1,720,967 research outputs found
THE NAMES OF THE PARTICIPANTS OF REGIONAL SYNODS IN ZADAR (ZARA) FROM 1663 AND 1680
Get PDFNa osnovi građe iz Arhiva Zadarske nadbiskupije autor analizira popis sudionika dviju biskupskih sinoda (1663. i 1680.). U radu se predstavljaju i opće prilike na širem području Zadarske nadbiskupije, posebice u kontekstu osmanlijskih prodora i osvajanja zadarskoga zaleđa. U prilogu se donosi cjelovit popis sudionika zadarskih sinoda te uz svakog sudionika pokušava dati objašnjenje.On the basis of the sources from the Archbishopric’s Archives in Zadar (Zara), author analyses participants’ lists of the bishopric’s synods of 1663 and 1680. In the context of Ottoman progression in the hinterland of Zadar, author describes military and political circumstances of that time in the realm of the archbishopric of Zadar (Zara). At the end of the study author delivers a complete list of all the participants of the synods. Moreover, author has tried to analyse biography of the each participant
“Catalogus episcoporum ecclesiae Nonensis” of the Zadar Canon Ivan A. Gurato
Get PDFU ovom prilogu povijesti Ninske biskupije po prvi put je editirana kronotaksa ninskih prvosvećenika, koju je u Notizie sulla chiesa di Nona, Ecclesia Nonensis sive Aenonensis priredio zadarski kanonik Ivan A. Gurato (1804.–1874.). Spis je danas pohranjen u Znanstvenoj knjižnici u Zadru, sign. 16519, Ms 448. Naslov ukazuje na činjenicu kako Guratov spis nije jedinstveno djelo, pisano s nakanom prikazivanja povijesti Ninske biskupije, nego je u njemu prikupljen raznovrsni materijal o toj Crkvi.
U prvom je dijelu najprije skrenuta pozornost na biografiju i spisateljsko–prepisivačku djelatnost samog autora. Nije, pak, bila namjera iznositi sve pojedinosti, nego samo ukazati na važnost i značenje cijelog opusa Ivana A. Gurata za zadarsko-ninsku prošlost, ali isto tako i za povijest hrvatskog naroda. Sam naslov studije Catalogus episcoporum... ukazuje na središnju temu, važnost kronotakse ninskih prvosvećenika u starijoj, ali isto tako i u novijoj historiografiji počevši s Farlatijevom Poviješću Ilirika, preko Carla F. Binachija, pa sve do najnovijeg redoslijeda koji je priređen u Šematizmu Zadarske nadbiskupije. Doduše, Guratova kronotaksa nije potpuna i u njoj se odmah zapažaju praznine, Ipak, ona doprinosi boljem poznavanju razvoja crkvenih struktura Nina i Ninske biskupije. Njezina se veličina ne sastoji samo u kronološkom nizanju imena pojedinih biskupa, nego puno više u tome što ju je pokušao pročistiti od naslaga srednjovjekovnih kronika. Istodobno je autor ukazao na važnost arhivskog materijala dostupnog u raznim arhivima i njih je na str. 35. naveo poimence.
Kritičkom zahvatu prethodi kratki pregled povijesnog osnutka Ninske biskupije, formuliran dvojbom “osnutak ili obnova”. Time se želi ukazati kako historiografija o tom problemu još nije izrekla posljednju riječ. Ninska biskupija nije bila osnovana odmah po kristijanizaciji Hrvata nego je kao institucija postojala znatno ranije. Stoga je moguće da je ime ponekog biskupa, koje donosi Carlo F. Bianchi, stvarno i postojalo, samo danas nisu dostupni nikakvi povijesni podatci. Ivan A. Gurato polazi od biskupa Teodozija, kojega smatra prvim biskupom Nina i navodi kronološki imena drugih biskupa do Grgura Parčića. Na odvojenim stranicama donio je Ivan A. Gurato još i kratke podatke o dvojici ninskih biskupa, Ivanu Krstitelju Juriliću i Josipu Grguru Žuviću. Posljednji spomenuti biskup uzdignut je 1807. godine na Katedru zadarskih nadbiskupa i poslije njega više nije nitko imenovan rezidencijalnim biskupom Ninske crkve. Reorganizacijom biskupija u Dalmaciji ukinuta je 1828. godine Ninska biskupija i njen teritorij je praktično priključen Zadarskoj nadbiskupiji.In this short contribution to the history of the Nin bishopric, the chronological survey of the Nin bishops which was compiled in Notizie sulla chiesa di Nona, Ecclesia Nonensis sive Aenonensis by the Zadar canon Ivan A. Gurato (1804−1874) has been edited. Today this manuscript is stored in the Scientific Library in Zadar, sign. 16519, Ms 448. Its title indicates the fact that Gurato’s manuscript is not a single unified work written with the intention of depicting the history of the Nin bishopric but rather a piece of writing which has collected various data relating to that church. The first part of the article begins by drawing attention to the biography and the writing-copying activities