Nedim Rabić

Hans Seybolt bio je samostanski pisar iz Donje Bavarske koji je živio u drugoj polovini 15. stoljeća. Kao izaslanik falačkog grofa boravio je 1476. godine na vjenčanju ugarskog kralja Matije Korvina i napuljske princeze Beatrix. O tom događaju je ostavio detaljan izvještaj koji je kao prijepis sačuvan u jedinom primjerku koji se nalazi u Državnoj biblioteci Bavarske pod signaturom Cgm 331. Seyboltov spis sadrži i kratke obavijesti o bosanskom kralju Nikoli Iločkom i njegovom sinu Lovri koje su predmet analize ovog rada.

Predmet ovog rada su dnevničke zabilješke bavarskog botaničara Otta Sendtnera objavljene u njemačkom časopisu „Das Ausland“ o tvrđavi u Srebreniku i tradiciji o njenom padu koji su u literaturi potpuno nepoznati. Ovaj minhenski univerzitetski profesor je boravio u Bosanskom ejaletu 1847. godine, te je tom prilikom, obišao značajan broj gradova krećući se od Splita, Livna pa do Travnika kao glavnim odredištem. Od vezirskog grada i sjedišta Ejaleta uputio se za potrebe svojih botaničkih istraživanja u Bosansku Posavinu, a tom prilikom je prošao kroz Srebrenik. Sendtner je detaljno i nadahnuto pisao o tvrđavi, a ostavio je i zabilješku lokalnog narodnog predanja o njenom padu pod Osmanlije koja zavređuje posebnu pažnju. Također se u Sendtnerovom izlaganju mogu uočiti romantičarski nara- tivi i orijentalni elementi u opisima tvrđave Srebrenik i pejzaža koji je okružuje koji se mogu pripisati specifičnostima imaginacije o srednjem vijeku prisutne u intelektualnim krugovima u Evropi sredinom 19. stoljeća.

Apstrakt: U radu se ukazuje na jedan, u historiografiji o stećcima zanemaren spis iz 1725. godine. Riječ je o izvještaju načinjenom nakon uspostave granice između Habsburške monarhije i Osmanskog carstva kao rezultata Požarevačkog mirovnog sporazuma 1718. godine. Iako veoma štur, ovaj spis nedvojbeno ukazuje na postojanje nekropole stećaka u Bijeljini ili njenoj neposrednoj blizini kao i na području naselja Kobaš na Savi. Ovi podaci predstavljaju drugi najstariji spomen stećaka u pisanim izvorima, nakon spomena u putopisu Benedikta Kuripešića 1530., te sami po sebi zaslužuju pažnju. Iznesene su indicije da bi se ovi spomenici, ili barem dio njih, mogao odnositi na "senzacionalno" otkriće stećaka u temeljima porušene Atik džamije u Bijelini 2002. godine.

Stjepan II Kotromanic was the first Bosnian ruler that extends his rule to the shores of the Adriatic Sea. The paper treats this important and crucial part of Bos nian medieval history that took place in 1326. In addition to the course of events that ultimately resulted in Bosnia's access to the sea, the preconditions and consequences were also taken into account. To a lesser extent, in addition to politics, economic his tory is also treated, i.e. those aspects of it that are important for this topic.

