forić Plasto D – 80539 München
Filozofski fakultet u Sarajevu [email protected]
Odsjek za historiju
Franje Račkog 1 Prof. dr. Lejla Nakaš
BA – 71 000 Sarajevo Filozofski fakultet u Sarajevu
[email protected] Odsjek za bosanski, srpski i hrvatski jezik
Franje Račkog 1
Daniela Heilmann, M.A. BA – 71 000 Sarajevo
LMU München [email protected]
Graduate School Distant Worlds
Affiliate Member Dr. Aleksandra Papazovska
Schellingstr. 3 Arheološki muzej na Makedonija
D – 80799 München Kej Dimitar Vlahov b.b.
[email protected] 1000 Skopje
Makedonija
[email protected]

231
Ajla Sejfuli, MA Doc. dr. Aiša Softić
Zavičajni muzej Travnik Filozofski fakultet
Mehmed-paše Kukavice 1 Katedra za arheologiju
BA – 72 720 Travnik Franje Račkog 1
[email protected] BA–71 000 Sarajevo
[email protected]

232
 Uputstva / Richtlinien / Guidelines

Uputstva za pripremu materijala

za Godišnjak Centra za balkanološka ispitivanja ANUBiH

Forma priloga
Tekst (na njemačkom, engleskom, srpskom, hrvatskom, bosanskom jeziku...) uključuje apstrakt s ključnim riječima
na engleskom jeziku, kao i obuhvatan rezime na stranim jezicima, ilustracije, napomene i potpunu bibliografiju.
Tekst predati u digitalnom obliku uz primjerak odštampanog teksta u formatu “Din-A4” sa marginom od 2,5
cm. Molimo vas da tekst bude u programu Microsoft Word ili Corel Word Perfect. Nemojte unositi paginaciju,
zaglavlje ili na drugi način formatirati tekst. Poželjno je da tekst bude u fontu Times New Roman, Courier ili Arial
veličine 12 pt kao i proreda od 1,5.
Ilustracije bi takođe trebalo da budu predate u digitalnom obliku, ili dobrog kvaliteta pogodne za skeniranje.
Veličina ca. 19 x 13cm ili “Din-B5” format. Prihvatamo slijedeće formate *.gif, *.jpg, *.psd, *.tif ili *.bmp.
Strane izraze navesti u kurzivu (italic).
Tekst ne hifenirati.

Napomene i citiranje
Napomene bi trebalo navoditi kao “fus note” u formi kratkog citata, prema važećim bibliografskim pravilima.
Detaljno alfabetsko navođenje literature na kraju priloga treba da sadrži sve relevantne bibliografske podatke.
U tekstu, u fusnotama i u literaturi kod članaka na našem jeziku table se navode skraćenicom Tab. (a ne T.). Kod
tekstova na njemačkom jeziku Taf.). Rimski brojevi se u principu ne upotrebljavaju, nego se u cjelini sve citirane
numeracije pišu arapskim brojevima.

Redoslijed navođenja citata

Pri navođenju citata preporučuje se pridržavanje sljedećeg redoslijeda: 1) ime autora, 2) godina izdanja, 3) br.
strane, 4) navedena ilustracija, 5) br. table sa brojem ilustracije.

Primjer:
Childe 1926, 120-122.
Milojčić 1949, 267 f.; Sl. 8, 2; 14, 3. 5. 7.
Renfrew 1974 Tab. 4, 2-6.
Naumann 1968, 12. 34; 50-72, Sl. 7, Tab. 19, 1. 7. 8; 20, 3. 4a-c.

Kod citiranja radova istog autora koji su objavljeni u jednoj godini, pored godine se unosi slovo.

Primjer:
Lüning 1996a, 12-56. Lüning 1996b, 45 f.
Molimo Vas da šaljete samo kompletirani materijal.

Znaci interpunkcije kod citiranja

Kod navedenih primjera obratiti posebnu pažnju na to gdje dolaze znaci interpunkcije, a gdje ne (između slovnih
i brojčanih navoda nema interpunkcije- autor/godina; slika/broj i sl.

