CEU eTD Collection

LATE MEDIEVAL TOMBSTONES (STE MAThesis Medievalin Studies ŽABLJAK, MONTENEGRO Central European University Dejan Vemi June 2011 June Budapest

ć

Ć CI) CI) IN THE AREA OF CEU eTD Collection

Central offulfillment the European requirem University, partialBudapest, in LATE MEDIEVAL TOMBSTONES (STE MEDIEVALTOMBSTONES LATE Thesis submitted to the Department of Medieval Studies, the to DepartmentStudies, Thesis submitted of Medieval Accepted the conformancewith standards in CEU of the ______of the MasterArts degreeStudies Medieval of in ŽABLJAK,MONTENEGRO Chair, Examination Committee Chair, Examination Thesis Supervisor Dejan Vemi June 2011 June Examiner Examiner Examiner Budapest (Serbia) by i ć

Ć CI) IN THE AREACI) OF IN THE ents CEU eTD Collection

Central offulfillment the European requirem University, partialBudapest, in LATE MEDIEVAL TOMBSTONES (STE MEDIEVALTOMBSTONES LATE Thesis submitted to the Department of Medieval Studies, the to DepartmentStudies, Thesis submitted of Medieval Accepted the conformancewith standards in CEU of the ______of the MasterArts degreeStudies Medieval of in ŽABLJAK,MONTENEGRO External Examiner Examiner External Dejan Vemi June 2011 June Budapest (Serbia) by ii ć

Ć CI) IN THE AREACI) OF IN THE ents CEU eTD Collection

Central offulfillment the European requirem University, partialBudapest, in LATE MEDIEVAL TOMBSTONES (STE MEDIEVALTOMBSTONES LATE Accepted the conformancewith standards in CEU of the the to DepartmentStudies, Thesis submitted of Medieval ______of the MasterArts degreeStudies Medieval of in ŽABLJAK,MONTENEGRO ______External SupervisorExternal Dejan Vemi Supervisor June 2011 June Budapest (Serbia) by iii ć

Ć CI) IN THE AREACI) OF IN THE ents CEU eTD Collection Budapest, 2011 June of form higher any to this institution for other education degree. an academic t of part no that declare also I copyright. institution’s or person’s part no and others, of work the of made was use illegitimate and I bibliography.and notes in credited properlyas information external basedwork, own exclusivelymy is thesis present the that herewith Vemi Dejan undersigned, the I, ć , candidate for the MA degree in Medieval Studies declare declare Studies Medieval in degree MA the for candidate , iv

he thesis has been submitted in in submitted been has thesis he of the thesis infringes on any on infringes thesis the of on my research and only such such only and research my on declare that no unidentified no that declare CEU eTD Collection

ILLUSTRATIONS CATALOGUE BIBLIOGRAPHY CONCLUSION MEDIEVAL 4. LATE MIDDLE LATE GEOGRAPHICALAGES: ANDTHE A HISTORICALOVERV REGION DURING PIVA TARA IN MONTENEGRO BETWEEN AND RIVERS 3. THE AND 2. HOW WHYWERE 1. ANPREVIOUS OF ON OVERVIEW RESEARCH INTRODUCTION 4.5. The onste motifs 34 ...... 4.4. Cross-shaped monuments 4.3. TheŽugiBare latecemetery medieval of 4.2. The latecemetery medieval of Novakovi 4.1. “Greek Graveyard” (Gr 21 2.7. The and shapes influences...... –their origins 20 2.6. TheHypothesis...... SocialStatus 18 2.5. TheHypothesis...... Vlach 17 ...... 2.4. The Bogomil Hypothesis 14 2.3. The Motifs...... 11 ...... of2.2. Construction the Graves 2.1. Foundations of ste ...... 63 ...... 54 ...... 57 ...... 1 ...... 70 ...... ć STE ć ii h rao ala...... 37 theŽabljak...... in areaci of i...... 10 ...... ci Ć č CI STE ogole ...... 25 ...... groblje) ko IN THE AREAŽABLJAK OF TABLE OF CONTENTSTABLE Ć CI MADE? ć ć v

...... 27 ...... i ...... 30 ...... a

...... 10 ...... STE Ć CI ...... 25 ...... 5 ...... IEW 23

CEU eTD Collection

Fig. 31. LocalityFig. Novakovi 31. LocalityFig. Novakovi 30. LocalityFig. Novakovi 29 LocalityFig. Novakovi 28 LocalityFig. Novakovi 27 LocalityFig. Novakovi 26. LocalityFig. Novakovi 25. LocalityFig. Novakovi 24. LocalityFig. Novakovi 23. LocalityFig. Novakovi 22. LocalityFig. Novakovi 21. LocalityFig. Novakovi 20. LocalityFig. Novakovi 19. LocalityFig. Novakovi 18. LocalityFig. Novakovi 17. LocalityFig. Novakovi 16. LocalityFig. Novakovi 15. LocalityFig. Novakovi 14. LocalityFig. Novakovi 13. LocalityFig. Novakovi 12. LocalityFig. Novakovi 11. LocalityFig. Novakovi 10. LocalityFig. Novakovi 9. LocalityFig. Novakovi 8. LocalityFig. (drawing S Bijeli cross-shaped Mramor, byHermann monument 7. Locality VeFig. (drawing Bijeli cross-shaped Mramor, byDejan monument 6. Locality detail.Fig. Bijeli cross-shaped Mramor, monument; 5. Locality Fig. Bijelicross-shaped Mramor, monument. 4. LocalityFig. Bijeli cross-shaped Mramor, monument. 3. LocalityFig. (drawing Bijelidislocated Vemi Mramor, byDejan monument 2. LocalityFig. Bijelidislocated Mramor, monument. 1. ć ć ć ć ć i, monument no.3. monument i, (situationalplan-drawingi Bešlagi byŠefik ć ć ć ć ć ć ć ć ć ć ć ć ć ć ć ć ć ć ć i, monument no.82. monument i, no.78.(drawingBešlagi monument i, byŠefik no.78. monument i, i, monument no.83. monument i, no.82.(drawing monument i, Vemi byDejan no.74. monument i, no.74. monument i, no.71.(drawingBešlagi monument i, byŠefik no.71 monument i, no.63.(drawingBešlagi monument i, byŠefik no.63.(drawingBešlagi monument i, byŠefik no.63. monument i, no.59. monument i, no.49.(drawings monument i, byŠefik Bešlagi no.49. monument i, no.23. monument i, no.18. monument i, no.10. monument i, no.7. monument i, no.6.(drawing monument i, Bešlagi byŠefik no.6. monument i, no.4. monument i, LIST OF FIGURESLIST vi .

ć ). ć ć ć ). ). ). ć ć ć ). ć ). ). ). ). ć mi ). terneck). ć ). CEU eTD Collection LocalityFig.Žugi Bare 59. LocalityFig.Žugi Bare 58. LocalityFig.Žugi Bare 57. LocalityFig.Žugi Bare 56. LocalityFig.Žugi Bare 55. LocalityFig.Žugi Bare 54. LocalityFig.Žugi Bare 53. LocalityFig.Žugi Bare 52. LocalityFig.Žugi Bare 51. LocalityFig.Žugi Bare 50. LocalityFig.Žugi Bare 49. LocalityFig.Žugi Bare 48. LocalityFig.Žugi Bare 47. LocalityFig.Žugi Bare 46. LocalityFig.Žugi Bare 45. LocalityFig.Žugi Bare 44. LocalityFig.Žugi Bare 43. LocalityFig.Žugi Bare 42. LocalityFig.Žugi Bare 41. LocalityFig.Žugi Bare 40. LocalityFig.Žugi Bare 39. LocalityFig.Žugi Bare 38. LocalityFig.Žugi Bare 37. LocalityFig.Žugi Bare 36. LocalityFig.Žugi Bare 35. LocalityFig. Novakovi 34. LocalityFig. Novakovi 33. LocalityFig. Novakovi 32. ć ć ć ć ć ć ć ć ć ć ć ć ć ć ć ć ć ć ć ć ć ć ć ć ć ć ć ć i (northerncemetery).i of the part (centrali partcemetery). of the cemetery). (southerni part of the a of (situation the cemetery). a, no.83. monument a, no.83. monument a, no.81. monument Bešlagia, no.79.(drawingbyŠefik monument a, no.79. monument a, byŠefik no.75.(drawings Bešlagi monument a, no.75. monument a, byŠefik no.61.(drawings Bešlagi monument a, no.61. monument a, no.60. monument a, no.53. monument a, no.50. monument a, no.50. monument a, no.49. monument a, no.48. monument a. no.40. monument a, no.39. monument a, no.33. monument a, no.33. monument a, no.22. monument a, no.22. monument Bešlagia, no.49.(drawingbyŠefik monument byBešlagia, no.49.(photo Šefik monument Bešlagia (situationalplan-drawing byŠefik vii

ć ć ). ). ). ). ć ć ć ć ). ). ). ). CEU eTD Collection monum single or cemeteries excavated the of many Furthermore, Bogomil cult. as known also were as such terms graveyards folkloric by them call usually inhabitants tombstone “roof”). a (with pseudo-sarcophagus high similar most shape the pillars; and crosses, trunks, slabs, of shape sarcophag grave of top on positioned antique stone of blocks aresolid they pseudo-sarcophagi; Unlike phenomenon. unique a are They 1). Map (see Serbia Monteneg northern Croatia, southern Herzegovina, and Bosnia in predominantly (Sarajevo: Rabic, 2009), 56-62; for the general cla general the for 56-62; vijeka 2009), Rabic, (Sarajevo: srednjeg mramorje humsko i Bosanko ge centuries, fifteenth and fourteenth, thirteenth, 1 excavated been not have them of most excavation; no with existing, onl been have monuments Many arise. still questions many found been have (Graves). (Graves). Graveyard), 2 Srbijezapadne umjetnost Ste In vernacular languages such names are: are: names such languages vernacular In ć i rdal dvlpd rm lb i lt tefh c twelfth late in slabs from developed gradually ci Ste Although (Ste . It is the term mainly used by scholars and in the scholarly li scholarly the in and scholars by used mainly term the is It . ć Mramor Mramor , ak ć (Mramorje. Ste (Mramorje. limestones ci, Culture and Art) (Sarajevo: Veselin Masleša, 19 Masleša, Veselin (Sarajevo: Art) and Culture ci,

(sing.) or or (sing.) ste (sing.) ć ci ooi gravestones Bogomil , have been investigated for more than a century and thousands of them of thousands and century a than more for investigated been have stones , Mramorje Mramorje , ste ć ci in West Serbia) (Belgrade: Srpsko arheološko dru arheološko Srpsko (Belgrade: Serbia) in ci West ć ci

, and , (pl.) are late medieval tombstones found in the western Balkans, western the in found tombstones medieval late are (pl.) or graves Mramorovi Mramorovi INTRODUCTION Gr (Ste č tn hge drn ti tm. e: urvo Lovren Dubravko See: time. this during higher tting o Groblje ko . ssification of steof ssification 2 In older, mostly popular, literature these monumentsthese literature popular, mostlyIn older, ć for their supposed association with the medieval medieval the with association supposed their for 1 i Maoj o Bsi ad u fo te ide Ages Middle the from Hum and Bosnia of Mramorje ci. h term The 1 p. enn Limestones), meaning (pl. nuy o h sae f rns n srohg during sarcophagi and trunks of shape the to entury

Gek Graveyard), (Greek ć 82), 75-128; Emina ZeEmina 75-128; 82), ste ci shapes see: Šefik BešlagiŠefik see: shapes ci ć ak itself literally means means literally itself re graveyards Greek ents have not been published, published, been not have ents to antique sarcophagi is the is sarcophagi antique to ajrk Groblje Madjarsko štvo, 2005), 25-50. 25-50. 2005), štvo, Kamenovi terature, while the local local the while terature, s. They appear in the the in appear They s. č y been registered as registered been y evi archaeologically. ć (Stones), , , ć ro, and western western and ro, , , Mramorje. Ste Mramorje. Ste , i, i, Hungarian Hungarian ć (Hungarian (Hungarian ovi ci, kultura i kultura ci, ste standing standing Grobovi ć ć , , ci Ste are the the ć ć ci. ci ci ) )

CEU eTD Collection Furthermore, thatsome cemeteries the is fact are disappeared have or da in have monuments these amongst correlations and framework cultural attem few a only Finally, scholars. to unknown remain still they so Žabljak. registered, and some 30 years later only few dozen dozen few only later years 30 some and registered, 3 the on influences the all that is opinion general The regions. the all These scholarly the in discussed been not have which monuments region, the from ŽugiBare cemete The context. regional their in monuments these discuss to and from data archaeological relevant the present to is intention my sc by discovered recently only or unknown still are cemeteries even the on published been have articles andoffer picture theseBosnia a in Herzegovina, monuments and complex of Se Croatia, motifs.and shapes, dating, number, their to related questions 4 theSte Veselin Masleša, 1971); eadem, 1971); Masleša, Veselin Middle Ages) (Sarajevo: Rabic, 2009); 2009); Rabic, (Sarajevo: Ages) Middle 5 1982). Beogradu Beogradu 6 2005). društvo, arheološko Ze Emina 2008); At the medieval cemetery near Petrova Crkva in Nik in Crkva Petrova near cemetery medieval the At ei Bešlagi Šefik Lovrenovi ei Bešlagi Šefik ć ste ak) (Niš: Prosveta, 2001). 2001). Prosveta, (Niš: ak) ste The primary aim of this thesis is to place these monuments withi monuments these place to is thesis this of aim primary The on research Scholarly At the same time, the region of Montenegro has remained mainly une mainly remained has Montenegro of region the time, same the At 6 36 (1973): 111 – 138. 138. 111 – (1973): 36 In order to contextualize these cemeteries, I also present and di and present also I cemeteries, these contextualize to order In ć ć ć ć ci , , ci ae iutd n oten otngo bt o te i te iiiy of vicinity the in them of both Montenegro, northern in situated are a Ste are particularlytheir shapes of motifs and interesting because decorative and to find potential correlations in their shapes and motifs with with motifs and shapes their in correlations potential find to and ć ć , , “Ste , č ć Ste evi ci. Bosanko i humsko mramorje srednjeg vijeka srednjeg mramorje humsko i Bosanko ci. ć ć i ktlšotpgasi pregled kataloško-topografski ci, , , ć Mramorje. Ste Mramorje. i ooii alaa ( Žabljaka” okolini u ci Ste

ć ste ci, kultura i umjetnosti kultura ci, ć ci zapadne Srbije zapadne ci ć Ste ci ste has already produced significant results for some general general some for results significant produced already has ć ci-Katalog ć ci of this region. A significant number of monuments and and monuments of number significant A region. this of Ste survived: Milenko Karan, Karan, Milenko survived: ć ci ši (Ste in the Area of Žabljak). Žabljak). of Area the in (Ste ć 2 (Mramorje. Ste (Mramorje. (Montenegro) in 1949 about 400 ste 400 about 1949 in (Montenegro)

(Ste ć ć i te aaou) Zge: aeia Klovi Galerija (Zagreb: Catalogue) the ci, ci, a Catalogue and Topographic Survey) (Sarajevo: (Sarajevo: Survey) Topographic and Catalogue a ci, ć ci, Culture and Art) (Sarajevo: Veselin Masleša, Masleša, Veselin (Sarajevo: Art) and Culture ci, (Ste ć ci. Mramorje of Bosnia and Hum from the the from Hum and Bosnia of Mramorje ci. ć 4 ste ci in Western Serbia) (Belgrade: Srpsko Srpsko (Belgrade: Serbia) Western in ci Several books published recently published books Several Psihologija ste Psihologija ć two cemeteries in Montenegro in cemeteries two ci shapes and motifs can to be be to can motifs and shapes holarly research. Therefore, research. holarly lsi Engaso mzj u muzeja Etnografskog Glasnik t t peet general a present to pts is f Novakovi of ries en ae ni now until made been n the broader group of group broader the n nger. scuss two other two scuss xplored. Only a few few a Only xplored. literature until now. now. until literature ć ka 3 ć ste (The Psychology of of Psychology (The

ci tombstones were tombstones ci ć ci the town of of town the . from other other from ć rbia. evi dvori, dvori, evi ć ste and i 5

ć ci . .

CEU eTD Collection give orderalocalities in more readable to exa some to refer will I archaeologically, excavated been not thes Since here. tested be to is opinion That areas. neighbouring in found ethnic (the briefly thatissueas to well. of origin the Since here. discussed be Miloševi Ante 102-143; (1962): 7 Society from the 13 the from Society eadem, 1987); Ottoman the to Century Twelfth Late the from Survey Century and Medieval eadem, 2006); the Press, Michigan in Slavonia And Dalmatia, Croatia, eadem, 2007); Institute, 13 the from südslawisc Society den in Südeuropa-Verlagsgesellschaft Bogumilengräber und “Bogomilentum d Actes cathares” et bogomiles funèraires monuments Herzegovina) and Her i zašti Bosni u za spomenika srednjovjekovnih zavod “Simbolika Regionalni (Split: Bosnia) Southwest Bosni jugozapadnoj Marian Wenzel, “Bosnian and Herzegovinian Tombston Herzegovinian and “Bosnian Wenzel, Marian (n Abr Te nvriy f ihgn rs, 200 Press, Michigan of University The Arbor: (Ann , relig was origin their whether concerns debate this general, In Some general questions concerning questions general Some Vlach The Bosnian Church: A New Interpretation. A Study o Study A New Interpretation. A Church: Bosnian The th oina itrjkg ršv Bse Hercegovine i Bosne društva istorijskog Godišnjak th hypothesis) or ofcharacter a ( hypothesis) social to the 15 to the Ste( to the 15 the to hn tnct Dd o Mte i te akn. St A Balkans. the in Matter Not Did Ethnicity When ć i n Vah. Ste Vlachs. and ci th (1959): 173-199; John V. A. Fine, Fine, A. V. John 173-199; (1959): Centuries th The Early Medieval Balkans. A Critical Survey from from Survey Critical A Balkans. Medieval Early The Centuries: A New InterpretationNew A Centuries: ć , ,

Ste ć i Vai Ste Vlasi, i ci (Boulder: East European Quarterly, 1975). Quarterly, European East (Boulder: ć i n Vah irtos f 14 of Migrations Vlach and ci ste

ć picture. picture. ci ste is a question of great scholarly debate, I shall refer refer shall I debate, scholarly great of question a is u 10. Congres d’Etudes Byzantines, Istanbul (1957): Istanbul Byzantines, d’Etudes Congres 10. u Conquest ć u pmnk klue pi, 91; lkadr Solov Aleksandar 1991); Split, kulture spomenika tu cegovini” (Symbolism of Medieval Tombstones in Bosn in Tombstones Medieval of (Symbolism cegovini” ć ci 3 al-oen Periods Early-Modern i vak mgaie 4 i 5 stolje 15. i 14. migracije vlaške i ci es--Who Made Them and Why,” Why,” and Them Made es--Who

, their construction, origin, and motifs will also will motifs and origin, construction, their , e Ländern,” hen ) eadem, 0); ste (Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, Press, Michigan of University The Arbor: (Ann (London: Saqi in association with The Bosnian Bosnian The with association in Saqi (London: ć f the Bosnian Church and Its Place in State andState in Place Its and Church Bosnian the f ci h Bsin hrh Is lc i Sae and State in Place Its Church. Bosnian The asstatus). a of sign social 8 (1956): 5-67; “Le Symbolisme des des Symbolisme “Le 5-67; (1956): 8 h Lt Mdea Blas A Critical A Balkans. Medieval Late The mples known from some other other some from known mples th n 15 and Volker und Kulturen Südeuropas, Südeuropas, Kulturen und Volker udy of Identity in Pre-Nationalist Pre-Nationalist in Identity of udy (Ann Arbor: The University of of University The Arbor: (Ann ious ( ious

th the Sixth to the Late Twelfth Late the to Sixth the Centuries in Dalmatia and and Dalmatia in Centuries e two cemeteries have have cemeteries two e Bogomil Südost-Forschungen ć u amcj i Dalmaciji u a hypothesis), 7

162-165; 162-165; jev, jev, 21 ia ia CEU eTD Collection

Map 1 4

CEU eTD Collection http://www.archive.org/stream/bosnienunddiehe00asbg http://www.archive.org/details/boszniasahercze01asb 10 Ragusa of Republic Ancient 1875 September and August ae Jhn vn Asbóth) von Johann name: date the same around to the period. monuments wa and century fourteenth the from coins Hungarian some found He Luschan. A an was them excavated who one first The scholars. foreign many that theory the introduce tombstones.” “mysterious were they him For 1875. in Herzegovina and some described Evans Arthur Englishman the others, to travelling delegation Austrian official an of member a was who peri Roman the was interest of field his Since Hoernes. Moritz ascribed (Museum espe increased, monuments these in interest Herzegovina and Bosnia t During time. long a quite for popularity extreme enjoyed which 9 1530Konstantinopel nach Bulgarien Serbien, 8 1885. and 1882 11 Bešlagi Curipeschitz, Benedict His travel description on Bosnia is available in isavailable Bosnia on description His travel Bešlagi Hnain itra, áo Abt, hs ok n emn a pbihd ne the under published was German in book (his Asbóth, János historian, Hungarian A The oldest mention of mention oldest The At the same time, the first archaeologist who focussed on focussed who archaeologist first the time, same the At ć ć 1982, 12, 70; Arthur J. Evans, J. Arthur 70; 12, 1982, ste 1982, 14. 14. 1982, Zemaljski muzej Zemaljski ć ci to the Bogomils. the to 1. ANPREVIOUS OF ON OVERVIEW RESEARCH 10 e ecie svrl erplss hogot ona n Herzegovina and Bosnia throughout necropolises several described He Itinerarum der Botschaftreise des Joseph v. Lamberg v. Joseph des Botschaftreise der Itinerarum (London: Longmans, Green and Co, 1877), 170-175. 170-175. 1877), Co, and Green Longmans, (London: : with an Historical Review of Bosnia: and a Glimpse a and Bosnia: of Review Historical an with ) in Sarajevo was established in 1888. in established was Sarajevo in ) ste

travelled through Bosnia and Herzegovina several times between between times several Herzegovina and Bosnia through travelled ć

ci ste 11 were the tombstones of medieval Bogomil heretics, a theory theory a heretics, Bogomil medieval of tombstones the were

ć ci Through Bosnia and the and Bosnia Through dates from 1530, from the notes of Benedict Curipeschitz, Benedict of notes the from 1530, from dates (Innsbruck: 1910), 38-39. 38-39. (Innsbruck: 1910), full text on the internet: the Hungarian version is version Hungarian the theinternet: on fulltext goog oog#page/n7/mode/1up 5 and the German version is at: at: versionis theGerman and

ste Herzegó ć ci during his travels through Bosnia Bosnia through travels his during od, vina on Foot during the Insurrection, the during Foot on vina und Niclas Jurischitz durch Bosnien, Bosnien, durch Jurischitz Niclas und