The paper focuses on a regional approach in the historiography of the Bosnian Middle Ages, especially from the point of view of its affiliation with the concept of East-Central Europe. This concept originated in the 1920s, grew after 1945, and it was established in the general scientific public only in the late 1980s and early 1990s. Today it is also experiencing strong growth, but is limited mainly to the area of present-day Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Hungary. Although there is no universally accepted definition of the spatial size of East-Central Europe, there is a large number of contributions, some of them indisputably are fundamental, and consider Bosnia an integral part of it.
The diverse relevance of the term “region” (Latin “regio”) gained global significance in the late 1990s, although the question of the existence of historical regions within Europe has been a subject of interest for historians since the formation of the European idea from ancient times. Initially, the term East- Central Europe was used almost exclusively by scholars in emigration. Oscar Halecki was one of the main protagonists and advocates. During and after the Second World War, he was the most influential in bringing the notion of East-Central Europe to life in scientific and political discourse. Another reason for the revival of regional approaches in contemporary media is more recent, and is often associated with the so-called spatial turn as a turning point in contemporary humanities. This caused regional history to no longer be viewed merely as a set of political entities. Therefore, particular attention has been paid to the development of the notion of the region and the spatial turn as essential categories not only of contemporary historiography but of sciences in general.
On the one hand, very little has been written in the European languages about the history of Bosnia, not to speak of its medieval past; on the other hand, the use of the term “Eastern Central Europe” outside of a research publication on East-Central Europe may cause misunderstandings about its borders. The spatial dimensions of East-Central Europe, as well as the historical-culturalscientific use of this term, are discussed a lot since it was introduced in the historiography. The question of the association of Bosnia and other Balkan states to the East-Central European region is less geographical in nature; rather,
this connection is reflected in the cultural-historical context. On the other hand, the study of the medieval history of southeastern Europe has been predominantly an object of regional national historiographies. The historiographical presentation is made more difficult, not only by the widespread literature in several languages, but also by the very different sources. Although interest in this topic seems largely extinct, the multi-ethnic region of Southeastern Europe, in the broad spectrum of European historical development, plays a major role. Since the beginnings of modern national movements, the Middle Ages have been a starting point for the emergence of critical historiographies as well as mythical historical images in this area.
The perspectives of studying the history of Bosnia as a cultural and spatial component of East-Central Europe in the Middle Ages can be understood as
links between micro and macro histories in the development of contemporary concepts of regionalism. The merging of micro and macro histories in this area opens new possibilities, but also raises many questions: why is the East-Central European context important in exploring the Bosnian history of the Middle Ages? How to define the regionality of micro and macro-regions and how to understand the relationship between Bosnia and East-Central Europe? These are just some of the questions we have raised in this paper.

Summary:
Re-examining of source material and contemporary literature, mainly unknown to the domestic academic public, we emphasized the significance of a somewhat forgotten, strong female figure of Bosnian but also German Middle Ages. With her marriage to the Helfenstein Count Ulrich, Marija did not only move away from her homeland but also completely vanished from domestic tradition and historiography.
Since L. Thallóczy’s good and detailed article from the end of the 19th century was the last attempt in domestic historiography to give a complete review about Duchess Marija, we considered it necessary to rehabilitate his efforts after a historiographic silence of many decades. We strengthened it and partly refreshed it with the reviews of T. Schön and G. Burkhardt. With a critical analysis of papers of these two mentioned authors and numerous others and on the basis of source reports which were available to us, we came to the discovery which we presented here in a very short form. We stress that we largely used the chronicle of O. Gabelkover which for the last time was used by Thallóczy 120 years ago. A great number of our abstracts derive from it. Therefore, this paper does not aim to comprehensively review the life of the Bosnian Duchess Marija, but rather to disclose those aspects of her life which were less known and mostly problematized. In this sense, for the full understanding, we will consult the cited articles and complete the knowledge of this unique figure of Bosnian history.
According to the problem, the greatest attention is devoted to Marija’s origin. Compared to earlier reviews, we make a strong assumption that Marija was the daughter of the Bosnian Ban Stjepan II Kotromanić and by no means the daughter of his father Stjepan I, as this opinion prevailed in historiography. We reviewed her wedding, but also her life that was marked with political and social engagement in Germany. Brought to an uncomfortable position due to the unequal marital bond, Marija was faced with different challenges and duties in the county. After the death of her husband Ulrich in 1372, she became the leading figure of the county, even though her sons, according to the succession law, gradually assumed the leading role. By the virtue of numerous German archival sources it is possible to precisely outline her social life imbued with frequent and generous donations to church institutions. She gave birth to nine children, six sons and three daughters. She died in 1403. She was buried in the sepulchral chapel in Überkingen, but there is no trace of her grave today. Allegedly, there was also an inscription on her tombstone, but because of the dubious length and character of the text we deemed it as inauthentic. Finally, we attempted to provide an answer to the question why Marija was labelled as the main culprit for the destruction of the house of Helfenstein by the chronicler Oswald Gabelkover, and after him by many other authors.
Looking at it from a scientific and historical point, Marija… von Bosnien (as she frequently signed documents) deserves a more significant place than domestic historiography recognized it until now. Her long and well-documented activity, allows us to expect new historiographic approaches to this subject in future.