of the author. There was no intention of elaborating all the matter in detail but only to indicate the importance and the significance of Ivan A. Gurato’s entire opus that pertains to the history of Zadar and Nin but also to the history of the Croatian people. The very title of the study Catalogus episcoporum… indicates the central theme, the importance of the chronological survey of the Nin bishops in older but also in newer historiography beginning with Farlati’s Povijest Ilirika (History of the Illyrians) through Carlo F. Binachi up to the newest sequence which has been set forth in Šematizam Zadarske nadbiskupije (Names of the Zadar Archbishopric). True to say, Gurato’s chronological survey is not complete and one immediately notices blank spots but it nevertheless makes a contribution to a better understanding of the development of church structures in Nin and the Nin archbishopric. The achievement of his survey does not only consist in the chronological listing of names of individual bishops but much more in his efforts to purify it of the sediments of medieval chronicles. At the same time the author with his survey indicated the importance of archival material accessible in various archives which he listed by name on pag. 35. The critical turn of the article is preceded by a short account of the dilemmas attending the historical establishment of the Nin bishopric which is formulated as “founding or restoration” and with this the author seeks to show that historiography has not said the final word in regard to this problem. The Nin bishopric was not founded only after Croats accepted Christianity but as an institution it existed much earlier so that it is possible that the name of a particular bishop which is mentioned by Carlo F. Bianchi refers to a real person but today there are no available facts. Ivan A. Gurato begins with bishop Theodesia whom he considers the first bishop of Nin and proceeds to chronologically list the names of other bishops up to Grgur Parčić. On separate pages Ivan A. Gurato gives brief information about two Nin bishops, namely Ivan Krstitelj Jurilić and Josip Grgur Žuvić. In 1807 the last mentioned bishop was promoted to a chair of the Zadar archbishopric and after him nobody was named the residential bishop of the church in Nin. In 1828 the reorganization of bishoprics in Dalmatia rescinded the Nin bishopric and its territory was practically conjoined to the Zadar archbishopric
ZADAR (ZARA) – A NEW ARCHBISHOPRIC AND METROPOLITAN SEE OF DALMATIA IN THE CONTEXT OF THE TWELFTH CENTURY
Get PDFTema rada važan je događaj iz zadarske i dalmatinske crkvene povijesti – uzdizanje Zadarske biskupije na stupanj metropolije i nadbiskupije, bulom pape Anastazija IV. od 17. listopada 1154. Na osnovi opsežne domaće i strane literature, kao i uvidom u izvornu građu, podrobno se govori o političkim okolnostima u svezi s uzdignućem Zadra u sjedište nadbiskupije, posebice u kontekstu zadarsko-mletačkih odnosa 12. stoljeća. Na kraju rada donosi se u prilogu kronotaksa zadarskih biskupa i bula pape Anastazija IV. iz 1154. godine.Day 17 th October 1154 is one of the foremost dates in the long history of Church in Zadar. Namely, on this day pope Anastasius IV (1153-1154) proclaimed Zadar to become archbishopric and metropolitan see. The new archbishop Lampredius (cc. 1141-1178) gained, thus, four bishoprics: Krk, Rab, Osor and Hvar. Pope Hadrian IV (1154-1159), as a political ally of the Venetian dodge, subordinated the new archbishopric to the patriarch in Grado. This decision of pope was in accordance with Venetian political goals because this ecclesiastical subordination allowed stronger political relation between Venice and eastern Adriatic coast. At the same time, foundation of the new metropolitan see on the Dalmatian coast was a kind of punishment to the Hungarian-Croatian kings, who had alliance with the Sicilian kingdom. Therefore, the foundation of archbishopric of Zadar was not inspired only with the pastoral care but it was carefully planed political move of the Holy See. On the other hand, archbishop Lampredius and community of Zadar were not satisfied with pope’s decision of Zadar’s subordination and they tried to avoid it, though they did not manage in their attempts. Thus, Lampredius was forced to swear a solemn oath to patriarch of Grado. However, in the future Lampredius tried in every way to escape from the embrace of Venice and patriarch of Grado. But, alas, all these attempt were in vain since pope had to keep alliance with Venice in his struggle with the emperor Friedrich i Barbarossa. At the end of this study author delivers a list of archbishops of Zadar. The list contains names of 62 archbishops, from the time of Lampredius up to present days