233
Primjer:
Naumann 1968, 12. 34; 50-72, Sl. 7 Tab. 19, 1. 7. 8; i sl.
Zarez dolazi iza godine kao i između broja pojedinačne slike i broja ilustracije na toj slici: Milojčić 1949, 267 f.;
Sl. 8, 2; itd.
Brojevi ilustracija se međutim razdvajaju tačkom: Sl. 14, 3. 5. 7.
Navođenje odvojenih stranica takođe se razdvaja tačkom: Naumann 1968, 12.34.
Ukoliko se radi o dva autora imena se razdvajaju kosom linijom “/”. Kod više od dva autora navodi se samo prvi
autor, a na ostale se ukazuje sa “i dr.”.

Primjer:
Marinov / Yordanov 1978, 60-67; Agapov i dr. 1990, 48 f.
Pojedinačni citati u okviru jedne fus note mogu se razdvajati tačka-zarezom (semikolon) “;”.

Primjer:
Nehaev 1992, 76; Hančar 1937, 251, 333.

Literatura
Kod monografija navodi se kompletan naslov bez skraćivanja. Navodi se takođe i podnaslov.

Ukoliko je knjiga izdata u okviru serije navesti i naziv serije kao i broj sveske-izdanja. Između imena autora i
naslova citiranog rada navesti godinu izdanja. Broj sveske izdanja se navodi neposredno poslije naslova.

Primjer:
Martin-Kilcher, S. 1976, Das romische Graberfeld von Corraux im Berner Jura. Basler Beitrage zur Ur- und Fru-
hgeschichte 2, Derendingen 1976.

Naslov časopisa se u principu ne skraćuje. Godina izdavanja se navodi između broja časopisa i broja stranice, od
kojih je odvojena zarezima.

Primjer:
Anthony, D. W. / Brown, D. R. 1991, The Origin of Horseback Riding, Antiquity 65, 1991, 22-38.

Ukoliko se radi o zborniku radova (spomenica, akti kongresa, katalog i sl.) navedeni rad se navodi u neskraćenom
obliku. Prije naslova citiranog zbornika treba da stoji “u:”. Ime izdavača koje slijedi treba odvojiti sa “ed.” i staviti
ga prije naslova zbornika.

Primjer:
Henrickson, E. F. 1994, The Outer Limits: Settlement and Economic strategies in the Central Zagros Highlands
During the Uruk Era, In: Stein, G. / Rothman, M. S (ed.), Chiefdoms and Early States in the Near East, Mono-
graphs in world Archaeology, Madison 1994, 85-102.

Ukoliko se navode dva ili više autora imena se odvajaju sa “/”.

Primjer:
Anthony, D. W. / Brown, D. R. 1991, The Origin of Horseback Riding, Antiquity 65, 1991, 22-38.
Ako imate dodatnih pitanja molimo Vas da konsultujete redakciju.

234
 Richtlinien zur Veröffentlichung im Jahrbuch des Zentrums
für Balkanforschungen der AWBH

Form der Vorlage

Der Text (deutsch, englisch, serbisch, kroatisch, bosnisch...) sollte ein Abstrakt mit Schlüsselwörter in englisch,
sowie eine Zusammenfassung in Fremdsprachen, Abbildungen, Anmerkungen und vollständiger Literaturliste
umfassen.
Text bitte in digitaler Form (als Textdatei) und als Din A4-Ausdruck mit 2,5 cm umlaufenden Seitenrand ein-
senden. Bitte verwenden Sie möglichst ein gängiges Textverarbeitungsprogramm, wie Microsoft Word oder
Corel Word Perfect. Fügen Sie keine Seitenzahlen, Kopf- oder Fußzeilen ein und verwenden Sie ausschließlich
die Schriftarten Times New Roman, Courier oder Arial der Größe 12pt sowie einen Zeilabstand von 1,5 Zeilen.
Ungewöhnliche Sonderzeichen (Č,č,Ć,ć,Š,š,Ž,ž usw.) unbedingt im Probeausdruck speziell markieren!
Auch die gewünschten Abbildungen möglichst in digitaler Form oder als scanfähige Druckvorlage einsenden.
Folgende Dateiformate sollten ausschließlich Verwendung finden:*.GIF, *.JPG, *.TIF oder *.BMP (Größe ca. 19 x
13 cm oder Din A5).
Fremdsprachliche Begriffe durch Kursivdruck hervorzuheben (signifier).
Der Text sollte fortlaufend, d.h. ohne Silbertrennung, und ohne Einzüge verfasst sein. Bitte nur das komplette
Druckmaterial abgeben.