Ste he Austro-Hungarian rule in in rule Austro-Hungarian he ste ste ustrian medical doctor, Felix doctor, medical ustrian at the Croats, Slavonians, and the and Slavonians, Croats, the at Constantinople. ć ć ć cially after the Provincial Provincial the after cially ci ci ci came into the focus of of focus the into came STE was from Vienna, Dr. Vienna, from was did not make much of much make not did 9 He was the first to to first the was He Ć CI s the first one to to one first the s

at: at: 8 Among the Among and

CEU eTD Collection Bosnia%E2%80%99s-Encounter-with-Modernity http://wisc.academia.edu/MarinaAntic/Papers/124640/ is Hörmann Kosta on secondaryliterature good with amongimpression the scholars. photos and maps data, statistical presented He 1899. in Kiev in Congress later count from 1971. relatively been have to appears which 59,500, at established was number D later. years ten again process same the organised authorities ir some of aware being Probably monuments. 27,067 of number the estimated visible the all register to rangers and authorities police ste detecton themexceptthe cross anythingof or character Christian religious som excavated the Regarding them. and in material cultural any find necropolisesnot did he although 100 about examined He him. on impression an Bosnia and Herzegovina), Herzegovina), and Bosnia 14 13 12 of number large the to due appear; approach methodological really af Only deal. great a decreased scholars foreign among interest influential for a time. long of creators the as ide The 1918. in Herzegovina and Bosnia in rule Austro-Hungarian of end the 15 Bešlagi Bešlagi Bešlagi Bešlagi ć ci were made for the first time. The government of Bosnia and Herz andBosnia of government The time. first the for made were Ste estimate Herzegovina, andBosnia in rule Austro-Hungarian Duringthe Between the World Wars, no systematic work was done on these monument these on done was work systematic no Wars, World the Between twent of beginning the from lasted research in stagnation of period A ć ć ć ć 1982, 16, 20. 20. 16, 1982, 13-14. 1982, 1982, 16. 16. 1982, 1982, 15; Kosta Hörmann, “Srednjovjekovni spomenic “Srednjovjekovni Hörmann, Kosta 15; 1982, ć ci ee rsne itrainly y ot Hran t h 11 the at Hörmann Kosta by internationally presented were ste 13 ć Trudy ci

ok rmnne a ie ta ws ieped mn shlr and scholars among widespread was that idea an prominence, took 15

vl 2(ocw 92,1512 a itrsig stu interesting an 165-172; 1902), (Moscow 2 vol. ,

14

available on-line: on-line: available Historicizing-Bosnia--Kosta-H%C3%B6rmann-and- 6

i Bosne i Hercegovine” (Medieval Tombstones of of Tombstones (Medieval Hercegovine” i Bosne i ste ć ci ter the Second World War did a did War World Second the ter rn 19 ad 88 te total the 1898, and 1897 uring Drn 18 ad 88 they 1888 and 1887 During . localities and monuments a monuments and localities motifs, Hoernes could not not could Hoernes motifs, egovina ordered the local local orderedegovinathe y rte b Mrn Anti Marina by written dy motifs. precise and close to a a to close and precise ad ae good a made and , s of the number of number the of s a of the Bogomils Bogomils the of a th ieth century until century ieth Archaeological Archaeological regularities, the the regularities, 12

s, and even and s, graves, e ć ,

CEU eTD Collection hs o nrhr Mneer (Nikši Montenegro northern of those Biteliof site the (at Bosnia and migrations Vlach between correlations on focuses Miloševi Ante scholar Croatian the LovrenoviDubravko scholar by that is study recent Ze Emina localities; Bešlagi Šefik by given data the corrected monuments. framew general a discover to attempts serious first the were the about data known ste logical next the localities, and monuments the of catalogue of number 1960s.necropolises during the and 1950s were published ste systemati The priority. a became systematisation certain 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 betw relations the detecting to detail more added has Montenegro) Lovrenovi Ze Ze Bešlagi Bešlagi Bešlagi Ste ć ste ci č č ć evi evi ci-Katalog n ona n Hreoia a dn b te ae 90. eea monogra Several 1960s. late the by done was Herzegovina and Bosnia in ć There is also a new catalogue of of catalogue new a also is There Ze Emina Recently, The first ć ć ci ć ć ć 2005, 23-24. 23-24. 2005, , , 1982. 1982. , 1971. , 21. 1982, in Bosnia and Herzegovina.and Bosnia in Mramorje ć , , ste Ste (Ste ć ć ci ci summa , 2009. 2009. , ie a 6,5 fud n 12 localities. 3162 on found 69,356 as given , (2005). theof Most (2005). , ć ci, the Catalogue). Zagreb, 2008. 2008. Zagreb, the Catalogue). ci, č evi ste including all the regions with allthe including ć ie te ubr s 18 ouet a 23 localities. 203 at monuments 4118 as number the gives ć ci ć ), he did notice some similarities between the between similarities some notice did he ), č I ws ulse i 1982. in published was It .

evi ć ć i te ae ytmtsto fr Serbia. for systematisation same the did is of a special interest for my study. Although he mainly mainly he Although study. my for interest special a of is ste 21 ć ci

in Serbia are in its western part. part. western in its are Serbia in ć . y eerh n h ae o Žabljak of area the in research My ). ć ste ht n eba hr ae 27 ouet i 121 in monuments 2267 are there Serbia in that ć 7 ci

oeig h woe region. whole the covering ć , presenting the most up-to-date data about data up-to-date most the presenting , ste ć 16 18 sation of recording the inscriptions on inscriptions the recording of sation ci ste

hs to tde o Šfk Bešlagi Šefik of studies two These was published in 1971, with the total with was 1971, in published ć ci ork of the complete use of these these of use complete the of ork 17 in Dalmatia and south-western south-western and Dalmatia in p was the presentation of all the the all of presentation the was p ic i ws rmrl js a just primarily was it Since een these two regions (see (see regions two these een ste ć ci 19 22 e suy has study Her of that area and area that of The study of of study The 20

h most The phs about about phs (northern ć

CEU eTD Collection Bogomilism. between relations the on light shedding is contribution immense B medieval of history religious and political the in interested been on motifs decorative the predominantly was Maria While Fine. A. V. John and Wenzel Marian scholars American special interestmy for (seeMap study 2). 2).Map Novakovi 23 24 111-136. Bešlagi 1973. in research his of results the presented and Miloševi Wenzel 1962; eadem 1965; Fine 1975; eadem 1987; ea eadem 1987; Fine 1975; eadem 1965; 1962; Wenzel ć , “Ste ,

Among foreign scholars the greatest contribution to research on research to contribution greatest the scholars foreign Among 23 ć i and Bare Žugi Bare and i ć Due to their motifs, motifs, their to Due 91 4-1 Utl o tee a ol be oe sch one been only has there now Until 40-41. 1991, ć ci u okolini Žabljaka” (Tombstones in the Area of Ž of Area the in (Tombstones Žabljaka” okolini u ci 24

ć a particularly, actually the whole area of Žabljak. of area whole the actually particularly, a

ste ć ci in the vicinity of cities Pljevlja (Montenegro) are also of also are (Montenegro) Pljevlja cities of vicinity the in The article contains just a short and incomplete de incomplete and short a just contains article The ste dem 2000; eadem 2006; eadem 2007. eadem 2007. eadem 2006; 2000; dem 8 ć

ci and their origin, John V. A. Fine has mostly mostly has Fine A. V. John origin, their and abljak), abljak), olarly work concerning the two cemeteries of of cemeteries two the concerning work olarly Glasnik Bešlagi ste ć osnia and Herzegovina. His Herzegovina. and osnia ci

n Wenzel’s field of interest interest of field Wenzel’s n Etnografskog muzeja Etnografskog , the Bosnian Church, and Church, Bosnian the , ć visited the area in July 1966, 1966, July in area the visited ste ć ci was made by the by made was scription: Šefik Šefik scription: 36 (1973): (1973): 36 CEU eTD Collection

Map 2 9

CEU eTD Collection

would undertake the final artisticwould undertake job.final the mas a – grave the – destination the to brought was modelled) (roughly tons.30 than the of Some purpose. this for used were sledges and logs that assume tr were monuments the how exactly describing sources historical no gr a of foundation the caused have actually may quarry a of presence i transport, to heavy and massive are monuments these since logical 27 26 25 ste with nor and constructions such have not did graves Some terrain. graves the of orientation the in variations some but west, the towards the theof with head west-east, grave, oriented of the axis long over usually put can tombstones be from lost the Tombst graveswith recognized grave. the bases. Some m the keep to is function Its slabs. stone smaller or rocks of made ther grave a of surface the around and surface the On foundation. its for Opusculum Archaeologiae Opusculum 28 about or 1:2 even 1:3. Lovrenovi Bešlagi Maja Šunji Maja Kova č in modern Serbian means modernSerbian in Necropolises with with Necropolises Another part in the process of making the final makingthe of process the in partAnother ć ć ci are in a minority in comparison with the graves without them. Tha them. without graves the with comparison in minority a in are ci 1982, 37-39. 37-39. 1982, ć ć 2009, 68. 68. 2009, , “Medieval Monolithic Tombstones/ Monolithic “Medieval , 26 All these facts imply the involvement of a large number of peopl of numberlarge a of involvement implyfactsthe these All 28 32 (2009): 153. 153. 32 (2009):

2. HOW AND 2. HOW WHYWERE ste ć smith/blacksmith

ci always seem to be in the vicinity of a quarry.a of vicinity the in be to seem always 2.1. Foundations of ste2.1. Foundations

Ste , although it seems that its archaic meaning was al was meaning archaic its that seems it although , ć ci 10 at the Grebine Site Next to to Next Site Grebine the at

STE ste ć ak ć Ć ci CI tombstone was to prepare the graveprepare the to was tombstone ste MADE? ć ci assive assive above them. In fact, graves graves fact, In them. above aveyard nearby. There are There nearby. aveyard monuments weigh more more weigh monuments Č e is almost always a base base aalways almost is e t also suggests that the the that suggests also t ansported, yet one can can one yet ansported, ee ae u t the to due made were eveljuša (Plina) near Plo near (Plina) eveljuša ste n cle a (called on ć t relation is usually is relation t 25 deceased oriented oriented deceased ak e. Once the stone Oncethe e. Although this is this Although standing above standing so so ones were ones were artist kova . . č č ) e.” e.” 27

CEU eTD Collection

in just coffin, a without buried were deceased the cases these in skel the under found was pin the person positioned irregularly an of case pla pin small a cases some in noticed he excavations during Namely, Bešlagi 33 32 31 30 29 burial. t cases such many In grave. same the inside individuals several weretombs a stone above made slabswith of kind roof of the deceased. thos also are there but stone, of made are them of Some sarcophagi. meta without or with coffins in buried were Some dead. the above slab a ca some In ground. the into laid be simply would deceasedthe and all, at richly massive decorated, only but tombstones, decorated massive afford could population the of all indicat This wood. of made memorial of kind some had have may tombstone Bešlagi Lovrenovi Lovrenovi Bešlagi 90. Fine 1975, 33 ć ah rv uuly a js oe niiul atog i a ubr f case of number a in although individual, one just has usually grave Each construction. their in deal great a differ graves The grav that suggests which however, line, a in usually are graves The ć ć In a few cases the skeleton was buried facedown. The reason for t for reason The facedown. buried was skeleton the cases few a In suggests that it was a punishment, while Ante MiloševiAnte while punishment, a was it that suggests 1982, 46-50; Miloševi 46-50; 1982, 44-57. 1982, ć ć 2009, 161. 161. 2009, 170-172. 2009, ste ć ć 1991, 16-18; Ze 16-18; 1991, ak

was proof of someone’s wealth and social power. and was ofwealth social someone’s proof 2.2. Construction of the 2.2. Construction Graves č evi ć 2005, 81-84. 81-84. 2005, 11

30 Some of them have no construction no have them of Some blanket fastened with a pin. The The pin. a with fastened blanket ć his was apparently secondary secondary apparently was his gives an alternative remark. alternative an gives ced over the skeleton. In the Inthe skeleton. the over ced md o wood. of made e 32 ses there was a board or or board a was there ses l fittings. There are also are There fittings. l

eton. He concludes that that concludes He eton. his is unknown; Šefik unknown; is his elh pol. A people. wealthy es that probably not not probably that es 29 s ihu a without es

tee are there s 31 Some CEU eTD Collection ste Bi In (28%). graves 73 in found were goods grave skeletons; 355 with graves 265 Grborezi, At (Croatia). Bisko and Herzegovina) and (Bosnia Grborezi archaeologic the of two example, For necropolises. complete few a overturned during the burial. body the that simply be would position upside-down unusual an such for reason fifteenth was century found. deceased.the of mouth the in put mostly graves, 21 in found were thirteent the from coins money 30 Grborezi, soul In gifts. or grave real coins” considered “Charon’s as appeared coins if Only etc.). buttons, (42%). 39 Ste( 38 37 348-349. 1999), Gyldendal, Middle Denmark’s in Life Daily Death. and (Sickness in: Death), and Død.”(Sickness og Material “Sygdom Source Historical as Graves and Skeletons skeletons of parts other on found were stains green positions: their to according coins by caused were seemed it cases eight in while coins by caused were s Hamar on noted also were stains Green excavation. 36 35 34 known. Petrinec 2008, 259-260. 259-260. 2008, Petrinec aa ernc“aai gooia so ste ispod grobovima u Petrinec,“Nalazi Maja Miloševi lost accidentally been have may coins of Evidence Miloševi Miloševi ć ć ci were found, but 28 graves with about 40 skeletons; grave goods were were goods grave skeletons; 40 about with graves 28 but found, were ci ci, the Catalogue) (Zagreb: Galerija Klovi Galerija (Zagreb: theCatalogue) ci, 35 38 Grave goods appear fairly frequently. A small number of number small A frequently. fairlyappear goods Grave hs gae od ae lot las esnl hns ie jewell like things personal always almost are goods grave These hn t oe t waos to ae o sod fud n rvs beneath graves in found swords of cases two weapons, to comes it When

There are two finds of spears, and one of a mace from graves. from mace a of one and spears, of finds two are There ć ć ć 1991, 14. 14. 1991, Bešlagi35; 1991, 26-27. 1991, ć 1982, 49-54; Bešlagi49-54; 1982, 37 34

ć algi i amrs idlle – n relgs k arkeologisk En – Middelalder Danmarks i Dagligliv evi dvori, 2008), 246-269. 246-269. 2008), evidvori, ć on jaw bones, facial bones or neck vertebrae. In th In vertebrae. neck or bones facial bones, jaw on aka” (Finds in the Graves beneath beneath Graves the in (Finds aka” . See: Berit Sellevold, Sellevold, Berit See: . probable (although coins were not found) that the that found) not were coins (although probable keletons in 13 cases. In two cases it was evident t evident was it cases two In cases. in 13 keletons ć , Basler, Basler, , Ol: npb olg 20) 1415 as P K M K. P. also 154-155; 2001), forlag, Unipub (Oslo: due to decay. Several coins were found in Hamar dur Hamar in found were coins Several decay. to due gs A Acaooia Clua Hsoy (Copenha History) Cultural Archaeological An Ages. 12

Grborezi . Sarajevo: . From Death to Life in Medieval Hamar - - Hamar Medieval in Life to Death From ste 36 ć

In Bisko one coin from the from coin one Bisko In ci 1964. 1964. h and fourteenth centuries centuries fourteenth and h have been excavated, and and excavated, been have 86 ste86 ally excavated sites are are sites excavated ally 39 It is interesting that in that interesting is It ste ery (earrings, rings, rings, (earrings, ery ć ć ci found in 12 graves graves 12 in found ci were found and and found were ci , in: ), was accidentally accidentally was would they be be they would sko only three three only sko Ste ree other cases cases other ree hat such stains stains hatsuch ulturhistorie green stains green ć ste ci-Katalog ć ci ing the the ing adsen adsen gen: gen: are

CEU eTD Collection dec the had graves 591 the of most centuries), fourteenth the to eleventh beneath t to applied be cannot indicator, a chronological as individual buried ofarm the position S Southern in graves medieval to applies that criterion the that shows h yugs gae te esn bre hv ter oe am cros arms lower their have buried persons the graves youngest the arm lower the with elbows the at angle right a at bent arms region. pelvic the over placed hands their with lay bodies the graves along stretched arms their with out laid were individuals buried the According the in oldes of criterion, Denmarkarm the buried this position to the person. is fromdocumentedgraveyards the period medieval onScandinavian of Christianization. for typical more considered sometimes is practice burial a Such cases. 51 along the bodyin armshad stretched their that interesting is It body. the along stretched other the and abdomen, Insom grave. the of end westernthe athead their with backtheir on onefar case. just known from is were glasses drinking localities different at cases several (Copenhagen: Gyldendal, 1999), 325-351. 325-351. 1999), Gyldendal, (Copenhagen: kulturhistorieDeath). and Død.”(Sickness og “Sygdom K. P. Madsen, 44 40. 43 42 41 40 Sellevold 2008, 53. About the arm position in medi in arm Aboutposition the 53. 2008, Sellevold ed., Wolf, Kirsten & Phillip, Pulsiano, Miloševi Bešlagi 2008,261-263. Petrinec Nevertheless, in neighbouring Hungary, in the churchyard in Esztergom in churchyard the in Hungary, neighbouring in Nevertheless, One dating criterion which seems to apply to medieval graves in sout in graves medieval to apply to seems which criterion dating One In most cases the deceased have their arms crossed over their their over crossed arms their have deceased the cases most In ć ste 1982, 51. 51. 1982, ć 1991, 24, 31. 31. 24, 1991, ć Scns ad et. al Lf i Dnaks Middl Denmark’s in Life Daily Death. and (Sickness ci .

40

Medieval Scandinavia: an Encyclopediaan Scandinavia: Medieval eval Denmark see: Madsen 1999, 325-351. 325-351. 1999, Madsen see: Denmark eval 13 In: In:

41 Dagligliv i Danmarks Middelalder – En arkeologisk arkeologisk En – Middelalder Danmarks i Dagligliv Two similar cases are known from Bisko.known from cases are Two similar e Ages. An Archaeological Cultural History), History), Cultural Archaeological An Ages. e found in the graves, while pottery so so pottery while graves, the in found s lying parallel over the stomach. In stomach. the over parallel lying s pagan times; it has been well been has it times; pagan e cases one arm was over the overwas arm one cases e their bodies. In the younger the In bodies. their . (New York: Garland, 1993), 37- 1993), Garland, York: (New . weden and in Denmark, the the Denmark, in and weden Later, the bodies have their have bodies the Later, abdomen or chest, they lay lay they chest, or abdomen e oe te chest. the over sed at Grborezi the deceased deceased the Grborezi at eased with their arms their with eased hern Sweden and and Sweden hern (dated from the from (dated 43 he graves he

t graves graves t 44 This 42

CEU eTD Collection belief Christian or pagan with connections their stressed have others ste made; funeral localcustoms. could have communities had different gene such no that seems It questioned. been has this recently However, interprete were body the of part upper the of front in crossed were w cemeteries some Europe Central in example, For interpretations. we there but one, is interpretation chronological The graves. in hands pelvis.or chest the on either or occasionally, chests on crossed were hands body, the along stretched ca bread ritual be to seems what or scene dancing the like motifs G and Romanesque of assemblage European general the from come scenes horseme warriors, arcades, weaponry, crescents, crosses, rosettes, canmotifs be raised. pr general some but limitations, space to due here discussed be cannot 47 46 79-83. 1992), Europe, Medieval 45 387; Nada Mileti Nada 387; 102 1962, Wenzel 1965); Masleša, Veselin W (Sarajevo: Marian see hypothesis, Vlach the For Bogomils. to Sarajevu u muzeja Zemaljskog 48 Hung Seventeenth-Century and Sixteenth- in Contexts 37-100; Lovrenovi 37-100; Ibidem; Dóra Mérai, Mérai, Dóra Ibidem; D a (On kéztartásról” vitatott “Egy Takács, Miklós in Village Medieval the “Zsidód, Molnár, Erzsébet lkadr oojv “eu i ooii otvl k poštovali Bogomili li “Jesu Solovjev, Aleksandar ć ci . While some scholars have argued for their origin either in Bog in either origin their for argued have scholars some While . hr ae ay ifrn hptee aot h maig f h de the of meaning the about hypotheses different many are There idn prles o te ois os o apa t b a ra diff great a be to appear not does motifs the for parallels Finding ć , , ć 2009, 62-91. 62-91. 2009, Ste ć The True and Exact Dresses and Fashion. Archaeologi Fashion. Dresses and Exact and True The ci ci (St e 3, n.s. (1948): 81-102, and other works by the sam the by works other and 81-102, (1948): n.s. 3, ć ci) (Belgrade, Zagreb, Mostar: Jugoslavija, Spektar Jugoslavija, Mostar: Zagreb, (Belgrade, ci) 45

There are various suggestions for how to interpret the position of position the interpret to how for suggestions various are There 2.3. The Motifs 2.3. The Motifs ebated Gesture), Gesture), ebated ary -163. For a more general overview see Bešlagi see overview general more a For -163. the Territory of Esztergom.” In: In: Esztergom.” of Territory the enzel, enzel, 14 (Oxford: Archaeopress, 2010), Archaeopress, (Oxford: rst?” (Did the Bogomils Recognize the Cross?) Cross?) the Recognize Bogomils the (Did rst?”

kan mtv n ste na motivi Ukrasni Opuscula Hungarica Opuscula cal Clothing Remains and their Social Social their and Remains Clothing cal 47 e author. Solovjev attributed ste attributed Solovjev author. e as b itrrtd s the as interpreted be also n

d as Orthodox Christians. Orthodox as d n, tournaments or hunting hunting or tournaments n, ith graves in which hands hands which in graves ith , Prva kniževna komuna, 1982), 1982), komuna, kniževna Prva , omil or Vlach symbolism, symbolism, Vlach or omil re also ethnic or religious religious or ethnic also re s. ć cima 48

bes ocrig the concerning oblems 48-49. 48-49. l tee hypotheses these All ral statements can be be can statements ral one hand was placed placed was hand one et ad Burial and Death 6 (2005): 85-101. 85-101. (2005): 6 Te ois n Ste on Motifs (The othic motifs. Some motifs. othic oaie ois on motifs corative iculty. Motifs like like Motifs iculty. ć 1982, 129- 1982, Glasnik (York: (York: ć ć ci) ci) 46 ci ci

CEU eTD Collection us be can cemetery single a within motifs of patterns distribution di regional the like approach spatial a and motifs) of (combinations Neverthe death. of cause or status, social their tombstone, the under ste case. own his under buried was and earlier died Kustraži address inscription an with tombstone a is there (Croatia) Imotski f a found archaeologists motif, only the as sword a of representation Svojdr in Nevertheless, graves. male of least at or marke warriors, the probably are presentations weapon the that agree scholars as as such motifs many of meaning the about arguing although However, the and motifs solar and astral of combinations to hard meanings their and peculiar considered been have scenes and answe some least at that believedwas it though even excavations, them on a be can tradition funeral.the after duringand a Such tel tradition. sources written from data the confirming pre-Christian archaeologically, older, an of influence 51 50 Ste 49 Miloševi Ze Miloševi Ante ć ć ci) ci) ci č evi : why some of them were used, whether they can tell somethin tell can they whether used, were them of some why : Prilozi povijesti umjetnosti u Dalmaciji u umjetnosti povijesti Prilozi So far, it seems that one cannot really decode the meaning of t of meaning the decode really cannot one that seems it far, So h mtf on motifs The ć 2005, 81, 159. 159. 81, 2005, ć ste ć . There is a hunting scene on her tombstone and a horseman with a s a with horseman a and tombstone her on scene hunting a is There . 1991, 54. 54. 1991, ć ci and to decode rules for their placement, if such rules rules existed. placement, for and decode to their ć “ržtk oaso ord shajvna a ste na sahranjivanja obreda poganskog “Prežitak , ste 49 ć The problem appears when one wants to find the reason for having for reason the find to wants onewhen appears problem The

ci ean ngai ad ytros ept archaeological despite mysterious and enigmatic remain 26 (1987): 91-97; Lovrenovi 91-97; (1987): 26 ste ć 15 ak