“Catalogus episcoporum et archiepiscoporum urbis Jadertinae” des Archidiakons Valerius Ponte
Get PDFU Znanstvenoj knjižnici u Zadru pohranjene su danas tri kronotakse zadarskih biskupa i nadbiskupa, čiji bi autor trebao biti Valerije Ponte: Ms 856, fol. 32–38, ovdje označen kao Catalogus A, zatim Ms 856, fol. 43–44a, ovdje naveden kao Catalogus C, te još Ms 112, fol. 31–35, ovdje spomenut kao Catalogus D. Radi lakšeg pregleda preuzeta su iz Ponteove “Historia ecclesiae Iadrensis” imena biskupa i nadbiskupa, Ms 112, fol. 15a–27a, koji je označen kao Catalogus B. Sve spomenute kronotakse su pri redanju biskupa skoro identične navodeći imena dvadesetorice biskupa. U pitanju nadbiskupa se znatno razlikuju i samim time pokazuju kako Ponte nije mogao biti svima autor. Ponte je autor samo prve kronotakse (Catalogus A). Ova serija predstavlja autorovu radnu skicu; nastala je poslije 1637. godine i dovršena za vrijeme nadbiskupa Teodora Balbija; u njoj su uz imena biskupa spomenuta još i 48 nadbiskupa. Druge se dvije kronotakse razlikuju, Catalogus C navodi imena 50 nadbiskupa, a Catalogus D imena 53 nadbiskupa; uz njih se spominje i ninski biskup Marko Loredan kao apostolski administrator (Catalogus A ga ne spominje). Obadvije kronotakse su zaključene s imenom nadbiskupa Karamana. Ovdje spomenuti Catalogus B uz biskupe navodi još 48 nadbiskupa i serija se zaključuje s imenom nadbiskupa Priolija i pozivaju se izričito na argumentaciju Pontea u njegovoj “Povijesti Zadarske Crkve”, kada donose podatke o nadbiskupu Jakovu de Fuligneo. Ova je činjenica evidentan dokaz da je neka nepoznata ruka kompilatorski obradila Ponteov tekst. Doprinos Valerija Pontea povijesnoj se znanosti danas ne smije nikako podcijeniti niti omalovažavati, nego ga treba smjestiti u kontekst historiografije 17. stoljeća. On je svojim radom utirao put modernoj historiografiji ukazujući na važnost arhivskog materijala razasutog po raznim arhivima; danas je on najvećim dijelom pohranjen u Državnom arhivu u Zadru i Arhivu Zadarske nadbiskupije. Ponteov rad nije ostao neprimijećen, nego ga je historiografija cijenila i cijeni njegov doprinos boljem poznavanju zadarske prošlosti. Ivan Lucius Lučić, s kojim ga je vezivalo prijateljstvo sve do smrti, prvi se poslužio njegovim radom, a zatim osobito utjecajni Daniele Farlati. Ovaj se u svome djelu “Illyricum sacrum” u petom svesku pozivao na Ponteovu argumentaciju. Valerije Ponte je imao utjecaja i na kasnije zadarske povjesničare 18. i 19. stoljeća. Ivan Zanotti-Tanzlingher i Carlo F. Bianchi od njih su samo dvije najutjecajnije osobe. Veličina Ponteova rada i njegove kronotakse jadertinskih prvosvećenika sastoji se u tome što ju je on među prvima pokušao pročistiti od nanosa srednjovjekovnih kronika spominjući samo pouzdane osobe, čija se autentičnost mogla dokazati dostupnim vrelima. U tom je pothvatu svakako imao znatnog uspjeha i njegov pokušaj predstavlja velik napredak, na kojemu mu mogu biti zavidni i današnji crkveni povjesničari.Today the Scientific Library in Zadar stores three chronotaxes of Zadar bishops and archbishops whose author must have been Valerius Ponte (1603–1679): Ms 865, folio 32–38, designated here as Catalogus A, then Ms 865, folio 43–44a, here designated as Catalogus C and Ms 112, folio 31–35, here mentioned as Catalogus D. The names of the bishops and the archbishops have been taken from Ponte’s Historia ecclesiae Iadrensis, Ms 112, folio 15a–27a, which is designated as Catalogus B in order to facilitate the reading. When listing the bishops all the said chronotaxes are almost identical, listing twelve bishops. When archbishops are in question they differ to a large extent which only shows that Ponte could not have been the author of all of them. Ponte is the author of only the first chronotaxis (Catalogus A). This series is the author’s working copy, it was written after 1637 and it was completed during the time of archbishop Teodor Balbo; alongside the names of the bishops it mentions 48 archbishops. The other two chronotaxes differ, catalogue C mentioning 50 archbishops and Catalogue D 53 archbishops; the Nin bishop Marko Loredan is mentioned