Abstrakt:
Rad istražuje porijeklo i život jedne bosanske vojvotkinje koja se sredinom 14. stoljeća udala sa grofa Ulricha X od Helfensteina iz njemačke pokrajine Švapske. U radu se analiziraju domaći, ugarski i njemački izvorni podaci kao i informacije koje pruža hroničar helfenštajnskih grofova Oswald Gabelkover, ali i drugi hroničari 15. i 16. stoljeća. Posebna pažnja poklanja se literarnoj građi većim dijelom nepoznatoj domaćoj akademskoj javnosti. Izraženo je nastojanje da se genealoški problem riješi na način vezivanja porijekla Marije za bosanskog bana Stjepana II Kotromanića koji bi prema ovakvoj postavci bio njen otac. Ovim radom se ukazuje na zaboravljenu značajnu žensku ličnost bosanskog i njemačkog srednjeg vijeka koja se u brojnim njemačkim izvorima navodi kao Maria Gräfin von Helfenstein Herzogin von Bosnien.

Re-examining of source material and contemporary literature, mainly unknown to the domestic academic public, we emphasized the significance of a somewhat forgotten, strong female figure of Bosnian but also German Middle Ages. With her marriage to the Helfenstein Count Ulrich, Marija did not only move away from her homeland but also completely vanished from domestic tradition and historiography.
Since L. Thallóczy’s good and detailed article from the end of the 19th century was the last attempt in domestic historiography to give a complete review about Duchess Marija, we considered it necessary to rehabilitate his efforts after a historiographic silence of many decades. We strengthened it and partly refreshed it with the reviews of T. Schön and G. Burkhardt. With a critical analysis of papers of these two mentioned authors and numerous others and on the basis of source reports which were available to us, we came to the discovery which we presented here in a very short form. We stress that we largely used the chronicle of O. Gabelkover which for the last time was used by Thallóczy 120 years ago. A great number of our abstracts derive from it. Therefore, this paper does not aim to comprehensively review the life of the Bosnian Duchess Marija, but rather to disclose those aspects of her life which were less known and mostly problematized. In this sense, for the full understanding, we will consult the cited articles and complete the knowledge of this unique figure of Bosnian history.
According to the problem, the greatest attention is devoted to Marija’s origin. Compared to earlier reviews, we make a strong assumption that Marija was the daughter of the Bosnian Ban Stjepan II Kotromanić and by no means the daughter of his father Stjepan I, as this opinion prevailed in historiography. We reviewed her wedding, but also her life that was marked with political and social engagement in Germany. Brought to an uncomfortable position due to the unequal marital bond, Marija was faced with different challenges and duties in the county. After the death of her husband Ulrich in 1372, she became the leading figure of the county, even though her sons, according to the succession law, gradually assumed the leading role. By the virtue of numerous German archival sources it is possible to precisely outline her social life imbued with frequent and generous donations to church institutions. She gave birth to nine children, six sons and three daughters. She died in 1403. She was buried in the sepulchral chapel in Überkingen, but there is no trace of her grave today. Allegedly, there was also an inscription on her tombstone, but because of the dubious length and character of the text we deemed it as inauthentic. Finally, we attempted to provide an answer to the question why Marija was labelled as the main culprit for the destruction of the house of Helfenstein by the chronicler Oswald Gabelkover, and after him by many other authors.
Looking at it from a scientific and historical point, Marija… von Bosnien (as she frequently signed documents) deserves a more significant place than domestic historiography recognized it until now. Her long and well-documented activity, allows us to expect new historiographic approaches to this subject in future.

Rad ukazuje na osnovna saznanja o srednjovjekovnoj prošlosti Gradačca. Nastao je samostalnom inicijativom 2007. godine tokom druge godine studija na Odsjeku za historiju na Filozofskom fakultetu u Sarajevu. Tokom daljeg, kontinuiranog interesa, za prošlost ovog grada neki su stavovi i tvrdnje, zastupljene u ovom radu, revidirane.