. 51 kamenica No secondary burials were found in either in found were burials secondary No ć cima” (Survival of a Pagan Burial Rite on on Rite Burial Pagan a of (Survival cima” (a shallow concavity) motif, etc. etc. motif, concavity) shallow (a ug (Serbia), under a slab with a a with slab a under (Serbia), ug ling about the feasts at the grave the at feasts the about ling ć 2009, 87. 2009, rs could be found. Some motifs motifs Some found. be could rs eful. A good example of such of example good A eful. ing Vladna, wife of Jerko Jerko of wife Vladna, ing tiuin f ois r the or motifs of stribution g about the person buried buried person the about g he motifs and symbols on symbols and motifs he interpret. These are some are These interpret. less, a study of patterns patterns of study a less,

ml skeleton.emale rs of local noblemen, noblemen, local of rs word. Her husband husband Her word. rl r oa, most solar, or tral lso traced traced lso 50 From CEU eTD Collection Church,members andBosnian layrich both and rich of ordained.” Orthodox, the ar stones these “Under Fine: A. V. John cite to – status social and a that here noticed be should It crescent. or cross a sometim shield, and sword the then frequent, also is motif arrow and bow ca (also motif lily the animals, with emblems heraldic simple heraldry.incomplete w of part symbols, social as seen be probably should motifs sword These single where graves over – all at expected not where appear sword, ends),both theyupper but also appearand sidesas well. sides onlong eastern the on frequent more are present, if Crosses, space. more reasons practical for be to seems which monuments, the of sides long motifs architectural or tournament hunting, of Scenes monuments. the on cera in motifs havingcertain of rulespecial no wasthere that most the for explanation adequate an give to task hard a is it however, death. their of cause the even or sex, position, social someone’s no.48, no.49,no.50,and no.75,no.81). ŽugiBare at clusters certain in grouped monuments arrow and bow the is cemetery same the within patterns distribution lies Radonja Ratkovi Radonja lies 52 55 2002). 54 53 Lovrenovisee: inscriptions this,other and For “A se leži Radonja Ratkovi Radonja leži se “A Fine 1975, 90. 90. Fine 1975, HašimbegoviElma Lovrenovi Most of the motifs do not seem to follow any specific rule, and som and rule, specific any follow to seem not do motifs the of Most Ste ć ć 2009, 62. 62. 2009, ci hc hv isrpin o te ae f ra hl i poiig informat providing in help great of are them on inscriptions have which ć ć , I have been killed beneath the town of Kljuof town the beneath killed been have I , , “Fleur-de-lis in Medieval Bosnia,” M.A. Thesis, ( Thesis, M.A. Bosnia,” Medieval in “Fleur-de-lis , 53 Other symbols of a person’s social status besides weapons might might weapons besides status social person’s a of symbols Other ć , pogiboh pod gradom pod Klju pod gradom pod pogiboh ,

ć 2009, 91-128; Bešlagi 91-128; 2009, 16

ste ć č em za svoga gospodina vojevodu Sandalja” (“Here (“Here Sandalja” vojevodu gospodina svoga za em a (see the situational plan of Bare ŽugiBare of plan situational the (see a ć ak č itself is a symbol of someone’s wealth wealth someone’s of symbol a is itself ć , for my lord Duke Sandalj” (My translation). translation). (My Sandalj” Duke lord my for , 1982, 419-452. 419-452. 1982, tain place. They appear everywhere everywhere place.They appear tain lled fleur de lis) de fleur lled Budapest: Central European University, University, European Central Budapest: and western end (either one or or one (either end western and female skeletons were found. were skeletons female 52 e to be found rich Catholics, Catholics, rich found be to e uh ouet ae rare; are monuments Such , since the long sides give sides long the since , oi, hc apas on appears which motif, of these motifs. It seems seems It motifs. these of es in combination with combination in es are usually found on found usually are a Lovrenovihat e of them, like the like them, of e 54 or rosettes. The rosettes. or 55

also be also o on ion ć calls ć a: a: CEU eTD Collection

Istanbul (1957): 162-165. 162-165. e Istanbul(1957): bogomiles funéraires monuments des Symbolisme “Le Herzegovina); and Bosnia in Tombstones 57 56 life. God of Mother the where garden the to west, the towards running deer on amongst scenes the hunting Thi west. the towards running is deer the cases most the in scene; Bogomils.symbols of Neo-Manichean between connection a of strongl Solovjov Aleksandar area. same the within and time, same the that are arguments supporting main two The time. This beliefs. Bogomil with associated be to believed were which symbolism the saw he motifs some In Bogomils. heretic medieval explana such that suggest possibilities. to is intention My literature. scholarly part scholars, different by proposed explanations the to refer shall Aleksandar Solovjev, “Simbolika srednjovjekovnih sp srednjovjekovnih “Simbolika Solovjev, Aleksandar Lovrenovi 56

So far, just one scene seems to follow the same rule more or l or more rule same the follow to seems scene one just far, So rhr . vn ws h frt o nrdc te da that idea the introduce to first the was Evans J. Arthur Novakovi the from motifs the discuss and explain To ć 2009, 79. 79. 2009, ste

ć ste ci n te oois epann ter ois s h religious the as motifs their explaining Bogomils, the and 2.4. The Bogomil Hypothesis 2.4. The Bogomil ć Godišnjak istorijskog društva Bosne i Hercegovinei Bosne društva istorijskog Godišnjak ci , and it may also be seen legendsand may also medieval about it in a hunted , 57

17 omenika u Bosni i Hercegovini” (Symbolism of Mediev of (Symbolism Hercegovini” i Bosni u omenika

ctae” ce d 1. oge dEue Byzantine d’Etudes Congres 10. du Actes cathares” t

ste ć ci and the Bosnian Church had existed at existed had Church Bosnian the and ć ad ae Žugi Bare and i theory was popular for a long long a for popular was theory ste icularly those frequent in the in frequent those icularly s scene is the most frequent most the is scene s ć ci y supported the hypothesis hypothesis the supported y of Neo-Manichean beliefs beliefs Neo-Manichean of ess. This is a deer-hunting deer-hunting a is This ess. ee h tmsoe of tombstones the were in ofr rne of range a offer tions s wt te pig of spring the with is, 8 (1956): 5-67; eadem, 5-67; (1956): 8 ć cmtre, I cemeteries, a al al s, s, CEU eTD Collection

People. real the are pillars and stones cross-shaped standing and trunks, so-called the pseudo-sarcophagi, only and cultures, ste as dubious are slabs the her for addition, part warriors or dancing horseman, hunt, deer horse, the as such tombstones att Wenzel Marian herdsmen, and breeders horse were they Since one. r the replaced She tradition. their of part a as Vlachs the by practic this that one, new a introduced she hypothesis Bogomil the of creators the anycannot to and belimited ascribed particular confession. monument.of kind this erected all Churches on inscriptions people living the and deceased the protect to be might simply It people. reas magical for used been have could cross the that assumes also Bos with dualists Bosnian the identify not does Fine but motifs, frequent beliefs dualist with associated symbols as interpreted positively reasons. several for abandoned been now has 60 59 58 Wenzel 1962, 102-143. See also: Malcolm 1994, Chap 1994, Malcolm also: See 102-143. 1962, Wenzel Lovrenovi Malcolm, in: Noel 3 Chap. also see 89; Fine 1975, New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1987. 1987. Press, Martin’s St. New York: The hypothesis that the Vlachs, a non-Slavic autochthonous Romanised populat Romanised autochthonous non-Slavic a Vlachs, the that hypothesis The According to John V. A. Fine, the popular theory that theory popular the Fine, A. V. John to According ć 2009, 239-246. 239-246. 2009, ste ste ć ć ci ci was introduced by the American scholar Marian Wenzel. Marian scholar American the by introduced was clearly document that members of the Catholic, Orthodox, and Bosnian Bosnian and Orthodox, Catholic, the of members that document clearly

2.5. The Vlach 2.5. The Hypothesis ste Bosnia. A Short History Short A Bosnia. 59 ć 18 ci ć Consequently, the erection of these tombstones these of erection the Consequently, 58 . 6; Tom Winnifrith, Winnifrith, Tom 6; . ci since they exist in many other regions and and regions other many in exist they since ci . According to Marian Wenzel, Wenzel, Marian to According . is o al tee r n mtf ta cn be can that motifs no are there all, of First

eligious hypothesis with an ethnic ethnic an with hypothesis eligious ste (London: Macmillan, 1994). 1994). Macmillan, (London: The Vlachs: The History of a Balkan Balkan a of History The Vlachs: The ć ons apart from the faith of the of faith the from apart ons e had been mostly influenced influenced mostly been had e ci f oois Coss are Crosses Bogomils. of were Bogomil tombstones, Bogomil were ributes the motifs on the on motifs the ributes monuments such as the the as such monuments nian Church itself and itself Church nian rm h da. The dead. the from icularly to them. In them. to icularly 60 Arguing against Arguing ste ć ci ceased to to ceased ion, were ion, CEU eTD Collection

tombstones belongedtombstones Vlachs.”“possibly the to centuries. fifteenth and fourteenth the during Bosnia southwestern a migrations Vlach the between relations in interested primarily ste well. gre of reason the migrate. to right the including for Vlach of status the get to wanted peasants many society feudal of decay gradual and invasion Turkish the to due them. from distinguish assimi mostly already were Ages Middle late the in Vlachs partic a Finally, not. or Vlachs with connected were they whether known mos the For Vlachs. not were who others many for erected were sources historical from known Vlachs for erected been have to known (16) Islam. major the when century, sixteenth the of beginning the at erected be 65 64 63 62 61 67 66 1982). Svjetlost, (Sarajevo: Administration) Hazim ŠabanoviHazim 129- Fine 2006, 19; 12, Fine 1987, 381; Fine 1975, 19. Fine 1987, Bešlagi Miloševi Miloševi Lovrenovi ć ci 65 , mostly during the mid-fifteenth, mostly duringcentury. the Some scholars argue for the hypothesis that the Vlachs were in f in were Vlachs the that hypothesis the for argue scholars Some

The Croatian scholar Ante MiloševiAnte scholar Croatian The The Wenzel hypothesis has several weak points. One is the small small the is One points. weak several has hypothesis Wenzel The ć 1982, 525. 525. 1982, ć ć 1991, 8; Bešlagi 8; 1991, 1991, 57. 57. 1991, ć 2009, 61-62, 165. 61-62, 2009, ć , , Bosanski pašaluk-Postanak i upravna podjela upravna i pašaluk-Postanak Bosanski 62 ć hn hy esd o e lc-paig s unknown. is Vlach-speaking be to ceased they When 1982, 523-526. 523-526. 1982,

64 Such special status was guaranteed by the Turkish authorities Turkish the by guaranteed was status special Such ć 131; Bešlagi131; argued recently for the Wenzel hypothesis. He was He hypothesis. Wenzel the for recently argued 67 66 19

ć 1982, 525. 525. 1982, (The Bosnian Pashaluk--Its Establishment and and Establishment Pashaluk--Its Bosnian (The lated by the Slavs and hard to to hard and Slavs the by lated t of the tombstones it is not not is it tombstones the of t nd ity of Vlachs converted to to converted Vlachs of ity ater social independence, independence, social ater of the dependent, settled dependent, the of He concludes that those those that concludes He ste act the last who erected who last the act ular problem is that the the that is problem ular number of monuments of number ć ci . 61 in Dalmatia and and Dalmatia in However, stones However, 63 Additionally, as CEU eTD Collection

seems improbable.knowledge about the symbolism the between dec the of status the emphasise to – purpose same the having heraldry heraldry of part a as appear motifs such are, usually they as weaponry the from separately taken not If perspective. different or rosette, crescent, star, the as such motifs some belief,popular eit symbols, religious as seen Usually way. same the in seen be 68 fact, in certainty instead about of only motifs symbols. and, people modern to blurred quite appears message symbolic mess certain a sending of purpose the had motifs the and illiterate majori the since symbols, and motifs the interpreting in cautious be a had have character. secular a may have to seem motifs the of most motifs connotation, some Although tombstones. these under found be to are of members rich and Orthodox, rich Catholics, Rich them. afford to enough Fine 1975, 90. 90. Fine 1975,

If Fine ste

ć emphasizes the social element. He believes that that believes He element. social the emphasizes ste ci themselves are symbols of higher social status and power, then the then power, and status social higher of symbols are themselves ć ci and our time and the lack of documentary evidence getting more confid more getting evidence documentary of lack the and time our and

2.6. The Social Status Hypothesis Status 2.6. The Social 20

. They may be seen as an incomplete incomplete an as seen be may They . ste even cross may also be seen in a in seenbe also may cross even ć 68 ci motifs (sword, shield, helmet), helmet), shield, (sword, motifs Fine suggests that one has to has one that suggests Fine were erected by anyone rich anyone by erected were her in official religion or in in or religion official in her age instead of writing. That writing. of instead age y f h pplto were population the of ty ae. u t te gap the to Due eased. the Bosnian Church Church Bosnian the one can talk with with talk can one ir motifs may motifs ir religious religious ent CEU eTD Collection

lvnc uea taiin ie h Russian the like tradition funeral Slavonic ste s had which markers, grave wooden earlier from copied monuments stone a is There forms. Classical the than patterns relevant more stefor models mig that Ages Middle late the in visible still were sarcophagi like real sarcophagi. high Classical sarcophagi. to The similar most are the roofs),shaped (with hi the usually are they because which, pseudo-sarcophagi, ridged the on influence main the made periods, the of monasteries and churches the from sarcophagi medieval the as therefore intriguing.emergence is their to appear which monuments are pseudo-sarcophagi ridged and “trunks” Eur to strictly attributed common be may the and assemblage to belong slabs the While emergence? their influenced stone. grave a afforded have could population of emergence the 70 69 71 56-62. For the influences on influences the For Lovrenovi Bešlagi ć ci. 71 oee, codn t Bešlagi to according However, Classical- that literature scholarly the in found be often can It The rise of economic power during the late fourteenth and fifteent and fourteenth late the during power economic of rise The Such wooden grave markers (usually in the shape of a house) are known known are house) a of shape the in (usually markers grave wooden Such ć 1982, 118-121. 118-121. 1982, ć 2009, 61. 61. 2009, ć ci. According to him, Romanesque, Gothic, and Orthodox Church art are much much are art Church Orthodox and Gothic, Romanesque, him, to According ci. ste ste ć ć ci ci 2.7. The shapes – their origins and originsand –their 2.7. Theinfluences shapes art see: Bešlagisee: art , and from the mid-fifteenth century even members of the wider wider the of members even century mid-fifteenth the from and ,

ste ć 1982, 117-128 with further references. See also Lo also See references. further with 117-128 1982, ć ć , it was improbable that a large number of antique antique of number large a that improbable was it , ci tombstones. domovina ste 21 ć

ci 69 art only if some specific motifs exist, high exist, motifs specific some if only art

oee, h qeto rmis what – remains question the However, ad rm h fnrl rdto o the of tradition funeral the from and , 70 This seems to refer predominantly to to predominantly refer to seems This lso a hypothesis that hypothesis a lso t ae a sm ifune as influence some had have ht period sarcophagi, as well as sarcophagi, period ghest, largest, and house- and largest, ghest, Romanesque and Gothic and Romanesque “trunks” are also quite “trunks” are h centuries influenced influenced centuries h hapes quite similar to to similar quite hapes be quite original and and original quite be pa gravestone opean ste ć ci vrenovi are in fact fact in are rm the from ć 2009, 2009, CEU eTD Collection ofgaps chronological ideas. transmission the supposed and models the in is on rest that disadvantages and advantages has model Each tradition. ste of emergence of coffins. Gothic sarcophagi and a Gothic of influence the as roofs narrow and high their with sarcophagi coast. Dalmatian the from art Romanesque and sarcophagi of emergence the for moment crucial the him, to According ne cemeteries their placed cases many in and churches, Christian later the for models as Lovrenovi for hypothesis” “valuable Balkansthe late Ages. or Middle during before actuall markers grave wooden such that indications strong of absence s of evidence written first the and Ages Middle late the between well. as Balkans western 74 73 ste porijeklu o hipotezi Monuments), 72 Lovrenovi Lovrenovi Skari Vladimir rel, he mi mdl ae mhssd n h shlry li scholarly the in emphasised are models main three Briefly, The hypothesis about older wooden grave markers in the shape of later later of shape the in markers grave wooden older about hypothesis The ć ć 2009, 58-59. 58-59. 2009, 60. 2009, lsi Zmlso muzeja Zemaljskog Glasnik ć “ea soesi zr oasi maooa (n S (One mramorova” bosanskih uzor slovenski “Jedan , ć ć i atqe acpai mdea srohg, n te l Saoi funeral Slavonic old the and sarcophagi, medieval sarcophagi, antique ci: aka” (A Contribution to Skari to Contribution (A aka” ste 72 ć h mi polm ih hs yohss s h crnlgcl gap chronological the is hypothesis this with problem main The ci

sne fe te lv arvd n h Blas hy sd h ol the used they Balkans the in arrived Slavs the after since , 5 12) 11 14 As: uae Hadžijahi Muhamed Also: 144. – 141 (1928): 15 ć , but a better one is that Classical sarcophagi were relevant were sarcophagi Classical that is one better a but , ć ’s Hypothesis of Steof Hypothesis ’s 22

74 ć Lovrenovi ci Origin), Origin), ci ste xt to older Roman cemeteries. Roman older to xt ć uch a tradition, as well as the as well as tradition, a uch ci lavic Model of Bosnian Marble Marble Bosnian of Model lavic is the influence of antique antique of influence the is eaue s rca fr the for crucial as terature sues of the availability of availability the of sues y existed in the western western the in existed y rt, with strong reminders reminders strong with rt, Radovi ć es h tl pseudo- tall the sees 3 (1973): 287-296. 287-296. (1973): 3 ć “rlg Skari “Prilog , ste ć ci is a a is ć evoj evoj 73 d d

CEU eTD Collection

inter the to River Tara the along Ages Middle the in population dense tim Turkish before Dubrovnik of Novakovi in necropolises documents the in mentioned often was plateau a inaccessible and rugged to retreated population the ones, liveable most ta and open From diminished. production and trade conditions such In centuries. aff rule, their improvement as well. during importance gained region whole The endowed. had Š in Sokol HraniSandalj nobles Bosnian the of rule the under JeseraVia m the of significance the fact that to Owing reach. to difficult l a Such canyons. deep with rivers mountain fast are rivers Piva and ( Durmitor under situated is Žabljak of town The Montenegro. in mountains t with region the is This high. m 2000 themover Ivica Sinjajevina, allof Durmitor, and Milica Malovi Milica t although breeders, Vlach-cattle of status the had first the in granted amounts credit the and number 76 1964). zadruga, književna Srpska 75 the Middle Ages), Ages), theMiddle 3. THE REGION DURING PIVA TARA IN MONTENEGRO BETWEEN AND RIVERS 3. THE Te rbjk sod u aog te Vah involv Vlachs other among out stood Drobnjaks “The Sima h rgo bten h Tr ad ia ies s n ra f ih mou high of area an is rivers Piva and Tara the between region The With the Ottoman-Turkish arrival there was a period of instabilit of period a was there arrival Ottoman-Turkish the With the between region the century, fifteenth and fourteenth late the In Ć irkovi ć is quite understandable. All late medieval tombstones ste quiteunderstandable. latetombstones is All medieval epan Polje was a major centre; these nobles were even buried ther buriedeven were nobles these centre; majorwas a Polje epan ć - ð ć , , uki Glasnik Zavi Glasnik soia rdjvkve oase države bosanske srednjovekovne Istorija ć A GEOGRAPHICAL AND HISTORICAL OVERVIEW ANDA GEOGRAPHICALHISTORICAL , Prilog istoriji Drobnjaka u srednjem veku (An Add (An veku srednjem u Drobnjaka istoriji Prilog , 76

ć č i and Bare ŽugiBare and i ajnog muzeja ajnog

THE LATE MIDDLE LATE AGES:THE (1999): 153-154. 153-154. (1999): he people of Dubrovnik still called them so.” (My t (My so.” them called still Dubrovnik of people he ć half of the fifteenth century. Many of them probabl them of Many century. fifteenth the of half a, with over 350 preserved monuments, testify to the the to testify monuments, preserved 350 over with a, 23 d n h cei cmec i Dbonk y oh thei both by Dubrovnik in commerce credit the in ed

Hsoy f h Mdea Bsin tt) (Belgrade: State) Bosnian Medieval the of (History ć and Stjepan Vuk Stjepan and ition to the History of the Drobnjaks in in Drobnjaks the of History the to ition edieval road the road edieval ć ci are found by ci road. are this č ior. As the plain of Jezera Jezera of plain the As ior. andscape makes this area area this makes andscape i ć Kosa y and strife for several several for strife and y Tara and the Piva was Piva the and Tara reas. The wide Jezera Jezera wide The reas. e in the church they they church the in e 2522 m). The Tara Tara The m). 2522

č ecting economic economic ecting a. Via Anagasti Via tis uh as such ntains 75 mer parts, the parts, mer The town of town The ranslation) In: In: ranslation) he highest he highest y no longer no y s The es. or

r r

CEU eTD Collection of had Jezera ceased by1878. clash with the Turkish authorities. This brought the erection of erection the brought This authorities. Turkish the with clash a areas rugged to retreated population The ended. region the of development the Turks. Valuable records werethe Turks. Tomi bySvetozar Valuablerecords left thewith Turkish army the in region. 1665madeabout in the situation some records writer, travel Turkish famous A times. turbulent these of records surroundin hostile the to due parts these in remaining in H interested deserted. were settlements its arrival Turkish the after soon dir the from primarily attack, an of case in accessible so was Jezera, there had been no house but one in Kov in one but house no been had there Jezera, 78 Luburi there.” approach authority Turkish no let and sword mounta rugged in lives that foe real a It’s lost... loo and prisoners many mountains, these In speak... Nikši of hills the then 77 Anthropological-geographical Research), Research), Anthropological-geographical Svetozar In: recovered.” Jezera changed. everything no was There torching. many of traces and remained groun the to levelled but left stack or stable hut, u villages the all 1877, August In warfare. Turkish fo and spreading abrupt This Jezera. the on so, say of banishment the after years ten than less in So, a huts winter and stables only were There Komarska. U t 16, hn h Trs ee aihd rm Dro from banished were Turks the when 1863, to “Up Pivska “The ć , ,

ih h arvl f h Otmn uk te pc of epoch the Turks Ottoman the of arrival the With Such a state of the affairs had lasted up to 1878, i.e., until the libera the until i.e., 1878, to up lasted had affairs the of state a Such Drobnjaci – pleme u Hercegovini u Hercegovini pleme – Drobnjaci nahiye nahiye ć (administrative region) which was subdued and broug and subdued was which region) (administrative Htrjk n Drobnja and Haternjak ,

Srpski etnografski zbornik etnografski Srpski (The Drobnjaks – A Clan in Herzegovina) (Belgrade: (Belgrade: Herzegovina) Ain Clan – Drobnjaks (The ins. They talk to the Pashas of Herzegovina only wi only Herzegovina of Pashas the to talk They ins. č d. Then they seemed like a brigand plain, where onl where plain, brigand a like seemed they Then d. ica Karadži ica č the Turks, we became witnesses to many new villages new many to witnesses became we Turks, the unding new villages was somewhat prevented by the l the by prevented somewhat was villages new unding ka p to Gornja Bukovica were burned down. There was no was There down. burned were Bukovica Gornja to p Tomi (My translation from Serbian into English) Cited i Cited English) into Serbian from translation (My trace left of the villages founded. But after the T the after But founded. villages the of left trace t were kept and over hundred hundred over and kept were t nahiye long the edges... New villages began growing and sp and growing began villages New edges... the long 24 ć