alongside them as the apostolic administrator (Catalogue A makes no mention of him). Both chronotaxes conclude with the name of the archbishop Karaman. The above mentioned Catalogus B lists alongside the bishops 48 archbishops and the series is completed with the name of the archbishop Proli and it explicitly calls upon Ponte’s argument in The History of the Zadar Church, when they record the facts concerning the archbishop Jacob de Fuligneo. This fact is obvious evidence that an unknown hand compiled and worked upon Ponte’s text. Today the contribution to historical knowledge made by Valerius Ponte cannot be underestimated nor should it be deprecated but rather it has to be positioned within the context of 17th century historiography. With his labors he paved the way for modern historiography pointing out the significance of archival material dispersed throughout various archives; today for the most part this has been stored in the State Archive in Zadar and in the Archive of the Zadar Archbishopric. Ponte’s labor has not passed unnoticed but historiography has valued and values his contribution to a better knowledge of the past of Zadar. Ivan Lucius Lučić who was his friend up to the time of his death was the first to use his findings and afterwards he had a special influence on Daniel Farlati. In the fifth volume of his Illyricum sacrum the latter refers to Ponte’s arguments. Valerius Ponte also influenced the later Zadar historians in the 18th and the 19th century: Ivan Zanotti-Tanzlingher and Carlo F. Bianchi are only the two most influential individuals. The greatness of Ponte’s work and of his chronotaxes of Zadar church fathers consists in the fact that he was amongst the first to try to purify the Medieval chronicles by mentioning only reliable persons whose authenticity could be proven by available sources. In this chore he had great success and his attempt represents a huge step forward which can be looked upon with envy even by contemporary Church historians.. .In der Bibliothek von Zadar (Znanstvena knjižnica u Zadru) sind drei verschiedene series episcoporum et archiepiscoporum urbis Iadertinae vorhanden. Sie werden dem Archidiakon Valerius Ponte (1603–1679) zugeschrieben: Manuskript 856, fol. 32–38, wird hier als Catalogus A, Manuskript 856, fol. 43–44a als Catalogus C und Manuskript 112, fol. 31–35 als Catalogus D bezeichnet. Um eine bessere Übersicht zu erhalten, wurden aus der Historia ecclesiae Iadrensis des Verfassers (ebenfalls in derselben Bibliothek, Manuskript 112, fol. 15a–27a vorhanden) die Namen der Bischöfe und der Erzbischöfe aufgelistet. Sie werden hier als Catalogus B bezeichnet. Alle series episcoporum et archiepiscoporum sind sich bezüglich der Bischöfe einig und nennen nur 20 Namen. Was die Namen der Erzbischöfe betrifft, so unterscheiden sie sich deutlich voneinander und zeigen damit, dass Valerius Ponte nicht der Verfasser aller drei “series” sein kann, sondern dass er nur Catalogus A entworfen hat. Diese Arbeitsliste ist nach 1637 entstanden. Sie erwähnt neben den Bischöfen auch noch 48 Namen von Erzbischöfen. Catalogus C und D unterscheiden sich in der Frage der Erzbischöfe. Während der Catalogus C 50 Namen von Erzbischöfen erwähnt, nennt der Catalogus D 53 Namen. Demgegenüber erwähnt Catalogus B nur 48 Namen. Der Beitrag des Valerius Ponte darf nicht unterschätzt, sondern seine Leistung sollte im Kontext der Historiographie des 17. Jahrhundert gewürdigt werden. Mit seiner Arbeit machte er auf die Bedeutung von Originalquellen der Kirche von Zadar aufmerksam. Diese befinden sich heute im Staatsarchiv in Zadar (Državni arhiv u Zadru) und im Archiv des Erzbistums Zadar (Arhiv Zadarske nadbiskupije). Ponte beeinflusste mit seiner wissenschaftlichen Leistung Johannes Lucius aus Trogir und Daniele Farlati. Vor allem der letztgenannte Autor hat sich in seinem Illyricum sacrum auf die Argumentation Pontes berufen. Valerius Pontes Werk floss in die Historiographie des 18. und des 19. Jahrhunderts ein: Johannes Zanotti- Tanzlingher und Carlo F. Bianchi sind hier zu nennen. Die Bedeutung der series episcoporum et archiepiscoporum urbis Iadertinae liegt darin, dass hier erstmals der Versuch unternommen wurde, eine Liste von Bischöfen und Erzbischöfen zu erstellen, wobei die Personen aus den mittelalterlichen Chroniken, die nicht nachweisbar waren, nicht in die Liste aufgenommen wurden
Wann und wo wurde zum ersten Mal ein Bischof von Zadar erwähnt?