Težnja prema regionalnim metodološkim konceptima u me-dievistici postoji najvjerovatnije koliko i medievistika sama. In-tenziviranje takvih nastojanja me-đutim novijeg je datuma. Knjiga Márte Font obuhvaća jedan spe-cifičan historijski prostor u Evropi, prostor koji nije omeđen geograf-sko-fizičkim, već historijskim obi-lježjima. Sva ranija nastojanja da se ovom prostoru odrede geograf-ske granice ostala su bezuspješna. Historijski prostor o kojem je ov-dje riječ je Istočno-centralna Evro-pa, termin koji je "skovan" poslije Prvog svjetskog rata, a mlađi je svega nekoliko godina od termina Srednja Evropa. Kada se pogledaju trendovi u evropskoj historiografi-ji, posebno u publikacijama na nje-mačkom i engleskom govornom području, lahko će se primijeti-ti da je pojam Istočno-centralna Evropa već dugi niz decenija ak-tuelan. Štaviše, može se reći da se, kako vrijeme odmiče, radovi koji u fokus uzimaju ovu regionalnu di-menziju sve češće pojavljuju, bilo da imaju pojam Istočno-centralna Evropa u svom naslovu, ključnim riječima ili unutar samog teksta. Isto se može reći i za naučne sku-pove historičara koji se posljednjih dvadesetak godina organiziraju diljem Evrope. Márta Font pripada uglednoj grupi mađarskih medievista čiji naučni opseg i domet, u geograf-skom pogledu, nadilazi mađarske nacionalne granice i radovi su joj objavljeni na mnogim evropskim jezicima. Rođena je 1952. godi-ne u Pečuhu u Mađarskoj. Studij historije i slavistike pohađala je na Univerzitetu u Segedinu 1970-1975. i tu je stekla doktorsku titulu 1979. s temom "Nekoliko pitanja

Rijetko je koja tema u medijevistici bila podvrgnuta izmjenama i reinter-pretacijama kao što je to slučaj sa feu-dalizmom. "Neko ko čuje riječ 'feuda-lizam' pomišlja na društvenu nejedna-kost u 'mračnom srednjem vijeku', na zle gospodare i siromašne seljake, na izrabljivanje i nasilje. Pa čak i školski udžbenici prikazuju neslobodne seljake (kmetove) kao bazu 'srednjovjekovne feudalne piramide'. Sve su to besmislice! Predstava piramide je obmanju-juća. Sa seljacima lena imaju malo, a sa sužanjstvom i izrabljivanjem ništa zajedničkog; i ona nisu institucije koje su sa srednjim vijekom nestale" (6. str.). Ovim rečenicama Steffen Patzold, profesor srednjovjekovne historije i po-moćnih historijskih nauka s Univerziteta u Tübingenu, otpočinje ovu knjigu. Navedenu tvrdnju pojačava iznošenjem činjenice kako je posljednja odluka u Saveznoj republici Njemačkoj vezana za lenske odnose donesena pred državnim sudom 5. aprila 1937. godine. Do tog datuma je svijest o lenima još bila uvijek izražena (npr. lensko udruženje u pruskoj provinciji Westfaliji je postojalo do 1876. godine), zbog toga su se historičari, posebno u 19. stoljeću, susretali sa pojmom koji je bio dio njihove stvarnosti. Stoga se desilo da su na društvene odnose srednjeg vijeka gledali kroz prizmu njihovog vremena. To je i otvorilo vrata interpretaciji ovog povijesnog fenomena sa kojom se mi danas ne možemo složiti. U 20. stoljeću uznapredovala su istraživanja o ovom pitanju, te se predstava o feudalnim odnosima u srednjem vijeku kontinuirano mijenjala, retuširala i "kalemila" drugim idejama, ali se osnovna postavka u suštini nije mnogo izmijenila. Do sredine osamdesetih godina prošlog stoljeća činilo se da su temeljna pitanja riješena i da je studija Belgijanca François-Louisa Ganshofa (1895-1980) iz 1944. sa naslovom Qu'est-ce que la féodalité zaokružila dotadašnja istraživanja na studiozan i pregledan način. Međutim, od tada se rasplamsala nova debata o ovoj temi koja još uvijek traje. Naše predstave o srednjovjekov-nom feudalizmu, koje su decenijama važile kao pouzdane činjenice, odjednom su dovedene u pitanje. Historičari su počeli da raspravljaju o temeljnim načelima o kojima je širom svijeta važio jedinstveni konsenzus, poput pitanjā: Kada i kako su lena nastala? Kakvu su ulogu vršila u srednjem vijeku? Kako je izgledao odnos između lenskoga gospodara i vazala? Pa čak-da li je uopće feudalizam postojao u srednjem vijeku?! To su samo neka od pitanja koja autor obrađuje. Jedni su nastanak feudalnih odnosa smještali u 8. stoljeće, u vrijeme nesigurnih epoha

Presentation on the International Conference: Odsjek za povijest Filozofskog fakulteta u Rijeci u saradnji s Odsjekom za povijesne znanosti HAZU Zagreb; Fourth medieval workshop in Rijeka, Panel: “Papacy and the Eastern Adriatic in the 12th and 13th Centuries”, Rijeka 30-31. V 2019.