Anmerkungen und Zitierrichtlinien

Anmerkungen sind grundsätzlich als Fußnoten in Form von Kurzzitaten in das Dokument einzufügen.
Ein ausführliches alphabetisches Literaturverzeichnis am Ende des Dokuments enthält alle wesentlichen bibliog-
raphischen Angaben (s. u.).

Gliederung innerhalb der Fußnoten

Folgende Reihenfolge innerhalb der Kurzzitate ist generell einzuhalten: 1. Autorname, 2. Erscheinungsjahr, 3.
Seitenzahlen, 4. Abbildungsverweis und 5. Tafelnummer mit Abbildungsziffer.

Bsp.:
Childe 1926, 120-122.
Milojčić 1949, 267 f.; Abb. 8, 2; 14, 3. 5. 7.
Renfrew 1974, Taf. 4, 2-6.
Naumann 1968, 12. 34; 50-72, Abb. 7, Taf. 19, 1. 7. 8; 20, 3. 4a-c.

Bei gleich lautenden Kurzzitaten wird an das Erscheinungsjahr ein Buchstab angehängt.

Bsp.:
Lüning 1996a, 12-56; Lüning 1996b, 45 f.

Interpunktion beim Zitieren

Keine Interpunktion zwischen Buchstaben und Nummern (Autorenname und Jahr: Nauman 1968; Abbildung
und Nummer: Abb. 7 Taf. 19).

Das Komma erscheint nach dem Jahr und zwischen der Abbildungsnummer und Einzelnbildnummer.

Bsp.
Milojčić 1949, 267 f.; Abb. 8, 2.
Nummerierung der Einzelnbildern innerhalb einer Abbildung wird mit einem Punkt getrennt: Abb. 14, 3. 5. 7.
Zitieren der Einzelnseiten wird ebenso mit einem Punkt getrennt: Naumann 1968, 12.34.

235
Sind zwei Verfasser beteiligt, werden die Namen im Kurzzitat der Fußnote durch Schrägstrich “/“ getrennt. Bei
mehr als zwei Autoren wird lediglich der erstgenannte Autor aufgeführt und auf die übrigen mit “u. a.“ verwiesen.

Bsp.:
Marinov/Yordanov 1978, 60-67; Agapov u.a. 1990, 48 f.
Einzelne Zitate innerhalb einer Fußnote können durch das Semikolon “;” getrennt werden.

Bsp.:
Nechaev 1992, 76; Hancar 1937, 251.333.

Literaturverzeichnis
Bei Monographien Katalogen, Festschriften u. ä wird der Titel vollständig und ohne Abkürzungen aufgeführt.
Der Untertitel, Herausgeber und Verlag ist ebenfalls mit aufzuführen. Ist das Buch innerhalb einer Publikations-
serie erschienen, ist der Serientitel anzugeben sowie die Serien- und Bandzahlen. In Klammern steht das Er-
scheinungsjahr, dem zitierten Titel vorangestellt wird.

Bsp.:
Martin-Kilcher, S. 1976, Das romische Graberfeld von Corraux im Berner Jura. Basler Beitrage zur Ur- und Fru-
hgeschichte 2, Derendingen 1976.

Zeitschriftentitel sind generell nicht abzukürzen. Die Jahrgangszahl wird dabei in Kommata eingeschlossen.