Get PDFAutor je u proučavanju zadarske crkvene povijesti pokušao na temelju dostupnih izvora, osobito izvješća Atanazija Aleksandrijskog, i na temelju relevantne literature riješiti u dosadašnjoj literaturi često ponavljani problem postojanja zadarskog gradskog biskupa već u prvoj polovici IV. stoljeća. Došao je do zaključka da je razvoj crkvenih struktura grada Zadra i njegova područja, gradskog municipija, protekao otprilike podjednako kao i u drugim središtima rimske provincije Dalmacije, osobito u centru carske provincije u Saloni, jer kršćanstvo kao nova duhovna snaga nije nipošto zaobišlo tu provinciju. Prema tome je Zadar već na samom početku IV. stoljeća imao svoga gradskog biskupa, svakako prije Milanskog edikta, koji je podupirao odluke Rimske sinode iz 341. godine i nešto kasnije sudjelovao na saboru u Sardici. Danas poznato samo ime zadarskog biskupa Feliksa iz god. 381., koji je sudjelovao u radu Akvilejske i Milanske biskupske sinode, jest pokazatelj nestanka izvora tijekom dugih stoljeća kršćanske prošlosti. Akvilejski je biskup Teodor s đakonom Augustunom na saboru u Arlesu god. 314. za Crkvu provincije Dalmacije zastupao ne samo solinskog već i zadarskog nepoznatog biskupa. Stoga se može reći da je Zadar već krajem III. stoljeća imao svoga biskupa i da se osnutak zadarske kršćanske zajednice zbio prije spomenutog sabora u Arlesu god. 314., na kojem je Crkvu Dalmacije predstavljao biskup Akvileje.In researching Zadar Church history, the author makes an attempt, on the basis of available data and the relevant literature, to solve the problem often encountered in extant literature of the existence of a Zadar city bishop as early as the first half of the IVth century. He draws the conclusion that the development of Church structures in the city of Zadar and its vicinity, the city municipium, proceeded approximately in the same fashion as in the other centers of the Roman province of Dalmatia. This was particularly true as far as the center of the imperial province in Salona goes because Christianity as a new spiritual force did not bypass this province. Accordingly, at the very beginning of the IVth century Zadar had its city bishop who supported the decisions of the Roman synod from 314 and a bit later participated in the council in Sardica. The fact that today we only know the name of the Zadar bishop, Felix, from the year 381 who participated in the Aquilea and Milan bishop synod is an indicates the disappearance of the original source material during the long centuries of Christian history. The Aquilian bishop Theodore with deacon Augustun represented not only the Salona bishop but also the unknown bishop from Zadar at the Arles council in 314. Therefore it can be said that already by the end of the IIIth century Zadar had its own bishop and that the founding of the Zadar Christian community took place before the above mentioned Arles council in 314 at which the bishop of Aquilea represented the Dalmatian Church.Die berechtigte historische Frage, wann und wo zum ersten Mal ein Bischof von Zadar erwähnt wurde, lässt sich sehr schwer sachgerecht einordnen, da heute kaum zeitgenössische Quellen vorhanden sind, die für die Entwicklung der kirchlichen Strukturen in der römischen Provinz Dalmatien aufschlußreich wären. Sogar für die Hauptstadt der Provinz (Salona) lässt sich heute der Christianisierungsprozess nicht mehr lückenlos verfolgen. Die ersten Spuren einer Christianisierung lassen sich in der Stadt Zadar und seiner Umgebung erst Anfang des 4. Jahrhunderts feststellen. In der älteren Historiographie, die Valerius Ponte (1603–1679), Johannes Tanzlingher-Zanotti (1651–1732) und Daniele Farlati (1690–1773) symbolisieren, wurde die Ansicht vertreten, dass der erste Bischof von Zadar Felix hieß; dieser nahm an der Synode von Aquileia (381) und Mailand (391) teil. Vitaliano Brunelli, dem auch Mate Suić folgt, vermittelt die Forschungsergebnisse dieser Gruppe in der neueren Literatur. Eine andere einflußreiche Gruppe von Kirchenhistorikern, vor allem der kroatischen Kirchenhistoriker (Krunoslav Draganović, Stanko Bačić und Mile Vidović) ist der Meinung, dass ein Bischof von Zadar, dessen Name unbekannt geblieben ist, mit seinen Kollegen aus Dalmatien an der römischen Synode 341, die Julius I. einberufen hat, teilgenommen hat. Dies lässt sich aber nicht mit dem Bericht des Athansius von Alexandrien in seiner Historia Arianorum in Einklang bringen, in der der einflußreiche Kirchenlehrer schreibt, dass die Bischöfe aus Dalmatien die Entscheidung des römischen Konzils unterstützt haben. Eine Ausnahme in der Historiographie stellte Carlo Federico Bianchi mit seiner Zara christiana (vol. 1, Zara, 1877, 29–30) dar, der den mittelalterlichen Chroniken Vertrauen schenkte und die Meinung vertrat, Zadar habe einen Bischof schon in der apostolischen Zeit gehabt und dieser hieß Donatus. In diesem kleinen Beitrag wurde die historische Frage erörtert, wann und wo zum ersten Mal ein Bischof von Zadar erwähnt worden ist. Aufgrund der vorhandenen Quellen – Historia Arianorum ad monachos des Athanasios von Alexandrien – lässt sich nicht eindeutig behaupten, dass ein nicht mit Namen bekannter Bischof