,”Drobnjak–antropogeografska ispitivanja” (Drobnjak ispitivanja” ,”Drobnjak–antropogeografska ć na, rm ona uoia o Jun to Bukovica Gornja from bnjak, otn eit h psa o Hreoia s te ar the so Herzegovina, of pashas the resist often , a and one in Pašina Voda and one somewhere in Kraja in somewhere one and Voda Pašina in one and a ć . 4 (1902): 456-458. 456-458. (1902): 4 78

ection of Pljevlja, it is probable that that probable is it Pljevlja, of ection ste ste ht to heel by Serhab Mehmed-pasha, Mehmed-pasha, Serhab by heel to ht Evlıya Çelebı, passing through through passing Çelebı, Evlıya ć owever, the Turks were not not were Turks the owever, ć ci ci obtns n economic and tombstones to a halt. The inhabitation The halt. a to gs. The Turks left many many left Turks The gs. gazis tion of this area from from area this of tion (warriors) nd was in a constant constant a in was nd 1930), 24. 24. 1930), č th the edge of the the of edge the th adola, all Ravna Ravna all adola, 77 y human bodies bodies human y

urks had gone gone had urks and believers believers and ast Serbian- ast , if we may may we if , n: Andrija Andrija n: t a house, house, a t reading. reading. ms ms – –

CEU eTD Collection

tha areas Bosnia, northern in as well as River, Sava the to close GraveyardHungarian with cemeteries medieval 24 are there often most tombstones, kilometres apart. si are cemeteries Both inhabitants. local by graveyard) (Greek 80 79 Novakoviare road the near cemeteries ranit throughclan. territoryDrobnjak of the the calle is which mountain, the crossing part the for except road,modern the as archives is road This interior. the into deeper River Tara the across continued Žabljak the i areawhere into Jezera called (1700 high), area descended m (the N of town the through seaside the from road that Ages Middle the P the between interior, the to coast the from led that road important Ze Nikši nowadays Onogošt, medieval the is Anagastum č evi otmdea lcl naiat gv vros ae t eivl cem medieval to names various gave inhabitants local Post-medieval Late medieval tombstones, tombstones, medieval Late during area study the in importance great of were Communications ć 2005, 22; Bešlagi 22; 2005, 4. LATE MEDIEVAL 4. LATE Via Anagasti Via

( Madjarsko grobljeMadjarsko ć 1982, 32. 32. 1982, Gr č 4.1. “Greek(Gr Graveyard” 79 ko grobljeko

or Via Jesera Via ste (Greek Graveyard), as in the area of Žabljak. In Serbia Serbia In Žabljak. of area the in as Graveyard), (Greek ć STE ć ci n ae ŽugiBare and i ste , lie near the the near lie , ). 80 (see Map 2). This route coincides even now with the with noweven coincides route This 2). Map (see Ć ć The latter name is to be found in northern Serbia, northern in found be to is name latter The CI ci ć 25 in Montenegro. Montenegro. in called Greek Graveyard, and about 10 called called 10 about and Graveyard, Greek called

IN THE AREAŽABLJAK OF

č i Jesera Via ć ko groblje) a, both of them called them of both a, t adjoined the medieval Kingdom Kingdom medieval the adjoined t utd eie te od two road, the besides tuated Te w lret medieval largest two The . iva and Tara rivers. During During rivers. Tara and iva d the “clan’s” road because “clan’s” road the d ikši known in the Dubrovnik the in known ć rse Mut Ivica Mount crossed the Middle Ages; an an Ages; Middle the s now located), and nows located), and eteries with with eteries Gr č ko Grobljeko ste ć ci

CEU eTD Collection reflect historyearlier a names. of different than sense Serbia. in just 15called wereby about that 2005there thebut usual as monuments, for recent g never are tombstones medieval churches), (around continuity has inhumation c Inall them. on inhumation of discontinuitylong with graveyards abandoned old, are names such that noticed have I observations my Through communities. not have I connected Hungarian Graveyardwith the leave.” in literature. to had had they years, seven for lasted have that tim long a here lived who “Greeks the about tells are story legendary the In left.” they and more, any plough not could they severe too becaus and here, lived who Greeks “the about legend some by explained whole the within name frequent occupat Turkish the than older past, distant some recognized people that explanat probable most the but unknown, is names such giving for reason exact archae and historical popular of products probably are They frequently. Bogomil and Graveyard Roman like names recent Other Hungary. of 82 81 Ze Bešlagi č evi R called were cemeteries a few 1982 only It until interesting that is a cemeteries the between discontinuity certain a show names Such ć ć 2005, 22; Bešlagi 22; 2005, 1982, 32-33. 32-33. 1982, ć 1982, 32. 32. 1982,

ste ć mramor ci area is Greek Graveyard. Such a name is usually usually is name a Such Graveyard. Greek is area 26 or

kamen 82 These names appear to beto new;appear they may These names , meaning gravestone. , meaning e ago, but after a harsh winter winter harsh a after but ago, e yet found any legend legend any found yet ological literature. The The literature. ological a of Žabljak the same same the Žabljak of a ion period. ion Graveyard appear less less appear Graveyard e the winter once was was once winter the e oman Graveyards, but oman but Graveyards, given only for the for only given iven such names, names, such iven ion seems to be to seems ion ases where the the where ases d h local the nd 81 The most The CEU eTD Collection

wasJezera regularlywaste settlement. preventing laid permanent le Turks the after established were that villages new in houses local the by used or broken been already had tombstones many place t Mont in biggest the were cemeteries two about these him to According information interesting some left scholar, and diplomat Russian century nineteenth the of end the towards area this through Travelling t large, considered be should graves fifty than more with cemetery cemetery. the in graves eighty-six counted I stones, amorpho the with Together stones. well-finished of less or groups expensive) no are there means That well-finished. less those with better The west-east. oriented lines in are graves The hill. the north extends cemetery. cemetery medieval The the late is hill, the of top a on and inland), – coast the from is direction the (if road the of side Riblj one. medieval the to identical less or more route a following pas Riblje, and Vražje lakes, two are Nearby Žabljak. of southeast Izdava 85 84 83 ея Pavel A. Rovinski, Rovinski, A. Pavel Lovrenovi manyste weight their Dueto

прошломь č ka knjižarnica Zorana Stojanovi Zorana knjižarnica ka vlae ald Novakovi called village A ć 2009, 159-160. 159-160. 2009,

и

настояащемь Crna Gora u prošlosti i sadašnjostii prošlosti u Gora Crna 4.2. The late medieval cemetery4.2. The latemedieval of Novakovi ”. ”. ć ci have foundation stones under them in order to ke to themorder in under stones foundation have ci Санкт

- Петерсбург ć a, 1993). First edition: edition: First 1993). a, ć i is located in the area called Jezera, eight kilometers kilometers eight Jezera, called area the in located is i : Типография 27 (Montenegro in the Past and Present) (Sremski Karl (Sremski Present) and Past the in (Montenegro

Разборь

83 Императорской olwn te supin ht every that assumption the Following

труда ft. During Turkish rule the area of of area the rule Turkish During ft. -finished monuments are mixed mixed are monuments -finished the visited he when but enegro,

e Jezero lake lies on the right right the on lies lake Jezero e П . the left side of the road, on road, the of side left the А ep them standing firmly. standingthem ep

академии ć elfnse (n more (and well-finished i i a ag cemetery. large a is his us stones and foundation foundation and stones us . . i i sed by the modern road road modern the by sed Ровинского inhabitants for building building for inhabitants Pvl . oisi a Rovinski, A. Pavel , -south along the top of -south along of the top ee tombstones. hese

наук : “ : , 1906. 1906. , Черногор ovci: i я

вь 85 84

CEU eTD Collection

88 87 86 (12 trunksandwhich ten tombstones). 22had pseudo-sarcophagus ornamentation pseudo-sarcophagus 11 and trunks 37 slabs, (six tombstones fifty-four noted fig. 6, (no. side eastern the on sword a with shield a and side upper the a cases another In 17-18). fig. 49, (no. side that on fallen has tombstone side southern the cases both in but deer, a hunting hand, his in arrow an helmet with warrior a is representation Another them). hold not does the towards placed hand large a with depicted is man a 11-12) fig. 6, th of sides northern the on appear representations (warrior) human both incorrect data. Bešlagi Šefik However, decades. three si no the was there 2001, in recorded Comparing situation the with 1966 plans. July in recorded situational on placed be should and monuments destroyed the place They indicate are missing. tombstones andare visible the foundation stones I observations. previous in omitted was point Another and precisely. ground measure the into sunk have tombstones the of many that emphasized be roofs. double hig usuallyare roofs double with pseudo-sarcophagi and sarcophagitombstones with pseudo-sarcophagi two and monuments, pseudo-sarcophagi trunks, sixteen slabs, ten are there then pseudo-sarcophagi, and trunks 80 over those and high 80cm to 30cm from are pseudo-sarcophagi and trunks high, Bešlagi of theclassification For Bešlagi After P. A. Rovinski, only Šefik BešlagiŠefik only Rovinski, A. P. After My observation is rather different. Following the general rule t rule general the Following different. rather is observation My h pstoig f ersnain de nt em o olw n specifi any follow to seem not does representations of positioning The ć ć 1973, 116-117. Bešlagi 116-117. 1973, data thebasic contains article 111-138. The 1973, 88

ste ć ci according to their height, see Bešlagi see height, their to according ć confused motifs on no. 49 in Novakovi 49 no. motifson confused

ć ofsd fw ouet, n hs rsne some presented has and monuments, few a confused 28 ć conducted research, in 1966. In NovakoviIn 1966. in research, conducted

. . ć 1982, 80-115. 80-115. 1982, ć i and no. 83 in Bare Žugi in Bare 83 no. and i on his head and a bow with with bow a and head his on 11-12 and no. 82, fig. 29- fig. 82, no. and 11-12 hat slabs are up to 30cm to up are slabs hat sword and the shield (he shield the and sword is unknown because the the because unknown is e stone. In one case (no. (no. case one In stone. e single shield appears on on appears shield single gnificant change over over change gnificant i hg tuk, nine trunks, high six n many cases only only cases many n h. Also, it should should it Also, h. c rule, although although rule, c 86 monuments) of of monuments) are difficult to to difficult are

ć s of lost and and lost of s cm are high high are cm a. a. 87 situation Pseudo- ć i he he i CEU eTD Collection one doesthis have not any reliefor representation. anytrace of other be with others with contrast In 19). fig. 59, (no. pseudo-sarcophagus high ridged, ste and trunks of monuments.sarcophagus shapes same the in made monuments wooden hollow from patterns tombstones such that hypothesis a was there Earlier 15). fig. 18, (no. towardhead the eastern ofend. the was deceased eas oriented is It side. upper its on round) bit a made was leg upper western) or re bas a of (easternimage the has stone One visible. not side are representations other the or one on fallen have monuments cons in taken be should It 22). 21, 20, figs. 63, (no. it above swastika a with andvine motif various of bandsappear kinds always of onthe edges the monuments. available space wider the is sides northern and southern the on being visible). hardly shield -- 12 no. and 30, Glasnik Zemaljskog muzeja Zemaljskog Glasnik 90 Hungarica Opuscula L Pál fun painted that century fifteenth the from sources 89 Vladimir Skari Vladimir shield a (gravestones) slabs medieval Hungarian On ć ci ı vei, “Temetvei, tombstones. tombstones. the of centre the in one highest the is monument interesting Another onthe t motif as of a boardsimitation an appears be to what has theOne monuments of eas the on once and twice, side upper the on alone appears crescent The ć ı , “Jedan slovenski uzor bosanskih mramorova” (One S (One mramorova” bosanskih uzor slovenski “Jedan , i sirjelek a k a sirjelek i 6 (2005): 77-83. 77-83. 6 (2005): 40 (1928): 141 – 144. 144. – 141 (1928): 40 90 ı This hypothesis offers an explanation for sudden appearance of such of appearance sudden for explanation an offers hypothesis This zépkori Magyarországon” (Grave Markers in the Cemet the in Markers (Grave Magyarországon” zépkori

89 eral shields were placed as grave markers in mediev in markers grave as placed were shields eral h ms poal epaain o acds usually arcades for explanation probable most The is often hanging from a cross. It is also mentione also is It cross. a from hanging often is 29

lavic Model of Bosnian Mramors (Ste Mramors Bosnian of Model lavic lief cross, a cross, lief t-west, which means that the the that means which t-west, on the lateral sides. The The sides. lateral the on eries of Medieval Hungary) Hungary) Medieval of eries ehp cpe earlier copied perhaps and therefore their their therefore and ideration that many many that ideration eeey i i a is it cemetery; tern side together side tern crux ansata, ansata, crux tr finishes, tter al Hungary: Hungary: al d in written in d pseudo- (the ć ci), ci), op CEU eTD Collection

m the In monuments. no with and higher, bit little a is part southern the The part. southern the in shape in amorphous mainly those and cemetery quali better of Those quality. their to according grouped clearly Novakovi to contrast In rocks. simply are they – treatment no with but large, them of some dimensions, different have tombstones amorphous The amorphous. 93 92 91 Žugi Bare in tombstones seventy and hundred two counted I Jesera ŽugiBare some tombstones havesome tombstones been decorations overturned some of the BešlagiŠefik in photo the is existed robber dance, line traditional at the of representation attempts relief a had monuments of consequences the probably was which dislocated, s the of some and monuments, pseudo-sarcophagus nine found I 2001. in same the quite t Again, amorphous. as others the all classified and slabs, ten and trunks Bešlagi Šefik by researched briefly was called whole lar six the among is it fact, in cemetery; large hundre a three considered almost with cemetery medieval late another is there 200x40x20cm, 170x80x20cm, 130x80x40 and so so and on. 130x80x40 170x80x20cm, 200x40x20cm, Bešlagi Bešlagi 93 road. On the left side, (in the direction from the coast to the int the to coast the from direction the (in side, left the On road. Gr ste but basically they are similar to the trunks and pseudo-sarcophagus and trunks the to similar are they basically but

ć ć 1973, 125. 125. 1973, 127. 1973, č ć ć ko Grobljeko ci a is a village 2 km northeast of Novakovi of northeast km 2 village a is a area. 91 n otat ih h Novakovi the with contrast In by local inhabitants just like the cemetery in Novakovi in cemetery the like just inhabitants local by 4.3. The late medieval cemetery4.3. The latemedieval of BareŽugi

ć ’s article.’s ć in 1966. He found ten pseudo-sarcophagi stones, fifty stones, pseudo-sarcophagi ten found He 1966. in 92 30 Because the traces of digging were obvious and obvious were digging of traces the Because

ć st, hs eeey s n fa ae. t is It area. flat a in is cemetery this site, i ć i. This village is also situated on the on situated also is village This i. gest with such tombstones in the the in tombstones such with gest

cannotseen. be ty are in the northern part of the of part northern the in are ty ć , f hc totid are two-thirds which of a, the ć d monuments. It is also also is It monuments. d a iddle of this area plateau plateau area this of iddle ć erior), just by the road road the by just erior), kolo i, here tombstones are are tombstones here i, terrain in the center of of center the in terrain e iuto ws not was situation he tombstones in size, in tombstones . The proof that it it that proof The . . n o these of One y. ć i. This cemetery cemetery This i. are really really are tones Via Via CEU eTD Collection although all belongthe general assembly of they to Novakovi in those as s upper the on sword aimage ofan has tombstone One 2). (Map Pljevlja Novakovi motif a Such fig.56). 81, (no. sides northern and southern the on zigzagbands t is specific Also borders. as usually decoration, as bands some have fig. 61, (no. crescent a of shape the in legs the with side, western he like cross Novakovi a with or star, a with alone either appears motif 60, no. and 42 fig. 39, (no. stars/rosettes four and cross the with (rosetogether star a with together once stone, the of side upper the on cases cresce The tombstones. the of sides upper the on are motifs more here ŽugiBare at only 40-41), fig. 33, no. and app pattern This side. upper its along stretches that rib relief ps the imitates that shape original an with trunk a is There ŽugiBare in tombstones the on appear that symbols the Concerning orientation. Ages.gravesareMiddle The east-west lines, in in fa the to testifies which road, the of curve the follows cemetery probabl one that indicates depression shallow the but present, longer no called ponds shallow small of w area whole the that is answer The shape. semicircular a in On time. earlier some at here stood church a that indicate may al an of part been have may pillar The (20x20x25cm). pillar broken a is 94 The name of the area – – area name the of The ć ć i or further towards the south, but towards the north it occurs at t at occurs it north the towards but south, the towards further or i ŽugiBare at tombstone pseudo-sarcophagus A i. Jezera ć , ih ny fw ifrne. h feuny f ois s diffe is motifs of frequency The differences. few a only with i, -- literally means the Lakes. The Jezera are a a pla are Jezera The Lakes. themeans -- literally

bare in the vernacular – therefore, therefore, – vernacular the in ć a but not at Novakoviat not but a 31

ste ć ci motifs (see Table 2). (seemotifs Table eudo-sarcophagus tombstone by a bas bas a by tombstone eudo-sarcophagus ć as, and still is to a certain extant, full extant, certain a to is still and as, ears in two cases (no. 22, fig. 38-39 38-39 fig. 22, (no. cases two in ears a has a bas relief cross motif on the the on motif cross relief bas a has a the north, the cemetery stretches stretches cemetery the north, the ct that the road originated in the in originated road the that ct ć 50-51).Most of the monuments the of 50-51).Most i. In contrast with Novakovi with contrast In i. Bare Žugi Bare e o wt a wsia s in as swastika a with or re, teau surrounded by mountains. mountains. by teausurrounded ć he monument with bas relief bas with monument he a, they are mainly the same same the mainly are they a, nt appears twice, in both in twice, appears nt The past. the in existed y t) n i aohr case another in and tte) ide (no. 53, fig. 48). One One fig.48). 53, (no. ide tar, and the empty space space empty the and tar, fig. 49). The crescent crescent The 49). fig. he site of Vrulja near Vrulja of site he ć a has no parallels in in parallels no has

. 94 Now a pond is pond a Now rent rent ć i, i, CEU eTD Collection side, they sideare opposite asalways well. onthe arc the if but side, southern its on overturned is It above. vine spiral a arcades motifs: similar with trunk, a another, is monument this Behind agaiarcades, are onthecross, westernside there and eastern a is side female a is It side. that is the dance, stone traditional This deer. a of image the with together top, its on but monument, such another is There 45). fig. 49, (no. placed was stone the before engraved t during robbery a in over turned was it fact the to due seen be made not was it so stone, pseudo-sarcophagus one of pedestal the of side a such here that is enigma greatest The bottom. the or sides the type of interesti is arrow an with bow simple a of motif engraved The theslabs can cemetery.a within cluster be as seen T 31). 30, 29, (no. cemetery the of border northern the at grouped 31), (no. slabs cross such were placed.One theyengravedcould after have the later, stones been the to belong They sides. lateral the of any the on appear they and engraved simply are crosses Many 54-55). fig. 79, the case particular libations.for i one common most the stone; the on function its about theories different the has stone 96 95 See photo in Bešlagi photo See Bešlagi ste ć 1982, 382-384. 382-384. 1982, ć ak 95 except the slab and on every side. Usually it is on the top, but can also be found on found also be can but top, on the is Usually it every side. slab and on exceptthe It appears, although not very often, in different regions with with regions different in often, very not although appears, It kamenica kamenica ć 1973. 1973. kolo oi, hc i a iclr ees ih n nnw rl. hr ar There role. unknown an with recess circular a is which motif, kolo , is shown on the southern side, now invisible because the stone lies on lies stone becausethe invisible now side, southern the on shown is , is a part of the bas relief cross – it is the lower end of the of end lower the is it – cross relief bas the of part a is

ih ie women. five with crux immissacrux 32 96

hr i a prl ie bv te. n the On them. above vine spiral a is There type; all of its legs are of equal length; length; equal of are legs its of all type; he 1980s; this indicates that it was it that indicates this 1980s; he ng; in general it appears on every on appears it general in ng; motif was engraved on the lower lower the on engraved was motif n with the spiral vine above. above. the spiral vine n with on the northern side with side northern the on ades are present on one on present are ades to be seen. Now it can can it Now seen. be to top (upper side), or on or side), (upper top s that its purpose was purpose its that s motif on the same the on motif ul f ois a motifs: of full is on one of the onone is of the ste his group of of group his ć ci cross (no. cross I this In . e e CEU eTD Collection the spatialis distribution no.81).of (no.arrow the 48-49; no.75and bow and motif cemeter the of part northern the at slabs similar very of group centra the within found been not have motifs Such 2). Map and 1 (Map influence central the to belong not do regions both that fact the is Bitelienigma distant in unexpected is motif such of presence the why Novakovifig.15, andMramor Bijeli at monument from region the in only appears and Montenegro, for particular motif Novakovi in trunk Nikši in one Montenegro: 2). (Map band zigzag relief bas Vrulj of site the to north, the beconnected to to seems motif a Such no.48, no.49,and no.75,no.81). ŽugiBare at clusters certain in ar grouped monuments and bow this exactly is cemetery same the within patterns useful. be can cemetery single a within motifs of patterns moti of distribution regional The symbols. or signs but scenes, not are ŽugiBare At now. until and t reliefscene, bas a is that different because completelyarrow, is Novakovi in once i times seven appears arrow an with bow engraved an of motif The 97 100 99 98 Pljevlja: Šuma) in Marina theNecropolis at

Bešlagi Bešlagi Vanja Beloševac,“Srednjovekovni nadgrobni spomenici nadgrobni Beloševac,“Srednjovekovni Vanja Miloševi ć ć 1982, 374-375. 374-375. 1982, 469. 1982, ć 1991, 41. 41. 1991, ć a two clusters can be noticed (see the situational plan of Bare of plan situational the (see noticed be can clusters two a ć ć i. The scene of hunting deer, where the hunter (warrior) has a bow wi bow a has (warrior) hunter the where deer, hunting of scene The i. i with the imitation of boards on its upper side (no. 18, fig. 15). This is is This 15). fig. 18, (no. side upper its on boards of imitation the with i ć , south of Jezera, and one in Pljevlja, further to the north. the to further Pljevlja, in one and Jezera, of south ,

97 t s osdrd ht hr wr to rf wrsos in workshops craft two were there that considered is It Glasnik Zavicajnog muzeja Zavicajnog Glasnik 33 na nekropoli u Marinoj šumi” (The Medieval Tombsto Medieval šumi”(The u Marinoj nekropoli na