Bsp.:
Anthony, D. W. / Brown, D. R. 1991, The Origin of Horseback Riding, Antiquity 65, 1991, 22-38.
In einem Sammelband (Festschrift, Kongressbericht, Katalog o.ä.) erschienene Arbeiten werden mit dessen un-
gekürztem Titel zitiert. Vor dem Titel des zitierten Aufsatzes steht “In:”. Der darauf folgende Name des Heraus-
gebers wird durch “(Hrsg.)” oder “(ed.)” gekennzeichnet und steht vor dem Titel des Sammelwerkes.

Bsp.:
Henrickson, E. F. 1994, The Outer Limits: Settlement and Economic strategies in the Central Zagros Highlands
During the Uruk Era, In: Stein, G. / Rothman, M. S (ed.), Chiefdoms and Early States in the Near East, Mono-
graphs in world Archaeology, Madison 1994, 85-102.

Wenn zwei oder mehrere Autoren zitiert sind wird mit “/“ getrennt.

Bsp.:
Anthony, D. W. / Brown, D. R. 1991, The Origin of Horseback Riding, Antiquity 65, 1991, 22-38.
Bitte wenden Sie sich bei offenen Fragen an die Redaktion.

236
 Guidelines for the article preparation for Godišnjak CBI ANUBiH

Form of article
Text (in German, English, Serbian, Croatian, Bosnian ...) should contain an abstract with key words in english
with a comprehensive summary in foreign language, illustrations, references and bibliography.
Text should be given in a digital form accompanied printed version format both “Din- A4” with margins 2,5 cm
each. You are kindly asked to send text in a Microsoft Word Program or in Corel Word Perfect. Do not insert
paging, headers or different kinds of text formatting. It is recommended that you use fonts: Times New Roman,
Courier or Arial, size 12 pt, and the line spacing 1,5. Special characters and symbols (Č,č,Ć,ć,Š,š,Ž,ž etc.) have to
be marked in a print version.
Illustrations should be prepared also in a digital form or with a good scanning quality - size cca. 19 x 13 cm or
“Din-B5” format. We accept following formats: *.gif, *.jpg, *.psd, *.tif or *.bmp. Foreign expressions should be
cited in italic Text should not be hyphenated.

Notes and citations

Notes should be in form of footnotes as short quotes according the bibliographic rules.
Detail alphabetic list of bibliography in the end of the article should contain all relevant bibliographical data. In
text, footnotes and bibliography in Bosnian and English, Tables are given with a short Tab. (not T.). In German
text (Taf.). Roman numbers are basically not in use, all numbering is principally in Arabic numerals.

Citation order
Citation is recommended by the following order: 1) Name of author, 2) Year of publication 3) Page number, 4)
Quoted illustration 5) Table number with a number of illustrations.

Example:
Childe 1926, 120-122.
Milojčić 1949, 267 f.; Fig. 8, 2; 14, 3. 5. 7.
Renfrew 1974, Tab. 4, 2-6.
Naumann 1968, 12. 34; 50-72 Fig. 7, Tab. 19, 1. 7. 8; 20, 3. 4a-c.

Citation of the same author’s articles published in the one year has to have letter mark following the year of
publication.

Example:
Lüning 1996a, 12-56; Lüning 1996b, 45 f.

We kindly ask you to send only the completed material.

Punctuation marks in quoting

In following examples see where the punctuation marks are (between letter and number characters in quote there
are no punctuation marks, author/year; illustration / number and picture number).

Example:
Naumann 1968, 12.34; 50-72, Fig. 7, Tab. 19, 1. 7. 8;

Comma comes after year, as between the number of a single picture or the number of the illustration in that pic-
ture (table) :

Example:
Milojčić 1949, 267f.; Sl. 8, 2; itd.

237
Numbers of illustrations are separated by periods: Fig. 14, 3. 5. 7.
Different pages quoting should also be separated by period mark: Naumann 1968, 12.34.