von Zadar an der römischen Synode 341 teilgenommen hat; dieser habe lediglich die Entscheidung des Konzils unterstützt. Andererseits lässt sich auch die Teilnahme des Bischofs von Zadar auf der Synode von Sardika 343 nicht eindeutig belegen, weil Athanasios in seiner Apologia contra Arianos nur sumarisch berichtet, ein Bischof aus Dalmatien war auf dem Konzil anwesend. Da der Bischof von Salona, Maximus (ca. 326–346) nicht an den synodalen Tagungen in Sardika teilgenommen hat, ist Zadar der einzige Ort in der römischen Provinz Dalmatien, aus welchem ein Bischof auf dieser Synode teilnehmen konnte: Zadar war im 4. Jahrhundert neben Salona das einzige Bistumsmunizipium in der römischen Provinz Dalmatien, die anderen Diözesen entlang der dalmatinischen Adriaküste schienen erst im 5. Jahrhundert gegründet worden zu sein. Aufgrund der vorhandenen Quellen lässt sich heute nur vermuten, dass Zadar nicht nur vor dem Konzil in Rom und Sardika eine Bischofsresidenz war, sondern die Stadt müsste schon früher eine christliche Gemeinde gehabt haben. In den Akten des Konzils von Arles wird 314 von einer Provinz “Dalmatia” gesprochen: Wenn der Bischof von Aquilea 314 auf dem Konzil von Arles die Kirche Dalmatiens vertreten hat, dann hat dieser nicht nur die Kirche von Salona, sondern auch die Kirche von Zadar vertreten
Translatio beati Chrysogoni martyris as a Narrative Source of Early Croatian History
Get PDFLegendarni opis prijenosa relikvija sv. Krševana, koji je iz nekoga starijeg predloška prepisao monah Zoilo, sin Ivanov, 1498. godine pokazuje sve značajke srednjovjekovne hagiografske literature. Na temelju unutarnjih i vanjskih kritičkih zapažanja iznosi se pretpostavka da su svečeve relikvije prenesene u Zadar tijekom 7. ili samim početkom 8. stoljeća, ali je sam sadržaj translacije literarno i stilski prerađivan i dotjeravan tijekom minulih stoljeća; latinski jezik odgovara periodu 12./13. stoljeća. Premda pisan u tradicionalnom žanru translatio ossis, ipak tekst prenosi na sebi svojstven način povijesna zapažanja važna za ranu hrvatsku povijest: u Zadru je još tijekom ranoga srednjeg vijeka u Justinijanovoj tradiciji gradski biskup prvi čovjek grada, a lokalna aristokracija nije se još uspjela nametnuti gradu. Po kopnenom zaleđu koje autor podrugljivo naziva oblast Marab (provincia qui dicitur Marab), naselili su se novi narodi koji su djelomično kršćani, ali su još uvijek pod snažnim poganskim utjecajem svojih pređa. Među njima nalazi se jedan biskup koji pak nema ono dostojanstvo, čast i ulogu kao što je to imao njegov kolega u susjednom Zadru. Spomenuti je biskup mogao biti samo biskup Nina jer niti jedno drugo mjesto u samom zaleđu Zadra nije imalo sve preduvjete za razvoj biskupske službe. Samim time Nin bi imao svojega gradskog biskupa još prije dolaska Franaka. Rodovsku je zajednicu predvodio „senio“ i predaja ga, kako bi ponizila stanovnike oblasti Marab, naziva stari Mirmidonac. Ovaj nije u izvornom smislu riječi „star“, nego predstavlja rodovskog starješinu, a nikako kneza kada se Hrvatska pod franačkim utjecajem transformira u kneževinu karolinškog tipa.The Translatio beati Chrysogoni martyris, which was copied from some older copy by monk Zoilo the son of Ivan in 1498, unifies, as far as its content goes, the familiar features of Medieval hagiographic literature: inventio – translatio – miracula. One episodes flows into another episode: first the building of the church in honor of the saint which is connected to the discovery and the transport of the saint’s reliquaries. The next episode is the theft of the reliquaries which was done by three monks and their fate in the mysterious land of Marab, especially the reaction of its inhabitants who are known as the Myrmidones. A report concerning an Aquila moneyman who out of gratitude bequeaths a rich gift to the building of the church in the saint’s honor was incorporated into the tradition. On the basis of inner and outer critical evaluations the hypothesis has been put forward that the saint’s reliquaries were transported to Zadar during the 7th or at the beginning of the 8th century but the content itself of the translation has been literarily and stylistically modified and upgraded during the last centuries. The Latin version dates to the 12/13th century. Although written in the traditional genre, translatio ossis, the text records in its own distinct fashion historical observations which are significant to early Croatian history: during the early Middle Ages in the Justinian tradition the city bishop in Zadar was the most prominent person in the city and the local aristocracy did not yet manage to impose itself on the city. New peoples, who are partially Christian but are still under the powerful pagan influence of their ancestors, settled the hinterland which the author mockingly designates as Marab land (provincial qui dicitur Marab). Amongst them was a bishop who does not have the dignity nor the role that his colleague had in the neighboring city of Zadar. The said bishop could only have been the bishop of Nin because there was no other place in the hinterland of Zadar with preconditions for the development of the bishop’s service. On the basis of this Nin would have had its city bishop earlier than the arrival of the Franks and the Nin bishopric would have existed before them. The clan community was headed by a „senior“ and traditional accounts, in order to humiliate the inhabitants of the Marab province, call him the „old Myrmidone“. He is not an „elder“ in the original sense of the word but a senior in the clan and in no way a duke during the period when Croatia under Frank influence is being transformed into a principality of the Charlemagne type