Presentation on the International Conferencer: Université de Haute-Alsace, Centre de recherche sur les économies, les sciences, les arts et les techniques”, Conference „Produire la carte. Représentations transfrontalières et interculturelles de l’Antiquité à nos jours”, Mulhouse (Francuska) 20-21. V 2019.

U radu se analiziraju odnosi Bosne i Srbije tokom vladavine bosanskog bana Stjepana II Kotromanića. Detaljnije je urađen osvrt na prve godine ekspanzivne politike Bosne, koja je rezultirala osvajanjem Humske zemlje i promjenom crkvene i političke strukture na ovom području. U kontekstu interpretacije Borisa Nilevića prikazan je jedan upad bosanske vojske u Polimlje, kojom je prilikom nastradao Manastir Banja kod Priboja – sjedište Dabarske episkopije. Na kraju je u obliku polemike raspravljano o vjerskom identitetu bosanskog bana.

Rad je dio turističkog preglednika "Gradačac: Grad Zmaja od Bosne" kojeg je izdala Općina Gradačac i sastavni je dio projekta "Upravljanje rizikom od mina i društvenoekonomski razvoj u zajednicama ugroženim minama u Bosni i Hercegovini u periodu od 2011.-2012. godine", koji je implementiran u Bosni i Hercegovini uz finansijsku podršku Kneževine Monako i Handicap International-a.

Razgovor vodila Bascha Mika; prijevod Nedim Rabić

Ugrožava li korona-kriza našu demokratiju? Zašto je civilno društvo utihnulo? Moramo li dogmi zdravstvene zaštite žrtvovati pravo na slobodu? Bascha Mika u razgovoru sa historičarom Paulom Nolteom. Paul Nolte, godište 1963, od 2005. predaje noviju i savremenu historiju na Slobodnom Univerzitetu u Berlinu. Učenik je Hans-Ulricha Wehlera (njemački historičar, 1931-2014, predvodnik tzv. bielefldske škole koja je koristila metode iz društvenih nauka u historijskoj analizi, nap. prev.), studirao je i doktorirao u Bielefeldu, a tamo je naučio da bi historičari trebali biti i kritični savremenici. Duže istraživačke boravke i gostujuće profesure vodile su ga u Harvard, Chapel Hill, München i Oxford. Njegova područja istraživanja su liberalizam, radikalizam i društveni pokreti od 18. stoljeća, historija naučnika i intelektualaca u 20. stoljeću i historija i aktuelni razvoj demokratije. Objavio je "Šta je demokratija" 2012; "Demokratija-101 najvažnije pitanje" 2015. Paul Nolte je volonterski angažiran u evangelističkoj crkvi kao predsjednik evangelističke akademije u Berlinu. Kako se osjećate u kućnom pritvoru, gospodine profesore Nolte? Čudno, vjerovatno kao mnogi drugi ljudi. Sami sebe uhvatite kako uživate u slobodi, usporenom ritmu, pročišćenom kalendaru, ali istovremeno je i opresivan osjećaj. Jer pitanje je šta se dogaĎa sa našim društvom u ovoj situaciji. Zabrana kontakta, ograničenja kretanja, policijske kontrole, kaznene naredbe-slobode su umanjene, prava izvrnuta, a mi se ne opiremo. Jesmo li mi poslušno društvo? Još uvijek razgradnja demokratskih prava [misli se na Njemačku, nap. prev.] nije dramatična kao u nekim drugim zemljama. MeĎutim, došli smo do tačke kada moramo biti veoma oprezni kada je riječ o opravdanosti i dužini trajanja mjera koje ograničavaju našu slobodu. Kada su 1968. doneseni Zakoni o vanrednom stanju bilo je masovnih protesta. A danas? Mene takoĎer podsjeća na stanje hladnog rada. Kada je prije pedeset godina uvedeno vanredno stanje, taj korak je javno veoma kritički popraćen. Sada nije obznanjeno vanredno stanje, ne radi

Autor rada je Manuel Lorenz. Rad je izvorno objavljen pod naslovom: “Bogomilen, Katharer und bosnische ‘Christen’. Der Transfer dualistischer Häresien zwischen Orient und Okzident (11.-13. Jh.)” 2011. godine u zborniku radova: Vermitteln – Übersetzen – Begegnen: Transferphänomene im europäischen Mittelalter und in der Frühen Neuzeit. Interdisziplinäre Annäherungen. Göttingen: V & R Unipress, ur. Balázs J. Nemes / Achim Rabus, Nova mediaevalia; Bd. 8. 87-136.