If there are two authors their names are separated by slash line “/”. In case of more authors only the name of the
first one is quoted and other are just mentioned as “et al.”.

Example:
Marinov / Yordanov 1978, 60-67; Agapov et al. 1990, 48 f.
Individual quotations in one footnote can be separated by semicolon “;”

Example:
Nehaev 1992, 76; Hancar 1937, 251, 333.

Bibliography
Monographs, catalogues, proceedings and other special publications are given with whole title without abbrevia-
tion. Subtitles, editor and publisher should also be included. If the book is published in a serial publication, serial
number and number of the volume should be introduced as well. A year of publication should be given between
the name of the author and the title of the quoted article or the book, there. Number of the volume should be right
after the title.

Example:
Martin-Kilcher, S. 1976, Das romische Graberfeld von Corraux im Berner Jura. Basler Beitrage zur Ur- und Fru-
hgeschichte 2, Derendingen 1976.

Principally title of the journal should not be reduced. Year of publication should be given¸ between the number of
the journal’s volume and page numbers, separated by comma.

Example:
Anthony, D. W. / Brown, D. R. 1991, The Origin of Horseback Riding, Antiquity 65, 1991, 22-38.

In case of a proceedings (commemorative volume, congress articles, catalogue), whole title should be given, with-
out abbreviation. It should be introduced “in” before the title of quoted Proceedings. Name of the editor that
follows should be also separated with “ed.”, and given before the title of the Proceedings.

Example:
Henrickson, E. F. 1994, The Outer Limits: Settlement and Economic strategies in the Central Zagros Highlands
during the Uruk Era. In: Stein, G. / Rothman, M. S. (ed.), Chiefdoms and Early States in the Near East, Mono-
graphs in world Archaeology, Madison 1994, 85-102.

In a case of two or more authors, their names are separated with “/ “.

Anthony, D. W. / Brown, D. R. 1991, The Origin of Horseback Riding, Antiquity 65, 1991, 22-38.

For any further questions please contact the editorial board.

238
 Godišnjak izlazi od 1957. godine. Prva (I) i druga sveska (II-1961) štampane su u izdanju Balkanološkog
instituta Naučnog društva BiH, a od 1965. (III/1) izdavač časopisa je Centar za balkanološka ispitivanja
ANUBiH. Počev od sveske XXXIX/37 numeracija je svedena na prvu cifru koja se izražava arapskim brojem.
Objavljeni radovi su vrednovani od strane međunarodne redakcije i recenzenata.

Das Jahrbuch erscheint seit dem Jahr 1957. Der erste (I) und zweite Band (II-1961) wurden im
Balkanologischen Institut der wissenschaftlichen Gesellschaft B-H herausgegeben. Seit dem Band III/1, 1965
erscheint die Zeitschrift im Zentrum für Balkanforschungen der AWK B-H.
Ab Band XXXIX/37 wird die Nummerierung auf die erste, folglich arabisch ausgedrückter Zahl, zurückgezogen.
Die veröffentlichten Artikel wurden von der internationalen Redaktion und Rezensenten begutachtet.

***

Naslovna strana / Titelblatt

Dževad Hozo

Ilustracija na naslovnoj strani / Illustration am Titelblatt

Amblem PeBA konferencije / Emblem der PeBA Konferenz

Adresa redakcije / Redaktionsadresse

[email protected]

Web izdanje / Web-Ausgabe

www.anubih.ba/godisnjak

Sekretarka Redakcije / Sekretärin der Redaktion

Sabina Vejzagić

Lektura / Lektorin
Zenaida Karavdić

Tehnički urednik / Technische Redakteur

Narcis Pozderac

DTP
Narcis Pozderac

Tiraž / Aufläge
500

Štampa / Druck
Dobra knjiga, Sarajevo

Časopis je indeksiran u / Zeitschrift verzeichnet in

C.E.E.O.L. (Central Eastern European Online Library)
Ebsco Publishing
Ulrich Periodicals
ZENON DAI (Journals Database of German Archaeological Institute)
Cross Ref