DIE EINSCHRÄNKUNG DER VERWENDUNG DER GLAGOLIZA AUF DER SYNODE VON ZADAR 1460
Get PDFU radu se prikazuje odluka Zadarske sinode od 4. prosinca 1460. na kojoj je nadbiskup Mafej Vallaresso pokušao suzbiti upotrebu liturgije na crkvenoslavenskom jeziku hrvatske redakcije
(lingua sclava). Sinodalni akti nisu danas sačuvani već je dostupan samo jedan dio sinodalnog kanona u dvije verzije. Originalnu verziju donosi Carlo F. Bianchi, dok je drugu, neznatno izmijenjenu, pribilježio Ivan Zanotti – Tanzlingher. Poslije interpretcije i konzultacije mjerodavnih vrela zaključuje se kako sinodalna odredba nije posve dokidala liturgijska slavlja na hrvatskom jeziku nego je samo na sinodi poduzet pothvat prostornog i vremenskog suzbijanja
»glagoljaške liturgije«. Zadarski su nadbiskupi pokušavali tijekom XVI. stoljeća suzbiti glagoljicu na teritoriju nadbiskupije, ali – kako to pokazuju dostupna vrela – nisu imali znatnijeg uspjeha.In this short discussion author analyzes decisions of the Zadar synod that was held on 4th December 1460. At this diocese council archbishop Mafeo Vallaresso tried to suppress local custom of having the holy service in Church-Slavonic language. The acts from this synod unfortunately are not completely preserved but only one article De celebratione missarum et elebrandi divina official today is known in two versions. The first, and presumably original, version was brought to us by Carlo F. Bianchi, and the second one, just slightly modified, was noted by Ivan Zanotti-Tanzlingher. The both notes deliver basically the same information, and differ only regarding the beginning of this act. Archbishop Vallaresso deeply influenced ecclesiastical life of his diocese at his time: he renovated archbishopric palace, ordered a new bell for the cathedral’s bell tower, and restored organ in the cathedral of St. Anastasia. Still,
even though he was a typical renaissance man, he did not care much about the specific local tradition of Zadar and deeply rooted Croatian language. Moreover, through the synod he tried to restrain Glagolitic liturgy only to two town churches: St. Donatus (Holy Trinity) and
St. Mary the Great. Similarly, a century later, archbishops of the sixteenth century also tried to suppress Glagolitic script in Zadar, for example on the synods of 1566 and 1594. However, in spite of their endeavors, as it is clearly visible from the extant sources, they did not have much success, and Church Slavonic remained an integral part of local liturgy until the reform of the Second Vatican Council.In dieser kleinen Abhandlung wird die synodale Entscheidung über die Einschränkung der Liturgie in der kirchenslavischen Sprache (der kroatischen Redaktion) analysiert. Der venezianische Patrizier und der Erzbischof von Zadar, Maphäus Vallaresso (1450-1496) hat am 4. Dezember 1460 die Synode in Zadar einberufen; ihre Akten oder Entscheidungen sind nicht erhalten, nur ein kleiner Ausschnitt aus dem Kanon »De celebratione missarum et celebrandi divina officia«. Dieser ist heute in zwei Versionen zugänglich, die sich sprachlich nur geringfügig voneinander unterscheiden. Die Originalversion hat
schon Carlo F. Bianchi veröffentlicht und die zweite hat Johannes Zanotti – Tanzlingher in seinem Werk Epitome synodorum dioecesis Iadrensis vermerkt. Die synodale Entscheidung versucht die Liturgie in der kirchenslavischen Sprache der kroatischen Redaktion
für bestimmte Zeit nur auf zwei Kirchen in Zadar zu reduzieren: Die Kirche der Hl. Dreifaltigkeit (heute hl. Donat) und die Kirche der hl. Maria. Diese Entscheidung ließ sich nicht verwirklichen, da die Liturgie in lingua slava (d. h. in kroatischer Sprache) eine lange Tradition hat und in allen Pfarreien verbreitet war. Die Erzbischöfe von Zadar, Mutius Callinus (1555-1566) und auch Aloysius Molinus (1592-1595) haben diese Entscheidung auf den Synoden 1566 und 1594 noch einmal verbindlich erklärt; die Versuche sind gescheitert. Erzbischof Oktavian Garzzadoro (1623-1644), der aus gesundheitlichen Gründen Papst Urban VIII. um die Entbindung von den Pflichten bat, fügte seiner Begründung hinzu, dass er die Sprache der Gläubigen seines Bistums nicht versteht. Dies ist
ein klarer Beweis dafür, dass in Zadar die Bevölkerung kroatisch gesprochen hat und die Liturgie bis zur Reform des II. Vatikanischen Konzils in der Landessprache gefeiert wurde
SEPTEM NOTABILIA DE AUCTORITATE PETRI WRITTEN BY IVAN STOJKOVIĆ, DOMINICAN FROM DUBROVNIK