ć i) in the north to Nikši to north the in i) ć a (see the situational plan of Bare ŽugiBare of plan situational the (see a (1999): 99-143. (1999): A good example of such distribution such of example good A y (no. 29, 30, 31), and another one one another and 31), 30, 29, (no. y row motif, which appears on on appears which motif, row ste ć a near Pljevlja, as well as theas well as nearPljevlja, a (Croatia). n Bare ŽugiBare n he images from Bare ŽugiBare images from he ć Jezera (fig. 1-2, dislocated dislocated 1-2, (fig. Jezera ci

area, but to the area of area the to but area, ć in the south.the in s r h distribution the or fs 100 Žugi ć n additional An a, but not even even not but a, ć 98 l l a); one is a a is one a); ste There is a is There 99 ć That isThat ci th an an th area ć nes nes ć a: a: a a a a CEU eTD Collection iutd n h rgo o esen ezgvn. ny 0 ncitos ar inscriptions 30 Only Herzegovina. eastern of region the in situated of number total the of 0.5% only are they that means That afterpossible excavation. A social. or chronological either be might cemetery the suc within for reason The working. stone of trace any without rocks simple i monuments finished well the imitate to purpose on chosen carefully ŽugiBare of plan situational ŽugiBareamorphous ones in chur possible the around part, southern in the concentrated mostly are of amorphous part northern in found be to are ornaments with better-finished Žugi Bare in but ones, amorphous the with mixed Novakovi in all, of First them. between differences some historical and cultural same the to belong cemeteries two these motifs the and tombstones the of shapes and types the general, In stopped being another reason.but reachable, for simply or one was some used of them centr one event military or political some to Due chronological. be are cemeteries these though even divergence, such for explanation Nikši Novakovi cemeteries, two these from motifs the to According 101 Bešlagi ć ad ae Žugi Bare and , Until the beginning of the 1990s 336 monuments in the shape of a cross were cross a of shape the in monuments 336 1990s the of beginning the Until ć 1982, 111. 111. 1982, ć i rltd o h nrh n te lela ein Mp ) A possibl A 2). (Map region Pljevlja the and north the to related is a ć ć

a are bigger and better preserved than those in Novakovi in than those preserved better a and are bigger a). It is worth mentioning that such amorphous tombstones were tombstones amorphous such that mentioning worth is It a). 4.4. Cross-shaped monuments monuments 4.4. Cross-shaped 34

ć te ae eaae it to rus The groups. two into separated are they a ć te etrfnse tmsoe are tombstones better-finished the i ste ć i was related to the south, toward toward south, the to related was i ć ci framework, although there are are there although framework, monuments. They are mostly are They monuments. final answer would only be be only would answer final so close to each other, could other, each to close so and symbols that appear in in appear that symbols and e was possibly inaccessible, inaccessible, possibly was e n size and shape. They are are They shape. and size n rgsee o te, of them, on registered e h typological diversity diversity typological h eeey wie the while cemetery, ch. However, the However, ch. ć known. i (see the the (see i 101 e

CEU eTD Collection of age the after s a such that is monuments cross-shaped with problem main The century. the to others all and century fifteenth the to dated are 5 only which f pla, r i te hp o a os ( ped–acpau wt a with pseudo–sarcophagus (a house a of shape the in are pillar, a of other and monuments cross-shaped Icross-shaped as literature monuments, havefromfield work. the and noted c also the is That area. vast a in one cross-shaped onlythe andthere Novakovi a inside four the circleAll representation(figs. each crosses, of 3-7). them medieval cross-shaped usually are They settlements. and cemeteries from away far monuments cross-shaped cases most in contrary, the On rare. are has one no but acceptable, and reasonable is cemeteries of edges the such as Šefik Bešlagi t in interested been have who scholars the all by adopted been has opinion the at appearing ones latest the be to have monuments cross-shaped scholars many influenced has fact That cemeteries. of edges other the ins and symbols Representations, history. art of subject a as studied arc excavated been has them of none know, I as far As period. medieval 102 Nada Mileti Nada Why is this so? My opinion is that there may be a significant a be may there that is opinion My so? this is Why late the are they that fact The same. the quite not is opinion My ć Via Jesera Via ste i and Bare ŽugiBare and i ć ć , , ci ste Ste tombstones. When they appear in medieval cemeteries they are al are they cemeteries medieval in appear they When tombstones. ć ć ste ci ak (Tombstones) (Belgrade: Vuk Karadzi (Belgrade: (Tombstones) ć t h Bjl Mao st, iutd eie h s-ald “cl so-called the beside situated site, Mramor Bijeli the at . It is a monument 1.70 meters high with the image of a warrior on i on warrior a of image the with high meters 1.70 monument a is It . ć ci , NadaMileti obtns s i i smtms ad o lsiy hm strictl them classify to hard sometimes is it so tombstones, ć a, which are almost fifteen kilometres away. This monument is a is monument This away. kilometres fifteen almost are which a,

ć ste , and others. ć ci . All the others, with the exception of those in the shape the in those ofexception the with the others, All . 35 102

ć , 1982). 1982). , situated near roads. There is one one is There roads. near situated to strongly adopt the opinion that that opinion the adopt strongly to appear separately, single, often single, separately, appear ase with the majority of other majorityother theof with ase criptions are the same as on as same the are criptions end of the of end mentioned that such cases cases such that mentioned sixteenth and seventeenth and sixteenth difference between these, these, between difference st because they appear on on appear they because st roof) or a trunk, so the the so trunk, a or roof) haeologically, but only only but haeologically, s are similar to those in ares those in to similar his kind of monument, of kind his hape continued even even continued hape ste ć ways on the the on ways n od or road” an ci y into the the into y era. This This era. t and t lone lone CEU eTD Collection never motifs cross-shaped appear monuments. onthe architecturalwith motif a trunk, just oris the emphasizedif with roof, it is “eternalthe isof ithouse” that emphasizes construction a ofshape onay ewe estates. between boundary a been have might cross a such Also, nowadays. even and Ages Middle the ste some are there under cenotaphs but yet, excavated been not have they because known not bur are persons Whether clans. two between battle a about is legend monume these with connected are legends cases most In happened. death) duel (a important something where place the words other in itself, Bijeli Mramor and the Local Saga), Saga), Local the and Mramor Bijeli 103 boa of imitation the with trunk dislocated a also is there Nearby, i graves single making of custom a also is there but cenotaphs, be c single These cenotaphs. theywere but home, from away far wars us roads, near persons deceased of images with monuments the placing of cust a was There too. elsewhere, and now, even region this in common quite rare, is fountain. Since ste such a this motif ea Vemi Dejan ć ak might have been connected to the road passing next to it, like the c the like it, to next passing road the to connected been have might My opinion is that such monuments symbolize not the not symbolize monuments such that is opinion My

ć “v ndrba pmnk kd ieo Maoa lo i Mramora Bijelog kod spomenika nadgrobna “Dva , ste ć ci . However, it should also be taken into consideration that a cross-shaped a that consideration into taken be also should it However, .

Such a custom of marking the place of someone’s sudden death is is death sudden someone’s of place the marking of custom a Such

Glasnik srpskog arheološkog društva arheološkog srpskog Glasnik ć ak is of greatas well.ak significance is 36

21 (2005): 189-200. 189-200. (2005): 21 kalno predanje” (Two Tombstones near near Tombstones (Two predanje” kalno eternal houseeternal rd, used as a as used rd, the deceased person. That fact fact That person.deceased the ross-shaped monuments could monuments ross-shaped n this region even nowadays. nowadays. even region this n ied under such monuments is is monuments such under ied or some kind of accidental of kind some or s such as Such arcades. s rosses at crossroads in in crossroads at rosses ually of men killed in killed men of ually landmark, marking a a marking landmark, nts; in Drobnjak the Drobnjak in nts; om in wider region region wider in om but the but 103 spolia

known cases of of cases known for the local local the for monument

CEU eTD Collection

American Philophical SocietyPhilophical American commonfor is Such a allthe situation areas with rarel slabs while trunks, on then pseudo-sarcophagi, on appears ornaments Typologically them. on engraving of sign any nor ornaments neither simple actually monuments, amorphous The all. at noted were inscriptions maymotif one more motive.” have than some tak be should ordered it gravestones interpreting or when Briefly, gravestone. carved they why of record no intentions; or motives b behind left evidence of lack great always is there general, gra Concerning symbolism. their discussing one even not them among and them with problem additional An interpreter. time the between time-gap great a is there if particularly ways. many in possible Tha well. as messages visual with case the is that and meanings, archai in (particularly words are there However, visual. or verbal com of kind anycrucial in are Symbols made. be can forsuggestions meanings not specificallyis meant motifs the What stone. the up put who people w it because interesting particularly is ornamentation their kinds, 105 104 ae A Hjy “mrcn rvsoe ad Attitude and Gravestones “American Hijiya A. James Tombstones” on Symbolism “Transition Lindahl, Carl f 6 mnmns n Novakovi in monuments 360 Of Besides the size, shape, and placement of placement and shape, size, the Besides 4.5. The motifs on ste on 4.5. The motifs , Vol. 127, No. 5 (1983): 339-363. 339-363. (1983): 5 No. 127, ,Vol. 104 osqety sc msae/ybl ae o es t de-code, to easy not are messages/symbols such Consequently,

105 ste

ć ad ae Žugi Bare and i ć ci ć sta tee r vr fw rte sucs about sources written few very are there that is 37 Western Folklore Western ci in the area the ofci Žabljak in ste s toward Death: A Brief History,” History,” Brief A Death: toward s

ć ste ci . ć ci , which convey information of various of information convey which , when they were made and their later later their and made were they when y their makers and buyers about their their about buyers and makers ytheir ć 45 (1986): 165-185. 165-185. (1986): 45 ol 4 hv onmns No ornaments. have 45 only a c languages) with two different different two with languages) c en into consideration that “a “a that consideration into en as clearly the choice of the the of choice the clearly as t makes their interpretation interpretation their makes t known, but some generalsome but known, the greatest number of of number greatest the y have any ornament. ornament. any have y atclr oe of mode particular large rocks, have have rocks, large munication, eithermunication, Proceedings of the the of Proceedings vestones in in vestones CEU eTD Collection

Ze 106 which rope, of motif the is complicated, more but this, to Similar boards. include: a motifs Figural warrior, a uppe the (on hollow helmet, sword, shield, arrow, and bow star, crescent, Symboli motifs. decorative as wreath and vine lines, zigzag rope), of short are: 2) Table (see Mramor, Bijeli in monument cross-shaped because abe thatof modern cannotequatedwith perceptionmedieval of person times. the dance- re figural of meaning symbolic The etc). sword, and shield crescent, himself). continuation of life (Christ vine the example, For motifs. symbolic or representations figural symbolic some had have may ornaments Decorative monument. a of sides the on shown scene main the frame motifs Such relief. bas in made frequent most the are which rope, and border) a as functioning (also meaning. ha have could ornament same the because ornaments the between distinction approp really not is it although division, basic a Tab as and classification 1 Table (see animals and humans of representations – figural lsiiain o te raet vr t a greater a to vary ornaments the of Classifications č evi ć 2005, 53-54; Bešlagi 53-54; 2005, kolo Decorative motifs are the most frequent. Short parallel lines a lines parallel Short frequent. most the are motifs Decorative ŽugiBare in tombstones on appear that motifs The primarily meaning which in those are motifs Symbolic wi stripes (engraved borders primarily are ornaments Decorative groups: three into divided be generally can ornaments The ), scenes (hunting deer) will be discussed with an understanding of of understanding an with discussed be will deer) (hunting scenes ), ć 1982, 136-139; Mileti 136-139; 1982,

kolo ć 1982, 37; Wenzel 1965, 413-421. 413-421. 1965, Wenzel 37; 1982, xet Fr ifrn oiin se Lovrenovi see: opinions different For extent. 38 (traditional dance) (a and (traditional deer). animals

ć a and Novakoviand a is not is appears 23 times, mostly as the as mostly times, 23 appears parallel lines, rope (imitation (imitation rope lines, parallel 106 riate to make such a sharp sharp a such make to riate ppear 44 times as a border. border. a as times 44 ppear decorative, symbolic, and symbolic, decorative, upper or any of the lateral lateral the of any or upper presentations (a warrior, a a warrior, (a presentations motifs, and zigzag stripes stripes zigzag and motifs, only decorative (a cross, cross, (a decorative only a as smoie the symbolize also may mtf ae h cross, the are motifs c th parallel lines), vines lines), parallel th le 2). I suggest this this suggest I 2). le ć r side), arcades, and and arcades, side), r meaning as well as as well as meaning i, also including the the including also i, d more than one one than more d the distance distance the ć 09 62; 2009,

CEU eTD Collection so-called the as such sarcophagi Christian early on relief cross. of type one as recognized be also should it Christianity, medieval a Christians in by used and Also well. times as Scandinavia prehistoric to Mediterranean since world the over all appeared Novakovi ŽugiBare – 50 fig. of shape the in end them of some well; as stylized are crosses ŽugiBare – 31 (no. length equal of arms the with most The relief. bas in are others engraved; are them of Some c are others the all cross, one this for Except (fig. 2-7). it on circ in crosses four the Bijeli and Mramor at monument including cross-shaped the thirt are There symbol. represented frequently most the is cross repres (no.monument Žugi 81,fig. –Bare 56 is that stripe relief bas zigzag the except sides, Novakovi in 10) (fig. 4 no. of border the as wreaths, with Novakovi in 21) (fig. 63 no. of side upper the on lily ŽugiBare app stripe relief bas zigzag A monuments. of side upper the on border 107 Bešlagi The swastika is an ancient symbol, usually recognized as a solar a as recognized usually symbol, ancient an is swastika The the are character) religious and social (of motifs Symbolic ć 1982, 189-194; Wenzel 1965,Tables 33, 34. 34. 33, 1965,Tables Wenzel 189-194; 1982, ć ć i). a. The vine motif appears 32 times, and a unique one is the vine in combination with a with combination a in unique appearsand onea. the vine is The vine motif 32times, ć a). Two crosses are anthropomorphic (no. 74, fig. 25-26; no. 78, fig. 28 – 28 fig. 78, no. 25-26; fig. 74, (no. anthropomorphic are crosses Two a).

ć a). a). 39

ć a) or with a longer lower arm. Many of the the of Many arm. lower longer a with or a) ć i. Also unique is the motif of half-arcades of motif the is unique Also i. ć ented across the lateral side of the the of side lateral the across ented i. All of these motifs frame the top or top the frame motifs these of All i. arved on monuments of other shapes.other of monuments on arved “dogmatic sarcophagus” from the the from sarcophagus” “dogmatic common are simple crosses, either crosses, simple are common an anchor (no. 39, fig. 42; no. 61, 61, no. 42; fig. 39, (no. anchor an y-three crosses in various shapes, various in crosses y-three 107 The swastika appears in bas in appears swastika The second group of motifs. The motifs. of group second t the very beginning of the the of beginning very the t ears just once (no. 81) in in 81) (no. once just ears or lunar symbol. It has It symbol. lunar or Europe from the the from Europe les that appear appear les that CEU eTD Collection of area the between similarity a is there area, Žabljak r is which swastika, symbols,the including cross offrequency higha true. not was that shown of creators as cross) the recognize not did they that believed on rare are crosses that considered regiother with comparison in high quite is Žabljak of area the in symbols. solar/astral all to attributed usually as beings human and nature of death and life the appearance, new and seasons four symbolically representing perhaps times, four appears usually also is circle a in cross A 2-7). (fig. warrior a of (length equal of arms with crosses four are there Mramor) ŽugiBare a of shape the in ending arms upper three with cross a is other the 54 fig. 79, (no. arm lower its of end the on libations) for (perhaps hollow other any this from crosses of representations Two rounded. bit a is arm upper highfig. –Novakovi trunk (no. 63, 22 Milan. in Ambrogio San of basilica 90, Fine argues against the Bogomil hypothesis. hypothesis. Bogomil the against Fine argues 90, (Belg Church) Bosnian Heretical the and (Christians s subject that on work recent most the As Bogumils. Sarajevu u muzeja Zemaljskog 110 109 1964). Hudson, 108 lkadr oojv “eu i ooii otvl k postovali Bogomili li “Jesu Solovjev, Aleksandar Lovrenovi Panofsky, Ervin In one case (no. 74, fig. 25 – Novakovi– 25 fig. 74, (no. case one In ste ć ć a). These motifs are unique in in unique are motifs These a). 2009, 63-71. 63-71. 2009, ć ci monuments were found in Novakovi in found were monuments ob cltr, t Cagn Apcs rm nin E Ancient from Aspects Changing Its Sculpture, Tomb 110 , .. 14) ad te wrs y h sm author same the by works other and (1948), n.s. 3, Crosses appear in every region on such monuments. Concerning suchConcerning monuments. such on region every in appear Crosses

108 ste ć A swastika (swastika A i) together with a with crescent, the same within composition. i) together ć ci in order to attribute them to the Bogomils (it was was (it Bogomils the to them attribute to order in rade. Serbian Academy of Science and Arts, 1987); F 1987); Arts, and Science of Academy Serbian rade. ee: Dragoljub Dragojlovic, Dragojlovic, Dragoljub ee: 109 ste The number of crosses (33) found on tombstones on found (33) crosses of number The 40 ć rst?” (Did the Bogomils Recognize the Cross?). Cross?). the Recognize Bogomils the (Did rst?” ć i) there is a representation of a of representation a is there i) ci

r. n h cossae mnmn (Bijeli monument cross-shaped the On art. crux gammatacrux ć i and Bare ŽugiBare and i recognized as a solar symbol. Here it it Here symbol. solar a as recognized crux immissacrux Žabljak and western Herzegovina, Herzegovina, western and Žabljak ste yt o Bernini to gypt ć ons. In the older literature it was it literature older Inthe ons. ci ) appears definitely once, on a on once, definitely appears ) crescent (no. 61, fig. 50-51 – 50-51 fig. 61, (no. crescent , but later investigations have have investigations later but , Krstjani i jeretii Krstjani are at other sites close to the to close sites other areat in a year, meaning descend descend meaning year, a in area that do not appear on appear not do that area well. This is the meaning meaning the is This well. Slve atiue ste attributed Solovjev . ć ) surrounding the image image the surrounding ) a: one is a cross with a with cross a is one a: -55 – Bare ŽugiBare – -55 (London: Thames and and Thames (London: crux ansata crux č ka crkva bosanska bosanska crkva ka ć ine 1975: ine a), and a), Glasnik Glasnik – its – ć ci to to ci

CEU eTD Collection cross symbol. monuments all of 30% about where region, Imotski the with especially above the swastika on the eastern side of the monument. At Bare Žu Bare At monument. the of side eastern the on swastika the above some otherbeing function thanlibations. for monument a of Žugi side upper the Bare on are hollows 53– usually because fig.exceptional 75, (no. tombstone pseudo-sarcophagus a of side the Novakovi– 31 fig. 83, (no. trunks of side upper the on reliefs 111 ŽugiBare 112 Žugi on heraldry, heraldry incomplete here probably symbolis Christian of part a definitely is it origin, Christian The resurrection.and here. death of symbol a as present accepted are cases both and cross, with combination in or star in common is relief bas in crescent (fig 60 no. trunk of side upper the on star a with together represented below cross a with together relief, bas in is it 39 no. of side upper Lovre KatiLovre Bešlagi ste ć a). The star was made in bas relief as well as the cresc the as well as relief bas in made was star The a). ć ci The crescent appears once at Novakoviat once appears crescent The A circle is often recognized as a symbolic presentation of t of presentation symbolic a as recognized often is circle A The star (similar or identical symbol to a rosette) is a par a is rosette) a to symbol identical or (similar star The ć monuments. It occurs only once, in combination with a crescent (no. 60, fi 60, (no. crescent a with combination in once, only occurs It monuments. 1982, 166-168; Wenzel 1965, 143. 143. 1965, Wenzel 166-168; 1982, ć a (no. 50, fig. 46). Three circles, in fact more hollow concavities ( concavities hollow more fact in circles, Three 46). fig. 50, (no. a ć , “Ste , 111

ć ci u Imotskoj Krajini” (Ste Krajini” uImotskoj ci

ste ć ć ci ci in Imotska Krajina), Krajina), in ci Imotska . On . .

41 ste 112 ć i (no. 63, fig 20, 22). It is appears in bas relief relief bas in appears is It 22). 20, fig 63, (no. i

ć Although this symbolism has an ancient, pre- ancient, an has symbolism this Although ci , a crescent usually appears together with a with together appears usually crescent a , m as well, and also part of medieval medieval of part also and well, as m Starohrvatska prosvijetaStarohrvatska ent beside it, so they compose one one compose they so it, beside ent ć i), and once on the high trunk in in trunk high the on once and i), t of astral symbolism appearing symbolism astral of t he sun. It appears twice in bas bas in twice appears It sun. he a crescent (fig. 42). It is also is It 42). (fig. crescent a gi ć . 49). Representation of a of Representation 49). . a it appears twice. On the the On twice. appears it a have some variant of the of variant some have , so maybe they had had they maybe so , crescent is widely widely is crescent kamenica ć a). This case is is case This a). 3 (1954): 131-182. 131-182. (1954): 3 g. 49 – Bare – 49 g. ), are on are ), CEU eTD Collection God.symbol of light, namely, to similar is star a of meaning symbolic The unit. integral and Novakovi in arrow does appear not Dro the traders, engrave an Whysuch North. the furtherto Dubrovnik fromgoods transporting same the by used and road same the by connected is suchwith a this a motif, appear not high whichatlocality. any does number other ŽugiBare ( of symbol same thehave them of nine monuments Pljevlja Amongthirty situation. near Šuma Marina in Žabljak, from far not also found, data Herzegovina eastern in Stolac near Boljuni and Polje Popovo like Žabljak, wi sites the All alone. representations are half and tournament, a some within are which of half hundred, one about is sites all from number Žugi Novakoviand rare is motif this general, In 44-45). fig. 49, no. 48, (no. cm 20 – 15 t close engraved always times, seven appears it Here arrow. and d ŽugiBare in rather different is is situation scene whole The 17-18). fig. 49, (no. hands (warrior’s) hunter’s ther motif this Novakovi Regarding it. in arrow an with strung, is bow the with sites 115 114 113 Beloševac 1999, 99 -143. -143. 99 1999, Beloševac Bešlagi Bešlagi ć a are among the biggest three cemeteries with with cemeteries three biggest the among are a Weapons are relatively frequent motifs in the area of Žabljak i Žabljak of area the in motifs frequent relatively are Weapons I i iprat o eto ta tee w sts Br Žugi Bare sites, two these that mention to important is It ć ć 1982, 234-235. 234-235. 1982, 143. 1965, Wenzel 170-171; 1982, ć ć ste ad ae Žugi Bare and i a, also engraved and of the same size.same the of and engraved also a, ć ci . The most frequent is the motif of a bow and arrow, which appears ei appears which arrow, and bow a of motif the is frequent most The . ć . n Novakovi In a.

113

ć ć i is an open question. question. an is open i a. There it is always presented alone as a motif of a bow bow a of motif a as alone alwayspresented is it There a. ć i i son n see f utn de, n the in deer, hunting of scene a in shown is it i 42 115

In comparison with all the other the all with comparison In ste ć ci ht ae uh smo. h total The symbol. a such have that ht f h sn i i cniee a considered is it sun; the of that o the same size of approximately of size same the o th this motif are not far from far not are motif this th ć ad aia ua were Šuma, Marina and a e is a difference between between difference a is e n comparison with other with comparison n bnjaci clan, who were were who clan, bnjaci one in bas-relief. The The bas-relief. in one scene, like hunting or or hunting like scene, Map 2), confirm this this confirm 2), Map a bow and arrow as in in as arrow and bow a . 114 d symbol of a bow bow a of symbol d The most recent most The ć ste i and Bare Bare and i ght times; times; ght ć ci sites CEU eTD Collection

case In construction. wooden of sort some imitated apparently they fig. 1-2 – dislocated; no. 18, fig. 15 – Novakovi– 15 fig. 18, no. dislocated; – 1-2 fig. time three appear stone in made boards of imitation an with Tombstones 3 n. 1 fg 2-3 n. 2 fg 2 – Novakovi – 29 fig. 82, no. 22-23; fig. 71, no. 13; ( trunks and trunks, high pseudo-sarcophaguses, on appear also that pillars n the from then place, first the in pseudo-sarcophagus the of shape the a represent symbolically motifs architectural because probably the of blood twoopponents. m of ritual a in sacrifice blood a for recipient a was it that probably (libation), sacrifice liquid a for recipient a as function 118 117 116 Žugi asrecognized and a nobility. symbol mostlyas is a of sign knighthood a and crossguard plain a has sword the cases, all In 48). fig. 53, (no. Novakovi 6 no. on and 3-7) (fig. Mramor Bijeli in monument cross-shaped the on for shield a considered Novakovi usually side, upper its on lance a for place a called Incasesfour times. appearsfive shield A head. hunter’s the scene,on Bešlagi Lovrenovi Bešlagi ć a). Here the hollow is at the end of a lower arm of a cross, whic cross, a of arm lower a of end the at is hollow the Here a). scutus bosniensisscutus rhtcua mtf nvr per n lb o cossae monument cross-shaped or slabs on appear never motifs Architectural The hollow concavity appears once on the upper side of a trunk (no. 79, fig. 54 fig. 79, (no. trunk a of side upper the on once appears concavity hollow The Novakovi– 49 (no. once represented is plume) a (with helmet A ć ć 1982, 56. 56. 1982, 225-229. 1982, ć ć i. A sword alone is represented once on the upper side of a high trunk at trunk high a of side upper the on once represented is alone sword A i. combinati in times four the of three times, four appears sword A i). ć 2009, 62. 62. 2009, , also typical for tombstones in Herzegovina. in tombstones also typical for , 118

43 ć

i; no. 33, fig. 40 – Bare ŽugiBare – 40 fig. 33, no. i; ć , n n. 0 fg 4-7 Br Žugi Bare – 46-47 fig. 50, no. and i, aking peace over the grave by mixing mixing by grave the over peace aking building. This is apparent from from apparent is This building. wine. There are some theories theories some are There wine. 116 s from Bosnia it is apparent apparent is it Bosnia from s round pommel. The sword sword The pommel. round , it is a four-cornered shield shield four-cornered a is it , 117 h seems to indicate a ritual a indicate to seems h In one case the shield hasIn shield case the one

s (one in Bijeli Mramor, Mramor, Bijeli in (one s ć and no. 82 (fig. 30) in in 30) (fig. 82 no. and i), as part of a hunting hunting a of part as i), no. 3, fig. 9; no. 7, fig. fig. 7, no. 9; fig. 3, no. oraet n. – 6 (no. tournament umerous arcades and and arcades umerous on with a shield, a with on ć a). Such motifs motifs Such a). s and pillars, pillars, and s Bare ŽugiBare -55 – Bare – -55 ć a). a). ć a a CEU eTD Collection deceased. the of portraits fact in are representations Novakovi – 17 fig. 49, (no. once only represented is Novakovi – 12 fig. 6, no. and 3-7, fig. Mramor, cr the (on twice represented is shield and sword a with (warrior) thosestone. made to similar of were constructions wooden that indicating as interpreted been has stone 2).Map (see distance geographical the of because Biteli krajina, Cetinska in found also are gravestones same i are discs those that hypothesis a is There ark. an of middle three usually disks, are unexplained, still but Interesting, ark. an are r casesthey these in but roofs), have houses (they that theywooden imitate devi meaning forces, evil from directly either him endanger could Ages. Middle the since rites w been has hand bare a of role the and importance The represented. is hand on common fairly is motif a Such hand. enlarged the almos warrior a of body the and damaged too was monument the it, saw Bešlagi Šefik by made scene, the front in shield the and sword the hold not does it and enlargedextremely Novakovi 121 Ze Rasa oblasti 120 119 122 Bešlagi Skari Miloševi Traian Stoianovich, Stoianovich, Traian č evi ć , , ć Figural representations are the third group of motifs on steon motifs of group third the are representations Figural Kult mrtvih kod Srba kod mrtvih Kult , 1928, 141-144; Bešlagi 141-144; 1928, , ć 1982, 310-314; Lovrenovi 310-314; 1982, ć ć (Medieval Tombstones in the Area of Ras) (Belgrade Ras) of Area the in Tombstones (Medieval 1991, 40-41. 40-41. 1991, (o 6 fg 1) s atclry neetn bcue h warri the because interesting particularly is 12) fig. 6, (no. i Balkan Worlds Balkan (The Cult of Dead in Serbian Culture) (Belgrade: E (Belgrade: Culture) in Serbian Dead of Cult (The 122 ć

. 1982, 120-121, 377; Jelena Erdeljan, Erdeljan, Jelena 377; 120-121, 1982, . 120 Its purpose is to protect the deceased from all kinds of evil that evil of kinds all from deceased the protect to is purpose Its (Armonk, London: M. E. Sharpe, 1994); Erdeljan 199 Erdeljan 1994); Sharpe, E. London:M. (Armonk, ć 2009, 82-86. 82-86. 2009,

ć , does not show exactly the real situation on the spot. When I When spot. the on situation real the exactly show not does , 44 ć i). A man as a deer hunter with a bow and arrow and bow a with hunter deer a as man A i).

119 The imitation of wooden constructions in constructions wooden of imitation The ste ć 121 : Arheološki Institut, 1996), 113-140; Slobodan Slobodan 113-140; 1996), Institut, Arheološki : i). Scholars sometimes infer that such such that infer sometimes Scholars i). ć h rpeetto o a aro in warrior a of representation The ci ; sometimes only the enlarged bare enlarged the only sometimes ; ć n fact ritual loaves of bread. The The bread. of loaves ritual fact n Srednjovekovni nadgrobni spomenici u u spomenici nadgrobni Srednjovekovni (Croatia), which is a curiosity curiosity a is which (Croatia), of them that appear across the across appear that them of oss-shaped monument in Bijeli in monument oss-shaped ć ci in the Žabljak area. A man A area. Žabljak the in ci tnografski muzej, 1982), 65 – 71. – 71. 65 1982), muzej, tnografski s o fo mn h could who men from or ls, of him. This drawing of drawingof This him. of t unrecognizable, except except unrecognizable, t ae bv graves above made ell known in funeral in known ell 6: 143. 143. 6: or’s right hand is is hand right or’s ather some kind of of some kind ather

CEU eTD Collection itself tombstone the in settled was that soul person’s deceased was belief popular The crescents. and (stars) rosettes crosses, nowadays. even Balkans western the of parts some in flags funeral text of made hands Such well. as tombstones medieval on appear symbols from protection a as swords and sickles, roosters, eyes, hands, stars, of symbols with necklaces wear to used girls village Slavic the recently, Until eye. evil the with especially him endanger protective be should motifs decorative function the even primary scholars some to their According consideration. probably as symbols of function sym protective the even or function, protective a has it revenge, for calling was stone beneaththe person the that means one enlarged an or alonehand expla other some also are There glasses. even or tools weapons, holding 126 125 124 uBeogradu muzeja Etnografskog 123 Žugi appears also deer A allegorical. also be may which scene, hunting damned me.” who wouldtouch bones…” my disturb “Don’t like: epitaphs have them of many inscriptions, afterli the in on found inscriptions disturbed being of fear a was there That unique. and Novakovi in (fig.10) 4 no. borderon Bešlagi 1996,123. Erdeljan Bešlagi Kosti P. ć a; the scenes are engraved, not bas reliefs as the one at Novakovi at one the as reliefs bas not engraved, are scenes the a; ht h rpeettos f aros r i fc prris is portraits fact in are warriors of representations the That ć ć ć 1982, 422, 422, 444-445. 1982, 296. 1982,

, “Obi , ucin smoial rpeetn poetv eyes. protective representing symbolically function, č aj postavljanja zastava na grob” (The Funeral Custo Funeral (The grob” na zastava postavljanja aj ste ć ci . Although among almost 70,000 monuments only 384 (0.55%) have have (0.55%) 384 only monuments 70,000 almost among Although . 33 (1970): 20, 27. 27. 20, (1970): 33

126

ć i, made of half-volutes with wreaths (circles), is interesting is wreaths(circles), with half-volutesof made i, 45

m of Putting a Flag over a Grave), Grave), a over Flag a Putting of m power such as: crosses, swastikas, swastikas, crosses, as: such power . beginning of 1990s, many south- many 1990s, of beginning that such a hand represents the the represents hand a such that 123 125 In other cases such hands are hands such cases other In They occur together with the with together occur They eadn ti ter, the theory, this Regarding on no. 83 and no. 49 at Bare at 49 no. and 83 no. on usinbe o te deer- the for questionable the evil eye. Many of these these of Many eye. evil the o o knighthood. of bol ć fe is testified to by the the by to testified is fe i. Besides the deer there there deer the Besides i. like volutes have such such have volutes like nations, such as that a that as such nations, murdered; the hand ishand murdered;the l ae u o the on put are ile or “Let him be be him “Let or ae in taken 124 Glasnik Glasnik The CEU eTD Collection century. scholars. ago years hundred a (about recently until alive were rite funeral Som funeral. duringgraveyard afterdanced the at the or dead,” dead” “forthe or so-called the rite, funeral a as Church the by forbidden been have turnedbecause onthatside. was over tombstone the easthe because verified becannot idea this deer, a and arrow and bow the and deer the hunting between connection some be might there that suppose to interesting the leading fact Bešlagi Šefik by described was but in is monument This together. dancing women and men with mixed, is 58), BešlagiŠefik by made photo the from known tur been has tombstone the that fact the to owing seen be cannot scene the dance, the hunterreduced himself. a bow and symbol arrow –the may symbolize to this in pattern, some is there If 37). (fig. arrow with bow a is 128 127 Sources), Sources), 129 376. (1966), Jugoslavije folklorista Ze Slobodan 6-8; Veselin Bešlagi András Kubinyi, “Kés Kubinyi, András Concerning the motif of the of motif the Concerning It is interesting that on the both of the monuments there is also is there monuments the of both the on that interesting is It 129 Opuscula Hungarica Opuscula ć 128 Č 1973, 121-122. 121-122. 1973,

ajkanovi kolo uh acs ee lo obde b te hrh n ugr i te fifte the in Hungary in Church the by forbidden also were dances Such č . On no. 49 (fig. 36) it is a female kolo with five figures in bas re bas in figures five with kolo female a is it 36) (fig. 49 no. On . evi kolo ć ć , “Svekrva na tavanu” (Mother-in-Law in the Garret) the in (Mother-in-Law tavanu” na “Svekrva , , “Igre naseg posmrtnog rituala” (The Dances of Our of Dances (The rituala” posmrtnog naseg “Igre , ı Sc a cn i kon rm te lclte with localities other from known is scene a Such . k ı zépkori temetkezések a t a temetkezések zépkori kolo 6 (2005): 13-18. 13-18. (2005): 6 . At NovakoviAt .

ć . kolo 127 On no. 83, Šefik BešlagiŠefik 83, no. On on steon ć i (no. 49), where is also a scene with a hunter with a a with hunter a with scene a also is where 49), (no. i ı ć rténeti forrásokban” (Late Medieval Burials in the the in Burials Medieval (Late forrásokban” rténeti in 1967. The other scene of a of scene other The 1967. in 46 ć ci, it is well known from medieval sources to to sources medieval from known well is it ci,

simplified scene the hunter may be be may hunter the scene simplified , , Funeral Rite). Rad XI Kongresa Saveza Saveza Kongresa XI Rad Rite). Funeral Glasnik Etnografskog muzeja Etnografskog Glasnik ć noted a man riding a deer, in deer, a riding man a noted , rte dw b several by down written ), mrtva tern side is not visible now visible not is side tern a scene of the traditional traditional the of scene a these two: the scene of of scene the two: these ned over. The scene is is scene The over. ned č ko koloko poor condition now, condition poor ste kolo ć e remains of that e that remains of ci on no. 83 (fig. (fig. 83 no. on s el i is it well; as lief. Now that that Now lief. ,

“ kolo 6 (1931): 6 Historical Historical of the the of enth CEU eTD Collection

133 132 71-74. 131 muzeja 130 that noticed been has It hunter). (the death by struck itself soul th that be might explanation possible the pattern, a such Following known. Merovingian on deer a of Representations horns. deer get to had himself a of importance an such to Owing culture. popular in creature divine a tradit medieval, post and medieval later, Theafter-life. the into a is deer The Cernunos. god the as also, tradition Celtic Greco in present was deer-god a Anatolia, from originally Probably besi symbol swastika a with deer a of representation prehistoric ri funeral and fertility of cults prehistoric in role important an ref hypothesis Another occasion. any on not performed are do and character dances such Nowadays cult. funeral the with connected occasions ( “ dance” the called dance folk of type a for name recent more the in even the Mother of God is. wi garden the to west, the towards running chaseddeer a about legends on scenes hunting amongst frequent most the is scene the at placed is it although east), (the hunter the facing is deer wes the towards running is deer a cases most the In fallen. or dead Bešlagi Lovrenovi Srejovi Dragoslav Istorija Crne GoreCrne Istorija 18 (1955): 231-232. 231-232. (1955): 18 The symbolism of a deer on deer a of symbolism The There was often some connection between the the between connection some often was There ć eeoo koloJelenovo 1982, 327-329. 327-329. 1982, ć 2009, 79. 79. 2009, ć (The History of Montenegro), vol. 1, no. 1 (Titogr 1 no. 1, vol. Montenegro), of History (The “ee u ai nrdi obi narodnim našim u “Jelen , 132 and

No

ć o kolono ste ć ), which used to be danced only at night and only on on only and night at only danced be to used which ), ci is a special question. It is considered that deer played played deer that considered is It question. special a is č ajima” (Deer in Our Folk Customs), Customs), Folk Our in (Deer ajima” 47

kolo ste psychopompos ć and the deer on on deer the and ci ad: Redakcija za istoriju Crne Gore, 1967), 1967), Gore, Crne istoriju za Redakcija ad: , and it may be seen in medieval medieval in seen be may it and , ion confirms the influence of such such of influence the confirms ion western part of monument. This This monument. of part western on des it at Lipci in Montenegro. in Lipci at it des tes. ste 130 t. On no.49 in Novakovi in no.49 On t. ć -Roman mythology and in in and mythology -Roman n hs ein tee s a is there region, this In ci deer’s dance” and “night “night and dance” deer’s th the spring of life where where life of spring the th et te tiueta the that attitude the lects – the leader of the soul soul the of leader the – the deer in fact is never never is fact in deer the ergd ee Christ even deer-god, e deer symbolizes the symbolizes deer e sarcophagi are well well are sarcophagi ste Glasnik Etnografskog Etnografskog Glasnik ae n cultic any have ć ci . 133 It is seen is It ć i a i 131

CEU eTD Collection regions with mor is area Žabljak a the in appear Bosnia that motifs other in of frequency between, in sites numerous are there because enigmatic Cr in region Imotski the than closer sites at exist not does which He western of region Imotski the with area this relates it and Biteli from known is parallel Novakovi B at monument dislocated 1-2, (fig. side upper its on boards of imitation ra quite is it Serbia and Serbia.of whole the for representations Bosnia in and frequent so not is motif this w in highest the Pljevlja) near Šuma Marina site the (including are asat well. other localities known medieval late of part are monument, dislocated Novakovi for of inhabitants thethese medieval areas. fact in what dubious remained it and times, recent more from data recreation.favorite their t from scene a simply than more nothing is deer a hunting of scene 137 136 135 134 Miloševi Bešlagi Ze Bešlagi č evi Specific to these cemeteries is the high frequency of a bow a bow a of frequency high the is cemeteries these to Specific n eea, codn t ter ois h mdea cemeterie medieval the motifs their to according general, In ć ć ć 2005, 65. 65. 2005, 1982, 374-375. 374-375. 1982, 257. 1965: Wenzel, 338-341; 1982, ć ć ć 1991, 41. 41. 1991, ) s lo neetn. ic ti i a oi priua for particular motif a is this Since interesting. also is i) , ae Žugi Bare i, ste ć ci . ć 134 ad h st o Bjl Mao, ih n cossae ad one and cross-shaped one with Mramor, Bijeli of site the and a However, many of these explanations were based on ethnographic on based were explanations these of many However, ć

(Croatia). 135 137 A trunk from Novakovi from trunk A The frequency of the cross motif is also significant also is motif cross the of frequency The 48 ste

ć ci art. All of the motifs present on these sites sites these on present motifs the of All art. zgvn, s os h swastika, the does as rzegovina, hole e or less the same as the other the as same the less or e ć such symbolism really meant meant really symbolism such i and Bijeli Mramor, with the with Mramor, Bijeli and i oatia. This relation is a bit bit a is relation This oatia. ste he daily life of noblemen, noblemen, of life daily he s in the area of Žabljak: Žabljak: of area the in s Montenegro, nd arrow motif, which is is which motif, arrow nd ć ijeli Mramor and fig. 15, 15, fig. andMramor ijeli ci d ezgvn. The Herzegovina. nd e wt ol twelve only with re, Herzegovina In area. 136 t only its CEU eTD Collection

form.” specific e show ato society “much likely more aare members community of mate of sets those Conversely, messages. stylistic any carry comm a of members to visible is artefact an less The community. people enable statutes and of ranks a matrix within status They or rank of their broadcast the uniqueness differentiation. social of process to support give styl me However, ideology. common stylistic certain a and such norms social Wobst to compliance Martin H. to According understand. could people shape size, their through expressed message stylistic the was to visible easily them make to was monuments these made who people orna rich very sometimes and position dominant usually size, their to ste between gap the to due it about knowledge confident more some 139 138 archaeological of medievalthe in westernBal excavations cemeteries grave, the w within stone was one smaller at least grave was there absent, “satisfied.” being deceased the keeping for rituals certain t with community of corresponding the for object an also was It people. H. Martin Wobst, “Stylistic Behaviour and Informat and Behaviour “Stylistic Wobst, Martin H. 115. 1996, Erdeljan 139 oee, epr nih it smoim f ste of symbolism into insight deeper However, importa great of was itself tombstone the that mentioned be should It

ion Exchange,” Exchange,” ion 49

ć i s ad ak I i ipoal t get to improbable is It task. hard is ci Anthropological Papers Anthropological Even when the tombstone above the the above tombstone the when Even , ornaments and position that those that position and ornaments , rial culture that are visible to all all to visible are that culture rial unity, the less probable it is to is it probable less the unity, ć kans. ci and our time. According According time. our and ci hich has been shown by has shown by been hich the local community. It community. local the ments, the intention of of intention the ments, 138 he deceased, meaning deceased, he xpression of stylistic of stylistic xpression to “summarize and and “summarize to

si msae also messages istic 61 (1977): 317-337. 317-337. (1977): 61 nce for medieval medieval for nce ssages convey convey ssages ” within their their ” within CEU eTD Collection

Shape Shape ilr 1 1 1 15 Pillar 39 40 shaped 9 Cross – 22 30 roof double with 6 sarcophagus 16 10 Pseudo- sarcophagus 1 Pseudo- trunk High Trunk Slab Table 1. Mramor Bijeli Bijeli 1 1 6 15 6 9 Ste ć ci 50

Novakovi shapes at different sites. shapes at different sites.

2 ć Bare Žugi i 3

ć a Total Total a 5

CEU eTD Collection

ie 3 2 32 1 23 2 1 3 2 2 30 3 1 21 4 Vine 1 5 Zigzag 1 2 “rope” 1 concavity 1 2 “kamenica” 1 Pseudo - board 1 3 2 24 1 Deer hunt 1 Dance 2 Warrior 5 3 Helmet Sword 2 6 Shield 1 arrow 1 and Bow 13 Rosette/Star Crescent Cross oi Novakovi Motif

Table 2. 1 3 1 1 1 8 7 1 1 1 Ste ć ć ci Bare Žugi i motifs at different motifs sites. 51

ć a Bijeli Mramor Bijeli a

Total Total CEU eTD Collection

52

CEU eTD Collection

53

CEU eTD Collection

diinly upre, ih w mr seies Atog i ws nw that known was it Although specimens. more two with supported, additionally that work my Through Montenegro. northern in these from apart parallels Miloševi clearrelat some they have Nevertheless, 2). Map and 1 (seeMap central the to belong not do localities these fact, In them. other many with kilometers), 350 (about other each from distant are ŽugiBare road medieval same Also, area. Žabljak to close relatively is that Pljevlja near Nikši from those to close are motifs ste ste decorative motifs. These now. until literature discusse been not have which monuments Mramor), (Bijeli region the from presented also have I Žabljak. of town the of vicinity the in them h cmtre o Novakovi of cemeteries The in monuments these discuss to and Montenegro in cemeteries medieval ć ć ci ci . I have noticed, surveying through many other localities with with localities other many through surveying noticed, have I . w motifs and shape their in correlations potential find to and occur The potential links with Cetinska Krajina (Croatia) are also int also are (Croatia) Krajina Cetinska with links potential The within monuments these place to also was thesis this of aim The The intention of this research was to present the relevant archae relevant the present to was research this of intention The ć a ntcd priua ye f lb ht e on i Biteli in found he that slab of type particular a noticed has ć a. Via Jesera or Via Anagasti Anagasti Via or Jesera Via ć ste ad ae Žugi Bare and i ć ci ć r priual itrsig eas o ter hp and shape their of because interesting particularly are and Pljevlja (both in Montenegro). Marina Šuma is located is Šuma Marina Montenegro). in (both Pljevlja and CONCLUSION CONCLUSION 54 ć ae iutd n oten otngo bt of both Montenegro, northern in situated are a

s r te w cmtre i Novakovi in cemeteries two the are as

ste Nikši ć ci area, but to the area of influence influence of area the to but area, ć and Pljevlja are situated by the the by situated are Pljevlja and ions. The Croatian scholar Antescholar Croatian The ions. and discussed two other other two discussed and ste ste ć riguing. These localities localities These riguing. (Croatia) has no other other no has (Croatia) ological data from two two from data ological ć their regional context. context. regional their ć ith other regions with with regions other ith ci the whole area where where area whole the ci hypothesis has been been has hypothesis that the decorative decorative the that graveyards among among graveyards i te scholarly the in d such a type of of type a such ć ste i and and i ć ci

CEU eTD Collection to beto directtw erroneous, revealed since examples influence thebetween these t was opinion That areas. neighbouring in merely found be to have motifs certainly migration. if not cultural interaction, hy the supports study My past. the in regions these between part took Miloševi areas. two these between relation direct third the be Miloševi to according which (Croatia), Krajina Cetinska steunique moti cross of percentage higher the is That Croatia. in Krajina northern of regions two these between similarity additional an noted ste with sites other Žugi area. of numbersgreat since necessary methodology monum every of position precise the with cemeteries, both for photos and thatperiodin of the Ages Middle of the in territorythe westernBalkans. common but unique a represent They wealth. and status social someone’s group. ethnic or religious Bešlagi Šefik and Fine A. V. John with agree 140 Miloševi ć ak ć a than the number of number the than a exsisted in Nikši in exsisted The general attitude in scholarly literature is that all the i the all that is literature scholarly in attitude general The t s o e xetd ht hr ae osdrby oe rvs i graves more considerably are there that expected be to is It wi catalogues and maps plans, situational made have I addition, In Concerning the question of attributing Concerning the question ć ć 1991, 44. 44. 1991, ak no. 22 (fig. 38-39) from Bare ŽugiBare from 38-39) (fig. 22 no. ak ste ć ci . Until now the region of Montenegro has been omitted from any serious any from omitted been has Montenegro of region the now Until . ć , INovakovi, found type in the same ste Ste

ć ci ć ci indicates. Archaeology has already shown this situation at t at situation this shown already has Archaeology indicates. ee is ad oeot h smoi rpeettos of representations symbolic the foremost and first were ste 55 ste ć ć ć

ci ć : They cannot be ascribed to any particular particular any to ascribed be cannot They : a is also quite similar to the one from Lufrom one the to similar quite also is a ci to some particular religious or ethnic group I group ethnic some particular religiousor to are vanishing rapidly from the whole the from rapidly vanishing are ć is “an isolated example.” isolated “an is ć i and Bijeli Mramor. Furthermore, IBijeli Mramor. andi Furthermore, ć ’s hypothesis was that a migration a that was hypothesis ’s fs than in the other areas. The The areas. other the in than fs nfluences on nfluences Montenegro and Cetinska Cetinska and Montenegro Novakovin ohss ht hr was there that pothesis th detailed descriptions descriptions detailed th ested here, and shown shown and here, ested ent found. I find such such find I found. ent cultural phenomenon cultural o distant areaso distant ste ć ci ć 140 shapes and and shapes i and Bare Bare and i It would It ste č . ani, ć he ci