Get PDFKratki i fragmentarni spisi Ivana Stojkovića Dubrovčanina (†1443.), koji su nastali poslije pregovorâ s husitima vođenih od siječnja do travnja 1433. godine, ostali su neobjavljeni. Među njima se nalazi i »Septem notabilia de auctoritate Petri« u kojem autor ukratko razlaže osobitost Petrove službe. Apostol Petar i njegovi nasljednici rimski biskupi nalaze se nesumnjivo na samom vrhu crkvene hijerarhije, ali u konkretnoj povijesnoj situaciji nije papa nikako »gospodar«, nego »služitelj« vjerujuće zajednice. Papinstvo je dio univerzalnog poslanja Crkve i ne može se promatrati odvojeno od vjerujuće zajednice sabrane na sveopćem saboru, kojoj je povjeren autoritet i papa ga vrši u njezino ime.During his entire life Dominican Ivan Stojković was preoccupied with theology, i.e. research of the Church. From the times of the councils in Pavia and Siena, and councils in Basel until his death in 1443, he intensively worked on this topic. The tractate Septem notabilia de auctoritate Petri, written after april 1433, represents one of his shorter manuscripts in which Stojković discussed some ecclesiastical aspects. However, most of these manuscripts never were published. The purpose of this study, i.e. Septem notabilia, was theological apology of Peter’s service and papal authority regarding contemporary ecclesiastical thought. This period often is seen as negative since during this fi rst half of the fi fteenth century promoters of Church councils advocated ecclesiastical reformation,
though this planned renovation was not against papal authority but against troubled position of Church in the Western Europe. Namely, a council that represents fragmented Church could not exist without legally elected Peter’s successor. Therefore, Stojković’s chief thesis regarding the »authority of Apostle Peter and his succesors« was that auctoritas and postestas were given to the Church, i.e. the authority was given to the assembly of the believers and this community can exercise this authority throughout general council. This thesis Stojković based on the Holy Scripture, maintaining that Jesus Christ did not entrust Church to only one person. Moreover, he tried to relate this aspect with the historical development of papal authority, mainly avoiding legal and juridical aspect of Peter’s service. Thus, Stojković did not try to explain whose authority is higher and more
justifi ed: papal or council’s. By the same token, he maintained that there existed only one authority, which could be divided and distributed among many. Therefore, according to Stojković, Apostle Peter, and his successors, gained the head and honorary position within the Church, though the community of believers did not lose its signifi cance; i.e. Jesus Christ entrusted faith and belief to Church in persona Petri. Namely, the authority was entrusted to Church and Peter was only the person responsible for implementation of this
authority. Therefore, pope is not and cannot be a sovereign of the Church, since there can be only one caput, and this is, though invisible, Jesus Christ, and thus pope can only be caput secundarium
ECCLESIASTICAL SYNOD OF THE CHURCH OF ZADAR (ZARA) IN 1647
Get PDFZadarska biskupija – osnovana još samim početkom 4. stoljeća a od 1154. godine nadbiskupija i metropolija – bila je u 17. stoljeću stalna meta turskih pustošenja, jer se grad Zadar tijekom mletačko-turskih ratova pretvorio u najsigurniju venecijansku utvrdu na istočnoj obali Jadrana. Sinodalni život zadarske crkve bio je u vremenskom periodu između 1607. i 1688. godine iznimno bogat; u tako malom vremenskom razmaku je bilo sazvano i održano čak trinaest sinoda. Sinoda 1647. godine, koju je sazvao nadbiskup Bernard Florio (1642.-1565.) pripada ovom vremenskom periodu I pokazuje kolika važnost se pridavala sinodama I njihovom značenju za obnovu crkvenih struktura.The bishopric of Zadar (Zara) – founded already in the fourth century and from 1154 also archbishopric and metropolitan see – became in the seventeenth century a constant target of the Ottoman attacks, since the city of Zadar in this period became the most secure stronghold of Venice on the eastern Adriatic coast. In the period between 1607 and 1688 the ecclesiastical life in Zadar was rather rich and in this period there were organized 13 synods. The synod that occurred in 1647, and initiated by archbishop Bernard Florio (1642-1665) belongs to this period, demonstrates importance of the ecclesiastical life and ecclesiastical tendencies to renew the Church structure. Unfortunately, the written evidence about the work of this synod is lost. However, in the archives of the Croatian Academy of Sciences and Arts one can find a transcript of its conclusions under the title »Brevissimum compendium synodi dioecensane Iadrensis, habita anno 1647 in civitate Iadrae«. The archival code of this document is II d. 34, no, fol. 1r-9r. This document contains 28 acts that are divided in two parts. The first part contains the rules about celebration of the holy sacraments, and these sacraments had to be in accordance with the Roman missal, except those who obey Glagolitic rule that was revised by Rafael Levaković. The second part includes rules about clerics, their discipline and canonical core service in metropolitan Church of St. Anastasia. The last act concerns themonarchies and its monasteries which should be visited yearly
- …