CEU eTD Collection getting better coherent a and picture more of of investigation ste ć ci . My belief is that spatial investigations like this one can be be can one this like investigations spatial that is belief My . ste 56 ć ci

occurrences Montenegro. in helpful in in helpful CEU eTD Collection

Ć Benedict. Curipeschitz, ______. ______. ______. ______. “Ste______. ______. ______. Bešlagi ______. ______. ______. Benac, Alojz. Laws.”InBak, Central “Signs in European of János. Conversion Andjeli irkovi ć Jurisichitz durch Bosnien, Serbien, Bulgarien nach Konstantinopel durchJurisichitz Bosnien, Konstantinopel Serbien, Bulgariennach State). zadruga, Belgrade:književna Srpska 1964. rijetkosti Narodne 1962 rijetkosti Bosne Hercegovine, Republike i umjetnosti, 1959. umjetnosti, Narodne Hercegovine,Bosne i 1954. Republike muzeja uBeogradu Masleša,Overview). Veselin 1971. Sarajevo: 1982. Brepols, 2000. Converting Individuals 171. Arnautovi in Kings Bosnian ć ć , Šefik. , Šefik. , Pavao. “Grobovi bosanskih kraljeva u Arnautoviu kraljeva bosanskih “Grobovi Pavao. , , Sima. Sima. , Ste Kupres Ste BrijegŠiroki Olovo Ste Ste Ste Kalinovik Radimlja ć ć ć ć ć Leksikon steLeksikon ci Centralne Bosneci Centralne ci ci na Blidinju Blidinju na ci ci – kultura i umjetnost umjetnost i kultura – ci ć i Ktlšo tpgasi pregled topografski – Kataloško ci. soia rdjveon bsnk države bosanske srednjovjekovne Istorija ci u okolini Žabljaka” (SteŽabljaka” okolini u ci . Belgrade: Prosveta,. Belgrade: 1963. . Beograd: Savezni institute za spomenika za kulture, institute zaštitu Savezni . Beograd: 1951. . Sarajevo: Zemaljski zavod za zaštitu spomenika culture i prirodnih rijetkosti rijetkosti prirodnih spomenikai culture zaštitu za Zemaljskizavod . Sarajevo: . Sarajevo: Zemaljski zavod za zaštitu spomenika culture i prirodnih prirodnih i culture spomenika zaštitu za zavod Zemaljski Sarajevo: . . Sarajevo: Zemaljski. Sarajevo: 1950. muzej, . Sarajevo: Zemaljski. Sarajevo: 1952. muzej, tnrru dr oshfrie e Jsp v Lmeg n Nicolas und Lamberg v. Joseph des Botschaftreise der Itinerarium 36 (1973): 111–138. 36 (1973): ć aka , ed. Guyda Armstrong and Ian N. Wood,115-124.Tumhout: , ed. GuydaIan Armstrong and N. Wood,115-124.Tumhout: (Ste (Ste ć (Ste ć ci in Blidinje). Zagreb: Jugoslavenska akademija znanosti i i znanosti akademija Jugoslavenska Zagreb: Blidinje). in ci i near Visoko). near i ć BIBLIOGRAPHY ci, the Lexicon).ci, Svjetlost, the2004. Sarajevo: ć ci in Central Bosnia). Sarajevo: Veselin Bosnia). Masleša,ci Central in 1982. Sarajevo: (Ste ć ć ci in the Area of Žabljak). Žabljak). of Area the in ci 57 ci, Culture and Art). Sarajevo: Veselin Masleša, Masleša, Veselin Sarajevo: Art). and Culture ci,

Glasnik Zemaljskog muzeja Zemaljskog Glasnik (Ste ć ć ima kod Visokog (The Graves of the the of Graves (The Visokog kod ima (History of the Medieval Bosnian Bosnian Medieval the of (History ci, the Catalogue and Topographic Topographic and Catalogue the ci, Christianizing Peoples and Christianizing 1530. Insbruck,1530. 1910. Glasnik Etnografskog Glasnik 19

(1962): 165- (1962): CEU eTD Collection Kati Karan, Miljenko. Tit II). – I Montenegro of (History II. – I Gore Crne Istorija De toward Attitudes and Gravestones “American James. A. Hijiya, Hašimbegovi Hadžijahi ______. ______. ______. ______. A. V. John Fine, Dragojlovi Č ______. ______. ajkanovi ć , Lovre. “SteLovre. , (1954): 131-182. Gore, 1967. Proceedings Society the Philophical of American European University, 2002. Skari Quarterly,Boulder, byDistributed University Columbia Press, 1975. Ottoman Conquest muzeja Place in State and Society from the 13the from Society and State in Place The 2006. University of Michigan Press, PeriodsEarly-Modern Medievaland the in Slavonia and Dalmatia, Croatia, 2007. Interpretation New A Centuries: BosnianScience Serbian Belgrade: Arts, Academy Church). 1987. of and MedievalHermits.Belgrade: Societies 1997. of Balkans). the Equilibrium, Century ć ć Mhmd “rlg Skari “Prilog Muhamed. , ć Rabotnici, vojnici, duhovnici. Društva srednjovekovnog Balkanasrednjovekovnog Društva duhovnici. vojnici, Rabotnici, When Ethnicity Did Not Matter in the Balkans. A Study of Identity in in Identity of Study A Balkans. the in Matter Not Did Ethnicity When Attic). the in (Mother-in-Law tavanu” na “Svekrva Veselin. , The Bosnian Church: A New Interpretation. A Study of the Bosnian Church and Its Its and Church Bosnian the of Study A Interpretation. New A Church: Bosnian The Twelft Late the from Survey Critical A Balkans. Medieval Late The h Ery eivl akn. Ciia Sre fo te it t the to Sixth the from Survey Critical A Balkans. Medieval Early The , Dragoljub. Dragoljub. , The Serbs ć ć ’s Hypothesisof Ste Elma. , 6(1931): 6-8. . Ann Press, Arbor2000. University of The Michigan : Psihologija stePsihologija The Bosnian Church. Its Place in State and Society from the 13the from Society and State in Place Its Church. Bosnian The ć ci u Imotskoj Krajini” (SteKrajini” Imotskoj u ci . Malden: Blackwell 2004. Publishing,

Ferd-i i Mdea Bsi. MA Tei. uaet Central Budapest: Thesis. M.A. Bosnia.” Medieval in “Fleur-de-lis rtai jereti i Krstjani . Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan. Ann Arbor:1987. The Press, University of ć ka ć ci Origin). (TheSte of Psychology the ć vj ioei prjku ste porijeklu o hipotezi evoj . London: Saqi in association with The Bosnian Institute, Bosnian The with association in Saqi London: . č a rv Bosanska Crkva ka Radovi ć th ci in Imotska Krajina). Imotska in ci 58 to the 15the to

3 (1973): 287-296. 3(1973): , Vol. 127, No. 5 (1983): 339-363. Vol. 127, No. 5(1983): 339-363. , th Centuries ograd: Redakcija za istoriju Crne istoriju za Redakcija ograd: ć ak). Niš: Prosveta,Niš: 2001. ak). (Christians and the Heretical Heretical the and (Christians . New York: East European East York: New . ć Starohrvatska prosvijetaStarohrvatska aka” (A Contribution to to Contribution (A aka” ath: A Brief History”, History”, Brief A ath: Glasnik Etnografskog Etnografskog Glasnik . (Workers, Soldiers, Soldiers, (Workers, . h Century to the to Century h Pre-Nationalist ae Twelfth Late . Ann Arbor: Ann . th to the 15the to 3 3 th

CEU eTD Collection Miloševi Mileti Dóra. Mérai, Malcolm, Noel. Malovi In: Death). and Død.”(Sickness og “Sygdom K. P. Madsen, Marjanovi Luburi Lovrenovi L SymbolismLindahl,“Transition onTombstones” Carl. “Kés András. Kubinyi, R The – Burial Christian and “Christianity J. Olsen, – Kieffer ı vei, Pál. “Temet Pál. vei, ć ć Nada. , ć itet Cnuis n amta n Suhet ona. pi: Reg Split: Bosnia). Southwest spomenika kulture 1991. zaštitu Split, and Dalmatia in Centuries Fifteenth BosniJugozapadnoj komuna, 1982. hi Sca Cnet i Sxenh ad eetet-etr Hungary Seventeenth-Century and Sixteenth- in Archaeopress, Contexts 2010. Social their of Ages).Middle the Drobnjaks the in Ages. An Archaeological Cultural History), Cultural Ages. Copenhagen: 1999. An Archaeological 325-351. Gyldendal, kulturhistorie arkeologisk En Thirteent the from Serbia in Centuries). Posebna 259.Belgrade:akademijanauka, izdanja Srpska 1956. Symbolism State and Insignia (Ruler Belgrade: 1930. Bosnia Ages).Middle Rabic, and Sarajevo: 2009. the Humin Medieval Hungary). thein Historical Sources). 188. Aarhus: University Aarhus 1997. Press, Data Burial Archaeological rniin rm aaim o hitaiy fo te Perspective the from Christianity, In to Archaeologist.” Paganism from Transition , Andrija. Andrija. , - ć ð Ante. , ć ć uki -Dušani , Dubravko. The True and Exact Dresses and Fashion. Archaeological Clothing Remains and Remains Clothing Archaeological Fashion. and Dresses Exact and True The ć , Milica. “Prilog istoriji Drobnjaka u srednjem veku” (An Addition t Addition (An veku” srednjem u Drobnjaka istoriji “Prilog Milica. , Ste Bosnia. A Short History A Short Bosnia. Drobnjaci – pleme u Hercegovini. Hercegovini. u pleme – Drobnjaci Ste ć ı ć ci i sírjelek a középkori Magyarországon” (Grave Markers in the ce the in Markers (Grave Magyarországon” középkori a sírjelek i , Smilja. Smilja. , ć (Ste ı i Vai Ste Vlasi. i ci Ste k ı ć ć zépkori temetkezések a történeti forrásokban” (Late Medieval Buria Medieval (Late forrásokban” történeti a temetkezések zépkori ci). Belgrade, Zagreb, Mostar: Jugoslavija, Spektar, Prva kniževna kniževna Prva Spektar, Jugoslavija, Mostar: Zagreb, Belgrade, ci). (Ste ci. Bosanko i humsko mramorjeci. Bosanko srednjeg humsko i vijeka Opuscula HungaricaOpuscula uil Scey Te hoooia ad oil nlss of Analysis Social and Chronological The Society: & Burial ldrk isgie džva iblk u rii 3 1 veka 15 – 13 Srbiji u simbolika državna i insignije Vladarske ć ci and Vlachs. SteVlachs. and ci Opuscula Hungarica e. lu Ked esn n Krn øln Nesn 187- Nielsen, Høilund Karen and Jensen Kjeld Claus ed. , (Sickness and Death. Daily Life in Denmark’s Middle Middle Denmark’s in Life Daily Death. and (Sickness ć i vak mgaie 4 1 stolje 15 i 14 migracije vlaške i ci . London: Macmillan,. 1994. Glasnik Zavi 59 6 (2005): 77-83. 6(2005):

ć ci and Vlach Migrations of Fourteenth and and Fourteenth of Migrations Vlach and ci (The Drobnjaks – A Clan in Herzegovina). in Clan A – Drobnjaks (The WesternFolklore 6 (2005): 13-18. 6 č ajnog muzejaajnog Dagligliv i Danmarks Middelalder – Middelalder Danmarks i Dagligliv eligious Background, and the the and Background, eligious 45 (1986): 165-185. 1 (1999): 153-154. 1(1999): (Ste t te Fifteenth the to h ć of a Churchyard Churchyard a of ionalni zavod za za zavod ionalni a u Dalmaciji i i Dalmaciji u a ć ci. of Mramorje o the History History the o meteries of meteries . Oxford: Oxford: . ls ls . CEU eTD Collection Herc i Bosni u spomenika grobnih srednjovjekovnih “Simbolika Aleksandar. Solovjev, Skari In: Monasteries.” Norwegian Medieval in “Burials ______. Berit. Sellevold, edition: First A. Pavel. Rovinski, Radoj ed., Wolf, Kirsten & Phillip, Pulsiano, Novakovi Ottfried. Neubecker, Territory the in Village Medieval the “Zsidód, Erzsébet. Molnár, stena sahranjivanja obreda poganskog “Prežitak ______. ć č , Vladimir. “Jedan slovenski uzor bosanskih mramorova” (One Slavic Model of Model Slavic (One mramorova” bosanskih uzor slovenski “Jedan Vladimir. , i Smoim f h Tmsoe i Bsi ad Herzegovina). and Bosnia in društva Bosne Hercegovine i Tombstones the of (Symbolism Marble Monuments). Archaeolo for of Society York), Europe, Medieval 15-21. 1992. York: Department by: Trust, organised Archaeological York York of UniversityArchaeology, the at 1992 September 24th in archaeology medieval on conference a 1992, Europe Medieval / papers Source Material 1906. настояащемь Izdava Karlovci:Sremski Herzegovinian Tombstones). Garland, 1993. zadruga, 1982. Tradition. Selected Works), ed. Sima Sima ed. Works), Selected Tradition. In Literature). and Practice in Serbs Book 1976. Co., De Trust, Archaeological York Archaeology, MedievalofArchaeology, York),York: Europe, University 79-83. 1992. Medieval for Society of University the at 1992 September 21st-24th Europe in archaeology Burial Rite onSteRite ć Seoa. Rlei oasi i hercegova i bosanskih “Reljefi Svetozar. , ć Soa. “Heraldi Stojan. , Pepitd aes Mdea Erp 19, cneec o medieval on conference a 1992, Europe Medieval / papers (Pre-printed From Death to Life in Medieval Hamar -- Skeletons and Graves as Hist as Graves and Skeletons -- Hamar Medieval in Life to Death From ć ci). ”. Crna Gora u prošlosti i sadašnjosti i prošlosti u Gora Crna eady Sucs Smos n Meaning. and Symbols Sources, Heraldry: Разборь Prilozi povijesti umjetnosti uDalmaciji umjetnosti povijesti Prilozi . Oslo: Unipub forlag, 2001. Unipub . Oslo: Санкт č Glasnik Zemaljskog muzejaGlasnik i obi ki

- Петерсбург труда č ka knjižarnica Zoranaka knjižarnica Stojanovi č 8 (1956): 4-67. Letopis matice Letopis srpske j u ra piei taiii (eadc utm o the of Customs (Heraldic tradiciji” i primeni u Srba u aji

П eivl cniai: n Encyclopedia an Scandinavia: Medieval . А : : . soia taiia Iarn radovi Izabrani tradicija. i Istorija Ровинского Ć Типография 60 irkovi

ć č 9 – 3. egae Spk književna Srpska Belgrade: 436. – 293 , i ste kih 40(1928): 141–144. (Montenegro in the Past and Present). and Past the in (Montenegro “ : 137 (1961): 1-15.

Императорской ć Черногор cima” (Survival of a Pagan Burial Burial Pagan a of (Survival cima” 26(1987): 91-97. ć aka” (Reliefs on Bosnian and and Bosnian on (Reliefs aka” Death and Burial Burial and Death ć of Esztergom.” In: Esztergom.” of a, 1993. adned McGraw-Hill Maidenhead: i я

Godišnjak istorijskog istorijskog Godišnjak вь York organised by: by: organised York

gy, University of of University gy, ея академии

Hsoy and (History прошломь Nw York: New . Europe 21st- Europe partment of of partment (Pre-printed Medieval Medieval Death and Death Bosnian Bosnian egovini”

orical orical наук

и , ,

CEU eTD Collection Tomi aás Mkó. Ey iaot étrárl (n Dbtd Gest Debated a (On kéztartásról” vitatott “Egy Miklós. Takács, Šunji zrm, zbls Azl O Pam “ tmlm öüi eekzs a temetkezés Šabanovi körüli templom “A Praem. O. Anzelm Szabolcs, Szuromi, Rei das und Comunicationen Verhaltniss, “Geografische Hermann. Sterneck, Ste ed.Strayer, R., Joseph Tom. Winnifrith, ______. W and Them Made Who – Tombstones Herzegovinian and “Bosnian Marian. Wenzel, Vemi Vego, Marko. Srejovi Recogni Bogomils the (Did krst?” postovali Bogomili li “Jesu ______. ć ci-Katalog ć ć ć Mj. Mdea Mnlti Tombstones/ Monolithic “Medieval Maja. , Seoa. Dona–nrpgorfk iptvna (rbjk Anthropologic – (Drobnjak ispitivanja” ”Drobnjak–antropogeografska Svetozar. , Djn “v ndrba pmnk kd ieo Maoa lklo predanj lokalno i Mramora Bijelog kod spomenika nadgrobna “Dva Dejan. , ć geographical Research). (2005): 85-101. (Plina) near Plo Establishment and 1982. Sarajevo:Establishment Administration). Svjetlost, Discipline). Refle as Churchyard the in (Burials tükrében” egyházfegyelem 1877. Vienna: IV. Table Grabsteine,” Alte Montenegro, – Nord und Herzegowina Etnografskog muzejaEtnografskog 1987. 1965. Südost-Forschungen Zemaljskog muzeja uSarajevu obtns er iei rmr n te oa Saga). Local the društva and Mramor Bijeli near Tombstones , Dragoslav. “Jelen u našim narodnim obinarodnim našim u “Jelen Dragoslav. , ć , Hazim. Hazim. , Ukrasni motivi nasteUkrasni motivi Ljubuški (Ste 21 (2005): 189-200. 21(2005): 189-200. The Vlachs: The History of a Balkan People.Balkan a of History The Vlachs: The ć Opuscula Hungarica oasi aau-otnk urva podjela upravna i pašaluk-Postanak Bosanski ci, the Catalogue). Zagreb:Galerija Catalogue).ci, the Klovi Dictionary the of Middle Ages č . Sarajevo: ZemaljskiSarajevo: 1954. muzej, . e.” e.” Opusculum ArchaeologiaeOpusculum 18(1955): 231-232. 21 (1962): 102-143. 21 (1962): Srpski etnografskizbornik ć cima 3(1948): 81-102. (Decorative Motifs onSte Motifs (Decorative 6 (2005): 9-12. 6(2005): 9-12. 61

č Ste ajima” (Deer in Our Folk Customs). Customs). Folk Our in (Deer ajima” . New York: Scribner, 1982-1989.. New Scribner, York: 32 (2009): 133-166. 32 ć ci at the Grebine Site next to to next Site Grebine the at 4(1902): 357-482. ć evi dvori, 2008. evi dvori, New York: St. Martin’s Press, Press, Martin’s St. York: New ć ci). Sarajevo: Veselin Masleša,ci). Sarajevo: Glasnik srpskog arheološkog arheološkog srpskog Glasnik ure). Te ona Pashaluk--Its Bosnian (The cted in Medieval Church Church Medieval in cted psua Hungarica Opuscula ze the Cross?). Cross?). the ze sen in Bosnien, der Bosnien, in sen középkori középkori Braumüller, Č e” (Two (Two e” eveljuša Glasnik Glasnik hy?” hy?” al- 6 CEU eTD Collection

Ze Ze H. Martin. “Stylistic Exchange”, BehaviourInformation Wobst, and č č evi evi ć ć Kongresa Saveza folklorista Jugoslavije SavezaKongresa folklorista Srpsko arheološko društvo, 2005. arheološkoSrpsko društvo, (1977): 317-337. Sooa. Ir nšg omto rtaa (h Dne o or Funeral our of Dances (The rituala” posmrtnog našeg “Igre Slobodan. , , Emina. , Mramorje. Ste Mramorje. ć ci Zapadne SrbijeZapadne ci 62 (1966): 376. (1966): 376.

(Mramorje. Ste(Mramorje. ć ci in West Serbia). Belgrade: Belgrade: Serbia). West in ci Anthropological PapersAnthropological Rite). Rite). Rad XI XI Rad 61 CEU eTD Collection 50 cm, lengthNo. and 16–Trunk nomotifs: heightcm. with 140cm, width 60 No. 15–Amorphous:length and height 15 cm. 60cm, 100cm, width length 80cm, and nomotifs: height15cm. No. with 14–Slab 150cm, width Thereandarearcades lateral above a motif rope onallthe them. sides, No. 13–(Bešlagi visible. ofside a motifs ( shield No. 12–(Bešlagi length170cm, 70cm, width andNo. sarcophagus 11–Pseudo nomotifs: height60cm.with and western(fig. side). 14-southern sides no.4.There to similar a is It vine theupper asonboth easta a cross side. borderonthe has border southernhalf-volutes sidesmade ontheand circles,what northern with of makes i No. 10–(Bešlagi length poor andNo. in condition: 9–Trunkcm. height nomotifs, with cm, 70 width 60 140 No. 8–Amorphous:length150cm, 50cm. width The well-preserved lines. is monument southe engraved parallel (fig. with 13, stripe above northernground.eastern,and it are five and sides, ontwolateral arcades There Partially 60cm, and the height70cm. set into No. sarcophagus: 7–Pseudo length 180cm, width side and fig. 12). thehand sword’srepresentationvine Above stretches (fig. runs handle. a11 the towards better around is The pommel of plaincrossguard visible. and a enla and shield with a sword the now. bodyhand forThe side. hand onthe Except northern motif lateral his hardly is visible ground.the southern side, partially the an set with into of Representation enlarge a man cm. Turned 50cm, and on height140over No. sarcophagus: 6–Pseudo length 180cm, width northern onthe visible southern side as side. Vine well as motif the sides. lateral heightoverNo. 160cm, 50cm, 5–High width and onthe 100cm. Turned length trunk: parallelwith 10-southern and lines onthe(fig. side). upper rope side hasborder unique it half-volutes circles with The onthe sides lateral (wrenches). No. 4–(Bešlagi runs a bas-relief. bandin (rosette) side aonthe(figure made There 9 upper is star arcadesIt Abovecm. of the six representations sides. ontheand northern southern has No. 3–(Bešlagi No. 2–Amorphous:length50cm, 60cm. width nomotifs,No. with the 1–Slab ground: set into length190cm,130cm. width comparativeAll from references Bešlagi ć ć no. 2). Trunk: lengthcm,80 width and no.2). height 45cm. As an 170 upper High 70cm, length190,width andwide 100 height no.1).base: a trunk with ć ć ć no. 8) Pseudo sarcophagus: Pseudo and height80cm. no.8) length150cm,60 width 80cm, and height cm. Trunk: On lengthcm, the width upper no.7) 35 140 50cm, and height cm. Trunk: There lengthcm, width no.6) 60 a 160 is scutus bosniensis ć CATALOGUE ) anda are alines stripeparallel with borderof barely 1973. Novakovi 63

ć i i re is a stripe re is -northern side). rn side). an arcades arcades d right d right -eastern t t ern rged CEU eTD Collection areeastern and turned The western is on the over tombstone crosses sides. lateral a head scene. helmetplumeonhis with and this above and aarrow. A There holds bow vine runs ofThere deer on therepresentation northern lateral bas-relief in a is hunting No. 49–(Bešlagi 70cm. x floor with No. space 48–Foundationof 160 stone 70cm. x floor with No. space 47–Foundationof 180 stone No. 46–Amorphous:length 60cm, 60cm. width No. 45–Amorphous:length 60cm. 120cm, width No. 44–Amorphous:length 50cm, 60cm. width 65cm, lengthNo. and 43–Trunk nomotifs: heightcm. with 160cm, width 40 No. 42–Amorphous:length 120cm,60cm. width No. very 41–Trunk nomotifs, with andcm. height length190cm, 120cm, damaged: width 40 No. 40–Amorphous:length 80cm. 180cm, width floor with tombstones 170cm. No. 39–Group space 220x of amorphous of 120cm. x floor with No. space 38–Foundationof 180 stone length 90cm, height nomotifs: No. with 37–Slab 190cm, width 7cm. 120cm. x floor with No. space 36–Foundationof 100 stone No. 35–Amorphous:length 60cm. 120cm, width 100cm. x floor with No. space 34–Foundationof 180 stone length 80cm, and nomotifs: height20cm. No. with 33–Slab 180cm, width No. 32–Amorphous:length 60cm 150cm, width No. 31–Amorphous:length 70cm. 100cm, width No. 30–Amorphous:length 70cm. 100cm, width length 70cm, and nomotifs: height10cm. No. with 29–Slab 160cm, width No. 28–Amorphous:length 70cm. 110,width set onthe significantly southern side and damaged. 50cm, lengthNo. and 27–Trunk nomotifs: heightcm. with The is 120cm, width tombstone 40 No. 26–Groupsmaller80cm. floor with amorphous of spaceof tombstones several 200x the ground.into 70cm, lengthNo. and 25–Trunk nomotifs: heightcm. with The 170cm, set width trunk is 30 No. 24–Amorphous:length 80cm, 60cm. width northern sideside). (fig. 16-south-eastern Ithe upper but turned The is side of it. over tombstone the couldrecognize monument, not onthe bas-relief Bešlagi to upper as a side. According borderonthe No. 23–(Bešlagi 150cm. x floor with No. space 22–Foundationof 200 stone turnedroof. overfollows the side. Empty boundary onthe southern stripe of the No. 21–(Bešlagi No. 20–Amorphous:length 50cm. 130cm, width No. 19–Amorphous:length 60cm. 170cm, width anywhere Montenegro side). exceptin (fig. 15-upper Mramor. does very occ motif not is aBijeli This monument to dislocated one in similar on theIt upper and the three across side. middle slots, has twelve circles(medalli of board heightNo.an 18–Trunk: 100cm, length200cm, imitation and width 40cm. There is length 60cm, and nomotifs: height15cm. No. with 17–Slab 150cm, width 141 Bešlagi ć , 1973, 116. 116. 1973, , ć ć ć no. 13). Pseudo-sarcophagus: lengthcm, and height 90cm. Pseudo-sarcophagus: 120cm,60 width no.13). 50cm, width and height 40cm. Trunk: There length150cm, rope no.12) a is lengthcm, heightcm. Pseudo-sarcophagus: 190cm,80 width 130 no.10).

64

ć 141 there should be on thereone crescent should side. The hunter has onthe southern ons). This ons). This ur CEU eTD Collection No. 73–Amorphous:length height 40cm, 130cm, width 20cm. No. 72–Amorphous:length 160cm,90cm. width belowand the no.24-drawingb arcade eastern side (fig.side 23-northeastern onthe vine circles with (Bešlagi it above turned onthe is southernmonument over ontheand side. arcades northern There a are four side No. 71–(Bešlagi No. very 70–Trunk nomotifs, with and heightcm. length180cm, 80cm, damaged: width 30 100cm. x floor with No. space 69–Foundationof 190 stone No. 68–Amorphous:length 90cm, 60cm. width ground:No. very length50cm. 67–Slab, damagedand the 110cm, set into width 110cm. x floor with No. space 66–Foundationof 160 stone No. 65–Amorphous:length 70cm. 200,width No. damagedand the 64–Slab, ground: set lengthcm, 70cm. into width 110 22). side (fig.a lines the upper a and again vine motif parallel sideis there 20-eastern la abovea andcrescentonthe crosseastern swastikait a onthe with westernside, now.a Therevine. stripeparallel There with arecrosse the above is line two onthe southern visible is lateralformerly be side. The representation visible turned ground. and onthe is A northern monument over setvine deeply motif the side lateral into No. 63–(Bešlagi height 30cm. No. damaged 62–Trunk 50cm, nomotifs, and width with onthe eastern length120cm, side: turned over side. onthe southern 50cm, lengthNo. and 61–Trunk nomotifs: heightcm. with The is 140cm, width tombstone 60 No. very 60–Slab, the ground: lengthcm,50cm. damaged, into width 130 set (fig. side). 19-eastern It the higher in centreandmonuments, of the height170cm. the other graveyard. stands than length nomotifs: No. 59–Pseudo-sarcophagus 120 cm, 105 width awith wide with base, No. 58–Amorphous:length 70cm. 170cm, width 160cm. x floor with No. space 57–Foundationof 160 stone No. very 56–Trunk nomotifs, with and heightcm. length150cm, 70cm, damaged: width 30 northeast-southwest.is 105cm, lengthNo. and 55–Trunk nomotifs: height cm. with The 140cm, width orientation 40 an the ground.set engravedcross. into It isosceles has No. damagedthe 140cm,50cm. 54–Slab western width The completely slab is on length side: No. 53–Amorphous:length 80cm, 50cm. width length90cm,No. and 52–Trunk nomotifs: height cm. with 190cm, width 30 length140cm,50 No. width and 51–Pseudo-sarcophagus nomotifs: height40cm. with The has tombstone irregular southwest. orientation northeast No. 50–Pseudo-sarcophagus,170cm,100 width and 40cm. height length damaged: very 18). presentedaŽugi ofBare photo a different from tombstone “there horse(damaged).” a a and riding a deer chasing is hunter side. Bešlagi 143 142 Same, fig. 8. 8. fig. Same, Bešlagi ć . 1973, 116-117. 116-117. 1973, . ć apparently confused whenAccording monument. apparently data about writing this him to ć ć no. 16). High trunk: length 170 cm,70 High width and height110cm. The no.16). length170 trunk: cm,50 High width and height100cm. The no.14). length170 trunk:

ć incorrectly has five incorrectlyarcades has a drawing). his cross in There is 65

ć a. 143 142 (fig. side and fig. 17-northern With this description With he low it is not visible visible not is low it s on the lateral sides: onthe sides: s lateral nd figs,21and teral side. Onteral side. y Bešlagi ć ). CEU eTD Collection of the (upper cross arounded is bit side. The arm upper No. 74–Trunk: 60cm, length110cm, a height30cm. width Theis cross only onthe motif cm, and height30cm. No. 86–Pseudo-sarcophagus, the ground: 60 set 140cm, into width damagedand very length 60cm. x floor with No. space 85–Foundationof 180 stone parallel along lines the sides. lateral turnedThecm, is The andover tombstone only height130cm. are ontheside. northern motifs No. 84–(Bešlagi ain formlateral(fig. side). of niche 31-northeastern sidesare recessed circlesdiam cm. There onthetwelveareconvex upper centimetresin side, two No. 83–(Bešlagi plain crossguard(fig.fig.30). 29-northern side and ( on the upper westernthe northern side.a On lines parallel the borderwith side side, and the with pill turned onthe is southernmonument over side. lateral There are twoarcades No. 82–(Bešlagi No. very 81–Trunk nomotifs, with and heightcm. length130cm,60 damaged: width 30 100cm. x floor with No. space 80–Foundationof 140 stone No. 79–Amorphous:length 50cm. 130cm, width side and fig. 28). scene 27-nort onthethis eastern ancross (fig. either.anthropomorphic There side is that therehuntinga scenethe wasof deer, unrecognizable.” nowadays Bešlagi Accordingthe below roof’sa it. vine border,and to turned thea is and northern overis rope height80cm. along The on side. There motif monument No. 78–(Bešlagi northeast-southwest. asparallel onthe T ontheas lateral upper well as lines the side, sides. borders No. 77–(Bešlagi 70cm. x floor with No. space 76–Foundationof 120 stone 60cm, lengthNo. and 75–Trunk nomotifs: heightcm. with 110cm, width 30 26-northern side). 144 scutus bosniensis Beslagic. 1973, 119. 119. 1973, Beslagic.

ć ć ć ć ć ) is represented, with a sword behind it. The it. sword and) represented, haspommel is behind a a with round sword no. 21). A pseudo-sarcophagus with a with double roof: 80 length180 cm, A width pseudo-sarcophagus no.21). length60 cm, and Trunk 40 height a with 160cm, wide no.20). width base: cm,70 High width and height90cm. no.19). The length170 trunk: awith 150 cm,50 wide width Pseudo-sarcophagus base: length no.18). 80cm, width and height 50cm. Trunk: Thereare length170cm, no.17).

66

crux ansata ć : “On lateral the visible seems: side it ). (Fig. 25-upper(Fig.). side, fig. 144

I recognize not could he orientation is eter each. The hwestern a shield ars on CEU eTD Collection

No. 47–Trunk: 70cm. length200,width No. 46–Amorphous. No. 45–Amorphous. length140cm,60cm.No. set: width 44–Slab, No. 43–Trunk, very damaged. height 110cm. ofNo.motif rope: a 42–Highwith widelength 160cm,60 and and width base border trunk 50 cm, and height120cm. length aNo. 41–Pseudo-sarcophagusborder a with 150cm, width wideof with motif rope: base heightItside). over (fig. 130cm.turned onthe is 43-southwestern southern side 60cm, and width No. upper 40–Pseudo-sarcophagus awith length160cm, side: borderonthe easilyabove of (fig. the Only 42-detail cross cross it. now is recognizable the and height the arecross 170 cm,60 aroundcresc width and 30cm. the Stars(rosettes) No. 39–(Bešlagi No. 38–Amorphous. height 100cm. 60cm, and width No. upper 37–Pseudo-sarcophagus awith length180cm, side: borderonthe lengthcm,45 No. width and 36–Slab: height20cm. 100 lengthcm,70 No. width and 35–Slab: height10cm. 140 No.height 34–Trunk: length150cm,40 width and 50cm. side). a ontheside (fig. northern motif base40-northernas side and and fig. 41-s squareframes It 100cm,width andthea southern height110cm. double Turned side. wide lateral has on over No. 33–(Bešlagi cm, and height90cm. No. 32–Pseudo-sarcophagus 50 length170cm, side: lateral width onthe southern over turned height 10cm. length 70cm, andthe width middle: an No. with 31–Slab engravedcross 160cm, isosceles in lengthcm,80 No. width and 30–Slab: height10cm. 170 lengthcm,60 No. width and 29–Slab: height10cm. 150 andNo. 28–Trunk height60cm. a with length160cm, 80cm, borderof width lines: parallel No. 27–Amorphous lengthNo. 26–Trunk nomotifs: 60cm, with 170,width and height30cm. the ground: 40cm.No. set into width 25–Slab 140cm, length lengthcm,60 No. width and 24–Slab: height15cm. 130 No. 23–Pseudo-sarcophagus: 60cm, and height40cm. length150cm, width southern side and fig. 39-southeastern side). 60cm, width and theupper roof: height50cm (fig. length140cm, side 38- which imitates No. 22–(Bešlagi any without No. Mostly 1–21: amorphous motifs. comparativeAll from references Bešlagi ć ć ć no. 17). Trunk crescentfour a upper with cross, no.17). andstars length side: onthe awith rib across Pseudo-sarcophagus length150cm, side: no.20). the upper Pseudo-sarcophagus a with carvedbut rib along no.11). likea trunk, the ć 1973 Bare Žugi 67

ć a ). outhern outhern ent CEU eTD Collection No. 80–Amorphous. upperfig. side and 55-drawing). arm ends a with ( hollow No. 79–(Bešlagi No. 78–Amorphous. heightNo. 77–Trunk: 50cm, length150cm, and width 40 cm. No. 76–Amorphous. lilyeastern onthe motif side above three the wide and reliefabove base, circles(rings) bas the in slots. arrowwith isosceleanupper board). of engraved and a side (imitation a There is bow height lateral180 cm,60 width and as 170cm.covered Southern sidewell is as byslots t No. 75–(Bešlagi No. Amorphous, any 62–74: slabsand without trunks motifs. side as side welland (fig. fig. 51-drawings). 50-western a crosson the of the theon westernwith upper in shape aThere is crescent. arms side No. 61–Pseudo-sarcophagus: 70cm, and height 150cm. There length170cm,cross width a is crescent a with star). and49-detail heightcm of (fig. acm, 70 relief width 40 length 160 side: onthe upper No. 60–(Bešlagi 100 cm. No. length 60cm, 59–High and height over 120cm, side: trunk, width turned onthe southern heightNo. 58–Trunk: 60cm, length120cm, and width 30cm. No. 57–Amorphous. No. 56–Amorphous. No. 55–Amorphous. height 160cm. No.southern 54–Pseudo-sarcophagus, length cm,60 side: and width onthe over 140 turned side (fig.48-northern side). There70 cm, onthe upper and pommel plain crossguard with and height90cm. a round is sword No. 53–(Bešlagi No. 52–Amorphous. No. 51–Amorphous. the northernand sidefig. (fig.47-northern side). 46-southwesternside 140 cm. There“apple” a baswith in side,arcades vine reliefontheand an upper is five No. 50–(Bešlagi arrowAnother onthearrow base is bow wider side.and onthe (fig. itself upper 45- basi the eastern alsoaand Therea onnorthern is bow arcades deer and wi side,side. lateral now due theinvisible to fact There was robbedcross it turned and on during thea over 1980s. is 100 cm. of There arepresentation a is No. 49–Bešlagi (fig. side). 44-northern andc heightcm, 40 lengthupper onthe width sides: lateral 70 side, and 110 lines parallel No. 48–(Bešlagi 145 Bešlagi ć . 1973, 123. 123. 1973, . ć (no. 13). High trunk with a wide base: length 150 cm, width 70cm, and base: height a Highwith length150cm, wide (no. width 13). trunk ć ć ć ć ć ć no. 5). Trunk with the representation of Trunk the a with representation cross no.5). side. The onthe upper lower Highbasis,turnedwider northern over no.4). a trunk length with onthe side: of Trunka thea bas with representation star, crescentin no.9). both with High lengthcm, ontheside: width northern over no.10). trunk, turned 160 50cm, and base: height a Highwith length135cm, wide width no.14). trunk no. 12). Trunk with a wide base and engraved bow with an andwith onthe Trunk arrow engraved a motif with widebow no.12). base kamenica 145

(fig. 52-detail and fig. 53-drawings).(fig.fig. 52-detail and ). There is alsoThere a is double side borderonthe (fig.). upper 54- kolo dance on the southern a side lateral with dancevine above, 68

Thereacross or a is s cross cross s th anth above on s). eastern he m m CEU eTD Collection 20cm,No. width and 270–Atetragonal: pillar, broken, height25cm. length20cm, No. Amorphous. 105–269: representation ( shield of a tetragonal No. 104–(Bešlagi No. Amorphous. 84–103: recognizemuch (fig.fig. 58-draw damagedIthe motifs 57-northerncould side and not two males ha monument anda twofemales, andriding deer.thatthe aOwingfact to man upperBešlagi side.a There is dog, according to southern lengthcm,60 side: width and height 90cm. a Theredecoration onthe 160 is rope BešlagiNo. 83–(no. 2according to No. 82–Amorphous. the roof side).relief and aarrow(fig. on bow56-northern ontheside, northern southern lengthcm,60 side: width and height 110cm. a There 130 is bas zigzagstripe in No. 81–(Bešlagi ć no. 3). Pseudo sarcophagus Pseudo a wide no.3). and base over set with onthe turned ć no.1). Trunk: length 150, width 60 cm, and height 30 cm. There Trunk:60cm, length150,width and height30cm. no.1). is ć scutus bosniensis ). High trunk, very over damagedandHigh turned onthe ). trunk, 69 ć , on the uppera side,, and

) onthe upper side. kolo with four with figures, ing). s beens CEU eTD Collection

LocalityFig. (photo byDejan Bijelidislocated Vemi Mramor, monument 1. LocalityFig. (drawing Bijeli dislocated Vemi Mramor, byDejan monument 2. ILLUSTRATIONS ILLUSTRATIONS 70

ć ) ć )

CEU eTD Collection

Fig. 4. Locality (photo byFig. Vemi Bijelicross Dejan monument Mramor, –shaped 4. LocalityFig. (photo by Bijeli cross-shaped Vemi Mramor, Dejan monument 3. 71

ć ć ) )

CEU eTD Collection

Locality detailFig. (photo byDeja Bijeli cross-shaped Mramor, monument; 5. 72

n Vemi

ć )

CEU eTD Collection

Fig. 6. Locality VeFig. (drawing Bijeli cross-shaped Mramor, byDejan monument 6. Fig. 7. LocalityFig. (drawing S Bijeli cross-shaped Mramor, byHermann monument 7.

73

mi terneck) ć )

CEU eTD Collection

Fig. 8. LocalityFig. Novakovi 8. ć i (situationalplan-drawingi Bešlagi byŠefik 74

ć )

CEU eTD Collection

LocalityFig. Novakovi 10. LocalityFig. Novakovi 9. ć i, no. 3. (photo by Dejan Vemi no.3.(photo byi, Dejan ć i, no.4.(photo byi, Vemi Dejan 75

ć ) ć )

CEU eTD Collection

Fig. 11. LocalityFig. Novakovi 11. Fig. 12. LocalityFig. Novakovi 12. ć ć i, no.6.(photo byi, Vemi Dejan i, no.6.(drawing Bešlagii, byŠefik 76

ć ) ć ) CEU eTD Collection

Fig. 14. LocalityFig. Novakovi 14. LocalityFig. Novakovi 13. ć ć i, no.10.(photo byi, Vemi Dejan no.7.(photo byi, Vemi Dejan 77

ć ) ć )

CEU eTD Collection

Fig. 16. LocalityFig. Novakovi 16. LocalityFig. Novakovi 15. ć ć i, no.23.(photo byi, Vemi Dejan no.18.(photo byi, Vemi Dejan 78

ć ć ) )

CEU eTD Collection

Fig. 18. LocalityFig. Novakovi 18. LocalityFig. Novakovi 17. ć ć i, no.49.(drawingsBešlagii, byŠefik no.49.(photo byi, Vemi Dejan 79

ć ) ć )

CEU eTD Collection

Fig. 19. LocalityFig. Novakovi 19. ć i, no.59.(photo byi, Vemi Dejan 80

ć )

CEU eTD Collection

byBešlagi Šefik LocalityFig. Novakovi 21. Fig. 20. LocalityFig. Novakovi 20. ć ) ć ć i, no.63.(drawingi, i, no.63.(photo byi, Vemi Dejan 81

(drawingBešlagi byŠefik LocalityFig. Novakovi 22. ć ) ć ć ) i, no.63. i,

CEU eTD Collection

LocalityFig. Novakovi 24. Fig. 23. LocalityFig. Novakovi 23. ć ć i, no.71.(drawingŠefik Bešlagii, by i, no.71.(photo byi, Vemi Dejan 82

ć ) ć )

CEU eTD Collection

LocalityFig. Novakovi 25. LocalityFig. Novakovi 26. ć ć i, no.74.(photo byi, Vemi Dejan i, no.74.(photo byi, Vemi Dejan

83

ć ć ) )

CEU eTD Collection

Fig. 28 LocalityFig. Novakovi 28 LocalityFig. Novakovi 27 ć ć i, no.78.(drawingŠefik Bešlagii, by i, no.78.(photo byi, Vemi Dejan 84

ć ) ć )

CEU eTD Collection

LocalityFig. Novakovi 30. LocalityFig. Novakovi 29 ć ć i, no.82.(photo byi, Vemi Dejan i, no.82.(drawingDejani, Vemi by 85

ć ) ć )

CEU eTD Collection

LocalityFig. Novakovi 31. ć i, no.83.(photo byi, Vemi Dejan 86

ć )

CEU eTD Collection

Locality Fig. Novakovi 33. LocalityFig. Novakovi 32. ć i (photo byi Vemi Dejan ć i (photo by Dejan Vemi (photo byDejani 87

ć -southern part of the cemetery) -southern part of the ć -central part of the cemetery) of -central the part

CEU eTD Collection

Fig. 34. LocalityFig. Novakovi 34. ć i (photo byi Vemi Dejan

88

ć -northerncemetery) of the part CEU eTD Collection

LocalityFig.Žugi Bare 35. ć a (situational plan-drawing by Šefik Bešlagia (situationalplan-drawing byŠefik 89

ć )

CEU eTD Collection

LocalityFig.Žugi Bare 37. LocalityFig.Žugi Bare 36. ć ć a, no. 49. (drawing by Šefik Bešlagia, no.49.(drawingby a, no.49.(photo byŠefik Bešlagi 90

ć ) ć )

CEU eTD Collection

Fig. 39. LocalityFig.Žugi Bare 39. LocalityFig.Žugi Bare 38. ć ć a, Vemi no.22.(photo byDejan a, Vemi no.22.(photo byDejan 91

ć ć ) )

CEU eTD Collection

Fig. 41. LocalityFig.Žugi Bare 41. LocalityFig.Žugi Bare 40. ć ć a, Vemi no.33.(photo byDejan a, Vemi no.33.(photo byDejan 92

ć ć ) )

CEU eTD Collection

LocalityFig.Žugi Bare 43. LocalityFig.Žugi Bare 42. ć ć a. Vemi no.40.(photo byDejan a, Vemi no.39.(photo byDejan 93

ć ć ) )

CEU eTD Collection

LocalityFig.Žugi Bare 45. LocalityFig.Žugi Bare 44. ć ć a, Vemi no.49.(photo byDejan a, Vemi no.48.(photo byDejan 94

ć ć ) )

CEU eTD Collection

Fig. 47. LocalityFig.Žugi Bare 47. LocalityFig.Žugi Bare 46. ć ć a, Vemi no.50.(photo byDejan a, Vemi no.50.(photo byDejan 95

ć ć ) )

CEU eTD Collection

Fig. 49. LocalityFig.Žugi Bare 49. LocalityFig.Žugi Bare 48. ć ć a, Vemi no.60.(photo byDejan a, Vemi no.53.(photo byDejan 96

ć ć ) )

CEU eTD Collection

LocalityFig.Žugi Bare 51. Locality Fig.Žugi Bare 50. ć a, no. 61. (drawings by Šefik Bešlagia, byŠefik no.61.(drawings ć a, no. 61. (photo by Dejana, Vemi no.61.(photo by

97

ć ) ć ) CEU eTD Collection

Fig. 53. LocalityFig.Žugi Bare 53. LocalityFig.Žugi Bare 52. ć ć a, no. 75. (drawings by Šefik Bešlagia, byŠefik no.75.(drawings a, Vemi no.75.(photo byDejan

98

ć ) ć )

CEU eTD Collection

Fig. 55. LocalityFig.Žugi Bare 55. Fig. 54. LocalityFig.Žugi Bare 54. ć ć a, no. 79. (drawing by Šefik Bešlagia, no.79.(drawingby a, Vemi no.79.(photo byDejan

99

ć ) ć )

CEU eTD Collection

LocalityFig.Žugi Bare 57. LocalityFig.Žugi Bare 56. ć ć a, Vemi no.83.(photo byDejan a, Vemi no.81.(photo byDejan 100

ć ć ) )

CEU eTD Collection

LocalityFig.Žugi Bare 58. LocalityFig.Žugi Bare 59. ć ć a, no. 83. (drawing by Šefik Bešlagia, no.83.(drawingby aVemi (photo byDejan 101

ć -situation of -situation the cemetery) ć )